Europe’s Digital Networks Act must do more than strengthen telecoms. It must strengthen Europe’s digital economy.

Europe’s technological sovereignty will not be achieved by regulating foreign technology companies out of the market. At the same time, it will not be achieved simply by strengthening Europe’s telecom operators. It will come from building a digital ecosystem in which European companies of all sizes can innovate, compete and grow without being structurally dependent on foreign gatekeepers.

The proposed Digital Networks Act (DNA) matters far beyond the telecommunications sector. The draft report presented by MEP Michał Kobosko offers an important opportunity to turn a technical regulatory reform into an instrument of European technological sovereignty.

A digital economy that has outgrown its regulatory framework

For decades, European telecommunications operators have operated under detailed regulatory obligations, while global tech companies have progressively expanded their control over essential layers of the digital economy. The latter have largely excaped the regulatory control imposed on the telecom operators.

As a result, today, a handful of companies control great portions of the tech stack. Not only major digital platforms but also operating systems, cloud infrastructure, content delivery networks, artificial intelligence services and, increasingly, physical connectivity infrastructure like satellites and submarine cables.

Dominant tech companies are not subject to the same obligations as traditional telecom operators, even when they exercise substantial influence over how digital services reach citizens and businesses. Kobosko’s report rightly recognises this transformation. By proposing to extend certain regulatory responsibilities beyond traditional telecom operators, it introduces a fundamental principle: companies exercising comparable control over essential digital functions should face comparable responsibilities, regardless of their business model.

This is not about punishing successful global companies. It is about ensuring that European innovators can compete on fair terms.

From net neutrality to a level playing field across the digital ecosystem

One of the report’s most promising proposals is to extend open internet principles to actors beyond internet access providers. Today, net neutrality rules primarily constrain telecom operators. Yet the ability to influence how digital services are delivered lies on delivery networks, operating systems, application providers and AI platforms.

Imagine a European AI startup competing with a global tech giant that offers its own AI services while also controlling the infrastructure used to deliver competing services. For instance, Google, Microsoft and Amazon are both providers of AI services and of cloud computing to their AI competitors. If tech giants can make their own AI services faster or more reliable than those of their competitors, the European startup could lose customers not because its technology is inferior, but because its rival controls the infrastructure.

Kobosko proposes that AI providers, operating system providers, as well as dominant cloud and content delivery infrastructure providers, such as AWS, Google and Microsoft, must not compromise the equal treatment of traffic where they can influence its management or delivery. This is a fundamental recognition that the internet’s openness needs protection across the entire technological stack, not only at the network access layer.

Stronger European networks, but not at any cost

The report also helpfully addresses the imbalance in negotiating power between telecom operators and the largest providers of internet traffic. It would require providers accounting for at least 2% of peak downstream traffic in the EU to negotiate interconnection. Crucially, smaller content providers and startups would be excluded.

European telecom operators need the investment capacity to deploy advanced connectivity infrastructure. Stronger European networks are an essential component of technological sovereignty. But we must avoid confusing the interests of large telecom incumbents with those of the European digital economy as a whole.

Kobosko’s proposal has the merit of supporting the power rebalance between telecom operators and tech giants, where the latter should pay the extra cost when massively using the network infrastructure. At the same time, the report strongly maintains the principle of net neutrality, thus preventing telecom operators from treating the traffic of dominant tech companies, offering them an undue advantage vis-à-vis smaller competitors.

Indeed, the objective must be to encourage investment in infrastructure by telecom operators, as well as fair commercial relationships with dominant tech companies, while preserving the open internet that has enabled thousands of European SMEs to innovate.

Roaming, or a loophole for hyperscaler dominance?

Kobosko also proposes scrapping the limits on permanent roaming. Today, a German who travels to Italy can roam for free. However, if they move to Italy permanently, then they must buy an Italian SIM card instead of the German one. Removing that rule sounds like a win for the Single Market, and it could further lower prices.

But it has a hidden cost and it might open a major sovereignty loophole. Connectivity would no longer be tied to the European operators that build the local networks. Global tech platforms could easily bundle pan-European mobile services into their existing subscriptions. Imagine mobile connectivity becoming part of Amazon Prime or an Apple subscription, delivered through European virtual operators using local telecom networks.

European telcos would continue to build and maintain the networks, but risk being reduced to mere infrastructure wholesalers for global platforms. Tech giants would thus capture the customer relationships and most of the value. Europe would risk losing control of one of the few layers of the digital stack where it still has a strong industrial presence.

An opportunity to build European technological capacity

The Digital Networks Act should be judged against a simple test: will it make it easier for European technology companies to develop, deploy and scale their solutions? The Kobosko report provides several promising answers. It recognises the growing power of digital gatekeepers, promotes interoperability, seeks to rebalance responsibilities across the ecosystem and introduces sovereignty considerations into strategic infrastructure governance.

But its ambition should go further. Europe needs a regulatory framework that not only addresses market imbalances but actively creates opportunities for European technology providers. Open standards, fair access, proportionate obligations, competitive infrastructure markets and genuine supplier choice must become central objectives.

Above all, we must ensure that new obligations target companies according to their actual market power and control over essential infrastructure, rather than imposing disproportionate compliance costs on smaller innovators.

The Digital Networks Act can help deliver that vision. The Kobosko report is a promising starting point. Now the European Parliament has the opportunity to turn that ambition into concrete rules that strengthen not only Europe’s connectivity infrastructure, but Europe’s technological future.