European Union: Advocate General issued opinion that term “operator” under Regulation 833/2014 should be interpreted broadly to include any person managing or controlling communication services regardless of profit motive

On 12 February 2026, the Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a preliminary opinion clarifying the interpretation of the concept of operator under Article 2f(1) of Council Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine. The primary aim of 833/2014 is to prevent the transmission of disinformation by “operators” from specific entities, such as Sputnik and Russia Today, across the European Union. The opinion follows a request for a preliminary ruling from a German regional court regarding criminal proceedings against individuals broadcasting prohibited content via a public blog. The regional court asks the CJEU whether the term “operator” includes those who publish prohibited material under Article 2f(1) but only generate income from donations. The Advocate General (AG) proposes that the term operator must be interpreted broadly to include any natural or legal person ensuring the technical and operational management of communication networks or services or exercising effective control over their provision. Under this functional definition, the AG argues it is irrelevant whether the person derives income from the activity or pursues a commercial objective. The interpretation clarifies that natural persons operating websites for leisure or idealistic reasons are subject to the same prohibitions as professional media entities if they facilitate the broadcasting of restricted content.