For others, including academics and Commission officials, the shift is less a sign of a new strategy and more the product of a new, more technical approach to regulation whose effectiveness is best measured in its market impact — not by the fines it generates.

“The goal of the DMA is to change behavior, not to maximize fines,” said Alexandre de Streel, academic director of the digital research program at the Centre on Regulation in Europe, a Brussels-based think tank. “I don’t think you can judge the willingness or the effectiveness based on the fine imposed on the operator.”

What has changed is the machinery, he argues. The priorities related to digital market dominance remain as they were — data aggregation practices, self-preferencing by platforms and access to app stores.

In the past few weeks, the European Commission has quietly wrapped up the first wave of cases — starting with the remaining Google probes. | Emmanuel Dunand/AFP via Getty Images

The quiet instrument

One tool that is doing more of the DMA’s work is the so-called specification decision: a technical order setting out what compliance should look like, with no finding of illegality or fine. In July, one such decision forced Google to share search data with rivals, while another opened its Android smartphone operating system to rival AI assistants.

Kay Jebelli of the Chamber of Progress, a tech industry coalition partly funded by Google and Apple, observes that the Commission wants to pursue a lower-profile strategy — in particular toward the Trump administration — while still packing a punch.

“The Commission has pretty much exhausted established competition theories,” Jebelli said. “As it ventures further into unknown territory, behavioral interventions like specification decisions and regulatory dialogue will stand on stronger legal footing and face less blowback from the U.S.”