EU General Court on Stripchat: when is an online platform “very large”?

Arno Lampmann

From 45 million active users in the EU, an online platform counts as “very large” and becomes subject to the strictest obligations of the Digital Services Act. On 14 October 2026, the General Court of the European Union ruled that the European Commission was right to designate the adult platform Stripchat as such, even though later data showed a lower user number. For platforms and marketplaces, the question of how to count users has become a legal question with significant consequences.

The Digital Services Act (Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, DSA) distinguishes between ordinary online platforms and “very large online platforms” (VLOPs). The second group is subject to additional obligations: risk assessments, independent audits, advertising repositories, data access for researchers, an annual supervisory fee and direct supervision by the European Commission. Whether a platform belongs to this group depends on a single figure. How that figure is calculated is regulated by the DSA only in broad terms.

In case T-134/24, Technius v Commission, the General Court of the European Union (EuG) has addressed this question in detail for the first time. The key points:

The Commission was entitled to calculate the user number itself on the basis of the same analytics data and to reject the operator’s method, which artificially lowered the figure.
What matters is the factual and legal situation at the time of the designation. Later corrections by the data provider do not affect its lawfulness.
Where no binding calculation method exists, the operator itself must choose a reliable method. This does not breach the principle of legal certainty.
The judgment is not yet final. An appeal to the Court of Justice is limited to points of law.

What was the Stripchat case about?

The case concerned whether Stripchat had exceeded the threshold of 45 million average monthly active recipients in the EU in 2023. Under Art. 24(2) DSA, providers of online platforms must publish this figure regularly. In February 2023, the operator Technius Ltd reported around 31.8 million active recipients. The figure was based on data from the analytics service Similarweb. From this data, Technius deducted so-called “bounced visits”, meaning visits in which users leave the site without seeing any content.

The Commission considered this calculation too low. It relied on the “unique visitors” metric of the same service and arrived at more than 62 million average monthly visitors. On 20 December 2023, it designated Stripchat, together with Pornhub and XVideos, as a very large online platform. Technius brought an action against the designation, arguing in particular that the data was unreliable and that the principle of legal certainty had been breached.

What did the General Court decide?

On 14 October 2026, the General Court dismissed the action in its entirety (Press Release No 146/26). The Commission had stated sufficient reasons for its decision: it had relied on the same Similarweb data as Stripchat itself, considered it reliable and explained clearly why the operator’s method could not produce a reliable result.

On the substance, the Court held that the Commission’s method was permissible. The “unique visitors” metric already involves a filtering process that removes a large proportion of “bounced visits”. An additional flat-rate deduction would have artificially reduced the figure. The Commission was therefore entitled to reject the operator’s method.

The Court also rejected the argument based on legal certainty. That principle does not require every rule to eliminate all doubts about its interpretation or to prescribe a specific calculation method. The concept of an “active recipient” in Art. 3(p) DSA is sufficiently clear for providers to calculate their user numbers. As long as no legal act lays down a method, the operator must choose a reliable one.

Why does the later correction of the user numbers not count?

Because the lawfulness of a decision is assessed on the basis of the facts and the law as they stood at the time it was adopted. After the designation, Similarweb changed its methodology. Using the corrected values, the figure for the relevant period was only around 37.3 million active recipients, well below 45 million.

The Court held that this was irrelevant. When designating a platform, the Commission had to take into account the information available to it under Art. 33(4) DSA: the figures published by the provider, the information supplied on request and any other information available. The data corrected only later and the new methodology were not part of this.

This is an important lesson for platform operators. Anyone who relies on overturning a disputed designation later with better figures will be too late in court. The right moment to raise objections is the procedure before the designation. Where the Commission relies on information other than that reported by the provider, it must give the provider the opportunity to comment within ten working days.

The Commission revoked Stripchat’s designation in May 2025 after its user number had remained below the threshold for one year. Under Art. 33(5) and (6) DSA, the special obligations only end four months after notification of the revocation. For the period in which Stripchat counted as a very large online platform, the original designation remains the legal basis of all obligations attached to it.

Which obligations depend on the designation as a very large online platform?

The designation triggers an extensive set of obligations that apply four months after notification of the designation. Very large online platforms must, among other things:

identify and assess the systemic risks of their service at least once a year, such as the dissemination of illegal content or risks to minors (Art. 34 DSA), and take effective mitigation measures (Art. 35 DSA),
undergo an independent audit every year (Art. 37 DSA),
maintain a publicly searchable repository of their advertising (Art. 39 DSA),
grant authorities and vetted researchers access to data (Art. 40 DSA),
set up an independent compliance function (Art. 41 DSA) and pay an annual supervisory fee to the Commission (Art. 43 DSA).

Supervision lies with the Commission. Infringements can lead to fines of up to 6% of worldwide annual turnover (Art. 74 DSA). The Temu case shows that this is not theoretical: the Commission imposed a fine of EUR 200 million on the marketplace because its risk assessment had not adequately captured the risks posed by illegal and unsafe products.

In May 2025, the Commission opened proceedings against Stripchat, Pornhub, XNXX and XVideos concerning the protection of minors. This is another reason why the question of whether, and for how long, a platform counted as “very large” is of considerable practical importance.

