Those who depend on Google, Amazon, or Meta are living dangerously – and often only realize it when it's too late

Existential threat at the push of a button: How dangerous is dependence on Big Tech?

Powerless against Big Tech? What happens when the digital bouncer locks you out?

For countless companies, Google, Meta, and Amazon have long been the ultimate saviors for reach, customer acquisition, and revenue. But what began as a convenient and highly efficient solution is gradually turning into a fatal dependency trap for many medium-sized businesses. Nearly every second advertising euro in Germany now flows into the coffers of these tech giants. This immense market power harbors a gigantic risk, often overlooked in everyday practice: A sudden account suspension—often triggered automatically and without warning by an algorithm—can cut off the main sales channel in an instant and acutely threaten the company's economic survival.

While the European Union is attempting to curb the arbitrary actions of online platforms with new, stringent laws such as the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Digital Markets Act (DMA), affected companies often face an impenetrable wall of bureaucracy in a crisis. This comprehensive background report sheds light on what actually happens when a platform is blocked, which legal steps (and emergency measures) are promising, how German courts are currently ruling, and why legal action alone does not solve the problem. It demonstrates why the strategic development of proprietary digital infrastructures and so-called first-party data is no longer merely an option, but simply a matter of business survival.

Related to this:

• US corporate alert “Digital Kill Switch”: Framework for action for companies – Seven concrete steps towards AI resilience

When the digital doorman closes the door

Platform bans as an economic risk for companies – The silent takeover: How tech companies became the lifeline of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)

Anyone running a business today who takes digital sales seriously can hardly avoid a handful of global platforms. Amazon, Google, and Meta—these three corporations now account for around 72 percent of all digital advertising investments in the German advertising market; in relation to the entire German net advertising market, this already represents 49.3 percent of revenues in 2025—and forecasts for 2026 show that the 50 percent mark will already be exceeded. Nearly every second advertising euro in Germany thus flows into the coffers of these three corporations. This is not merely market concentration—it is a dependency structure that effectively places millions of companies in the hands of a few private platform operators.

This is not a conscious act of submission, but rather the result of a long growth process in which the platforms were simply better, cheaper, and had a wider reach than any alternatives. Companies gradually became entangled in this dependency. They reallocated advertising budgets, consolidated sales channels, integrated CRM systems, and handled all their customer communication via platforms they did not own. The result is a structural vulnerability that only becomes apparent when the worst happens: the loss of account access.

A 2025 survey conducted by the digital antitrust law firm Hausfeld in conjunction with YouGov clearly demonstrates the extent of this dependency. A total of 66.1 percent of the marketing decision-makers surveyed stated that their company's economic success depends on Big Tech platforms. For 22.7 percent, Google, Meta, or Amazon are even a central source of revenue or crucial to their survival. And if these platforms were to be down for even just one week, half of the companies would already face significant problems; 15 percent anticipate substantial revenue losses within just seven days in this scenario.

The scenario that nobody considers: What happens if the account is blocked?

For most companies, account suspension by a major tech platform is not a theoretical risk, but a real threat for which they are ill-prepared. The process is always similar: either the suspension occurs without warning, often triggered by automated systems that report suspicious activity, or it follows a policy violation that the company may not even have been aware of. In both cases, a significant portion of the value chain disappears from one moment to the next.

The economic consequences are immediate: revenue from advertising programs is halted, payouts are frozen, offers are deactivated, and access to customer data is cut off. For an Amazon seller, account suspension means all product listings disappear instantly. For a company that uses Google Ads as its primary lead generation channel, the flow of potential customers ceases abruptly. For a content creator on YouTube or meta-platforms, ongoing collaborations, payouts from partner programs, and years of building reach are at stake.

What makes this particularly painful is the asymmetry: A corporation like Amazon or Google can block an account in seconds – automatically, scalably, and with minimal effort. In contrast, affected companies sometimes face weeks of appeals processes, battling a bureaucracy with virtually no personal contact, where any successful reinstatement depends on the platform operator's goodwill. This power imbalance is structural and intentional – it's part of the business model.

A legal framework without teeth? What EU law actually protects

European law has responded to this structural power imbalance – but the protective effect is more nuanced than it initially appears. Three sets of regulations are centrally relevant here: the Platform-to-Business Regulation (P2B Regulation), the Digital Services Act (DSA), and the Digital Markets Act (DMA).

