The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) is receiving complaints related to the Digital Services Act (DSA), but it currently lacks formal authority to act until the law is fully transposed by the national parliament. The DSA, which aims to regulate large online platforms and protect users, became applicable in February 2024, but enforcement will only begin once the Netherlands passes the necessary implementing legislation.
Martijn Snoep, Chairman of the ACM, highlighted that enforcement under the DSA is expected to lead to clashes between regulators and Big Tech leaders, although he plans to approach this more neutrally. The ACM focuses on three main areas: ensuring platforms comply with basic rules, protecting minors online, and tackling irresponsible hosting providers. While the Dutch regulator is investigating non-compliant companies, it cannot yet take enforcement actions against foreign firms or force them to share information.
The ACM has received 227 complaints, mostly regarding companies based outside the Netherlands, and while it can redirect these to other regulators, it cannot yet act on them. Snoep emphasised that, despite challenges, the Netherlands is preparing to enhance its regulatory capacity to ensure fair compliance, though he prefers waiting before introducing new legislation on emerging issues like online child safety or advertising.
Despite the slow start, the ACM is confident that over time, as the industry adapts to a more regulated environment, digital platforms will gradually become more compliant with the DSA’s requirements.
Australia‘s competition watchdog has called for a review of efforts to ensure more choice for internet users, citing Google’s dominance in the search engine market and the failure of its competitors to capitalise on the rise of AI. A report by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) highlighted concerns about the growing influence of Big Tech, particularly Google and Microsoft, as they integrate generative AI into their search services. This raises questions about the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated search results.
While the use of AI in search engines is still in its early stages, the ACCC warns that large tech companies’ financial strength and market presence give them a significant advantage. The commission expressed concerns that AI-driven search could lead to misinformation, as consumers may find AI-generated responses both more useful and less accurate. In response to this, Australia is pushing for new regulations, including laws to prevent anti-competitive behaviour and improve consumer choice.
The Australian government has already introduced several measures targeting tech giants, such as requiring social media platforms to pay for news content and restricting access for children under 16. A proposed new law could impose hefty fines on companies that suppress competition. The ACCC has called for service-specific codes to address data advantages and ensure consumers have more freedom to switch between services. The inquiry is expected to close by March next year.
Canada’s Competition Bureau has filed a lawsuit against Google, accusing the tech giant of abusing its dominant position in online advertising. The bureau seeks an order for Google to divest two ad tech tools and pay a penalty to ensure compliance with competition laws.
The investigation, launched in 2020, found that Google controls key aspects of the ad tech stack in Canada and allegedly employed tactics to entrench its market power. Google disputes the claims, arguing that the online ad market remains competitive.
The case mirrors global scrutiny of Google’s advertising practices, including a similar lawsuit in the United States and ongoing EU investigations. Google’s earlier offer to sell an ad exchange failed to satisfy European publishers.
TikTok is stepping beyond the digital screen with its first UK and Ireland Awards, celebrating 72 creators across 12 categories. From travel influencers to comedy sketch stars, these creators, with over 101 million combined followers, will be recognised in a London ceremony, highlighting the growing cultural impact of short-form content.
The platform’s nominees range from lifestyle influencers to niche creators like fossil hunters and ASMR pool cleaners. TikTok’s Melissa McFarlane emphasised that the awards showcase creators’ influence on everything from literature to cooking, proving that TikTok communities are shaping trends well beyond the app.
Nominees like Ayamé Ponder, known for her comedy sketches, are also using their platforms for broader causes. Meanwhile, creators Jade Beaty and Ryan Losasso hope the awards will inspire others to try content creation, a process they say takes considerable effort despite misconceptions.
With millions of European users and global awards spanning 20 regions, TikTok aims to underline the value of its creators’ work. As the app continues to define social media culture, these UK awards celebrate the diverse talents driving its viral success.
Recent viral tweets have falsely claimed that the Indian government is supporting Pi Coin, citing an article from the Ministry of Ayush’s website. The article, however, was posted on a user-generated content (UGC) platform, not by government officials. The Ministry of Ayush, responsible for traditional medicine, has no official connection to Pi Coin, and the article was simply part of content posted by users to build links.
Despite its appearance on a government site, the article does not represent the views or support of the Ministry of Ayush or any other Indian government body. These misleading claims were likely spread by Pi Coin promotional accounts.
Users must verify the sources of information they come across, especially on social media, where misinformation can spread quickly. The Ministry of Ayush has no involvement in promoting Pi Coin, and the article in question was not authored by government officials.
In conclusion, claims that the Indian government is backing Pi Coin are false, and users should be cautious of such misleading content circulating online.
