Amazon isn’t taking the European Commission’s argument literally or figuratively. On Thursday, the U.S tech titan made a legal complaint at the EU’s General Court in Luxembourg, requesting the judges to invalidate its classification as a “Very Large Online Platform” (VLOP) under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). The tech giant believes that the designation is not only misplaced but also an unsuitable reaction to what it views as a low-level systemic risk profile.

Comprehending the DSA and the VLOP Label

The Digital Services Act, a set of rules passed in 2022, seeks to restrain the power of Big Techs by requiring enhanced control, more stringent moderation of toxic content, and better transparency from big digital platforms. Firms defined as VLOPs by the DSA go through enhanced responsibilities such as rigorous risk assessments, third-party audits, and more data-sharing obligations.

Amazon, one of the world’s most powerful online marketplaces, was among those companies who received the VLOP designation. Amazon argues that its platform is not on DSA’s target list. Simply put, Amazon feels it is being unfairly grouped with social media sites where content moderation takes a much more prominent position.

Amazon’s Argument

Arguing on behalf of Amazon in court, lawyer Robert Spano accused the Commission of having a flawed thinking. He said,

“Online marketplaces like the Amazon Store do not pose systemic risks. Second, the VLOP rules do not and cannot rationally assist in preventing the dissemination of illegal or counterfeit goods”.

Amazon contends that the danger of its marketplace is contained within individual sellers or listings and is already addressed by product safety and consumer protection legislation. There is no evidence so the company suggests that a platform’s size is inherently linked to higher systemic risk. This is a factor on which the Commission relies in order to use the VLOP classification. 

Spano said,

“When it comes to marketplaces like the Amazon Store, size does not multiply risk. It is an arbitrary, disproportionate and discriminatory metric”. 

Terming the rules as arbitrary, disproportionate, and discriminatory, Spano criticized the DSA’s structure as unsuitable for e-commerce platforms and proposed that imposing a uniform standard over greatly varying kinds of platforms is both legally and practically defective.

A Broader Level Fight

Amazon is not the sole tech giant to resist the EU’s new regulatory order. Meta Platforms, TikTok, and German online retailer Zalando have all filed their own lawsuits against elements of the DSA. Though each case is specific, the underlying tension is straightforward. Cross-border technology firms are increasingly uneasy with the EU’s growing regulatory jurisdiction.

For Amazon, this battle in the courts is not just about avoiding tougher requirements, rather it’s about upholding the principle that various platforms need customized regulation. If the General Court rules in favor of Amazon, it may create a precedent that compels EU legislators to further distinguish their regulation categories. On the other hand, if the Commission wins, it will strengthen the EU’s power to impose broad obligations to any platform with significant numbers of users regardless of how their services operate.

A Decision That May Redefine Regulation

The Luxembourg-based General Court will decide in the coming months. A ruling for Amazon would undermine one of the DSA’s key enforcement tools, while a rejection will strengthen Europe’s status as the world trendsetter in digital regulation. Either way, the case is another installment in the ever-growing, more fraught relationship between the EU and American tech companies, a fight over who gets to define risk, responsibility, and fairness in the digital world.

The crux of the issue isn’t merely about tags or legal categorizations, it’s about defining responsibility in a digital world that is increasingly driven by platform monopolies. E-commerce is not social media, the economics of selling a USB cable bear no resemblance to the task of moderating viral conspiracy videos. The EU’s Digital Services Act strives to impose accountability broadly, but Amazon’s resistance exposes an underlying fallacy, which is treating the same playbook for essentially different players.