The Digital, Governance and Sovereignty Chair promotes its students’ works. This video was shot to promote a Policy Brief selected as one of the best works written during the course taught by Pr Florence G’sell “Comparative Approach to Big Tech Regulation” in Spring 2023. You can read it on the website of the chair: www.sciencespo...
In November 2022, the European Union (EU)’s Digital Services Act (DSA) entered into force. It imposes new duties on online intermediaries aiming to protect users’ fundamental rights online. Among a range of rules, Article 25 establishes a prohibition against dark patterns. This policy brief analyses the DSA’s approach to dark patterns through the following research question:
"How should the Digital Services Act's prohibition on dark patterns be implemented?"
After introducing the policy context and offering a descriptive analysis of the DSA and its antecedents with regard to dark patterns, we will analyse four issues of relevance to Article 25’s implementation. These findings aim to steer the European Commission’s (EC, or the Commission) implementation of Article 25 DSA, highlighting four areas that the Commission must address, whether through guidelines on Article 25 and/or through delegated acts. The discussion will be structured according to the logic of concentric circles, expanding from a narrow to a wide perspective. The first issue discussed-“legal definitions”-explores uncertainties in the terms contained within the Article. The second issue-“legal scope”-zooms out of Article 25 to assess how it might interact with pre-existing regulation of dark patterns, specifically the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD). Our third issue looks beyond legal meanings to practical implications of enforcement; namely, in what ways Article 25 impacts who enforces dark pattern prohibitions and how they do so. The fourth issue takes a holistic view of the DSA, exploring provisions outside Article 25 that could be used to address dark patterns. Finally, here is a series of recommendations.
1-Clarify terms: manipulative interface personalisation would be better addressed by strengthening GDPR data protection, a potential deceitful effect should be enough to meet Article 25 the standard used to assess if a practice is likely to deceive should be lower than the average consumer, to account for digital asymmetries.
2-Clarify scope: Define the interplay of the scopes of the DSA, UCPD and GDPR.
3-Coordinate enforcement, especially between Digital Service Coordinators and consumer authorities.
4-Harness the full “DSA toolbox”, as there are other provisions within the DSA that can be used to tackle dark patterns, beyond the Article 25 prohibition.
---
Sciences Po is an international research university, both selective and open onto the world, ranking among the finest institutions in the fields of humanities and social sciences. Click for more information about Sciences Po. bit.ly/2bQkwiG
---
Follow us on social media!
---
RU-vid: / @sciencespo
Facebook: / sciencespo.en
Twitter: / sciencespo
Instagram: / sciencespo
TikTok : / sciencespo
Snapchat: / sciencespo
LinkedIn : / sciences-po
Facebook group: / sciencespogroup
Our newsletter: bit.ly/2NPQ6yo
Sciences Po App - Google Play: bit.ly/3sH5LpR
Sciences Po App - App Store: apple.co/3Bl43OC
27 сен 2024