The P2B Regulation has been in force since July 2020 and represents the most important legal basis for protecting business users. It obliges platform operators to clearly and comprehensibly state in their terms and conditions under which a user account can be blocked or restricted. Furthermore, platforms must establish a free internal complaint management system and offer out-of-court dispute resolution mechanisms. In practice, this means that a block without a comprehensible justification that cannot be derived from the terms and conditions is contestable. The procedure must be transparent and comprehensible for the affected business. Since May 2024, the Federal Network Agency has been responsible for the official enforcement of this regulation in Germany and can impose fines of up to €300,000 for violations.

The Digital Services Act (DSA) has been directly applicable in all EU member states since February 17, 2024, and establishes a uniform legal framework for digital intermediation services for the first time. It obliges platform operators to provide reasons for restrictions imposed on users – this explicitly includes the termination of user accounts, the suspension or cessation of payments, and other restrictions on the service. If an account is blocked, the user has the right to challenge the decision; the platform must provide a fair and transparent appeals mechanism. Users can also claim compensation for damages resulting from DSA violations. In cases of serious infringement, the European Commission can impose fines of up to 6 percent of the platform's global annual turnover.

The Digital Markets Act (DMA) targets the most powerful players: it designates so-called gatekeepers and compels them to undergo structural changes in their behavior. Since March 2024, it has been legally binding for six named corporations: Apple, Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Meta, Microsoft, and ByteDance (TikTok). Among other things, the DMA prohibits these companies from giving preferential treatment to their own products and services over those of their competitors. Violations can result in fines of up to 10 percent of global revenue, and up to 20 percent for repeat offenses. This is structurally effective – but initially offers no immediate help to an individual company facing account suspension.

The honest assessment of the European legal framework is therefore this: it exists, it is substantially better than it was five years ago, and it creates real points of attack. But it is not automatic. Most protective regulations are only as strong as the will and capacity to enforce them – and that requires proactive measures from the companies concerned.

When the account is blocked: The correct procedure in the acute phase

The first reaction after an account is understandably panic. The second should be documentation. Anyone who records everything from the very first moment – ​​screenshots of the suspension notification, timestamps, all communication with support – lays the foundation for all further steps, whether internal, out-of-court, or in court. This documentation is not optional, but essential: Without evidence, neither an effective appeal can be formulated nor a credible claim for damages can be quantified.

The first formal step in almost all cases is an internal appeal through the platform's own process. Amazon sellers, for example, must submit a so-called Plan of Action (POA) that specifically details which policy violations have been resolved or why they never occurred in the first place. Google provides its own appeal process for suspended advertisers, which requires identity verification and a detailed explanation. These platform-internal processes are time-consuming and often frustrating, but they are the necessary first step—and in many cases, the most successful.

If the platform upholds its decision despite an appeal, legal support is the next sensible step. Specialized law firms in IT law, competition law, and platform law can significantly expedite the process: They are familiar with the effective arguments against the platforms and know when taking legal action in a German court has a prospect of success. In urgent cases, particularly when the company's continued existence is at risk, an injunction may be considered—a fast-track court proceeding that can compel immediate unblocking.

The quasi-in-house solution: How Xpert.Digital closes operational gaps in B2B marketing and sales – Smart Content-Driven Business - Image: Xpert.Digital

Xpert.Digital is a data-driven B2B industry hub led by Konrad Wolfenstein . The company acts as an external, quasi-in-house solution for industrial partners, closing operational gaps in marketing, content, and sales – without requiring additional resources on the client side.

More information here:

• The quasi-in-house solution: How Xpert.Digital closes operational gaps in B2B marketing and sales – Smart Content-Driven Business

Between success and failure: What German courts have decided on platform bans

Case law regarding platform suspensions is no longer new in Germany, but it is far from uniform. There are cases in which merchants have successfully forced the reactivation of their Amazon accounts – and cases in which the courts have ruled in favor of the platform operators or denied jurisdiction.

A particularly groundbreaking ruling was issued in March 2025: The Düsseldorf Regional Court, in its decision of March 27, 2025 (Case No. 14d O 8/25), granted an immediate preliminary injunction against Amazon EU S.à.rl. Amazon had deactivated a merchant's account without any comprehensible justification, removed her listings, and withheld her funds. The court found that Amazon, by failing to provide an individual explanation and adhering to an opaque verification process, had violated Section 19 of the German Act Against Restraints of Competition (GWB) – the antitrust prohibition against abusing a dominant market position. This decision sends a strong signal: It demonstrates that courts are prepared to recognize Amazon's market power as a systemic problem and not merely as a private contractual dispute.

