EU Proposes Digital Fairness Act to Curb Deceptive Online Practices

The European Commission on Wednesday presented its proposed Digital Fairness Act, a sweeping package aimed at giving consumers more control over the time and money they spend online. The plan targets practices familiar to many internet users, such as a free streaming trial that quietly turns into a year-long paid subscription.

Under the proposal, companies would have to remind customers before a free trial ends and obtain their explicit consent before charging them. Cancelling a subscription online would become easier, and businesses would need to send reminders before certain contracts renew automatically.

Agustin Reyna, director general of the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC), which pushed for stronger EU rules against manipulative online practices, welcomed the plan as a starting point. "We haven't seen that kind of reform in consumer protection in the last 20 years," he told DW.

The draft law also takes aim at so-called dark patterns, marketing tactics designed to pressure users into purchases. One example is a hotel booking site that claims only three rooms remain to rush a decision. Dynamic pricing would face new transparency rules: a concert ticket could still become more expensive while a buyer waits in an online queue, but the seller would have to display the current price and state the maximum the customer could be asked to pay.

Online games are another focus. Children would no longer be able to pay to win or advance to the next level. Marketing and personalized advertising would need clear labeling, with restrictions when children are involved. Consumers would also gain the option to switch off features that encourage endless scrolling, such as video autoplay, part of an effort to make apps and websites less addictive.

Christoph Busch, an academic specializing in consumer law and digital services at Osnabrück University in Germany, argued that letting users opt out does not go far enough, and that requiring them to actively opt in would be more effective. "But then there is always the question of proportionality," he said. "And I think here the European legislators are trying to balance different interests."

Those competing interests are especially visible in the gaming sector. Video Games Europe and the European Games Developer Federation called the proposal "unworkable, unjustified and disproportionate," warning that a broadly worded ban on selling children features that help them advance "could cover almost any purchase in a game." Busch rejected that reasoning, saying that if a business model relies on addictive design features, "then maybe your business model has to be reviewed."

Catalina Goanta, an associate professor of private law and technology at Utrecht University, told DW that "regulation can very easily slide into overregulation." While she considers the act a solid and reasonable compromise, she said banning dark patterns and doomscrolling outright would be too prohibitive, and that many current problems could be solved by enforcing existing rules more effectively. She noted that past EU regulation has made the European market harder to access, particularly for small online businesses. Reyna disagreed, arguing the single rulebook simplifies matters: "Instead of having 27 different regulations to adhere to, companies will now only get one."

Companies that violate the law could face fines of up to six percent of their global annual revenue. The European Parliament and the Council, representing member state governments, must still agree on the final text and formally adopt it, and experts expect changes during that process. "It will be a difficult trialogue, especially in this climate of simplification and deregulation with a focus on strengthening European competitiveness," Busch said. Reyna sounded more hopeful, noting that while parliament is "a divided house, much more than in the past," consumer protection "brings parties together because it brings tangible outcomes to people."