X Prevents Research on Potential Election Interference
The social media platform X denied researchers access to public data on its platform. Together with Democracy Reporting International (DRI), we filed a lawsuit in summary proceedings.
RIGHT TO RESEARCH DATA NOT ONLY ENFORCEABLE IN IRELAND
One open legal question that we wanted to clarify with the lawsuit was the issue of where researchers can sue for access to research data. The Regional Court has now clearly answered this question: Researchers do not have to go to Ireland to file their complaint there, but can sue where they conduct their research. This is a great success, as it is the only way to ensure that the claim can be enforced in court.
RESEARCH PROJECT FOCUSED ON FEDERAL ELECTIONS
In summary proceedings, the Berlin Regional Court initially ordered X to grant DRI unrestricted access to all publicly available data from X until shortly after the general election in order to investigate whether the platform was influencing elections. The regional court reasoned that waiting any longer would thwart the research project, as the time immediately before the general election was crucial. After GFF and DRI applied to the court for a penalty payment, X lodged an objection. In addition, X filed motions for recusal against several judges at the regional court. The court granted one of these motions.
Declaration of there no longer being a need for adjudication
Publicly available data can change at any time, for example by being deleted by users or the platform. It was therefore important to obtain access to the data before the general election and not afterwards. The motion was therefore time-limited until shortly after the election. After the election was over, the motion also became obsolete due to the passage of time and the GFF and DRI had to declare to be no longer in need of adjudication ("Erledigterklärung"). Hence the only issue now were the costs. However, the court also had to take into account the extent to which our application for data access would have been successful if it had been decided in time.
Enforcing the Digital Services Act
The core of the lawsuit is to enforce a new legal provision of the DSA: the right to access research data (Article 40(12) DSA). This provision requires large online platforms to grant researchers immediate access to publicly available data on their platforms to investigate systemic risks. At the same time, the lawsuit seeks to clarify whether such cases for research data access can be brought to German courts.
DRI conducts research on political discourse on social media platforms in the run-up to elections in Europe, including the Bundestag election 2025. “Other platforms have granted us access to systematically track public debates on their platforms, but the company X has refused. We see it as our right under the Digital Services Act to access data and strengthen the public good by showing how political campaigns evolve on social media platforms,” says Michael Meyer-Resende, Executive Director of DRI.
Social Media influences public opinion
This lawsuit is part of the Center for User Rights, funded by the Mercator Foundation, Luminate, and the Open Society Foundation. Through this initiative, the GFF aims to sustainably strengthen, assert, and enforce users' rights while addressing the existing power imbalance between online platforms and their users. Beyond this specific case, the goal is to increase pressure on platforms. Social networks have a significant influence on public opinion and, consequently, on electoral processes. In Germany, there are already indications that manipulation campaigns have been launched. Access to relevant metrics from major platforms is a crucial tool to prevent elections from being influenced and disinformation from spreading.