Early on, the Hanover Regional Court established in a landmark ruling that blocking an Amazon account can constitute an abuse of a dominant market position. In 2019, the Hildesheim Regional Court initially issued a preliminary injunction compelling Amazon to release nearly €30,000 in account balances – although the court later revoked the injunction, citing jurisdictional issues. In 2022, the Munich I Regional Court clarified that it has jurisdiction over antitrust and competition law claims related to Amazon account suspensions.

What these rulings demonstrate is that there is no easy, predetermined path to success. The chances of success in legal challenges depend heavily on whether the suspension was unjustified, whether the platform operator's market power is sufficiently documented, and which court is chosen. Jurisdiction issues pose a significant obstacle: Since corporations like Amazon have their European headquarters in Luxembourg, it is often unclear which court has jurisdiction in a given case. Nevertheless, the trend in German jurisprudence is clear: Arbitrary suspensions by dominant platforms are contestable – and increasingly, successfully challenged.

At the European level, the DSA also offers the option of using the Appeals Centre Europe (ACE) in Luxembourg, which acts as a complaints body specifically for cases where users believe their cases have not been handled correctly. Practical experience shows that this body decides a significant proportion of complaints in favor of users – primarily when the legal violation is clearly documented.

The structural problem: Why legal resistance alone is not enough

As important as legal action is in acute situations, its main problem is equally clear: it is reactive. It only begins after the damage has already occurred. And even with successful legal action, the costs – in terms of time, money, and reputational damage – are considerable. Furthermore, quantifying and enforcing claims for damages against the major tech companies is extremely difficult because most platforms explicitly exclude liability for lost profits in their terms and conditions.

The real strategic response to the threat of account suspensions therefore lies not in strengthening the legal department, but in a fundamental review of one's own dependency structure. Anyone who generates 80 percent of their revenue through a single platform doesn't primarily have a legal problem – they have a strategic one. And this strategic problem cannot be solved by even the most clever lawyers.

The question that CEOs and marketing decision-makers must ask themselves is: What would happen if tomorrow the Amazon account were suspended, the Google Ads campaigns shut down, or the meta business page deactivated? For most companies that answer this question honestly, the answer is alarming. And that is precisely the starting point for a serious diversification strategy.

Breaking free from dependency: Strategies for a resilient digital presence

The key finding from the economic analysis of platform shutdowns is that structural resilience is not a luxury, but a competitive advantage. Companies that have consciously based their digital infrastructure on several independent pillars are not only better protected against account suspensions – they are also less vulnerable to blackmail, more cost-effective in their marketing, and closer to their customers.

The first and most important step in this direction is building a strong, proprietary web presence with controlled customer data. First-party data—information that companies collect directly through their own channels such as websites, apps, newsletters, or CRM systems—is the crucial asset in a world characterized by platform limitations. A company-owned email list is the most valuable first-party resource: it belongs to the company, no algorithm can limit its reach, and it functions across platforms. Building this list—through content offerings, webinars, analytics, or lead magnets—should be considered a strategic priority, not a marketing side project.

In parallel, an omnichannel strategy that integrates and links multiple sales channels is the most intelligent protection against the failure of individual channels. In the B2B sector, this includes the company's own website as the primary transaction platform, procurement portals, direct supplier relationships, and industry-specific platforms to complement the major marketplaces. In the B2C sector, it means combining a company's own online shop, selected marketplaces, and direct email marketing, instead of relying entirely on a single channel.

For allocating advertising budgets, industry experts recommend diversifying beyond Google and Meta: Microsoft Bing Ads, LinkedIn for B2B target groups, Pinterest, TikTok for Business, and industry-specific advertising networks. Partnership marketing—building your own publisher network of affiliates, influencers, and media partners—significantly reduces dependence on central platforms. If one partner drops out, others step in. This structural redundancy is the best protection against total loss.

Finally, the use of server-side tracking – the direct transfer of conversion data from a company's own server to advertising platforms – is also an important technical measure to reduce dependence on platform-side data measurement and simultaneously achieve more measurable conversions. Companies that consistently build their own data foundation are less dependent on what the platforms report about their customers – and that is a significant strategic advantage in a world of increasing data privacy restrictions.

