A Landmark Victory for Interoperability: CJEU Ruling Bolsters the Case for Digital Sovereignty

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has recently delivered a landmark judgment that significantly strengthens the fight for digital sovereignty and a more competitive European tech landscape. In a case involving Google's refusal to make Enel X's JuicePass app interoperable with Android Auto (Case C-233/23, Alphabet and Others), the court has established precedents that directly support many of the core principles of the EuroStack Initiative. This judgement isn't just a legal technicality; it's a potential game-changer for the balance of power in the digital market.

Note: here is the for the full text of the judgment.

The Case: Google vs. Interoperability

Enel X, a provider of electric vehicle charging services in Italy, developed the JuicePass app to help drivers find and reserve charging stations. To enhance the user experience, Enel X requested that Google make JuicePass compatible with Android Auto, Google's system for integrating smartphone apps with a car's onboard display. Google refused, initially citing the lack of a specific template for that type of app and later raising security concerns. The Italian Competition and Market Authority (AGCM) fined Google over €102 million for abuse of a dominant position, a decision that Google challenged, leading to the CJEU ruling.

The Ruling: A Win for Openness and Competition

The CJEU's judgment is a resounding affirmation of the importance of interoperability in the digital age. Here are the key takeaways, and why they matter for the EuroStack vision:

Beyond "Essential Facilities": The court ruled that a dominant undertaking (like Google) can abuse its position by refusing interoperability with a third-party app, even if that app isn't strictly essential for the third party's business. It's enough that the refusal makes the competitor's offering significantly less attractive to consumers. This goes beyond the traditional "essential facilities" doctrine and recognizes the realities of the platform economy, where access to dominant platforms can be crucial for success.
- From our perspective: This validates our core argument for enforceable interoperability. Dominant tech platforms can no longer hide behind the claim that their platforms aren't strictly "necessary" for competitors. If refusing interoperability harms competition and consumers, it can be an abuse of dominance.
Security Cannot Be a Pretext: While the court acknowledged that security concerns could justify a refusal to interoperate, the burden of proof lies squarely with the dominant platform. They must demonstrate that interoperability poses a genuine, insurmountable security risk – not just vaguely allude to it.
- From our perspective: This combats the all-too-common practice of "security-washing," where security is used as a smokescreen for anti-competitive behavior. It aligns perfectly with our "Security by Design" principle, but insists that security claims be legitimate and verifiable.
A Duty to Facilitate Interoperability: Perhaps most significantly, the court ruled that if no legitimate justification exists, the dominant undertaking has a positive obligation to develop the necessary interfaces or templates to enable interoperability "within a reasonable period." They may be entitled to "appropriate financial consideration," but they cannot simply refuse.
- From our perspective: This is a powerful endorsement of "Interoperability by Design." Dominant platforms don't just have to allow interoperability; they must actively facilitate it, even if it requires investment and effort. This levels the playing field for smaller players and fosters a more dynamic and innovative ecosystem.
Hindering Growth is Enough: The court clarified that a refusal to interoperate can be anti-competitive even if the third-party app and its competitors remain active in the market. It's about preventing them from growing and competing effectively.
Focus on Consumer Attractiveness: A key point of the ruling is that if the dominant player's actions result in making the application less attractive to consumers, then the action can be seen as abusive.

What This Means for Europe's Digital Future

This CJEU judgment is a major victory for the principles that underpin the EuroStack Initiative. It provides a strong legal foundation for:

Demanding Interoperability: We can now more forcefully demand interoperability from dominant tech platforms, armed with this legal precedent.
Promoting Open Standards: The ruling highlights the critical importance of developing open standards for interoperability. If standards are open and collaboratively developed, it becomes much harder for dominant players to control access or manipulate them for their own benefit.
Empowering European SMEs and Open Source: This judgment helps to level the playing field, allowing smaller European companies and open-source projects to compete more effectively with tech giants.
Strengthening Digital Sovereignty: By limiting the ability of dominant platforms to control access and dictate terms, the ruling contributes to a more sovereign and resilient European digital ecosystem.

The Path Forward: From Ruling to Reality

This judgment is a powerful tool, but it's just the first step. We need to:

Spread Awareness: Share this ruling widely within the European tech community, among policymakers, and with the public.
Engage with Regulators: Work with the European Commission and national competition authorities to ensure that this judgment is effectively enforced and that its principles are incorporated into future regulations, like the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
Support European SMEs: Provide resources and guidance to European SMEs facing similar challenges, helping them to leverage this judgment to challenge anti-competitive behavior.
Build the EuroStack: Continue to advocate for and build the EuroStack – a modular, scalable, and Open Source-based digital infrastructure that embodies the principles of interoperability, security, and European control.

The CJEU has sent a clear message: interoperability is not optional; it's a fundamental requirement for a fair and competitive digital market. This is a victory for European innovation, for European businesses, and for European citizens. We must build on this momentum and create a truly sovereign and resilient European digital future.