4 ms·

> But since Bluesky isn’t yet big enough to be considered a “very large online platform” under the DSA, the regulator says it can’t regulate Bluesky the way it

> But since Bluesky isn’t yet big enough to be considered a “very large online platform” under the DSA, the regulator says it can’t regulate Bluesky the way it does X or Threads. So are they breaking the law or aren't they? Sounds like they aren't but the EU wants to be on their back anyway.

afavour 2y ago
I thought the article was pretty clear: they are breaking rules (not laws, FWIW) but are not yet big enough for the EU to do anything about it. At their current growth trajectory they will soon. The EU statement seems to just be an anticipation of the inevitable.
dathinab 2y ago
> Sounds like they aren't but the EU wants to be on their back anyway. > The regulator hasn’t reached out to Bluesky directly, yet, The Financial Times writes. I think no on is on anyones back, they just follow standard procedure more or less. There is a new "growing" platforms which might be affected by such regulations and they just want to make sure what their state is and under which legal aspects they operate (e.g. if they have any EU offices onto which they should base official communication). The things pointed out by the article are also non issues: - a missing statistic about EU users which you need once you have a certain size but practically kinda should have before _to show you have not quite yet that size_. But that is somewhat of a nothing burger, you add it when needed and as long as there is no reason to believe you acted with malicious intend it's unlikely to involve any penalties. - regulation related to moderation, non issue as Bsky enforces their AGB and that already fulfills more or less all moderation requirements (maybe not some increased reporting requirements for larger companies, but like said they don't count as such yet) So IMHO a nothing burger. My guess is various news paper made "official" information/press requests to some EU institutes asking if Bsky complies with this or that and stuff like that and then created a issue from atm. more or less nothing. Wonder if it was with malicious intend.

afavour 2y ago

I thought the article was pretty clear: they are breaking rules (not laws, FWIW) but are not yet big enough for the EU to do anything about it. At their current growth trajectory they will soon. The EU statement seems to just be an anticipation of the inevitable.

dathinab 2y ago

> Sounds like they aren't but the EU wants to be on their back anyway. > The regulator hasn’t reached out to Bluesky directly, yet, The Financial Times writes. I think no on is on anyones back, they just follow standard procedure more or less. There is a new "growing" platforms which might be affected by such regulations and they just want to make sure what their state is and under which legal aspects they operate (e.g. if they have any EU offices onto which they should base official communication). The things pointed out by the article are also non issues: - a missing statistic about EU users which you need once you have a certain size but practically kinda should have before _to show you have not quite yet that size_. But that is somewhat of a nothing burger, you add it when needed and as long as there is no reason to believe you acted with malicious intend it's unlikely to involve any penalties. - regulation related to moderation, non issue as Bsky enforces their AGB and that already fulfills more or less all moderation requirements (maybe not some increased reporting requirements for larger companies, but like said they don't count as such yet) So IMHO a nothing burger. My guess is various news paper made "official" information/press requests to some EU institutes asking if Bsky complies with this or that and stuff like that and then created a issue from atm. more or less nothing. Wonder if it was with malicious intend.