Five Canadian news companies have launched a lawsuit against OpenAI, claiming its AI systems violate copyright laws. Torstar, Postmedia, The Globe and Mail, The Canadian Press, and CBC/Radio-Canada allege the company uses their journalism without permission or compensation. The legal filing, made in Ontario’s superior court, seeks damages and a permanent ban on OpenAI using their materials unlawfully.
The companies argue that OpenAI has deliberately appropriated their intellectual property for commercial purposes. In their statement, they emphasised the public value of journalism and condemned OpenAI’s actions as illegal. OpenAI, however, defended its practices, stating that its models rely on publicly available data and comply with fair use and copyright principles. The firm also noted its efforts to collaborate with publishers and provide mechanisms for opting out.
The case follows a trend of lawsuits by various creators, including authors and artists, against AI companies over the use of copyrighted content, and the Canadian lawsuit does not name Microsoft, a major OpenAI backer. Separately, Elon Musk recently expanded a legal case accusing both companies of attempting to dominate the generative AI market unlawfully.
Oxford University Press has crowned ‘brain rot’ its Word of the Year, spotlighting concerns about the mental impact of consuming low-quality online content. Defined as the supposed decline in intellectual or mental acuity caused by excessive exposure to trivial material, the term has seen a 230% surge in use from 2023 to 2024, driven by social media trends.
The phrase has historical roots, first appearing in 1854 when American author Henry David Thoreau criticised society’s intellectual decay in his book Walden. However, it has gained new relevance in today’s digital age, particularly among younger generations. Oxford Professor Andrew Przybylski clarifies that ‘brain rot’ is less a diagnosis and more a reflection of collective anxieties about online life.
Casper Grathwohl, President of Oxford Languages, notes that the term reflects broader concerns about how digital culture shapes modern identity and leisure. Its selection follows last year’s winner, ‘rizz,’ highlighting how internet slang continues to influence language. Alongside ‘brain rot,’ contenders like ‘Romantasy’ and ‘dynamic pricing’ illustrate the blend of digital culture, economic trends, and evolving lifestyles shaping language today.
Australia has proposed a law to curb anti-competitive practices by major tech companies, including fines of up to A$50 million ($33 million) for suppressing competition or preventing consumers from switching services. The move builds on recent efforts by the Labor government to regulate Big Tech, including a ban on social media use for children under 16 passed last week.
Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones highlighted the dominance of platforms like Apple, Google, and Meta, warning that their practices stifle innovation, limit consumer choice, and inflate costs. The proposed law, inspired by the European Union’s Digital Markets Act, aims to make it easier for users to switch between services such as social media platforms, internet browsers, and app stores.
The law would empower Australia’s competition regulator to enforce compliance, investigate digital market practices, and impose fines. It prioritises oversight of app stores and ad tech services, targeting practices like promoting low-rated apps and favouring in-house services over competitors. Consultation on the legislation will run until February 14, with further discussions to refine the draft.
Big Tech companies, which dominate Australia’s digital market, have yet to comment on the proposal. Government reports reveal Google controls up to 95% of online search, Apple’s App Store handles 60% of app downloads, and Facebook and Instagram account for 79% of social media services in the country.
Meta Platforms announced stricter regulations for advertisers promoting financial products and services in Australia, aiming to curb online scams. Following an October initiative where Meta removed 8,000 deceptive ‘celeb bait’ ads, the company now requires advertisers to verify beneficiary and payer details, including their Australian Financial Services License number, before running financial ads.
This move is part of Meta’s ongoing efforts to protect Australians from scams involving fake investment schemes using celebrity images. Verified advertisers must also display a “Paid for By” disclaimer, ensuring transparency in financial advertisements.
The updated policy follows a broader regulatory push in Australia, where the government recently abandoned plans to fine internet platforms for spreading misinformation. The crackdown on online platforms is part of a growing effort to assert Australian sovereignty over foreign tech companies, with a federal election looming.
Meta Platforms, the owner of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is set to face trial in Spain in October 2025 over a €551 million ($582 million) lawsuit filed by 87 media companies. The complaint, led by the AMI media association, accuses Meta of unfair competition in advertising through its alleged misuse of user data from 2018 to 2023.
The media companies argue that Meta’s extensive data collection provides it with an unfair advantage in crafting personalised ads, violating EU data protection regulations. Prominent Spanish publishers, including El Pais owner Prisa and ABC publisher Vocento, are among the plaintiffs. A separate €160 million lawsuit against Meta was also filed by Spanish broadcasters last month on similar grounds.
The lawsuits are part of a broader effort by traditional media to push back against tech giants, which they claim undermine their revenue and fail to pay fair fees for content use. In response to similar challenges in other countries, Meta has restricted news sharing on its platforms and reduced its focus on news and political content in user feeds.
Meta has not yet commented on the Spanish lawsuits, which highlight ongoing tensions between digital platforms and legacy media seeking to safeguard their economic interests.
