On Monday, AliExpress, Alibaba’s subsidiary, was slapped with a record-breaking €550 million (US$629 million) fine by the European Union for its failure to address sales of illegal, dangerous and counterfeit items on its platform. This penalty is considered to be the largest to date, issued by the European Commission in line with the EU’s Digital Services Act, a prominent law that mandates online platforms of substantial size to augment their efforts in combating harmful and illicit content.
This penalty is the third of its kind issued by the European Commission, following charges placed on AliExpress in June of the previous year for non-compliance with a Digital Services Act stipulation. This regulation requires platforms to evaluate and reduce the risk of distributing illegal products. AliExpress was given until October 20 to suggest corrective actions. Should the regulatory body determine in December that the company has failed to meet the requirements of the Digital Services Act, further sanctions may be levied.
The EU’s tech chief, Henna Virkkunen, expressed concern over this issue, describing it as highly risky for consumers and unfair to companies that abide by the rules. She highlighted the vast user base of AliExpress in Europe, standing at 193 million last year, compared to Shein’s 156 million and Temu’s 130 million. Temu has also been subject to fines under the Digital Services Act, and Shein is currently under investigation.
AliExpress has voiced its intention to contest the fine, deeming it as excessive. “Today’s decision and disproportionate fine disregards our robust risk management structure and the substantial, proactive improvements we’ve implemented,” AliExpress stated via email. The company also indicated its active collaboration with the Commission to satisfy its evolving expectations.
The Commission criticized AliExpress for not adequately assessing whether it had sufficient personnel to manage risks and for overestimating the efficacy of its system in identifying and removing illicit products. Furthermore, the Commission took issue with the company’s ineffective penalty policy, which allowed penalized businesses to continue selling illegal products on its platform.
The regulator also noted that AliExpress’s “brand authorisation” system, designed to deter counterfeit sales, was insufficient and easily bypassed by traders selling fraudulent items. There was also criticism of the company’s advertising and recommender systems for contributing to the spread of illicit products and relying on one quantitative indicator to assess the moderation system’s effectiveness in preventing the appearance or re-emergence of illegal products in similar forms.
However, the regulator did consider the novelty of the Digital Services Act as a mitigating factor when determining the fine, which could have been even larger. This penalty far surpasses the €120 million fine imposed on Elon Musk’s social media platform X and the €200 million fine on Temu, both for Digital Services Act violations.
What is the significance of the fine imposed on AliExpress by the European Union?
This penalty, amounting to €550 million (US$629 million), is a record-breaking fine issued by the European Commission under the EU’s Digital Services Act. It highlights the EU’s stance on ensuring large online platforms take more responsibility in preventing the distribution of illegal and harmful content.
How has AliExpress responded to the fine?
AliExpress has expressed its intention to appeal the fine, deeming it as excessive. The company asserts that this penalty neglects the robust risk management framework they have established and the proactive enhancements they’ve implemented in their operations.
What criticisms has the European Commission voiced regarding AliExpress’s operations?
The Commission has criticized AliExpress for inadequately assessing risks and overestimating its system’s effectiveness in identifying and removing illicit products. Other criticisms include the company’s ineffective penalty policy, its “brand authorisation” system’s shortcomings, and its advertising and recommender systems’ role in spreading illegal products.
