Poland’s antitrust and consumer protection watchdog, UOKiK, has fined PayPal Europe 106.6 million zlotys ($27.3 million) for failing to clearly outline activities that could incur penalties in its contractual clauses. UOKiK stated that PayPal’s descriptions of prohibited activities could have been more precise, making it difficult for users to understand what actions were not allowed and the potential consequences.
UOKiK’s head, Tomasz Chrostny, criticised PayPal’s clauses as general, ambiguous, and incomprehensible, giving the company excessive discretion to determine whether a user has committed a prohibited act and what penalties to impose. That could include actions like blocking money on accounts.
PayPal responded by emphasising its commitment to fair treatment and transparent communication with customers. The company stated that it has been cooperating with UOKiK during the investigation and is reviewing the decision. PayPal also noted that the decision is not final and that it has the opportunity to appeal in court.
India’s antitrust body, the Competition Commission of India (CCI), has concluded its investigation into Apple’s practices within the Indian app market, finding the tech giant engaged in abusive conduct. According to a confidential report viewed by Reuters, the CCI alleges Apple exploited its dominant position in the iOS app ecosystem by mandating developers to use its proprietary in-app purchase system. This requirement, the CCI asserts, limits competition and imposes unfair terms on developers who rely on Apple’s platform to reach consumers.
The 142-page report highlights Apple’s significant influence over digital products and services distribution through its App Store on iOS devices. It describes the App Store as a crucial channel for app developers, who must comply with Apple’s terms, including its billing and payment system. Both Apple and the CCI declined to comment on the report’s findings.
The CCI report marks a pivotal phase in India’s investigation, pending review by senior officials. It could result in fines and directives for Apple to revise its business practices. The case originated from complaints by a non-profit group and Indian startups, alleging Apple’s practices stifle competition and inflate costs for developers and consumers.
Why does this matter?
The investigation mirrors the heightened scrutiny Apple faces globally. In June, the EU regulators accused Apple of breaching antitrust laws, potentially leading to substantial fines. Apple is also under investigation for new fees imposed on developers, responding with plans to allow alternative app distribution in the EU under the Digital Markets Act.
The report underscores the regulatory pressure tech giants face worldwide, with similar antitrust actions targeting Google in India over its in-app payment policies. As the CCI deliberates its next steps, Apple’s market practices remain a focal point amid broader concerns over fair competition in the digital economy.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has reached agreements with Telstra and Optus regarding Google’s search services following an investigation into potential anticompetitive practices. The ACCC found that Google had arrangements with Telstra and Optus since at least 2017, ensuring its search services were pre-installed as the default on Android devices supplied by these telecom companies. These agreements restrict competition by limiting the visibility of rival search engines.
Telstra and Optus have cooperated with the ACCC and agreed that, as of 30 June 2024, they will not renew or enter into any new agreements with Google that mandate its search services as the exclusive default option on devices they distribute. These undertakings aim to promote competition and consumer choice in Australia’s digital market.
ACCC Commissioner Liza Carver emphasised the importance of these undertakings in enhancing consumer choice and fostering competition in digital platforms. She noted that practices such as exclusivity agreements can stifle innovation and limit options for consumers, highlighting the need for digital platforms to adhere to Australia’s competition laws.
The ACCC’s broader investigation into Google’s practices continues, focusing on potential competition concerns raised by these agreements and their impact on the digital economy. The commission plans to submit further reports on its findings, including recommendations for regulatory reforms aimed at promoting fair competition among digital platforms in Australia.
Two companies that benefited the most from AI average, Nvidia and Microsoft, are the most exposed to antitrust investigations for AI monopolies. Regulatory authorities have shifted their approach, acting quickly against potential monopolistic practices instead of taking years to intervene.
Notable investigations include the US Department of Justice examining Nvidia’s alleged anticompetitive behaviour in the GPU market and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) probing Microsoft’s $13 billion investment in OpenAI and strategic staff acquisitions from Inflection. The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is also investigating, particularly concerned about the over 90 partnerships tech giants have formed with large language model developers since 2019, potentially stifling competition.
Politically, there’s a risk that excessive intervention could be seen as stifling innovation, particularly in the face of global competitors like China. Regulators must balance fostering competition with enabling innovation, ensuring that the rise of generative AI, which promises significant technological upheaval, does not result in a market dominated by a few powerful players.
EU antitrust regulators scrutinise Microsoft’s partnership with OpenAI and Google’s AI deal with Samsung due to concerns over exclusivity clauses. Competition chief Margrethe Vestager plans to gather more third-party views. This development comes amid global unease about Big Tech’s dominance in new technologies.
After sending questionnaires to tech firms regarding their AI partnerships, Vestager now seeks additional information about Microsoft’s $13 billion investment in OpenAI’s for-profit subsidiary, which would result in a 49% stake, to determine if it harms competitors.
📢 For now, we conclude that @Microsoft has not acquired control of @OpenAI under 🇪🇺 Merger Regulation.
We will keep monitoring the relationships between all key players in the AI sector, incl. Microsoft & OpenAI.
While Microsoft’s deal isn’t subject to EU merger rules, Vestager also investigates if Big Tech is blocking smaller AI developers from accessing users and businesses. Similar concerns apply to Google’s agreement to pre-install its Gemini Nano model on Samsung devices.
