On 20 July 2026, the European Commission imposed a €550 million fine on AliExpress for breaching several obligations laid down in the Digital Services Act (DSA) (ec.europa.eu). As the first enforcement action of this magnitude under the Regulation, the decision represents far more than an exceptional financial penalty. It marks the DSA’s entry into its enforcement phase and sends a clear message to all Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs).
One important clarification should, however, be made. Contrary to what the size of the fine might suggest, the Commission is not sanctioning the mere presence of illegal content on the platform. Instead, its reasoning focuses on the inadequacy of the risk governance mechanisms implemented by AliExpress. This distinction is fundamental, as it illustrates the profound evolution of the European Union’s approach to the regulation of online platforms. For intellectual property rights holders, it reflects a shift from a predominantly reactive approach to trade mark protection towards a broader strategy based on prevention and the management of systemic risks.
The Digital Services Act: A New Approach to Platform Regulation
To fully understand the significance of this decision, it is useful to revisit the regulatory philosophy underpinning the Digital Services Act (eur-lex.europa.eu).
For almost twenty-five years, the European liability regime for intermediary service providers, established by the 2000 e-Commerce Directive, was largely built around notice-and-takedown mechanisms. Online platforms were not expected to prevent illegal content from being uploaded in the first place; rather, they were required to act diligently once such content had been brought to their attention.
The DSA does not replace this framework. Instead, it complements it by introducing a series of due diligence obligations proportionate to the size, influence and risk profile of intermediary service providers. VLOPs are subject to particularly stringent obligations. Articles 34 (risk assessment) and 35 (risk mitigation) require them to identify, assess and mitigate the systemic risks arising from the operation of their services. These risks include, among others, the dissemination of illegal content, adverse effects on fundamental rights, manipulation of services and negative consequences for consumers.
This development goes far beyond a mere change in terminology. The DSA introduces a fundamentally different regulatory approach. The objective is no longer limited to verifying whether a platform removes illegal content once notified. It is now equally important to assess whether the platform has established organisational structures, procedures, human resources and technical measures capable of sustainably reducing the occurrence of such risks.
Risk Governance at the Heart of the Decision
At the time of writing, the full text of the Commission’s decision has not yet been published. Nevertheless, the Commission’s press release provides sufficient detail to understand the overall rationale behind its findings.
According to the press release, the Commission’s concerns do not relate to the mere existence of counterfeit products on AliExpress. Rather, they focus on the manner in which the platform identified, assessed and managed the risks associated with their dissemination. In particular, the Commission considers that AliExpress failed to conduct a sufficiently rigorous assessment of the risks arising from the sale of illegal products on its marketplace. According to the Commission, the company underestimated those risks while overestimating the effectiveness of its own control mechanisms.
The Commission further considers that AliExpress’s moderation and detection systems did not provide a level of protection consistent with the requirements of the Regulation. The measures implemented were allegedly insufficient to limit the dissemination of counterfeit and other illegal products, while the human resources allocated to these activities were not commensurate with the scale of the identified risks.
Viewed from this perspective, the decision is particularly noteworthy. The DSA does not impose an obligation of result requiring VLOPs to guarantee the complete absence of illegal content on their services. Such a requirement would, in any event, be difficult to reconcile with the enormous volume of content processed every day. Instead, the Regulation imposes particularly demanding due diligence obligations that closely resemble an enhanced obligation of means. Platforms must be able to demonstrate that they have properly identified systemic risks, including the risk of counterfeiting, allocated appropriate resources and implemented measures reasonably capable of mitigating those risks. In other words, what the Commission sanctions is not the occasional failure of the system, but the structural inadequacy of the organisational measures designed to prevent the dissemination of illegal content.
About IP Twins
IP Twins assists intellectual property rights holders in detecting and removing counterfeit content across major online marketplaces, social media platforms and other digital services. Through continuous monitoring and tailored enforcement procedures, we help brands reduce the spread of counterfeit products and protect their online reputation.