> The EU often imposes fines mere weeks or days after compliance deadlines pass, suggesting this kind of extraction is a feature, not a bug, of the regulatory regime.

This argument is strange to me. If a local road changes its speed limit and on the same day the new limit takes effect, I get pulled over for driving too fast, that seems expected?

I guess I could see the argument that the companies don’t have enough time to make the necessary changes to adhere to the law, but then you should be advocating for the law taking effect at a later date rather than regulators being slow to issue fines when they are in full effect.

Extra territoriality is well established in international law - if you provide services to, or extract data from the EU, you are subject to EU laws. US tech will simply have to comply or withdraw services.

Its give and take: we could make the statement "american tech weaponizes tax discrepancies to extract billions from EU countries"

Some of the big tech mentioned are fined a lot heavier than others on some of those regulations. For example, Apple has barely received anything under the GDPR. Why? They don't collect unnecessary user data with shady "consent". Microsoft also doesn't seem to be struggling too much with the DMA or DSA, just the usual anti-trust stuff they always seem to get themselves in. But their gatekeeper obligations don't seem to be a problem whatsoever.

The EU has been clear for years they're fed up with the behavior of big tech with some of those things. If you don't want to listen, you have to feel the consequences. Easy as that.

Previously on Earth about trampling on privacy:

........

"vague, ever-shifting rules" seems a bit disingenuous.

I can understand GDPR (and I'm no lawyer) but the whole of 'American Tech' can't?