Dual oversight of cloud markets: the growing interplay between sector regulation and competition law in France

Estelle Rigal-Alexandre
Soulier Bunch, Paris
erigalalexandre@soulierbunch.com

Cloud as a strategic infrastructure within the AI value chain

Cloud services have become a foundational layer of the digital economy and, even more so, of the generative AI value chain. Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) and Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) models underpin access to the computing capacity, data and the tools required to train and deploy AI models.

It is against this backdrop that the French Competition Authority (FCA) initiated an ex officio inquiry as early as 2023 into competition in the cloud sector,^[1] culminating in an Opinion of 29 June 2023 that identified several structural risks within the IaaS and PaaS markets.

First, the Authority highlights the contractual imbalance between hyperscalers and their customers, resulting from the complexity of cloud offerings, which are often bundled, opaque and subject to frequent changes. This lack of transparency may prevent business users from anticipating the total cost of a service offer, thereby limiting their ability to compare offerings or to consider switching providers.

Second, the FCA highlights cloud credits offered as part of support programmes for innovative start-ups. When granted in substantial amounts or over significant periods, these credits may generate lock-in effects potentially amounting to exclusionary or even predatory practices.

Lastly, the FCA examines egress fees, ie fees charged when transferring data to another provider, within the context of the Data Act.^[2] Such fees, which are difficult to anticipate, can constitute a significant barrier to mobility and hinder multi-cloud strategies.

This analysis was supplemented on 28 June 2024 by an Opinion on the competitive functioning of the generative artificial intelligence sector,^[3] in which the FCA adopted a more forward-looking and policy-oriented approach.

In particular, it encourages the European Commission to pay close attention to providers of Model-as-a-Service (MaaS), which could potentially qualify as gatekeepers under the Digital Markets Act.^[4] It also invites national authorities, in particular the French Directorate General for Competition Policy, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control (DGCCRF), to closely monitor cloud credit practices in the AI sector, while calling for continued public investment in European supercomputers.

National anticipation of the Data Act: the SREN Law and the role of ARCEP

In parallel with this competition-driven dynamic, France adopted, on 21 May 2024, the Law aimed at securing and regulating the digital space (the ‘SREN Law’),^[5] which anticipates the entry into force of the Data Act and strengthens the oversight of cloud service providers.

The SREN Law notably provides for a framework governing cloud credits, including limits on their duration, a prohibition of exclusivity clauses, restrictions on tying practices and the possibility for the FCA to investigate self-preferencing practices. While certain implementing instruments are still awaited, the legislative message is clear.

As regards data transfer fees, the SREN Law goes beyond the Data Act by aligning such fees with actual costs in multi-cloud strategies. A Ministerial Decree of 17 November 2025 effectively prohibited data extraction and transfer fees,^[6] following ARCEP’s assessment that these operations entail zero incremental costs.

The SREN Law also pre-empts European provisions on interoperability and data portability^[7] and tasks ARCEP with issuing technical specifications to be in force until 12 January 2027.

Accordingly, a few days after the entry into force of the Data Act, ARCEP issued a recommendation to that effect.^[8] Although non-binding, this guidance sets out best practices intended, in particular, to help shape the European Commission’s ongoing work.

In particular, ARCEP recommends the publication of detailed information on the degree of interoperability of services, inspired by the Switching Cloud Providers and Porting Data (SWIPO) codes of conduct. This includes transferable data and assets, migration procedures, available technical methods (eg, APIs and encryption), technical dependencies and monitoring tools. ARCEP emphasises the need for stable and well-documented APIs, recommends the use of the OpenAPI specification and advocates a 12-month notice period prior to any update lacking backward compatibility.

On 16 February 2026, ARCEP launched two public consultations with a view to adopting guidelines on, first, switching charges other than those linked to data transfer (including migration support services) and secondly, costs attributable to data transfers in multi-cloud scenarios.^[9] ARCEP notably considers that the internal infrastructure costs associated with transporting data are not directly attributable to multi-cloud transfers, unlike some interconnection costs, such as peering or IP transit, which could therefore be charged to the user.

This technical approach illustrates a granular regulation of the economic parameters of cloud services, providing an ex-ante complement to ex-post competition analysis.

From sector inquiry to enforcement: self-preferencing and litigation prospects

Building on its sector inquiries, as well as on the Data Act and the SREN Law, the FCA submitted a report on 21 November 2025 to the French Parliament on self-preferencing practices in the cloud sector,^[10] following a public market consultation.

Several practices implemented by hyperscalers have been identified as potentially falling within the scope of the self-preferencing framework introduced by the SREN Law, suggesting a possible shift towards enforcement proceedings before the FCA:

• unfavourable pricing or technical and functional specifications applied to services or software distributed by third-party providers;
• conduct by software publishers favouring partner hyperscalers; and
• exclusive access to certain AI tools on hyperscalers’ cloud infrastructures.

The convergence between sector-specific regulation and competition oversight equips the French authorities with an enforcement arsenal enabling them to actively shape digital markets at a pivotal juncture.

Conclusion

The French experience reflects a coordinated surge in the involvement of national authorities regarding the regulation of cloud services and generative AI. The interaction between competition law and sector-specific regulation, modelled on the oversight of the telecoms sector, provides a comprehensive framework for addressing challenges related to interoperability, switching and self-preferencing in a consistent manner.

As the Data Act, the Digital Markets Act and the Artificial Intelligence Act^[11] are now taking effect, France is positioning itself as a testing ground for a hybrid framework that may inspire other jurisdictions facing the challenges of digital infrastructure concentration and the emergence of new bottlenecks within the value chain.