Best amendments to the European Technological Sovereignty and Digital Infrastructure Initiative

André Rebentisch writes on Linkedin:

The upcoming report on European Technological Sovereignty and Digital Infrastructure (2025/2007(INI)) is generating strong interest. Members of the Industry, Research and Energy Committee (ITRE) of the European Parliament have tabled a remarkable 464 amendments. They will be voted before the summer break. For your convenience, I’ve merged them into a single, easy-to-navigate pdf file.

Here are a few amendments that stand out, in our opinion, as particularly interesting or promising. They reflect a strong push for decentralised cloud and edge infrastructures based on open-source federated tech stacks, as well as a clear emphasis on EU jurisdiction and sovereignty:

Am 142 (Sancho Murillo et al.): Offers a powerful diagnosis of the systemic nature of market concentration across digital sectors (vertical integration, data monopoly), linking it directly to risks like foreign rule imposition and brain drain.

Acknowledging that market concentration extends beyond individual sectors, as dominant players leverage vertical integration, data monopolization, and control over key markets such as advertising, semiconductor manufacturing, and AI computing, resulting in risks including market abuse, foreign rule imposition, loss of domestic jobs, and brain drain.

Am 168 (Geese/Sancho Murillo/Kobosko): This is very promising. It champions decentralised cloud and edge infrastructures based on open-source federated tech stacks as key enablers of sovereignty. It explicitly calls for supporting scalable sovereign cloud infrastructures under Union jurisdiction, directly addressing the core challenge in the cloud/software space with a concrete, forward-looking approach.

Notes that decentralized cloud and edge infrastructures, running under an open-source federated tech stack are enablers of sovereignty and contribute to reducing the risks linked to third-country market dominance. Calls on the Commission to leverage the existing experiences and support scalable sovereign cloud infrastructures, fully under Union jurisdiction and free from interference and dependencies. Underlines that location of datacentres and localised storage of data are prerequisites of sovereign cloud but not equivalent for full compliance, and cautions against sovereignty-washing by actors that cannot offer full legal control and protection from third country interference.

Am 171 (Kobosko et al.): Boldly calls for binding criteria for strategic autonomy, ensuring critical services like cloud, AI, and data centers are operated by entities under EU jurisdiction and free from extraterritorial constraints. This is a very direct sovereignty push.

Urges the Commission to introduce binding criteria for the strategic autonomy of EU digital infrastructure, ensuring that critical services—including cloud computing, AI, and data centers— are operated by entities subject to European jurisdiction and free from extraterritorial legal constraints;

Am 181 (Geese): Focuses on building a resilient data ecosystem based on data commons and sovereign open-source code, ensuring EU jurisdiction. Strong focus on data governance and open source as enablers.

Calls on the Commission to design policies that are conducive to a resilient data ecosystem based on the data commons model5a. In order to do that, the Commission must support the capacity of local ecosystems and industries to build on sovereign open-source code and infrastructures, and maintain, and develop expertise around them. Recommends the Commission to review the legal framework and ensure full European jurisdiction over data stored within the EU, in order to empower a European data ecosystem.