Big Tech on Trial: How the EU is Reining in Silicon Valley

By Mei Rose

When the European Commission fined Google €2.95 billion in one of the largest antitrust cases in EU history this September, it was a familiar scene: a drawn-out investigation, a multi billion-euro penalty, and yet another clash between Brussels and Silicon Valley. The case illustrated a recurring problem - by the time traditional antitrust law catches up with Big Tech, the market has already forged ahead, leaving regulators to punish behaviour that has long since been superseded.

It was precisely this challenge that the Digital Markets Act (DMA) set out to address. Fully adopted by the European Parliament in 2022, the DMA marked a landmark shift in the EU’s approach from reacting to past abuses to preventing dominance before it takes hold. The Act designates “gatekeepers” such as Apple, Meta, and Google, and sets explicit, upfront rules dictating their operation - from running app stores and handling user data to ensuring that different services, like messaging apps, can run compatibly.

Unlike traditional antitrust cases, which often take years before a decision is reached, the DMA applies its obligations automatically to large platforms. Introduced by the European Commission, the Act marks a conceptual shift in how the EU conceives of regulation itself. Rooted in the principle of ex ante rather than ex post enforcement, it moves beyond punishing individual breaches to reshaping the structure of digital markets in advance. The law reflects the Commission’s belief that open competition requires both sanctions and ongoing supervision of actors holding systemic power, mirroring financial regulation following 2008. In this sense, the DMA is not only economic, but also constitutional in ambition: it seeks to embed fairness, transparency, and consumer choice directly into the architecture of digital commerce. Recent Financial Times reports suggest that both Apple and Meta are already in talks with the Commission to settle investigations opened under the Act - a sign that Brussels intends to enforce its rulebook swiftly and translate this new regulatory vision into practice.

Yet these cases are not only about policy. The EU’s evolving approach to regulating technology also reshapes the work of commercial law firms and corporate advisers, who must now guide clients through a fast-changing landscape blending competition law, data protection, and consumer regulation. For students interested in pursuing corporate law, these developments offer a window into the kind of cross-border and compliance-focused work that is becoming central to corporate practice today. As regulation becomes increasingly proactive and globally coordinated, understanding how legal frameworks like the DMA shape business strategy is an emerging dimension of tech commercial awareness. These same legal shifts, however, play out within a broader political struggle: Silicon Valley companies – including the aforementioned Apple and Meta – have been vocal in opposing what they consider to be Europe’s increasingly interventionist approach to tech regulation.

This resistance is most visible in the public responses of companies now under direct scrutiny. Apple, for instance, has framed the DMA as a threat to privacy, security, and innovation. In an open statement published on its website, the company warned that the DMA is forcing a redesign of core features exclusively for EU users, delaying the new technologies from entering the market. It further claimed that the law mandates Apple to grant unsecured third-parties access to company systems. Meta has made similar arguments, describing its “pay or consent” model (where users either agree to data tracking or pay for an ad-free experience) as necessary for funding free digital services.

From the Commission’s perspective, however, these claims only underline the need for stronger regulation. EU officials maintain that compliance must give consumers genuine choice, not what they term “a maze of dark patterns” limiting said choice. The resulting negotiations reveal the broader stakes: these reforms affect not only product design but, equally the power of private companies and democratic institutions to set the rules for the global digital economy.

And those stakes extend well beyond Europe. The DMA has also become a flashpoint in transatlantic relations, with the United States accusing the EU of unfairly targeting American companies. President Trump has again threatened retaliatory tariffs on European goods in response to what he calls “discrimination” against US tech firms. These tensions reveal how the enforcement of competition law can quickly expand beyond questions of market fairness into broader macroeconomic and diplomatic dynamics, where trade, regulation, and politics increasingly overlap.

For readers of Law for All, this intersection offers a reminder that corporate and competition law do not operate in isolation. Understanding how legal rules influence and are influenced by global markets has become central to modern commercial awareness. Whether advising clients on compliance, managing cross-border risk, or simply following current affairs, the ability to recognise the legal dimensions of macroeconomic change is a key skill for anyone considering a career in law or policy.

Bibliography:

• Apple Newsroom (2025). The Digital Markets Act’s impacts on EU users. [online] Available at: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/09/the-digital-markets-acts-impacts-on-eu-users/.

• European Commission (2025). Commission fines Google €2.95 billion over abusive practices in online advertising technology. [online] European Commission - European Commission. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/da/ip_25_1992.

• Foy, H. and Moens, B. (2025). Brussels told to prove digital rules do not ‘punish’ US tech or fix them. [online] @FinancialTimes. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/b6d9fb9c-901e-42e3-9610-5a449247fd49.

• Pandectes (2024). What is the Digital Markets Act? [online] Pandectes. Available at: https://pandectes.io/knowledge-base/what-is-the-digital-markets-act/ [Accessed 14 Oct. 2025].

• Satariano, A. and Smialek, J. (2025). Google Is Fined $3.5 Billion for Breaking Europe’s Antitrust Laws. The New York Times. [online] 5 Sep. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/business/google-eu-antitrust-fine.html.

Edited by Artyom Timofeev

Image Source: https://www.culturalevolution.org/platform-of-policy-recommendations/big-tech-governance/