The Tech Policy Press Podcast

Assessing Europe's Digital Markets Act One Year In

Date: March 9, 2025
Host: Dean Jackson (Tech Policy Press)
Guests:

• Alyssa Cooper (Knight Georgetown Institute)
• Anu Bradford (Columbia Law School)
• Hayoon Kim (Korea Economic Institute of America)
• Gunji Ravudapong (UC Berkeley Law School)

Episode Overview

This episode examines the impact of Europe's Digital Markets Act (DMA) one year after its implementation. Through discussions with experts from Europe, North America, and Asia, the podcast explores how the DMA has reshaped tech regulation, inspired global policy shifts, and become a focal point in geopolitical tensions—especially between the EU, United States, and other regions with their own digital antitrust strategies.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Why the DMA Matters and What’s Changed So Far

Alyssa Cooper on Motivations and Objectives

• Conference Motivation: The conference at Knight Georgetown Institute (KGI) aimed to bridge learnings from global competition policy for U.S. antitrust discussions and diversify expert perspectives.
• Central Issue: “The struggle for that control [of information] is really at the center of this current political moment. It's really a time of tremendous upheaval...” (Alyssa Cooper, 02:31)
• DMA’s Core Goal: To aggregate 15 years of tech antitrust insights into broad regulations targeting “gatekeepers” for fair competition.
• Complexity of “Self-Preferencing”: Debates continue over what constitutes unfair self-preferencing, highlighting the need for transparent definitions and independent analysis.

Consumer Impact and Early Results

• Visible Changes for Users:
  • New app stores launched in Europe, browser and search engine choices now more prominent, and siloing of user data between different services offered by the same provider.
  • “Consumers being offered a choice of browser, a choice of search engine... options to have data siloed between different services...” (Cooper, 08:51)
• Compliance and Enforcement:
  • Non-compliance investigations are underway; the outcomes will signal whether DMA enforcement is robust.

Broader Regulatory Influence (“Brussels Effect”)

• Global Inspiration:
  • The DMA’s framework is being considered or adapted by jurisdictions like the UK, Australia, India, and Thailand.

2. Challenges & Gaps in DMA Implementation

• Transparency in Enforcement:
  • Verifying violations (such as self-preferencing) is technically difficult—intent and outcome are hard to disentangle.
  • “It's very, very hard to disentangle the dynamics when there's... multiple different feedback loops...” (Cooper, 05:38)
• Need for Third-Party Input:
  • Mechanisms for input from competing companies, researchers, and civil society remain underdeveloped.
• Risk of Retaliation:
  • Smaller competitors fear retaliation if they seek relief from regulators.
• Future: Interoperable Messaging:
  • DMA Article 7 could eventually mandate cross-platform interoperability for services like WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger in the EU.

Notable Exchange

• On Blue/Green Bubble Divide:
  • “So would Android users finally get a blue bubble on that iMessage app?” (Jackson, 12:41)
  • “Apple has not been designated as a gatekeeper for the purposes of messaging yet... could be in the future potentially.” (Cooper, 12:45)

3. Geopolitical Tensions: US Pushback and the “Tariff” Framing

Anu Bradford’s Analysis

• US Tech & Administration Opposition:
  • “These laws did come into effect. And now... these costs are really real.” (Bradford, 15:00)
  • Major US tech firms and the Trump administration are framing DMA/DSA as protectionist and likening penalties to tariffs.
• Motives:
  • US industry and government argue these laws unfairly target US companies; European motives seen as regulatory, not protectionist.

Are DMA & DSA Protectionist?

• No European Tech Champions:
  • The DMA and DSA impact mostly US-based “gatekeepers”. There are no European equivalents the regulations are designed to protect.
  • “There's no European search engine that they are trying to protect. There is no European competitor to the Facebook...” (Bradford, 19:02)
• Why Europe Regulates:
  • Concern about dominant platforms exploiting their market position, data privacy, and the spread of harmful content.
  • “There are genuine, well documented concerns that are driving these regulations in Europe.” (Bradford, 18:20)
• Geopolitical Context:
  • Each jurisdiction is pursuing “technological sovereignty,” with digital sovereignty and industrial policy on the rise globally.

4. European Regulatory Debate: Are Tech Laws Hurting Innovation?

The Draghi Report and Europe’s Tech Ambitions

• Key Takeaways:
  • The Draghi Report suggests Europe has focused too much on regulating instead of innovating but also highlights deeper issues (capital, talent, market fragmentation) that hinder European tech.
  • “It's very hard to say that the DMA somehow would be holding the European companies back...” (Bradford, 22:58)
  • GDPR is cited as potentially burdensome for small firms, but the DMA/DSA target larger firms and are less likely to stifle local innovation.
  • “DMA and DSA are asymmetrical. They are imposing greater obligations for the companies that are larger...” (Bradford, 24:32)

