Thomas Le Bonniec was invited to speak on the 23rd of June, to the “Fight for Us not for them” event, held in Brussels, by organizations opposing the deregulation push on digital rights and especially the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) His presentation drew on Cecilia Rikap’s theory of digital dependency to argue that four main flows of data and knowledge currently move from the EU to the US for AI training purposes. Le Bonniec and Rikap argues that the Digital Omnibus (a series of amendment to the RGPD aimed to weaken it’s regulatory constraint) is going to accelerate these flows, and backfire on any innovation and digital sovereignty goals that have been set by European Institutions. The LeakyLM project, directed by the IMDEA Networks Institute, revealed that there were hidden data transfers when using the interface of 4 of the most commonly used LLMs. An other projetc in wich Le Bonniec is currently working and whose results will be released after the summer, has studied the behiavour of one work platform for “AI training” and found no fewer than 16 trackers on it. These flows are actually feeding directly into the AI for military use sector, as the same clients of this platform are engaged with the US department of war. Through his presentation, Thomas Le Bonniec suggests a few answers to the question : So what is there to be done, as the digital omnibus will accelerate the demotion of the EU into a digital periphery from which data and knowledge are extracted? Specifically on his last slide, where he suggests recommendations to repel modifications on articles 4, 9, 12, 13, and 88, of the GDPR, and embedding into law at the very least the algorithmic justice principle. He also argues that consent should be the sole legal basis for using personal data for AI slide thomasDownload

DiPLab’s Thomas Le Bonniec is the central voice in a new mini-series on Le Code a Changé (France Inter), one of France’s leading technology radio programs. Across three episodes, host Xavier de La Porte draws on Le Bonniec’s research and personal trajectory to examine one of the most urgent questions facing Europe today: what does it mean to be technologically dependent on American Big Tech, and what, if anything, can be done about it? Episode 1 — The Omnibus directive: a threat to personal data The series opens with the EU’s proposed Digital Omnibus directive, which Le Bonniec describes as a potential “oil spill on our personal data.” Framed by European policymakers as a simplification measure to ease regulatory burden on businesses, the directive risks quietly dismantling core protections established by the GDPR. Le Bonniec’s concern is that the directive introduces a subjective definition of personal data, allowing companies to decide for themselves whether the data they hold qualifies for protection. The right of access (one of European personal data protection pillars) is directly threatened. “You cannot be a free citizen if you are under constant surveillance,” he warns. “Mass surveillance, when named as such, tends to be associated with states… but corporations are just as capable of it.” Episode 2 — America, digital colonizer The second episode widens the lens. Le Bonniec traces a convergence between Silicon Valley’s techno-solutionist ideology and the political currents of Trumpism. Both share a vision of history in which a self-appointed elite carries the future of humanity on its shoulders. Europe’s digital dependency is not merely industrial, he argues: it is political. The erosion of European values and the mass capture of European data by American platforms represent a form of domination that too many European leaders continue to underestimate. Episode 3 — Story of a whistleblower The final episode is the most personal. Le Bonniec speaks from direct experience: he previously worked as a subcontractor for Apple, listening to recordings captured by voice assistants without users’ knowledge. Despite repeated scandals implicating Apple, Amazon, and Microsoft in mass data collection, no meaningful sanctions have followed. His conclusion is not resignation but a call for collective action: stop blaming individuals for structural problems, invest in free and open-source software as a path to sovereignty, and consider dismantling digital monopolies rather than merely regulating them.