The School Bell That Rings for War

On 1 September, known in Russia as Knowledge Day, thousands of schoolchildren were once again welcomed back with the ringing of the symbolic first bell, marking the beginning of new school year. However, this school bell does not toll for knowledge or peace. Instead, it symbolizes how Russia has transformed schools into factories for transmitting state-sponsored propaganda to younger generations. In this blog, I explain how Russia is strategically weaponizing the educational system to raise a militarized generation of subjects that accepts and embraces the normalcy of war. It seeks to achieve this goal, inter alia, through military training and involvement of children in the production of combat equipment; obligating teachers to teach state-mandated falsification of history; and forcing cultural assimilation of Ukrainians living in occupied territories.  

Copyright, AI, and the Future of Internet Search before the CJEU

With Like Company v Google, the first groundbreaking AI copyright case is now headed to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In this case, a Hungarian press publisher challenges Google and its Gemini chatbot for reproducing and communicating its editorial content without authorisation. The Court’s decision will establish the legal framework for AI’s relationship with copyright and press publishers’ rights across the EU. It will potentially reshape how generative AI systems can or cannot lawfully access, process and reproduce journalistic and other protected content. This may even fundamentally affect the economic and technical architecture of future AI development.

The GPAI Code of Practice

On 10 July 2025, the European Commission published the final version of its Code of Practice for General-Purpose AI (GPAI) – a voluntary rulebook developed by a group of independent experts and more than 1,400 stakeholders from industry, academia, civil society, and rightsholders. The Code is meant to prepare providers for what’s ahead: it offers a straightforward way to start complying with future obligations under the AI Act. Its success will ultimately depend on whether it manages to reduce compliance burdens and provide legal certainty. Even if not universally adopted, it could still serve as a regulatory benchmark under the AI Act.

Independence as a Desideratum

A recent report claiming that EU tech regulation has entered the ongoing trade negotiations with the U.S. has sparked fears that enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA) might be halted altogether. Although the DSA only came into full effect in February 2024, the European Commission’s subsequent enforcement has already showcased conflicts regarding its role as an autonomous political and administrative enforcement body. Considering the potential impact of the DSA on online communication, the Commission’s current role in DSA enforcement raises serious concerns. This calls for a search for alternative models of DSA enforcement. Three options present themselves.

Reforming the GDPR

After a surge of new digital legislation over the past two years, the European Commission appears to have no intention of easing its pace in reshaping Europe’s regulatory landscape. This includes proposals to reform the GDPR. Regulatory reforms should, however, focus on strengthening enforcement and fixing the structural problems of the GDPR, rather than merely simplifying and deregulating it.

The Antagonistic Unity of Copyright and Freedom of the Arts

On 17 June 2025, Advocate General Emiliou delivered his opinion in the second referral of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) to the CJEU in the case “Pelham” – also known as “Metall auf Metall” (Case C-590/23). He defines “pastiche” – currently the most controversial concept of European copyright law – and makes a fundamental statement on EU copyright law and its relationship to freedom of the arts as guaranteed by Art. 13 CFR.The InfoSoc Directive, which is at the heart of EU copyright law, is too restrictive with regard to the artistic use of copyright-protected works and therefore not compatible with the Charter’s freedom of the arts. Emiliou’s opinion is a breakthrough. It grounds copyright in freedom of the arts and paves the way for a new perspective on the relationship between copyright and artistic freedom.

Reform ohne Wirkung

Im vergangenen Monat hat die Kommission einen Reformvorschlag zur DSGVO vorgelegt. Konkret soll Art. 30 DSGVO angepasst werden, der Datenverarbeiter verpflichtet ein sog. „Verarbeitungsverzeichnis“ zu führen. Bisher galt für Unternehmen mit weniger als 250 Beschäftigten eine Ausnahme. Künftig soll diese Grenze auf 750 Mitarbeiter angehobenen werden. Doch der Vorschlag polarisiert.

Artificial Constitutionalism?

Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly becoming embedded in everyday life, serving functions that range from professional assistance to entertainment and even emotional support. As their popularity and adoption grow, so do the legal questions surrounding their use – especially when interactions with individuals result in harm. A crucial threshold issue in establishing the legal framework applicable to LLMs, including the responsibilities of their developers, is whether their outputs – often resembling human expression – can receive constitutional protection as “speech” The question is also key to determining the applicable legal regime, the liability of AI developers for such content, and its potential consequences for individuals.

The Meta Oversight Board in the Trump Era

In its latest decisions following major policy shifts at Meta, the Oversight Board appears to be moving toward a more permissive approach to harmful or discriminatory content. This post argues that such a trend could reshape the boundaries of acceptable speech online and raises pressing questions about the Board’s independence and role in an increasingly politicised content governance landscape.

Anatomy of a Fall

On 11 February 2025, the Commission published its 2025 work programme and revealed the likely withdrawal of the Proposal for an Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive (‘AILD proposal’), citing “no foreseeable agreement” among Member States. This blog post highlights the proposed AILD’s main merits and shortcomings and it explores the implications of its likely withdrawal for EU tech regulation by clarifying the interplay between AI liability rules, the AI Act, and the PLD.