Vestager also examines ‘acqui-hires,’ where companies acquire others primarily for their talent, such as Microsoft’s $650-million acquisition of Inflection, to ensure these practices don’t bypass merger control rules and lead to market concentration.
Why does it matter?
Reuters reported in April that the EU regulators were building a case that could lead to an antitrust investigation into Microsoft’s $13 billion investment in OpenAI. Partnerships involving Alphabet, Amazon, and Anthropic are also under scrutiny from antitrust enforcers on both sides of the Atlantic.
In a decision issued on 28 June 2024, a US federal judge authorised most of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawsuit against leading cryptocurrency exchange Binance. The origin of the lawsuit can be traced back to June 2023, when the SEC alleged that Binance and its CEO, Zhao, had manipulated the market, misused customer funds, non-complied with US customer restrictions, and misrepresented investors on their market surveillance controls.
Binance was also accused of enabling trades of crypto tokens, which were classified as unregistered securities by the SEC. For Binance, this ruling compounds its challenges following its recent $4.2 billion settlement with the Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission over financial misconduct.
However, the verdict partially favours the cryptocurrency industry as the judge invoked a previous ruling, stating that the SEC failed to prove that secondary sales of Binance’s tokens (those sold by sellers other than Binance on exchanges) should be classified as securities.
Why does this matter?
The following case reflects a broader regulatory trend directed to major crypto firms, such as Coinbase, Kraken, and Consensys, in an attempt to increase oversight of the cryptocurrency sector.
Meta asserts that its model complies with a ruling from EU’s top court and is aligned with the DMA, expressing a willingness to engage with the Commission to resolve the issue. However, if found guilty, Meta could face fines of up to 10% of its global annual turnover. The Commission aims to conclude its investigation by March next year.
The charge follows a recent DMA-related charge against Apple for similar non-compliance, highlighting the EU’s efforts to regulate Big Tech and empower users to control their data.
The European Union has directed Chinese fast-fashion e-commerce giants Temu and Shein to disclose their compliance with EU online content regulations by July 12. This move follows complaints lodged by consumer groups and designates both platforms as Very Large Online Platforms under the Digital Services Act. These designations impose stricter obligations on handling illegal and harmful content.
According to the European Commission, requests for information have been issued to Temu and Shein regarding their measures to combat illegal products, prevent user deception through manipulative interfaces, and safeguard minors. The Commission also seeks transparency in their recommendation systems, traceability of sellers, and compliance integration into platform design.
The enforcement action stems from consumer organisations’ complaints and underscores the EU’s commitment to ensuring digital platforms uphold regulatory standards. Failure to comply with the Digital Services Act could lead to fines of up to 6% of a company’s global turnover, emphasising the seriousness with which the EU views adherence to online content rules.
Temu and Shein are mandated to furnish comprehensive responses by the specified deadline, marking a pivotal moment in how global e-commerce giants navigate regulatory landscapes beyond their home markets. The outcome of these disclosures will be closely monitored as the EU continues to assert its regulatory authority over digital platforms operating within its jurisdiction.
Regulating AI, a non-profit organisation dedicated to promoting AI governance, has announced its advisory board’s formation. Board members include notable figures such as former US Senator Cory Gardner, former Bolivian President Jorge Quiroga, and former Finnish Prime Minister Esko Aho. The board aims to foster a sustainable AI ecosystem that benefits humanity while addressing potential risks and ethical concerns.
The founder of Regulating AI, Sanjay Puri, expressed his excitement about the diverse expertise and perspectives the new board members bring. He emphasised the importance of their wisdom in navigating the complexities of the rapidly evolving AI landscape and shaping policies that balance innovation with ethical considerations and societal well-being.
One of the organisation’s key initiatives is developing a comprehensive AI governance framework. That includes promoting international cooperation, advocating for diverse voices, and exploring sector-specific AI implications. Former President of Bolivia Jorge Quiroga highlighted the transformational power of AI and the need for effective regulation that considers the unique challenges of developing nations.
Regulating AI aims to build public trust, align international standards, and empower various stakeholders through its board. Former US Senator Gardner underscored the necessity of robust regulatory frameworks to ensure AI is developed and deployed responsibly, protecting consumer privacy, preventing algorithmic bias, and upholding democratic values. The organisation also seeks to educate and raise awareness about AI regulations, fostering discussions among experts and policymakers to advance understanding and implementation.
Italy’s financial watchdog, Consob, has begun experimenting with AI to enhance its oversight capabilities, particularly in the initial review of listing prospectuses and the detection of insider trading. According to Consob, these AI algorithms aim to swiftly identify potential instances of insider trading, which traditionally requires significantly more time when conducted manually.
The agency reported that its AI algorithms can detect errors in just three seconds, a task typically taking a human analyst at least 20 minutes. These efforts were part of testing conducted last year using prototypes developed in collaboration with Scuola Normale Superiore University in Pisa, alongside an additional model developed independently.
Consob views the integration of AI as pivotal in enhancing the effectiveness of regulatory controls to detect financial misconduct. The next phase involves transitioning from prototype testing to fully incorporating AI into Consob’s regular operational procedures. That initiative mirrors similar efforts by financial regulators globally who are increasingly leveraging AI to bolster consumer protection and regulatory oversight.
For instance, in the United Kingdom, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has utilised AI technologies to combat online scams and protect consumers. That trend underscores a broader international movement within regulatory bodies to harness AI’s potential in safeguarding market integrity and enhancing regulatory efficiency.
