Do Kwon, the founder of Terraform Labs, is facing a criminal trial in the US, currently anticipated for early 2026. Prosecutors are dealing with six terabytes of data, encrypted devices, and the need to translate messages from Korean to English, creating significant delays in evidence gathering. District Judge Paul Engelmayer described the extended schedule as unprecedented in his 15 years on the bench.
Kwon denies the nine charges against him, which include securities fraud and money laundering conspiracies related to the $60 billion collapse of the Terra/Luna ecosystem in 2022. The incident impacted over 1 million investors. In a separate civil fraud lawsuit, a New York jury ordered Terraform Labs to cease operations and pay $4.5 billion in fines.
Extradited from Montenegro after 22 months in custody, Kwon has financed his legal defence with $200 million. His lawyers have until next week to request an earlier trial date, with the next hearing scheduled for 6 March.
Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexandre de Moraes reiterated on Wednesday that technology companies must comply with national laws to continue operating in the country. His statement followed Meta’s recent announcement to scale back its US fact-checking program, raising concerns about its impact on Brazil.
Speaking at an event marking the anniversary of anti-institution riots, Moraes emphasised that the court would not tolerate the use of hate speech for profit. Last year, he ordered the suspension of social media platform X for over a month due to its failure to moderate hate speech, a decision later upheld by the court. X owner Elon Musk criticised the move as censorship but ultimately complied with court demands to restore the platform’s services in Brazil.
Brazilian prosecutors have also asked Meta to clarify whether its US fact-checking changes will apply in Brazil, citing an ongoing investigation into social media platforms’ efforts to combat misinformation and violence. Meta has been given 30 days to respond but declined to comment through its local office.
Faculty AI, a consultancy company with significant experience in AI, has been developing AI technologies for both civilian and military applications. Known for its close work with the UK government on AI safety, the NHS, and education, Faculty is also exploring the use of AI in military drones. The company has been involved in testing AI models for the UK’s AI Safety Institute (AISI), which was established to study the implications of AI safety.
While Faculty has worked extensively with AI in non-lethal areas, its work with military applications raises concerns due to the potential for autonomous systems in weapons, including drones. Though Faculty has not disclosed whether its AI work extends to lethal drones, it continues to face scrutiny over its dual roles in advising both the government on AI safety and working with defense clients.
The company has also generated some controversy because of its growing influence in both the public and private sectors. Some experts, including Green Party members, have raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest due to Faculty’s widespread government contracts and its private sector involvement in AI, such as its collaborations with OpenAI and defence firms. Faculty’s work on AI safety is seen as crucial, but critics argue that its broad portfolio could create a risk of bias in the advice it provides.
Despite these concerns, Faculty maintains that its work is guided by strict ethical policies, and it has emphasised its commitment to ensuring AI is used safely and responsibly, especially in defence applications. As AI continues to evolve, experts call for caution, with discussions about the need for human oversight in the development of autonomous weapons systems growing more urgent.
A prominent technology trade group has urged the Biden administration to reconsider a proposed rule that would restrict global access to US-made AI chips, warning that the measure could undermine America’s leadership in the AI sector. The Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), representing major companies like Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta, expressed concerns that the restrictions could unfairly limit US companies’ ability to compete globally while allowing foreign rivals to dominate the market.
The proposed rule, expected to be released as soon as Friday, is part of the Commerce Department’s broader strategy to regulate AI chip exports and prevent misuse, particularly by adversaries like China. The restrictions aim to curb the potential for AI to enhance China’s military capabilities. However, in a letter to Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, ITI CEO Jason Oxman criticised the administration’s urgency in finalising the rule, warning of ‘significant adverse consequences’ if implemented hastily. Oxman called for a more measured approach, such as issuing a proposed rule for public feedback rather than enacting an immediate policy.
Industry leaders have been vocal in their opposition, describing the draft rule as overly broad and damaging. The Semiconductor Industry Association raised similar concerns earlier this week, and Oracle’s Executive Vice President Ken Glueck slammed the measure as one of the most disruptive ever proposed for the US tech sector. Glueck argued the rule would impose sweeping regulations on the global commercial cloud industry, stifling innovation and growth.
While the administration has yet to comment on the matter, the growing pushback highlights the tension between safeguarding national security and maintaining US dominance in the rapidly evolving field of AI.
Telegram, the popular messaging app, has fulfilled 900 requests from US authorities for personal information about its users in 2024, with a significant rise in inquiries following the arrest of CEO Pavel Durov in France. A report from 404 Media, published on 7 January, revealed that the platform provided 14 requests for IP addresses and phone numbers between January and September 2024. However, most of these requests were made after October, affecting over 2,000 users.
The increase in requests came after French authorities arrested Durov on 24 August, accusing Telegram of enabling criminal activity. Durov has stated that since 2018, Telegram has been providing user information like IP addresses and phone numbers to law enforcement authorities when requested. The policy, which is mentioned in Telegram’s privacy guidelines, continues to be a source of controversy.
Despite the ongoing legal issues, with Durov still barred from leaving France, Telegram remains a key platform, especially within the cryptocurrency community, where it has more than 950 million monthly active users.
