The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has reached a settlement with Mango DAO and Blockworks Foundation regarding the unregistered sale of MNGO tokens, which are classified as securities. The settlement also addresses charges against Mango Labs for functioning as an unregistered broker in connection with various crypto assets on the Mango Markets platform. The SEC’s complaint asserts that these entities deprived investors of crucial protections guaranteed by federal securities laws by avoiding necessary registration requirements.
The SEC reports that Mango DAO and Blockworks Foundation raised more than $70 million from unregistered sales of MNGO tokens beginning in August 2021, targeting investors globally, including those in the US. The agency alleges that Blockworks Foundation and Mango Labs operated as unregistered brokers by soliciting users to trade securities, offering investment advice, and facilitating transactions on the Mango Markets platform.
Jorge Tenreiro, Acting Chief of the SEC’s Crypto Assets and Cyber Unit, emphasised that being labelled a decentralised autonomous organisation does not exempt entities from registration requirements. As part of the settlement, Mango DAO, Blockworks Foundation, and Mango Labs have agreed to pay nearly $700,000 in civil penalties, destroy their MNGO tokens, and stop soliciting trading for these tokens, pending court approval. The investigation and litigation were overseen by members of the SEC’s Crypto Assets and Cyber Unit.
A federal judge has scaled down a privacy lawsuit against Apple, which alleged the company collected personal data from iPhone, iPad, and Apple Watch users without permission. The lawsuit targets Apple’s apps, including the App Store, Apple Music, and Apple TV. US District Judge Edward Davila dismissed most claims involving the “Allow Apps to Request to Track” setting, clarifying that it only governs data collection by third-party apps and websites, not Apple’s in-house apps.
Despite dismissing many claims, the judge allowed some to proceed related to Apple’s ‘Share [Device] Analytics’ setting. The plaintiffs claim that Apple continued collecting data even after users disabled the setting, despite promises that it would stop data sharing. Judge Davila agreed, noting that users could reasonably assume they had withdrawn consent based on Apple’s own disclosure that disabling the option would prevent data collection.
This lawsuit is part of a broader trend of legal actions against major tech companies like Google and Meta, accusing them of gathering user data without proper consent. Neither Apple nor the plaintiffs’ lawyers have responded to requests for comment on the case as it unfolds.
Starting 1 October 2024, UK mobile operators like Three, Vodafone, EE, and O2 will be required to comply with new Ofcom regulations designed to protect consumers from unexpected roaming charges while abroad. These rules mandate that mobile providers send clear notifications when customers begin roaming, outlining costs, potential data limits, and steps to avoid overspending on mobile services. This comes after Ofcom found that many users were unaware of potential extra charges when traveling.
Although most operators have reintroduced roaming fees in Europe, Ofcom’s new rules ensure customers receive timely information to help them manage their mobile bills. The new regulations also address “inadvertent roaming,” where users unintentionally connect to French networks, particularly along the UK’s coastal areas. This can lead to unexpected bills even when customers believe they are still in the UK. To combat this, operators will need to provide alerts to help users manage their roaming expenses, including the option to set spending limits.
Additionally, the guidance issued by Ofcom will help mobile providers ensure compliance and promote good practices for informing customers. This initiative aims to create more transparency in roaming services, ultimately giving consumers the tools they need to avoid mobile bill shocks during their travels.
Appario, a former top seller on Amazon India, has petitioned a court to dismiss an antitrust investigation that concluded Amazon and several sellers breached local competition laws. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) alleges that Amazon, Walmart’s Flipkart, and certain smartphone brands favoured select sellers and prioritised specific listings. These accusations were based on a 2021 Reuters investigation, which exposed Amazon’s internal practices. Despite the findings, Amazon continues to deny any misconduct.
Appario, which has ceased selling on Amazon, is contesting the CCI’s findings in the Karnataka High Court, asserting that the report implicating it should be “set aside.” This legal action marks the first challenge to the CCI’s ongoing investigation, initiated in 2020, and poses a significant obstacle for Amazon in India, one of its most important markets.
The CCI previously conducted raids on Appario and other sellers during its investigation. Court records indicate that Appario is also challenging a CCI order that requires it to submit financial statements following the investigation. Neither Amazon nor Appario has commented on the ongoing legal proceedings.
A political consultant has been fined $7.7 million by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for using AI to generate robocalls mimicking President Biden’s voice. The calls, aimed at New Hampshire voters, urged them not to vote in the Democratic primary, sparking significant controversy.
Steven Kramer, the consultant behind the scheme, worked for a challenger to Biden in the primaries. He admitted to paying $500 for the calls to highlight the dangers of AI in political campaigns. Kramer’s actions violated FCC regulations prohibiting misleading caller ID information.
The FCC has given Kramer 30 days to pay the fine, warning that further legal action will follow if he fails to comply. The commission continues to raise concerns over AI’s potential misuse in elections, pushing for stricter regulations to prevent fraud.
The National Communications Commission (NCC) has introduced new regulations to curtail telecom fraud in Taiwan significantly. These measures establish a comprehensive framework to identify users categorised as ‘high-risk’ based on their repeated involvement in fraudulent activities. As a result, these high-risk users will face strict limitations and be permitted to apply for only three telephone numbers across the three major telecom providers within three years. The initiative is designed to deter fraudulent behaviour by restricting access to essential communication services.
Moreover, these regulations align with the recently enacted Fraud Hazard Prevention Act, which provides a foundational legal framework for addressing and mitigating fraud within the telecom sector. The NCC also prioritises collaboration with governmental agencies such as the National Police Agency (NPA) and the National Immigration Agency (NIA). That partnership aims to develop a comprehensive strategy for effectively combating telecom fraud and protecting consumers.
To further this goal, the NCC implements advanced verification systems allowing telecom companies to access NIA and NPA databases. That access will enable them to reauthenticate user identities upon receiving fraud alerts, ensuring that only legitimate users can access telecom services. This proactive approach fosters a safer environment for subscribers and empowers providers to make informed decisions to prevent fraud before it occurs.
In addition to these domestic initiatives, the NCC focuses on the international dimensions of telecom fraud, particularly regarding international roaming services. Under the new regulations, telecom providers must verify that users activating roaming services have entered Taiwan and can present appropriate identification.
That crucial measure aims to curb the misuse of these services for fraudulent purposes. Furthermore, the NCC plans to monitor high-risk offshore telecom operators, assessing their involvement in fraudulent activities and exploring the potential need for mutual legal assistance agreements with their home countries to strengthen enforcement efforts.
Meta, Facebook’s owner, has been fined €91 million ($101.5 million) by the EU’s privacy regulator for mishandling user passwords. The issue, which surfaced five years ago, involved Meta storing certain users’ passwords in plaintext, a format lacking encryption or security protection. Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (DPC), which oversees GDPR compliance for many US tech firms operating in the EU, launched an investigation after Meta reported the incident.
Meta admitted the error, emphasising that third parties had not accessed the exposed passwords. However, storing passwords in an unprotected format is considered a major security flaw, as it exposes users to significant risks if unauthorised individuals access the data. Deputy Commissioner Graham Doyle underscored that storing passwords without encryption is widely unacceptable due to potential abuse.
This fine adds to Meta’s growing list of penalties under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). To date, Meta has been fined a total of 2.5 billion euros for various data breaches, including a record €1.2 billion fine in 2023, which Meta is currently appealing. These repeated infractions highlight ongoing concerns about how the company handles sensitive user data.
The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has cracked down on five companies for deceptive use of AI. Three cases involved businesses falsely claiming to help consumers generate passive income through e-commerce. The FTC also reached settlements with DoNotPay and Rytr, two companies accused of misleading consumers with their AI tools. DoNotPay, which marketed automated legal services, agreed to a $193,000 settlement and will notify customers of the tool’s limitations, while Rytr faced criticism for allowing users to create fake product reviews through its AI writing feature.
FTC Chair Lina M. Khan stressed that AI tools must comply with existing laws, making it clear that deceiving or misleading consumers with AI is illegal. Despite not admitting wrongdoing, both Rytr and DoNotPay settled with the FTC. Rytr agreed to discontinue its review-generating feature, used to create fake product reviews, while DoNotPay accepted a settlement without admitting fault.
The FTC’s actions have sparked internal debate on how to regulate AI. While all five commissioners supported cracking down on false AI claims, the two Republican commissioners raised concerns about the agency’s authority in the Rytr case. This division highlights differing views within the FTC on the scope of its regulatory powers when addressing AI-related issues.
Google has filed a formal complaint with the European Commission over Microsoft’s cloud business practices. The tech giant argues that Microsoft uses its dominant position with Windows Server to stifle competition and lock customers into its Azure platform. Specifically, Google claims Microsoft enforces heavy mark-ups on users of rival cloud services and restricts access to essential security updates.
The dispute follows a recent settlement where Microsoft paid €20 million to resolve concerns raised by European cloud providers. However, the agreement excluded key rivals like Google and Amazon Web Services (AWS), fuelling further criticism. Google insists only regulatory action will halt what it sees as Microsoft’s monopolistic approach, urging the EU to step in and ensure fair competition.
Microsoft denies the accusations, stating they have settled similar issues amicably with other European providers. A Microsoft spokesperson expressed confidence that Google would fail to persuade the European Commission, as it had failed with EU businesses.
Google believes immediate intervention is necessary to prevent the cloud market from becoming increasingly restrictive. They warn that Microsoft’s influence over the European cloud sector, which is growing rapidly, could limit options for customers and hurt competitors.
In a crucial court case, Coinbase, the largest US cryptocurrency exchange, confronted the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in Philadelphia. The exchange is calling on the SEC to create new regulations for digital assets stemming from a lawsuit over the agency’s failure to address a 2022 petition. The petition aimed to clarify when a digital asset is deemed a security and suggested a new regulatory framework specifically designed for the cryptocurrency sector.
The SEC rejected Coinbase’s request in December 2023, asserting that current regulations are adequate for the cryptocurrency sector. Coinbase’s attorney argued that the SEC’s refusal to clarify registration processes has hindered the exchange’s ability to operate within US laws. In contrast, an SEC lawyer maintained that the agency is not obligated to create new rules, suggesting that businesses like Coinbase must adapt to the existing regulatory framework.
This legal dispute highlights an ongoing tension between the cryptocurrency industry and the SEC, which asserts that many crypto tokens qualify as securities and fall under its jurisdiction. The crypto sector largely views itself as existing in a regulatory grey area, pushing for new legislation to provide more precise guidelines for managing digital assets. This ongoing struggle underscores the need for a cohesive framework that addresses the unique challenges of the rapidly evolving crypto market.
As the appeals court considers both sides, the outcome could have significant implications for how cryptocurrencies are regulated in the United States, potentially shaping the industry’s future.
