This database monitors enforcement actions—including court cases—targeted at very large online platforms and very large online search engines, and gatekeepers as defined under the Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA). It covers initiatives at both the European Union and Member State levels. At present, the tracker records measures enforced under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), DSA, and DMA. Soon it will expand its scope to incorporate the Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA) once enforcement under this new framework begins. Updates are applied weekly (on Mondays by 17:00 CET).
For clarity and consistency, each enforcement action in the database is structured around several key pillars. The first pillar, known as the “Action Framework,” classifies each action into one of three categories based on the nature and formality of the enforcement process.
The category of “Official proceedings” refers to formal legal processes initiated by regulatory authorities to ensure compliance, where platforms are granted the right to defend themselves by being heard. Examples of such actions include the opening of proceedings, specification proceedings, and preliminary findings. Those actions are marked in blue.
In contrast, “Informal actions” encompass measures that occur outside the bounds of formal legal processes. These are typically early-stage or less formal interactions—for instance, requests for information, investigative steps, or retention orders—where the Commission exercises its investigative powers without resorting immediately to full legal enforcement. Those actions are marked in pink. However, it should be noted that such informal actions can also be undertaken during the course of official proceedings, as new investigations can be required to clarify the facts or respond to new information as it emerges. In that case, these actions will be marked in blue.
The third category, “Court cases,” includes actions that have progressed to judicial resolution with decisions rendered by EU courts, such as the General Court or the Court of Justice of the EU. These actions are marked in green. Examples of court-related actions are judgments, applications to the Court, interim relief orders, and Advocate General opinions.
The second pillar, “Title,” provides a brief description of each enforcement action. This description generally begins with the legal type of action, followed by the name of the relevant company or service mentioned in the official press release, and is often accompanied by a short contextual note. The third and fourth pillars are dedicated to identifying the “Company” and the “Service” respectively. The company field denotes the legal entity involved—such as Alphabet, Meta, or ByteDance—while the service field specifies the particular service provided by the company (for instance, distinguishing between Facebook and Instagram for Meta, or between Google Search and YouTube for Alphabet). Services are color-coded based on different categories, inspired by the classification of the European Commission for the DMA and adapted to this tracker: blue is for social media services based mostly on text (such as Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and X); pink is online platforms which are image and video-based (such as Pinterest, TikTok, YouTube); green is for search engines (such as Google Search, Bing); purple is for services linked to devices, such as operating systems, web browsers and app stores; brown is for marketplaces (such as Amazon, Zalando, Shein and Temu); yellow is for pornography platforms (such as PornHub, XVideos, XNXX); and orange is for intermediary online services (such as Booking.com, Google Shopping and Google Maps).
Within the fifth pillar, known as “Action,” each enforcement measure is categorized according to its legal nature—such as a request for information, the opening of proceedings, or an application to the court. Additionally, a few miscellaneous tags—“User complaint” and “Fine”—have been included to provide more context, indicating whether an action was initiated in response to a user complaint (as referenced in the press release) or resulted in a fine.
The sixth pillar, “Legislation”, indicates the relevant digital regulation(s) under which the enforcement action falls. Currently, the scope is limited to the GDPR, DSA, and DMA; the AIA is included in principle and will be fully integrated once its enforcement starts.
The seventh and eighth pillars—“Alleged violations” and the associated “Articles.”—detail the specific non-compliance issues and articles mentioned in the official press release. Following them, the ninth pillar, “Regulator/Court,” identifies the authority responsible for initiating the action. This could range from regulatory bodies such as the European Commission to judicial entities like the Court of Justice of the EU or the General Court. The tenth pillar, “Jurisdiction,” specifies whether the enforcement action originates at the pan-European (EU) level or from an individual Member State.
The eleventh pillar records the “Publication date” of the enforcement action, ensuring accurate timeline tracking in line with the weekly update schedule. The twelfth pillar, “Status”, describes the current state of an enforcement action, categorizing it as either ongoing or closed. An action labeled “Ongoing” indicates that its effects are still in operation or that a deadline remains active—this might apply, for example, to a retention order during active proceedings or pending court applications. Conversely, a “Closed” action denotes that the case or proceeding has concluded, such as when a definitive judgment has been issued or a retention order’s deadline has passed.
The final pillars display “Case number” (if available), include a “Link” to the press release, and provide a prominent “Enforcement case” identifier that allows users to filter by enforcement cases or court cases containing multiple actions or entries. Each entry is also expanded into its own page, where a summary of the action is available.
This well-defined methodology and structured approach ensure that we record, categorize, and present every enforcement action in a uniform manner. By adhering to these criteria, the Enforcement Tracker remains a transparent, reliable, and accessible resource for all users interested in the enforcement landscape of EU digital and data laws.
Action plan: submitted by a platform after the Commission has already issued a non-compliance decision/fine, as the remedial plan for coming into compliance. This is a post-fine corrective step, not a pre-emptive settlement (Article 76(2) DSA).
Advocate General (AG) opinion: The opinion of an Advocate General is sought in every case tried by the Court of Justice, unless the latter decides that there is no new point of law. Opinions are not binding to the judges of the Court.
Anti-Steering: Prohibits gatekeepers from steering users toward their own services over competitors (DMA Arts. 5–6).