Anyone can read all the comments in this thread and judge for themselves how this system works in practice. Several users say they received a favourable decision from Appeals Centre Europe
My experience with Appeals Centre Europe was deeply disappointing.
I submitted a dispute concerning YouTube’s decision to block monetisation on a compliant channel because it was linked to another suspended channel. The submission form allowed only 3,500 characters and did not allow me to attach evidence, screenshots or a detailed written memorandum.
ACE then contacted YouTube and later closed my case with the following explanation:
“Unfortunately, the information provided by the platform regarding your appeal indicates that it does not fall within our jurisdiction.”
I was never shown what YouTube had told ACE. I was not allowed to respond to it. ACE did not identify the exact reason why my case supposedly fell outside its jurisdiction.
Instead, it provided a generic list of excluded matters such as identity theft, hacked accounts, cybersecurity, spam, copyright and child sexual abuse material. My dispute concerned none of those subjects.
The practical result was that the platform I was challenging was able to provide undisclosed information that determined whether my case could even be examined, while I could not see that information, challenge it or submit proper supporting documents.
The case was therefore closed without any real examination of the merits.
ACE also publicly acknowledges that its decisions are not binding and that the platform ultimately decides whether to implement them. Reading the public comments of other users, it is easy to find people who say they received a favourable decision but obtained no actual restoration months later.
A favourable opinion that the platform can simply ignore is not an effective remedy.
In my case, the economic damage continues, YouTube’s decision remains unchanged and ACE provided no concrete protection.
I intend to report the entire procedure to Coimisiún na Meán, the authority that certified ACE, and to the European Commission, so they can assess whether this system genuinely meets the requirements of independence, impartiality, fairness and effectiveness under the Digital Services Act.
European users deserve transparent and effective protection, not an opaque procedure in which the platform sees the user’s complaint, submits undisclosed information and retains the final power to reject or ignore the outcome.
18 juin 2026
Avis spontané