The macro perspective: What regulatory pressure will change in the long term

The issue of platform blocking is not an isolated legal problem – it is a symptom of a deeper economic shift that has taken place over the last decade. The emergence of global digital platforms with monopolistic market positions has created a new form of gatekeeping: those who lose access to these platforms lose access to the market. This is an economic reality that poses significant challenges to traditional antitrust and competition law concepts.

The European regulatory approach, with its DSA, DMA, and P2B Regulation, is the most ambitious attempt globally to curb this power imbalance through law. It relies on transparency, accountability, and structural codes of conduct for gatekeepers. Whether this approach will be sufficient in the long term depends on enforcement practice. The first few years show that regulators are being taken more seriously than expected. The European Commission has initiated DMA proceedings against several gatekeepers, and the German Federal Network Agency is actively fulfilling its new role as the DSA coordinating authority.

For companies, this sends a twofold message. In the short term: The legal framework is better than its reputation suggests – it can be used, and it is being applied with increasing vigor by courts and authorities. In the medium term: Platform operators will be forced by growing regulatory pressure to make their account blocking and moderation processes more transparent and legally sound. This means that spontaneous, arbitrary account suspensions without justification are likely to become less frequent in the coming years.

In the long term, however, the fundamental challenge remains: as long as companies build their digital presence on platforms they don't own, they are structurally vulnerable. No law in the world can completely eliminate this risk. It can only be minimized through strategic action.

Resilience is not an option, but an obligation

The economic analysis of platform bans leads to a clear conclusion: the risk is real, underestimated, and its full economic dimension is rarely calculated by companies. Legal countermeasures exist and are more effective than commonly assumed – but they are reactive and time-consuming. The true strategic imperative lies in proactive diversification.

Companies that begin today to reduce their dependence on individual tech platforms, build their own databases, and diversify their sales channels are not just investing in their resilience against account suspensions. They are investing in a more fundamental independence: control over their own digital infrastructure, their own customer data, and their own business continuity. In a world where Google, Amazon, and Meta control more than half of the German advertising market, this is not a romantic utopia. It is sound business practice.

The crucial question is not whether a company can be affected by a platform ban. The question is whether the company will still be around afterwards.

☑️ Our business language is English or German

☑️ NEW: Correspondence in your native language!

Konrad Wolfenstein

I and my team are happy to be available to you as your personal advisor.

You can contact me by filling out the contact form here [email protected]:or simply call me at +49 7348 4088 965. My email address is

I'm looking forward to our joint project.

☑️ SME support in strategy, consulting, planning and implementation

☑️ Creation or realignment of the digital strategy and digitization

☑️ Expansion and optimization of international sales processes

☑️ Global & Digital B2B trading platforms

☑️ Pioneer Business Development / Marketing / PR / Trade Fairs

B2B support and SaaS for SEO and GEO (AI search) combined: The all-in-one solution for B2B companies - Image: Xpert.Digital

AI search changes everything: How this SaaS solution will revolutionize your B2B ranking forever.

The digital landscape for B2B companies is undergoing rapid change. Driven by artificial intelligence, the rules of online visibility are being rewritten. For companies, it has always been a challenge not only to be visible in the digital mass, but also to be relevant to the right decision-makers. Traditional SEO strategies and managing local presence (geo-marketing) are complex, time-consuming, and often a battle against constantly changing algorithms and intense competition.

But what if there were a solution that not only simplified this process but also made it smarter, more predictive, and far more effective? This is where the combination of specialized B2B support with a powerful SaaS (Software as a Service) platform comes into play, specifically designed for the demands of SEO and GEO in the age of AI search.

This new generation of tools no longer relies solely on manual keyword analysis and backlink strategies. Instead, it leverages artificial intelligence to more accurately understand search intent, automatically optimize local ranking factors, and conduct real-time competitive analysis. The result is a proactive, data-driven strategy that gives B2B companies a decisive advantage: they are not only found, but perceived as the leading authority in their niche and location.

Here's the symbiosis of B2B support and AI-powered SaaS technology that transforms SEO and GEO marketing, and how your company can benefit from it to grow sustainably in the digital space.

More information here:

​

• B2B Support & Blog for SEO, GEO and AIS – Artificial Intelligence Search
• Forget expensive SEO tools – this alternative dominates with unbeatable B2B features