Competition regulation

India urges preference for state telecom providers

The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) in India has introduced a policy urging all state governments and Union Territories to prioritise state-run telecom operators Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL) and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd (MTNL) for their communication needs. Although not legally binding, that policy directive emphasises data security as a key reason for favouring these public sector providers.

DoT Secretary underscored the increasing competitiveness of BSNL and MTNL, noting that BSNL now manages MTNL’s operations and will set up a dedicated nodal point to cater to state governments efficiently. The move marks a significant strategic shift toward promoting state-owned telecom companies in government communications.

The policy has raised concerns among private telecom companies, who fear losing valuable government contracts to BSNL and MTNL. Private providers currently hold over 92% of the market’s revenue, and government contracts are especially important for smaller ISPs with tight margins. Diverting these contracts could significantly hurt their financial stability.

BSNL and MTNL were initially created to operate independently and compete fairly with private firms. This new policy, favouring them, risks undermining that independence and disrupting the telecom sector’s competitive balance in India.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Bangladesh to reform telecom sector amid industry support and local concerns

The government of Bangladesh is introducing major reforms in the telecommunications sector through a new three-tier licensing framework, dividing licenses into international connectivity, national infrastructure, and access network services. That policy overhaul aims to modernise the sector, improve regulatory clarity, and align with global best practices.

The Association of Mobile Telecom Operators of Bangladesh (AMTOB), representing key players like Grameenphone, Robi, and Banglalink, supports the reforms and considers them a bold and necessary first step, even though the new rules will limit some of their operational freedoms, such as deploying their own fiber infrastructure and building independent towers.

Despite AMTOB’s support, mid-level domestic operators in areas such as International Gateway (IGW), International Internet Gateway (IIG), Interconnection Exchange (ICX), and Nationwide Telecommunication Transmission Network (NTTN) have expressed concerns that the policy favours foreign companies at the expense of local firms. They warn that the draft could cause significant job losses, threaten smaller businesses, and reduce government revenues.

AMTOB, however, rejects allegations of foreign favouritism and criticises intermediary infrastructure providers for poor connectivity and increased costs, attributing these issues to the fragmented regulatory environment created by the 2007 International Long Distance Telecommunication Services Policy (ILDTSP).

In response to past political favouritism in licensing, the interim government has launched investigations into corruption within the sector, with a white paper expected to increase transparency and accountability soon. AMTOB also highlighted that many countries allow mobile operators to own and manage their entire infrastructure, which leads to lower costs and better service quality, suggesting this model could guide future reforms in the telecom industry of Bangladesh.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Meta and TikTok contest the EU’s compliance charges

Meta and TikTok have taken their fight against an the EU supervisory fee to Europe’s second-highest court, arguing that the charges are disproportionate and based on flawed calculations.

The fee, introduced under the Digital Services Act (DSA), requires major online platforms to pay 0.05% of their annual global net income to cover the European Commission’s oversight costs.

Meta questioned the Commission’s methodology, claiming the levy was based on the entire group’s revenue instead of the specific EU-based subsidiary.

The company’s lawyer told judges it still lacked clarity on how the fee was calculated, describing the process as opaque and inconsistent with the spirit of the law.

TikTok also criticised the charge, alleging inaccurate and discriminatory data inflated its payment.

Its legal team argued that user numbers were double-counted when people switched between devices. The Commission had wrongly calculated fees based on group profits rather than platform-specific earnings.

The Commission defended its approach, saying group resources should bear the cost when consolidated accounts are used. A ruling is expected from the General Court sometime next year.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

AI startup faces lawsuit from Disney and Universal

Two of Hollywood’s most powerful studios, Disney and Universal, have launched a copyright infringement lawsuit against the AI firm Midjourney, accusing it of illegally replicating iconic characters.

The studios claim the San Francisco-based company copied their creative works without permission, describing it as a ‘bottomless pit of plagiarism’.

Characters such as Darth Vader, Elsa, and the Minions were cited in the 143-page complaint, which alleges Midjourney used these images to train its AI system and generate similar content.