Which platforms have to publish their user numbers at all?

In principle, every online platform that does not qualify as a micro or small enterprise. Under Art. 24(2) DSA, providers must publish, at least every six months and in a publicly accessible section of their online interface, the average monthly number of active recipients of the service in the Union, calculated as an average over the preceding six months. Online platforms are not only social networks, but also marketplaces, review portals, app stores and video and streaming services with user-generated content.

Micro and small enterprises within the meaning of Recommendation 2003/361/EC are exempt from this publication obligation (Art. 19(1) DSA). However, at the request of the Digital Services Coordinator or the Commission, they too must communicate their user numbers without undue delay and explain the calculation (Art. 24(3) DSA). In Germany, the Federal Network Agency (Bundesnetzagentur) is the Digital Services Coordinator.

Who counts as an “active recipient” is defined in Art. 3(p) DSA: anyone who provides information on the platform or is exposed to the information disseminated there. According to Recital 77, automated access by bots and scrapers may be disregarded. Multiple counting of the same person should be avoided where possible. The DSA expressly does not require individual tracking of users. Many details remain open, such as the minimum duration of a visit for it to be “active”. The judgment shows that this uncertainty can work against the operator if it cannot substantiate its deductions.

What does this mean for platform operators and marketplaces?

The judgment clearly places responsibility for a robust count on providers. Anyone who operates a platform or is growing fast in the EU should treat the user number as a compliance issue:

Document the method: Record in writing which data sources you use, how you count and why. A method you cannot explain to the Federal Network Agency or the Commission will be of no use in an emergency.
Substantiate deductions: Deductions for bots, multiple access or very short visits are possible, but must be based on verifiable data. A flat-rate deduction from values that had already been filtered was the decisive mistake in the Stripchat case.
Meet the deadlines: Publish the figure at least every six months in an easy-to-find place. Check whether the exemption for micro and small enterprises applies and whether you can rely on the twelve-month transition period under Art. 19(1) DSA after losing that status.
Set up an early warning system: If the figure approaches the threshold of 45 million, risk assessment, audit processes and the advertising repository should be prepared. After a designation, only four months remain.
Take the hearing seriously: If the Commission relies on its own data instead of your figures, the ten-working-day period for comments is the best opportunity to correct an incorrect number. In court, what counts is what the Commission knew when it took its decision.
Consider legal remedies: A designation decision can be challenged by an action for annulment before the General Court. The time limit is two months plus a flat ten-day extension on account of distance.

This also applies to providers from third countries. Marketplaces such as Temu, Shein and AliExpress have already been designated as very large online platforms. Any foreign marketplace or app provider growing in Europe should set up its user count from the outset so that it withstands scrutiny by the Commission.

What does this mean for retailers and businesses on the large platforms?

Even businesses that do not operate a platform themselves feel the effects. Very large online platforms must actively assess and mitigate the risks posed by illegal content and products. In practice, this leads to stricter checks on sellers, more automated suspensions and higher requirements for evidence, for example on product safety.

At the same time, the DSA strengthens the rights of those affected. If a platform suspends an account or removes content, it must give reasons for the decision (Art. 17 DSA) and offer an internal complaint-handling system (Art. 20 DSA). The duty to state reasons applies to all hosting service providers, the complaint-handling system to all online platforms above the small-enterprise threshold, not only to the very largest. Anyone who wants to challenge an unjustified suspension can rely on these provisions and, where necessary, seek interim relief before the German courts.

Frequently asked questions about very large online platforms

When is an online platform “very large” under the DSA?+

From an average of at least 45 million active recipients per month in the EU, calculated over the preceding six months. The obligations only apply once the European Commission has formally designated the platform, namely four months after notification of the designation (Art. 33 DSA).

What did the General Court decide in the Stripchat case?+

In its judgment of 14 October 2026 (T-134/24), the General Court dismissed the action against the designation of Stripchat as a very large online platform. The Commission was entitled to calculate the user number itself and to reject a method that artificially lowered the figure. Later data corrections do not affect the lawfulness of the decision. The judgment is not yet final.

Does every platform have to publish its user numbers?+

Yes, at least every six months, unless it is a micro or small enterprise (Art. 24(2) and Art. 19(1) DSA). At the request of the Digital Services Coordinator or the Commission, small providers must also communicate their figures and explain the calculation.

Who counts as an active recipient?+

Anyone who provides information on the platform or is exposed to the information disseminated there (Art. 3(p) DSA). Bots and scrapers may be excluded, and multiple counting should be avoided where possible. Every deduction must, however, be based on verifiable data.

What do very large online platforms risk in the event of infringements?+

The Commission can impose fines of up to 6% of worldwide annual turnover (Art. 74 DSA) and periodic penalty payments. It fined Temu EUR 200 million for an inadequate risk assessment.

Do you operate a platform or marketplace in the EU, or has a platform suspended your account?

We review your DSA obligations, support you in proceedings before the Federal Network Agency and the European Commission and enforce your rights against large platforms. You will usually receive an initial assessment within 24 hours.