Apple remains unable to sell its iPhone 16 in Indonesia despite agreeing to build a production facility in the country, according to Indonesia’s industry minister, Agus Gumiwang Kartasasmita. The ban stems from regulations requiring smartphones sold domestically to include at least 35% locally-made components—a threshold Apple has not met.
While Apple plans to invest $1 billion in a facility on Batam island to produce its Airtag tracking devices, the industry ministry clarified that this does not qualify as contributing to iPhone production. Kartasasmita emphasised that only phone components would satisfy the local content rules necessary for certification to sell iPhones in Indonesia.
Apple, which lacks manufacturing facilities in the country, has maintained its presence through application developer academies since 2018. Despite two days of discussions between Kartasasmita and Apple’s vice president of global government affairs, Nick Ammann, the company’s proposals for ‘innovative investment’ failed to meet Indonesia’s regulatory standards for smartphone sales.
The planned Batam facility, expected to launch operations next year, underscores Apple’s interest in expanding its footprint in Indonesia, a nation of 280 million people. However, the iPhone 16’s path to market in the region remains uncertain.
Meta Platforms has elected three new directors to its board, including Dana White, CEO of Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) and a close associate of President-elect Donald Trump. Investor and former Microsoft executive Charlie Songhurst and Exor CEO John Elkann have also joined. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said their expertise would help the company navigate opportunities in artificial intelligence, wearables, and digital connectivity.
White’s appointment strengthens his ties with Zuckerberg, who has become a mixed martial arts enthusiast. The two have shared public exchanges in recent years, with Zuckerberg attending UFC events at White’s invitation. Songhurst has been involved in Meta’s AI advisory group since May, while Elkann holds leadership roles at Ferrari and Stellantis, alongside chairing the Agnelli Foundation.
Zuckerberg has been adjusting Meta’s strategy ahead of a possible second Trump presidency. The company recently promoted Republican policy expert Joel Kaplan and donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund, signalling a shift in its political stance. Meta has also acknowledged past content decisions that were unpopular among conservatives as it prepares for the evolving political landscape.
The future of TikTok in the United States hangs in the balance as the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments on 10 January over a law that could force the app to sever ties with its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, or face a ban. The case centres on whether the law violates the First Amendment, with TikTok and its creators arguing that it does, while the US government maintains that national security concerns justify the measure. If the government wins, TikTok has stated it would shut down its US operations by 19 January.
Creators who rely on TikTok for income are bracing for uncertainty. Many have taken to the platform to express their frustrations, fearing disruption to their businesses and online communities. Some are already diversifying their presence on other platforms like Instagram and YouTube, though they acknowledge TikTok’s unique algorithm has provided visibility and opportunities not found elsewhere. Industry experts believe many creators are adopting a wait-and-see approach, avoiding drastic moves until the Supreme Court reaches a decision.
The Biden administration has pushed for a resolution without success, while President-elect Donald Trump has asked the court to delay the ban so he can weigh in once in office. If the ban proceeds, app stores and internet providers will be required to stop supporting TikTok, ultimately rendering it unusable. TikTok has warned that even a temporary shutdown could lead to a sharp decline in users, potentially causing lasting damage to the platform. A ruling from the Supreme Court is expected in the coming weeks.
Apple has agreed to pay $95 million to settle a class action lawsuit alleging its Siri voice assistant violated users’ privacy. The lawsuit claimed that Apple recorded users’ private conversations without consent when the ‘Hey, Siri’ feature was unintentionally triggered. These recordings were allegedly shared with third parties, including advertisers, leading to targeted ads based on private discussions.
The class period for the lawsuit spans from 17 September 2014 to 31 December 2024 and applies to users of Siri-enabled devices like iPhones and Apple Watches. Affected users could receive up to $20 per device. Apple denied any wrongdoing but settled the case to avoid prolonged litigation.
The settlement amount is a small fraction of Apple’s annual profits, with the company making nearly $94 billion in net income last year. While the company and plaintiffs’ lawyers have yet to comment on the settlement, the plaintiffs may seek up to $28.5 million in legal fees and expenses. A similar lawsuit involving Google’s Voice Assistant is also underway in a California federal court.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down federal net neutrality rules, ruling that the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not have the authority to regulate internet service providers (ISPs) in this way. The decision challenges the FCC’s attempt to reclassify ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act, a move to prevent discrimination in internet traffic, such as slowing speeds or blocking content.
The court’s ruling follows the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision to eliminate Chevron deference, a legal principle that typically allows courts to defer to regulatory agencies’ interpretations. With this shift, the judges were free to question the FCC’s interpretation of the law and ultimately concluded that ISPs cannot be regulated as telecommunications services.
The decision has sparked a call for legislative action. FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel urged lawmakers to pass laws safeguarding net neutrality, reflecting public demand for a fair and open internet. Meanwhile, Republican figures, including FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr, celebrated the ruling, viewing it as a victory against government overreach in regulating the internet.
This legal setback comes as the Biden administration’s push for net neutrality faces increasing challenges, and it remains uncertain whether future attempts to reinstate the rules will succeed.
