Mexico’s recent constitutional reform, which dissolves the Federal Telecommunications Institute (IFT) and six other regulatory agencies, has drawn criticism for potentially undermining regulatory independence. Passed by the Senate and awaiting state legislature approval, the reform shifts oversight responsibilities from autonomous bodies to federal executive control, sparking fears of inefficiency and diminished regulatory effectiveness.
The IFT, instrumental in modernising Mexico’s telecommunications and broadcasting sectors, warned that eliminating institutional autonomy could disrupt competition enforcement and sector regulation. Critics, including the Mexican Association for the Right to Information (Amedi), argue the changes risk political interference, jeopardising impartiality in decision-making.
The reform also raises concerns about Mexico’s adherence to international agreements, such as the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which mandates independent regulators for telecommunications. The government has suggested transferring the IFT’s responsibilities to existing ministries or creating a new agency, leaving the sector’s future regulatory framework uncertain.
Stakeholders stress the need for technical expertise, impartiality, and clarity in upcoming secondary legislation to avoid inefficiencies and ensure compliance with domestic and international obligations.
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.
India’s Competition Commission (CCI) has launched an investigation into Google’s gaming app policies following a complaint by gaming platform WinZO. The inquiry will examine allegations of discriminatory practices against apps offering real-money games.
WinZO accused Google of favouring certain categories, such as fantasy sports and rummy, while excluding others like carrom, puzzles, and racing games. The gaming platform filed the complaint in 2022, claiming Google’s updated policies create an uneven playing field, disadvantaging smaller developers.
The investigation compounds Google’s regulatory challenges in India, where it has already faced significant fines for anti-competitive behaviour in the Android ecosystem. A CCI official has been tasked with completing the inquiry within 60 days.
Google has yet to comment on the allegations, as the announcement coincided with Thanksgiving in the US.
Canada’s Competition Bureau has filed a lawsuit against Google, accusing the tech giant of anti-competitive practices in online advertising. The agency claims Google abused its dominant position in the Canadian ad tech market to maintain its control, stifling competition and innovation.
The Competition Bureau’s investigation, which began in 2020 and expanded earlier this year, found Google to be the largest provider across the advertising technology stack in the country. The lawsuit seeks a court order for Google to sell two of its advertising tools and pay a penalty to ensure compliance with competition laws in Canada.
Google denies the allegations, stating that the online advertising market is highly competitive and offers many choices for advertisers. The company argues its ad tech tools are designed to help businesses connect with customers effectively while supporting websites and apps.
This case mirrors similar actions taken against Google in the US and the EU. Closing arguments in a US Department of Justice lawsuit accusing Google of monopolising advertising markets were presented recently, while European publishers previously rejected a Google offer to sell part of its ad tech business to settle an EU investigation.
Crystal Intelligence and Dubai Police have collaborated to address economic crimes within the rapidly growing digital asset space. By combining advanced blockchain analytics with law enforcement expertise, the two entities aim to predict and prevent financial crimes, ensuring robust security within the digital asset ecosystem.
That collaboration reflects Dubai’s commitment to remaining at the forefront of global blockchain innovation. Moreover, as part of its broader strategy, the UAE, particularly Dubai, has positioned itself as a leader in digital assets by creating a regulatory framework that fosters innovation while ensuring security and compliance.
Notably, establishing the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA), the world’s first regulator for virtual assets, has attracted numerous blockchain companies and service providers to the city, further solidifying Dubai’s role as a central hub for digital assets. This collaboration also involves strengthening Dubai Police’s capabilities through Crystal Intelligence’s advanced tools in transaction monitoring, risk management, and predictive analytics.
Why does it matter?
These tools will enable law enforcement to proactively detect and address fraudulent activities across blockchain networks, thereby ensuring the integrity of Dubai’s digital asset market. By combining regulatory foresight with cutting-edge technology, Dubai demonstrates its leadership in integrating innovation with security. Ultimately, this partnership sets a new global standard for digital asset security and offers a model for other jurisdictions to follow as they navigate the complexities of financial crimes in the digital asset space.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has strengthened its rules to better protect consumers from tech support scams. With new amendments to the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), the agency can now act against fraudsters even when victims initiate the call, closing a loophole that left many unable to seek justice.
Tech support scams commonly trick victims through fake pop-ups, emails, and warnings that urge them to contact bogus help desks. These scams have disproportionately affected older adults, who are five times more likely to be targeted, leading to over $175M in reported losses.
Previously, the US FTC could only pursue scammers if they made the initial call. The rule change now removes exemptions for technical support services, allowing the agency to crack down on deceptive practices regardless of how contact is made. Authorities are also targeting fraudulent pop-ups as part of a broader effort to combat these schemes.
With cases like the fake ‘Geek Squad’ scams resulting in millions in losses, the FTC’s expanded powers mark a significant step in holding scammers accountable and protecting vulnerable populations from financial harm.
The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has launched a wide-reaching antitrust investigation into Microsoft’s business practices, focusing on cloud computing, software licensing, and artificial intelligence. Allegations suggest the company has imposed restrictive licensing terms that make it difficult for customers to switch from its Azure cloud services to rival platforms. FTC Chair Lina Khan approved the probe ahead of her expected departure in January, raising questions about its future under a potentially business-friendlier administration.
Critics, including competitors and industry groups like NetChoice, claim Microsoft’s licensing policies unfairly lock customers into its ecosystem. Google has raised similar concerns with European regulators, citing significant mark-ups for using Windows Server on competing cloud services and delays in providing security updates. The FTC’s investigation also touches on broader competition concerns in AI and cybersecurity, including Microsoft’s acquisition of AI startup Inflection AI.
Microsoft has not commented on the probe, but complaints have mounted over its practices in cloud computing and the integration of AI tools into productivity products like Office and Outlook. Some industry observers note that Microsoft has been relatively spared in recent US antitrust actions targeting Big Tech firms, including Apple, Google, Meta, and Amazon. However, the FTC’s focus on Microsoft could signal a shift in regulatory priorities.
The outcome of the investigation remains uncertain, particularly with a potential change in the political landscape. While the Trump administration previously pursued aggressive antitrust enforcement, including actions against Google and Meta, Microsoft has benefited from its policies in the past, such as winning a contentious $10 billion Pentagon cloud contract over Amazon. Experts believe a new administration may alter enforcement priorities but not necessarily halt ongoing probes.
Google is appealing a court order mandating significant changes to its Play app store, arguing to the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that legal errors during the trial unfairly favoured Epic Games. The tech giant contends that the San Francisco jury should not have been allowed to rule on Epic’s claims and that the trial judge overstepped by issuing a nationwide injunction.
Epic, known for creating “Fortnite,” accused Google of monopolising app distribution and payment systems on Android devices. A jury sided with Epic last year, leading US District Judge James Donato to require Google to permit rival app stores on Android and allow competitors access to Play’s app catalogue. This injunction, set to last three years, is on hold pending the appeal.
Google warns the mandated changes would disrupt app developers and users, framing the judge’s order as excessive intervention. Epic, meanwhile, dismissed Google’s appeal as baseless and a refusal to honour the jury’s unanimous decision. The appeals court is set to hear arguments in February, with a decision expected later in 2025.