Disney and Universal argue that the AI firm failed to invest in the creative process, yet profited heavily from the output — reportedly earning $US300 million in paid subscriptions last year.

Despite early attempts by the studios to raise concerns and propose safeguards already adopted by other AI developers,

Midjourney allegedly ignored them and pressed ahead with further product releases. The company, which calls itself a small, self-funded team of 11, has declined to comment on the lawsuit directly but insists it has a long future ahead.

Disney’s legal chief, Horacio Gutierrez, stressed the importance of protecting creative works that result from decades of investment. While supporting AI as a tool for innovation, he maintained that ‘piracy is piracy’, regardless of whether humans or machines carry it out.

The studios are seeking damages and a court order to stop the AI firm from continuing its alleged copyright violations.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Nvidia and FCA open AI sandbox for UK fintechs

Financial firms across the UK will soon be able to experiment with AI in a new regulatory sandbox, launched by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in partnership with Nvidia.

Known as the Supercharged Sandbox, it offers a secure testing ground for firms wanting to explore AI tools without needing their advanced computing resources.

Set to begin in October, the initiative is open to any financial services company testing AI-driven ideas. Firms will have access to Nvidia’s accelerated computing platform and tailored AI software, helping them work with complex data, improve automation, and enhance risk management in a controlled setting.

The FCA said the sandbox is designed to support firms lacking the in-house capacity to test new technology.

It aims to provide not only computing power but also regulatory guidance and access to better datasets, creating an environment where innovation can flourish while remaining compliant with rules.

The move forms part of a wider push by the UK government to foster economic growth through innovation. Finance minister Rachel Reeves has urged regulators to clear away obstacles to growth and praised the FCA and Bank of England for acting on her call to cut red tape.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Apple sues European Commission over DMA interoperability ruling

Apple is mounting a legal challenge against the European Commission after being ordered to open up its tightly controlled ecosystem to rival companies under the Digital Markets Act (DMA).

The tech giant filed its appeal with the EU’s General Court, claiming the decision would undermine user privacy and harm innovation.

The dispute centres on a March ruling by the Commission following months of dialogue, which concluded that Apple must guarantee interoperability—a requirement that would allow third-party developers to connect non-Apple products, such as smartwatches and headphones, to iPhones and iPads.

Apple has pushed back strongly, arguing that the mandate is ‘unreasonable, costly and stifles innovation.’ A company spokesperson said the move would benefit what Apple describes as ‘data-hungry companies’ like Meta and Samsung, who could gain access to users’ most sensitive data through third-party connections.

Since December 2024, the European Commission has been pressing Apple to make its ecosystem more open to promote competition across the digital sector. However, Apple maintains that complying with the order would compromise the company’s privacy-first approach and violate its data protection standards.

The Commission, meanwhile, insists the measures are proportionate and fully aligned with the EU’s stringent privacy and security framework. It argues that the order would not strip Apple of control over its devices, but rather enable fairer access for other tech players while keeping user protections intact.

The case is set to become a major test of how far the EU can push tech giants to comply with the Digital Markets Act, which was designed to curb the dominance of so-called ‘gatekeepers’ in digital markets.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Reddit accuses Anthropic of misusing user content

Reddit has taken legal action against AI startup Anthropic, alleging that the company scraped its platform without permission and used the data to train and commercialise its Claude AI models.

The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco’s Superior Court, accuses Anthropic of breaching contract terms, unjust enrichment, and interfering with Reddit’s operations.

According to Reddit, Anthropic accessed the platform more than 100,000 times despite publicly claiming to have stopped doing so.

The complaint claims Anthropic ignored Reddit’s technical safeguards, such as robots.txt files, and bypassed the platform’s user agreement to extract large volumes of user-generated content.

Reddit argues that Anthropic’s actions undermine its licensing deals with companies like OpenAI and Google, who have agreed to strict content usage and deletion protocols.

