Summarize this content to 2000 words in 6 paragraphs in Arabic
\n A Berlin court ruled in favour of two German nonprofits, who sued X for breaching EU law by not giving them access to data to study how posts on the platform could influence the upcoming election.
\n ADVERTISEMENTTwo German non-profit organisations won a lawsuit against Elon Musk’s X after the social media platform failed to provide them with data ahead of the upcoming election. Thelawsuit filed by Germany\u2019s Democracy Reporting International (DRI) and the Society for Civil Rights (Gesellschaft f\u00fcr Freiheitsrechte, GFF) on February 4 alleges that X violates the EU\u2019s Digital Services Act (DSA) that compels platforms to provide researchers with public data \u201cwithout undue delay\u201d.\u00a0The Berlin Regional Court ruled less than 72 hours later that X must grant both organisations “unrestricted access to all publicly available data” now and until shortly after the election, the non-profits said. The X data will be included in a wider, three-year research project that examines the online political discourse in the run-up to several major elections, including last year\u2019s European Parliament elections.\u201cThis decision is a huge victory for academic freedom and our democracy,” Simone Ruf, lawyer and deputy director of GFF\u2019s Center for User Rights, said in a statement. “We have secured access to crucial research data and are blocking attempts to manipulate elections. It is a strong signal for protecting fundamental rights in the digital age,” Ruf added.A spokesperson from DRI said it is the first lawsuit to their knowledge in Germany and the EU for this right to access data, though the EU is stillinvestigating X over possible DSA breaches.\u00a0Paid data plans \u2018dissuade\u2019 researchers, EU saysUnder the DSA, \u201cvery large\u201d platforms are required to provide access to their data to non-profits, organisations and associations that use it for research on the \u201cdetection, identification and understanding of systemic risks\u201d on social media.\u00a0The lawsuit said both organisations filled out X\u2019s onlineform for researcher access to data in April 2024 as part of their wider research project. DRI\u2019s application was denied in November.\u00a0The statement continued that other platforms have allowed DRI and GFF to access the data they need for their studies, but not X. They say it\u2019s important for them to fulfil their role by researching these risks.X gives limitedfree access to its Application Programming Interface (API), but if people want a higher volume of data, they have to pay a monthlyfee for \u201cPro access\u201d of up to $5,000 (\u20ac4,794), a cost that a spokesperson for DRI said is \u201cprohibitively expensive\u201d.\u00a0Plus, the \u201cPro Access\u201d tier only gives access to one million monthly X posts, which the lawsuit alleges will not be enough to effectively evaluate systemic risks on the platform.\u00a0\u00a0\u201cIf researchers ask about posts that have a certain keyword from a disinformation campaign and it\u2019s particularly virulent, your monthly budget can already be used up by this one request,\u201d the lawsuit says.The European Commission\u2019s initial investigation into X agreed, noting in a 2024 pressrelease that the company \u201cappears to dissuade researchers from carrying out their research projects, or leave them with no other choice than to pay disproportionally high fees\u201d.\u00a0Euronews Next contacted X for comment but didn\u2019t receive an immediate reply.\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Summarize this content to 2000 words in 6 paragraphs in Arabic A Berlin court ruled in favour of two German nonprofits, who sued X for breaching EU law by not giving them access to data to study how posts on the platform could influence the upcoming election. ADVERTISEMENTTwo German non-profit organisations won a lawsuit against<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":197178,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[59],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-197177","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-travel"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197177","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=197177"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197177\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":197179,"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197177\/revisions\/197179"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/197178"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=197177"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=197177"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/globetimeline.com\/ar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=197177"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}