A group of leading European companies, including Deutsche Telekom, Orange, Airbus, and 15 others, have voiced strong opposition against a draft plan that could potentially allow major US tech firms such as Amazon, Alphabet’s Google, and Microsoft to secure highly sensitive EU cloud computing contracts. This criticism targets a proposal by Belgium, under its current European Union presidency, aiming to establish a certification scheme (EUCS) for the cybersecurity of cloud services.
The proposal seeks to facilitate the selection of secure and trusted cloud service vendors by EU governments and companies, as reported by Reuters. However, it notably omits previous sovereignty requirements, which mandated US tech giants to form joint ventures with EU-based companies for data storage and processing within the bloc to earn the EU cybersecurity label.
Set for discussion by cybersecurity experts from the 27 EU countries on March 15, the Belgian plan could lead to the European Commission adopting this cybersecurity scheme in the upcoming autumn. The consortium of EU companies has urged national authorities and senior Commission officials to reject the proposal, citing significant concerns over data sovereignty and security.
Related: Cloud-Computing Providers See AI As Business Driver
“The inclusion of EU-HQ and European control requirements in the main scheme is necessary to mitigate the risk of unlawful data access on the basis of foreign laws,” the companies stated in a joint letter, highlighting the potential for European data to be accessed by foreign governments under laws like the U.S. Cloud Act or the Chinese National Intelligence Law told Reuters.
The EU firms argue that the cybersecurity label should emulate the Gaia-X cloud computing platform, which incorporates sovereignty requirements to lessen EU dependency on Silicon Valley tech giants. They warn that the absence of such clauses could disadvantage emerging EU cloud providers against their larger US counterparts.
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand