LinkedIn, owned by Microsoft, faces a class-action lawsuit from its Premium customers who allege that the platform improperly shared their private messages with third parties to train AI models. The lawsuit alleges that LinkedIn introduced a new privacy setting last August that allowed users to control the sharing of their data, yet failed to adequately inform them about the use of their messages for AI training.
Customers claim that a stealthy update to LinkedIn’s privacy policy on 18 September outlined this data usage, while also stating that opting out of data sharing would not prevent past training from being utilised.
The plaintiffs, representing millions of Premium users, seek damages for breaches of contract and violations of California’s unfair competition laws. In addition, they demand compensation of $1,000 for each individual affected by alleged violations of the federal Stored Communications Act. The lawsuit highlights concerns over the potential misuse of customer data, asserting that LinkedIn deliberately obscured its practices to evade scrutiny regarding user privacy.
LinkedIn has denied the allegations, stating that the claims lack merit. The legal action arose just hours after President Donald Trump announced a significant AI investment initiative, backed by Microsoft and other major companies. In San Jose, California, the case has been filed as De La Torre v. LinkedIn Corp in the federal district court.
With privacy becoming an increasingly crucial issue, the implications of this lawsuit could resonate throughout the tech industry. Customers are scrutinising platforms’ commitments to safeguarding personal information, especially in the context of rapidly evolving AI technologies.
UK citizens will soon be able to carry essential documents, such as their passport, driving licence, and birth certificates, in a digital wallet on their smartphones. This plan was unveiled by Peter Kyle, the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, as part of a broader initiative to streamline interactions with government services. The digital wallet, set to launch in June, aims to simplify tasks like booking appointments and managing government communications.
Initially, the digital wallet will hold a driving licence and a veteran card, with plans to add other documents like student loans, vehicle tax, and benefits. The government is also working with the Home Office to include digital passports, although these will still exist alongside physical versions. The app will be linked to an individual’s ID and could be used for various tasks, such as sharing certification or claiming welfare discounts.
Security and privacy concerns have been addressed, with recovery systems in place for lost phones and strong data protection measures. Kyle emphasised that the app complies with current data laws and features like facial recognition would enhance security. He also reassured that while the system will be convenient for smartphone users, efforts will be made to ensure those without internet access aren’t left behind.
The technology, developed in the six months since Labour took power, is part of a push to modernise government services. Kyle believes the new digital approach will help create a more efficient and user-friendly relationship between citizens and the state, transforming the public service experience.
OpenAI has told an Indian court that removing training data used for its ChatGPT service would conflict with its legal obligations in the United States. The company, backed by Microsoft, is defending a copyright lawsuit filed by Indian news agency ANI, which accuses OpenAI of using its content without permission and demands the deletion of ANI’s data from ChatGPT’s memory.
In a January 10 filing, OpenAI argued that Indian courts lack jurisdiction as the company has no physical presence or data servers in India. It also emphasised its legal obligation in the US to preserve training data while litigation is ongoing. OpenAI denied wrongdoing, asserting its systems make fair use of publicly available data, a stance it has maintained in similar copyright disputes globally.
ANI insists the Delhi court has the authority to rule on the case, citing concerns over unfair competition and alleging that ChatGPT reproduces its content verbatim. OpenAI, however, countered that ANI manipulated prompts to elicit such responses. The court is set to hear the case on January 28, marking a key moment in India’s scrutiny of AI and copyright law.
Britain’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has opened an investigation into the dominance of Apple and Google in the smartphone ecosystem. The probe will examine their operating systems, app stores, and browsers to determine whether their ‘strategic market status’ stifles competition and innovation, particularly for businesses developing content and services.
CMA Chief Executive Sarah Cardell emphasised the potential for more competitive mobile ecosystems to drive innovation and boost economic growth in the UK. Both Apple and Google defended their practices, with Apple highlighting its ecosystem’s support for jobs in Britain and Google pointing to Android’s openness as a driver of choice and affordability.
The investigation, the CMA’s second under new regulatory powers, will explore whether Apple and Google are leveraging their dominance unfairly by prioritising their apps and services or imposing restrictive terms on developers. A conclusion is expected by October 22, 2025, as Britain continues to tighten its oversight of major tech companies.
TikTok users in the United States remain in limbo as the popular app continues to be unavailable for download from Apple and Google app stores. The platform, owned by China’s ByteDance, resumed service following a temporary shutdown, but legal uncertainties have prevented its return to digital storefronts.
The impasse stems from a US law requiring ByteDance to divest TikTok or face a nationwide ban due to national security concerns. President Trump recently extended the enforcement deadline, sparking debates about potential buyers, including high-profile figures like Elon Musk. However, no clear resolution has emerged, leaving users and tech giants caught in legal purgatory.
Some frustrated fans have resorted to selling devices with TikTok pre-installed for exorbitant prices on platforms like eBay. Others are attempting workarounds, such as location changes or VPNs, to regain access. Despite these efforts, confusion about TikTok’s long-term future has prompted some users to abandon the app entirely, citing dissatisfaction with political interference.
As negotiations continue, TikTok’s status in the US remains precarious, with both users and the company waiting anxiously for clarity on its fate.
Instagram has been facing backlash after a technical issue caused search results for the terms ‘Democrat’ and ‘Democrats’ to be hidden. Users searching for these terms have encountered a message stating that the results may contain sensitive content. In contrast, hashtags such as ‘Republican’ continue to display posts without such issues. Meta, the parent company of Instagram, has stated that the problem is not politically motivated, as it has also affected other political hashtags.
Social media experts have warned that the glitch could harm Meta’s reputation, particularly in a highly partisan political climate. Matt Navarra, a social media consultant, described the situation as embarrassing for Instagram, suggesting it could fuel conspiracy theories and further divisions among users. Meta has confirmed it is working urgently to fix the issue.
This incident comes at a time of increased scrutiny over Meta’s handling of political content on its platforms. The company has faced criticism from various sides of the political spectrum, and its recent changes to content moderation policies have attracted further attention.
China’s foreign ministry stated on Monday that companies should make independent decisions regarding their business operations and agreements. The remarks came in response to United States President-elect Donald Trump’s proposal requiring 50% US ownership of TikTok.
The proposed ownership demand has reignited tensions over the popular social media app, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, as US officials continue to express concerns over national security and data privacy. Chinese officials have consistently emphasised the importance of allowing businesses to operate without undue government interference.
TikTok, which boasts millions of users worldwide, has faced scrutiny in several countries over its links to China. The foreign ministry’s statement highlights Beijing’s stance that such matters should remain in the hands of corporations rather than being dictated by political decisions.
A new poll by the Allensbach Institute reveals that Germans who rely on TikTok for news are less likely to view China as a dictatorship, criticise Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, or trust vaccines compared to consumers of traditional media. The findings suggest that the platform’s information ecosystem could contribute to scepticism about widely accepted narratives and amplify conspiracy theories. Among surveyed groups, TikTok users exhibited levels of distrust in line with users of X, formerly Twitter.
The study, commissioned by a foundation affiliated with Germany’s Free Democrats, comes amid ongoing US debates over the potential national security risks posed by the Chinese-owned app. The research highlights how young Germans, who make up TikTok’s largest user base, are more inclined to support the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which has surged in popularity ahead of Germany’s upcoming election. By contrast, consumers of traditional media were significantly more supportive of Ukraine and critical of Russian aggression.
Concerns about misinformation on platforms like TikTok are echoed by researchers, who warn that foreign powers, particularly Russia, exploit social media to influence public opinion. The poll found that while 57% of newspaper readers believed China to be a dictatorship, only 28.1% of TikTok users shared the same view. Additionally, TikTok users were less likely to believe that China and Russia disseminate false information, while being more suspicious of their own government. Calls for action to address misinformation underscore the platform’s potential impact on younger, more impressionable audiences.
Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, is once again under fire by the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) over its ad-free subscription service. Introduced in 2023, the fee-based option offered European users the ability to opt out of personalised ads, with a subsequent price cut of 40% implemented later that year. However, BEUC claims these changes are merely superficial and fail to address deeper concerns about fairness and compliance with EU consumer and privacy laws.
BEUC’s Director General, Agustin Reyna, criticised Meta for not providing users with a fair choice, alleging that the company still pressures users into accepting its behavioural advertising system. Reyna called on consumer protection authorities and the European Commission to investigate Meta’s practices urgently, emphasising the need for decisive action to safeguard users’ rights. The consumer group also accused Meta of misleading practices, unclear terms, and failing to minimise data collection while restricting services for users who decline data processing.
In response, a Meta spokesperson defended the company’s approach, arguing that its November 2023 updates go beyond EU regulatory requirements. Despite these assurances, EU antitrust regulators have raised concerns, accusing Meta of breaching the Digital Markets Act. They claim the ad-free service forces users into a binary choice, sparking broader concerns about how the tech giant balances profit with consumer protection.
As pressure mounts, Meta faces growing scrutiny over its compliance with EU laws, with regulators weighing potential measures to address BEUC’s allegations and ensure fair treatment for European users.
President Donald Trump’s executive order delaying the enforcement of a US TikTok ban has created new legal uncertainties for the platform and its service providers, including Google and Apple. Signed on Monday, the order pauses for 75 days a law requiring TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to divest the app over national security concerns.
While the order directs the Justice Department to halt enforcement and assures app distributors of no liability during the review period, legal experts warn that the promise offers little protection. Courts do not consider executive orders binding, and Trump could alter or selectively enforce the policy at any time, potentially exposing companies to massive penalties.
The ban, passed by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court days before Trump’s order, imposes steep fines of $5,000 per user for violations, making compliance a high-stakes gamble for service providers. Critics argue that the legal ambiguity could also open companies to shareholder lawsuits if they ignore the ban based solely on Trump’s directive.
Trump’s move has reignited tensions between the White House and lawmakers, who overwhelmingly supported the ban over fears of Chinese influence. The coming weeks may bring further legal battles and political manoeuvring as the future of TikTok in the US hangs in the balance.
