The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has taken crucial steps to enhance service quality in the telecommunications sector by mandating compliance reports from telecom companies, effective 1 October. That directive faces opposition from industry players, who contend that the new regulations will increase operational costs and compliance burdens.
Nonetheless, TRAI’s enforcement of these regulations aims to guarantee that consumers receive reliable and high-quality telecommunications services. Introducing stricter quality standards explicitly targets the performance of fixed, wireless, and broadband services, addressing persistent issues such as frequent call drops and service interruptions.
Furthermore, TRAI has significantly raised financial penalties for non-compliance, implementing a graded penalty system that escalates from ₹1 lakh to ₹10 lakh based on the severity of the violation. This adjustment creates a robust incentive for telecom companies to comply with the new quality norms. Additionally, operators must compensate users through rent rebates and validity extensions for service outages exceeding 24 hours, underscoring TRAI’s commitment to consumer protection.
Philippines has introduced Joint Administrative Order No. 24-03, Series of 2024, which outlines the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) for the Internet Transactions Act (ITA) of 2023. The new regulatory framework is designed to govern all business-to-business (B2B) and business-to-consumer (B2C) internet transactions under the jurisdiction of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI).
Specifically, it applies to transactions involving parties within the Philippines or businesses targeting the Philippine market. To clarify the scope of the ITA, the IRR defines key terms such as ‘availment of the Philippine market,’ which includes activities like advertising, soliciting orders, and providing support within the country. Additionally, ‘minimum contacts’ refers to any interaction with customers in the Philippines, including allowing access to digital platforms and facilitating the exchange of goods or services.
Philippines has also specified specific exclusions from the ITA’s coverage through the IRR. For instance, it does not apply to Consumer-to-Consumer (C2C) transactions, purely offline transactions, or foreign entities not targeting the Philippine market. Furthermore, while most online media content is excluded, live selling is considered a form of advertising.
Consequently, the IRR outlines different obligations for various online entities, such as digital platforms that do not oversee transactions, e-marketplaces that retain oversight, and e-retailers or online merchants who must adhere to specific compliance requirements.
Philippines has made the IRR effective immediately; however, it allows for an 18-month transition period for businesses to comply. During this time, companies must submit detailed information to the E-Commerce Bureau and ensure that online merchants provide their registration details. Additionally, digital platforms must disclose information about product origins. Furthermore, the IRR includes Codes of Conduct for businesses and consumers to ensure fair and ethical e-commerce practices.
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has reached a settlement with decentralised finance platform Rari Capital and its founders following accusations of misleading investors and operating as unregistered brokers. The settlement addresses serious concerns raised by the SEC over the platform’s compliance with financial regulations.
Rari Capital, which once managed over $1 billion in crypto assets at its peak, was co-founded by Jai Bhavnani, Jack Lipstone, and David Lucid. The SEC highlighted that the platform and its founders failed to properly disclose key information to investors, contributing to potential risks for those involved.
The following case underscores regulatory bodies’ increasing scrutiny of decentralised finance platforms, as they aim to ensure transparency and protect investors in the fast-evolving crypto space.
Prager Metis, the former auditor for collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, has agreed to pay $1.95 million to settle two cases brought by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The settlement resolves allegations of negligence in auditing the exchange under the leadership of Sam Bankman-Fried, who has since been convicted of fraud. The SEC accused the New York-based firm of providing inaccurate audit reports for FTX in 2021 and 2022, failing to meet accepted auditing standards.
The audit firm was found to have misunderstood FTX’s operations, particularly its relationship with Alameda Research, a hedge fund tied to Bankman-Fried. Alameda suffered significant financial losses, prompting Bankman-Fried to misappropriate $8 billion from FTX customers to cover them. FTX’s sudden collapse in November 2022 led to its bankruptcy filing, leaving many investors defrauded and billions in losses.
As part of the settlement, Prager Metis will pay $1.75 million in civil fines alongside disgorged profits and interest, though the firm did not admit any wrongdoing. Additionally, the SEC settlement included charges related to auditor independence violations between 2017 and 2020. Prager Metis’ legal representative stated that the firm was also a victim of FTX’s internal fraud.
Meanwhile, Bankman-Fried is appealing his conviction and 25-year prison sentence. Caroline Ellison, former chief executive of Alameda and Bankman-Fried’s former girlfriend, pleaded guilty and testified against him. Her sentencing is set for later this month, and she is requesting leniency from the court.
Ofcom has introduced new guidance to ensure that broadband providers offer clear and precise information about the technology behind their services. That change aims to address the confusion caused by the industry’s inconsistent use of the term ‘fibre’. Under the new rules, providers must use specific terms like ‘full-fibre’, ‘part-fibre’, ‘copper’, or ‘cable’ to describe their network technology, eliminating the vague term ‘fibre’ alone. That move will help consumers make more informed choices by understanding exactly what type of broadband service they are subscribing to.
Ofcom’s new guidelines mandate that this technology information be provided to consumers before finalising their purchase. Whether signing up in person, over the phone, or online, customers must be given unambiguous details about the underlying network technology of the broadband service they are considering. This ensures that potential buyers are fully informed about what they are committing to, reducing the risk of misunderstandings and dissatisfaction.
Ofcom also requires that broadband providers offer a more thorough explanation of the technology used in their services. This information should be easily accessible, often through a link, allowing consumers to understand better what their broadband service entails. By enforcing these measures, Ofcom aims to enhance transparency and ensure that consumers are well-informed about the broadband technology they choose.