5. The Road Ahead for European Leadership

• Ursula von der Leyen’s Role:
  • “She is competent, she's experienced, she's hardworking. I don't envy her, though. This is a really difficult political moment.” (Bradford, 26:52)
  • The EU Commission faces pressure to stand firm amid US threats, while maintaining internal and external support for regulations.
• Potential Risks:
  • “If you start bargaining with the US like that and you let the bullies get their way, they come with the next demand, the next day.” (Bradford, 28:21)
  • Even “slow-walking” enforcement may be seen as capitulation and could trigger both domestic backlash and global ripple effects: “If they now see that the Europeans are wavering... the rest of the world may do the same.” (Bradford, 32:19)

6. Global Diffusion and National Contexts

South Korea’s Experience (Hayoon Kim)

• Adopted a DMA-like Bill, then Pivoted:
  • South Korea drafted the Platform Competition Promotion Act, modeled after the EU’s DMA (39:40), but faced backlash and accusations of protectionism from the US and domestic industry.
• Unique Local Dynamics:
  • Korea’s market is dominated by local platforms (e.g., Naver, Kakao). The concern was that US pressure would make Korean companies, not US firms, the principal targets.
• Regulatory Shift:
  • South Korea moved from an ex-ante (DMA-like) approach to a more traditional, ex-post model due to political and diplomatic pressure.
  • “Due to such diplomatic and political considerations... the Korean tech's concern was that okay, it is likely going to be just us being targeted the most... therefore we're against it.” (Kim, 40:36)
• Political Upheaval has Paused All Regulation:
  • Martial law and leadership turmoil have halted legislative progress.

Broader Trends – "Brussels Effect Plus" (Gunji Ravudapong)

• Adoption and Adaptation:
  • Many countries are using the EU DMA as a template but adjust it for their markets (e.g., Japan focuses on mobile platforms; Australia on marketplaces and ad services).
• Drivers:
  • Faster remedy for anti-competitive practices than traditional enforcement, clarity of obligations and designation of “gatekeepers,” and support for local SMEs.
  • “Countries are looking for new tools and then say okay, I'm going to try to copy the EU law... before they're molding it into their jurisdiction.” (Ravudapong, 48:07)
• Local Tech Champions:
  • Countries with strong domestic tech sectors customize rules to avoid undermining their own champions.
• Solidarity & Limitations:
  • Smaller nations may struggle unless they coordinate; tech firms might simply exit smaller markets if regulations are too onerous.

7. Prospects for International Regulatory Solidarity

• Asian vs. European Alignment:
  • "I personally believe that... it is, realistically speaking, uncertain whether European and Asian countries can somehow... form a united front on this issue." (Kim, 53:34)
  • Europe is bolder, less constrained by US alliance pressures. Asian countries are more cautious due to security and economic ties.
• Domestic Instability Limits Policy:
  • South Korea’s ongoing political crisis makes swift or unified action unlikely.
• Possibility for Regulatory Coalitions:
  • "When countries sees digital harm... as a common concern. They would have a common ground to build upon and maybe think about... policy." (Ravudapong, 57:15)
  • Cooperation might happen piecemeal—on best practices or particular enforcement tools—rather than through a global regulatory bloc.

Memorable Quotes

• “The struggle for that control is really at the center of this current political moment. It's really a time of tremendous upheaval...” (Alyssa Cooper, 02:31)
• “There's no European search engine that they are trying to protect. There is no European competitor to the Facebook that is driving these cases...” (Anu Bradford, 19:02)
• “If you start bargaining with the US like that and you let the bullies get their way, they come with the next demand, the next day.” (Anu Bradford, 28:21)
• “Due to such diplomatic and political considerations... the Korean tech's concern was that okay, it is likely going to be just us being targeted the most... therefore we're against it.” (Hayoon Kim, 40:36)
• “Countries are looking for new tools and then say okay, I'm going to try to copy the EU law... before they're molding it into their jurisdiction.” (Gunji Ravudapong, 48:07)
• “I am very skeptical about other parts of the world... when it comes to united front, like solidarity.” (Hayoon Kim, 56:36)

Notable Timestamps

• 01:10: Dean Jackson introduces the conference and sets up the episode's structure.
• 02:00–12:59: Alyssa Cooper discusses KGI's work, conference takeaways, and DMA implementation.
• 13:23–33:30: Anu Bradford analyzes US-EU tech tensions, the rationale behind EU regulation, and the geopolitics shaping regulatory enforcement.
• 33:58–42:05: Hayoon Kim explains South Korea's unique approach to platform regulation and its domestic market.
• 42:22–58:25: Gunji Ravudapong discusses the global diffusion of DMA-style antitrust and possibilities for international regulatory solidarity.

Conclusion

This episode offers a nuanced, multi-perspective assessment of the DMA’s first year:

• While the DMA is significantly reshaping digital regulation and empowering consumers, enforcing its complex requirements remains challenging.
• Global adoption of similar rules reflects the DMA’s influence, yet implementation is shaped by local market realities and geopolitical pressures.
• The evolving US-EU dynamic, as well as the growing involvement of Asia-Pacific countries, suggests that the future of digital markets regulation will be contested and dynamic—requiring ongoing vigilance, innovation, and cross-border cooperation.

For deeper analysis and upcoming enforcement updates, watch for the March results from the EU’s ongoing DMA investigations.