The filing asserts that Anthropic intentionally used personal data from Reddit without ever seeking user consent, calling the company’s conduct deceptive. Despite public statements suggesting respect for privacy and web-scraping limitations, Anthropic is portrayed as having disregarded both.

The lawsuit even cites Anthropic’s own 2021 research that acknowledged Reddit content as useful in training AI models.

Reddit is now seeking damages, repayment of profits, and a court order to stop Anthropic from using its data further. The market responded positively, with Reddit’s shares closing nearly 67% higher at $118.21—indicating investor support for the company’s aggressive stance on data protection.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Eminem sues Meta over copyright violations

Eminem has filed a major lawsuit against Meta, accusing the tech giant of knowingly enabling widespread copyright infringement across its platforms. The rapper’s publishing company, Eight Mile Style, is seeking £80.6 million in damages, claiming 243 of his songs were used without authorisation.

The lawsuit argues that Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, allowed tools such as Original Audio and Reels to encourage unauthorised reproduction and use of Eminem’s music.

The filing claims it occurred without proper licensing or attribution, significantly diminishing the value of his copyrights.

Eminem’s legal team contends that Meta profited from the infringement instead of ensuring his works were protected. If a settlement cannot be reached, the artist is demanding the maximum statutory damages — $150,000 per song — which would amount to over $109 million.

Meta has faced similar lawsuits before, including a high-profile case in 2022 brought by Epidemic Sound, which alleged the unauthorised use of thousands of its tracks. The latest claim adds to growing pressure on social media platforms to address copyright violations more effectively.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EU fines Delivery Hero and Glovo €329 million over cartel practices

The European Commission has imposed a €329 million fine on Berlin-based Delivery Hero and its Spanish subsidiary, Glovo, for participating in what it described as a cartel in the online food delivery market. According to the Commission, the two companies engaged in illegal practices across Europe between 2018 and 2022, including market sharing, exchanging commercially sensitive information, and entering into a ‘no-poach’ agreement to avoid hiring each other’s employees.

This is the first time the Commission has penalised companies for a no-poach deal, which the EU competition chief, Teresa Ribera, said harmed workers’ job mobility in the digital economy. The anti-competitive behaviour reportedly began in mid-2018 when Delivery Hero took a minority stake in Glovo and persisted in various forms until 2022, when it gained full ownership of the Spanish firm.

Delivery Hero was hit with a €223 million fine, while Glovo received a €106 million penalty. Both companies admitted to their roles in the misconduct and agreed to a settlement. The case emerged not from company complaints but through whistleblowers and the Commission’s own monitoring.

Delivery Hero stated it had fully cooperated with the investigation and noted the final fine was 20% lower than initially expected, due to Brussels’s acknowledgement of a lower intensity of misconduct during some periods. The firm expressed hope that the settlement would allow all involved to move forward.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

OpenAI turns ChatGPT into AI gateway

OpenAI plans to reinvent ChatGPT as an all-in-one ‘super assistant’ that knows its users and becomes their primary gateway to the internet.

Details emerged from a partly redacted internal strategy document shared during the US government’s antitrust case against Google.

Rather than limiting ChatGPT to existing apps and websites, OpenAI envisions a future where the assistant supports everyday life—from suggesting recipes at home to taking notes at work or guiding users while travelling.

The company says the AI should evolve into a reliable, emotionally intelligent helper capable of handling a various personal and professional tasks.

OpenAI also believes hardware will be key to this transformation. It recently acquired io, a start-up founded by former Apple designer Jony Ive, for $6.4 billion to develop AI-powered devices.

The company’s strategy outlines how upcoming models like o2 and o3, alongside tools like multimodality and generative user interfaces, could make ChatGPT capable of taking meaningful action instead of simply offering responses.

The document also reveals OpenAI’s intention to back a regulation requiring tech platforms to allow users to set ChatGPT as their default assistant. Confident in its fast growth, research lead, and independence from ads, the company aims to maintain its advantage through bold decisions, speed, and self-disruption.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!