Google secured a significant victory on Wednesday, overturning a €1.49 billion ($1.66 billion) fine imposed by the European Commission in 2019. The fine, levied over antitrust violations, accused Google of abusing its dominance in online search advertising by restricting websites from using advertising brokers other than its AdSense platform. These practices, deemed illegal by the Commission, were said to have spanned from 2006 to 2016.
The General Court of Luxembourg, while agreeing with most of the European Commission’s findings, annulled the hefty fine. The judges ruled that the Commission had not fully considered all factors, particularly the duration of the unfair contractual clauses, which played a critical role in overturning the penalty. Despite the annulment, the ruling upheld many of the Commission’s assessments, but the financial punishment did not hold.
The fine was one of three that have cost Google a combined total of €8.25 billion in antitrust penalties, triggered by complaints from rivals such as Microsoft. Google noted that it had already revised the contracts in question in 2016 before the Commission’s decision.
The legal victory for Google comes just a week after it lost a separate case involving a €2.42 billion fine for unfairly promoting its price comparison service. While the battle over its advertising practices may have seen a favourable outcome, the tech giant’s ongoing legal challenges in Europe reflect the broader scrutiny facing major digital platforms across the continent.
Bitcoin experienced a 4.1% drop between 15th and 16th September, falling to $57,595 after failing to break through the $60,000 resistance level. This decline erased the gains made on 13 September when the price briefly surged to $60,580. While some analysts attributed Bitcoin’s earlier rise to a weakening US dollar and inflows into Bitcoin ETFs, the cryptocurrency has struggled to sustain momentum as traders remain cautious ahead of key economic events, such as the upcoming Federal Reserve interest rate decision.
Investors are closely watching the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting on 18 September, where a 0.50% interest rate cut could potentially boost risk on markets like Bitcoin. However, if the Fed opts for a smaller 0.25% cut, it may negatively impact market sentiment, especially with lingering concerns over corporate earnings and China’s economic slowdown. In addition, regulatory pressure has intensified, with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) expanding its lawsuit against Binance, further weighing on investor confidence.
In the short term, Bitcoin’s price faces both macroeconomic and regulatory challenges. Despite ongoing demand from institutions like MicroStrategy and positive inflows into spot Bitcoin ETFs, investor sentiment has been shaken by a large, dormant Bitcoin address selling $12.7 million worth of BTC and the growing legal scrutiny of major exchanges.
American personal genomics and biotechnology company 23andMe has agreed to a $30 million settlement after a data breach exposed the personal information of 6.9 million users. The breach, which occurred last year, compromised sensitive data, including DNA Relatives profiles and Family Tree information. Affected users will receive financial compensation and three years of security monitoring under the Privacy & Medical Shield + Genetic Monitoring program.
The lawsuit also accused 23andMe of failing to inform customers of Chinese and Ashkenazi Jewish descent that they were specifically targeted in the breach. The stolen information was later found for sale on the dark web. A federal judge must now approve the proposed settlement, which the company considers fair and beneficial for its users.
Despite its financial challenges, the company expects to cover $25 million of the settlement with cyber insurance. The breach, which began in April 2023 and lasted five months, affected nearly half of the company’s 14.1 million customers at the time. 23andMe disclosed the incident in an October 2023 blog post.
The company, led by co-founder Anne Wojcicki, is also facing financial difficulties. It posted a significant quarterly loss and has been attempting to go private. Shares of 23andMe have been trading below $1 since December 2023, a sharp drop from its original public offering price.
The ongoing legal confrontation between Kraken, a prominent crypto exchange, and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) intensifies as Kraken demands a jury trial to address allegations of violating federal securities laws.
According to a court filing on Thursday, Kraken faces accusations similar to those levelled against other major crypto exchanges, Binance and Coinbase, by the SEC. The US federal regulator contends that these companies failed to register as brokers, clearinghouses, or exchanges, as mandated by law.
In November last year, the SEC initiated legal action against Kraken in the Northern District of California, asking the court to permanently enjoin the exchange from committing further securities violations. The agency also seeks to disgorge Kraken’s ‘ill-gotten gains’ and other civil penalties. The SEC has specifically listed 11 tokens claiming these as unregistered securities, arguing that Kraken’s failure to register these securities directly violates federal law.
Kraken asserts it was not required to register with the SEC as it does not classify itself as an exchange, broker-dealer, or clearing agent within the meaning of the Exchange Act. The exchange argues that digital assets should not be considered investment contracts as they lack the rights and obligations associated with traditional financial instruments like stocks or bonds. Additionally, Kraken accuses the SEC of acting without due process and fair notice, suggesting the regulator’s enforcement actions are punitive rather than corrective.
By demanding a jury trial, Kraken is poised to challenge the SEC’s regulatory authority, potentially setting a legal precedent that could influence future digital asset regulation in the United States and beyond.
Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, is likely to avoid being subjected to the EU’s stringent new tech regulations aimed at curbing the power of Big Tech. The company is expected to fall outside the scope of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which imposes strict rules on firms that act as key intermediaries between businesses and consumers.
The European Commission investigated X in May, exploring whether the platform met the criteria to be classified as a ‘gatekeeper’ under the DMA. To qualify, a company must have over 45 million active users and a market capitalisation of at least €75 billion. Gatekeepers must open their messaging apps to rival services, allow users more control over pre-installed apps, and avoid giving preferential treatment to their products.
X has argued that it does not serve as a critical gateway between businesses and consumers, distancing itself from the obligations set by the DMA. While the investigation remains ongoing, the Commission has not provided further comment on its findings.
However, X faces more pressing issues under the EU’s newly implemented Digital Services Act (DSA), which requires large platforms to actively combat harmful or illegal content or face significant fines—up to 6% of their global turnover. X is under scrutiny as part of several ongoing investigations related to its compliance with the DSA.
