Jurisdiction

FTX Europe’s license suspension extended by Cyprus regulator

Cyprus’ financial regulator, the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC), has extended the suspension of FTX’s European branch by another six months, lasting until 30 May 2025. The continued suspension means that FTX EU remains barred from accepting new clients, providing services, or advertising, though it can still process transactions to return funds to existing clients.

The extension comes as the second anniversary of FTX’s bankruptcy filing approaches. After FTX declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the US in November 2022, CySEC halted FTX Europe’s license, questioning the firm’s management suitability and ensuring the protection of client assets. FTX Europe, initially acquired by FTX in 2021 for $323 million, has since been resold to its original owners for $32.7 million following legal disputes over the acquisition price.

FTX Europe’s website currently only supports balance viewing and withdrawal requests. Clients who do not withdraw funds will have their balances moved to a client-segregated account, which will be held for up to six years.

UK moves to safeguard national security in tech sector

The UK government has ordered China-registered Future Technology Devices International Holding Ltd to sell the majority stake—80.2%—in Scottish chipmaker FTDI, citing national security concerns. The government voiced concerns that UK-developed semiconductor technology and intellectual property could be misused if controlled by foreign interests that have been considered potentially harmful.

This directive requires FTDI’s Chinese parent company to follow a set procedure and timeline to complete the sale. The move highlights the UK’s efforts to protect sensitive technology sectors and its vigilance over foreign investments that may impact national security.

Increasingly, governments worldwide are scrutinising tech-related investments, especially in semiconductor industries, due to the strategic importance of chip technologies in national defence, infrastructure, and critical sectors.

Russian court fines Apple for failing to remove two podcasts, RIA reports

A Moscow court has fined Apple 3.6 million roubles ($36,889) for refusing to remove two podcasts that were reportedly aimed at destabilising Russia’s political landscape, according to the RIA news agency. The court’s decision is part of a larger pattern of the Russian government targeting foreign technology companies for not complying with content removal requests. This action is seen as part of the Kremlin’s broader strategy to exert control over the digital space and reduce the influence of Western tech giants.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the government has intensified its crackdown on foreign tech companies, accusing them of spreading content that undermines Russian authority and sovereignty. The Kremlin has already imposed similar fines on companies like Google and Meta, demanding the removal of content deemed harmful to national security or political stability. Critics argue that these moves are part of an orchestrated effort to suppress dissenting voices and maintain control over information, particularly in the face of growing international scrutiny.

Apple, like other Western companies, has faced mounting pressure to comply with Russia’s increasingly stringent regulations. While the company has largely resisted political content restrictions in other regions, the fine highlights the challenges it faces in operating within Russia’s tightly controlled media environment. Apple has not yet publicly commented on the ruling, but the decision reflects the growing risks for tech firms doing business in Russia as the country tightens its grip on digital platforms.

Apple faces first EU fine under Digital Markets Act

Apple is set to face its first fine under the European Union‘s Digital Markets Act (DMA) for breaching the bloc’s antitrust regulations, according to sources familiar with the matter. This comes after EU regulators charged Apple in June for violating the new tech rules, which are designed to curb the dominance of big tech companies. The fine, expected to be imposed later this month, adds to Apple’s ongoing antitrust challenges in the EU.

In March, Apple was hit with a €1.84 billion fine for restricting competition in the music streaming market through its App Store policies. The company also faces additional investigations related to new fees on app developers and potential violations of the DMA, which could result in penalties of up to 10% of its global annual revenue.

The Digital Markets Act, which came into effect earlier this year, mandates Apple to make changes, such as allowing users to choose default browsers and permitting alternative app stores on its operating systems. Apple has not commented on the impending fine, and the European Commission has yet to provide a response.

EU unveils new transparency rules under DSA for intermediary service providers.

The European Commission has introduced an Implementing Regulation that standardises transparency reporting for providers of intermediary services under the Digital Services Act (DSA). That regulation aims to ensure consistency and comparability in the data shared with the public by requiring providers to disclose specific information about their content moderation practices.

Providers must report on the number of pieces of content removed, account suspensions, the accuracy of automated systems, and the composition of their moderation teams. Very large online platforms (VLOPs) and very large online search engines (VLOSEs) are required to submit reports twice a year, while all other providers must report annually.

In addition to content moderation, the regulation mandates transparency in average monthly user numbers, recommender system parameters, and advertising data. Providers must also submit ‘statements of reasons’ for content moderation decisions to the DSA Transparency Database, aligning with the newly specified data categories.

The regulation addresses past inconsistencies by harmonising reporting templates, content, and timelines, ensuring clearer public access to information about digital services’ practices. To facilitate the transition, the regulation includes a clear implementation timeline.

Providers must begin collecting data under the new rules by 1 July 2025, with the first harmonised transparency reports expected in early 2026. That timeline allows digital services time to adjust their systems and practices to comply with the new requirements, further promoting accountability and public trust in the digital services sector across the EU.

UK’s CMA suspends GXO Wincanton merger citing competition risks

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has temporarily halted the proposed £762 million acquisition of UK logistics firm Wincanton by American logistics company GXO, citing potential competition risks. This decision follows the CMA’s preliminary investigation, which raised concerns about the merger’s impact on the already competitive contract logistics services sector.

An interim enforcement order (IEO) is now in effect, preventing any integration of the two firms during the review process. The CMA’s phase 1 investigation indicated that the merger could reduce competition in a market valued at £16 billion in the UK, where GXO and Wincanton are key players competing for contracts with major retailers. Naomi Burgoyne, senior director of mergers at the CMA, warned that diminished competition could lead to higher costs for consumers reliant on efficient delivery services.

GXO has five days to propose solutions to address the CMA’s concerns. If the proposals are found inadequate, the regulator will proceed to a more detailed phase two investigation. In response to the CMA’s announcement, a GXO spokesperson stated that they are reviewing the decision and are committed to collaborating with the CMA to achieve a favourable outcome, asserting that the acquisition would benefit logistics customers across the UK and support government initiatives for economic growth.

US Supreme Court set to review Facebook and Nvidia securities fraud cases

The United States Supreme Court will soon consider whether Meta’s Facebook and Nvidia can avoid federal securities fraud lawsuits in two separate cases that may limit investors’ ability to sue corporations. The tech giants are challenging lawsuits following decisions from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which allowed class actions accusing them of misleading investors to move forward. The cases will examine the power of private plaintiffs to enforce securities laws amid recent rulings that have weakened federal regulatory authority.

The Facebook case involves allegations from a group of investors, led by Amalgamated Bank, who claim the social media giant misled shareholders about a 2015 data breach linked to Cambridge Analytica, which impacted over 30 million users. Facebook argues that its disclosures on potential risks were adequate and forward-looking. Nvidia’s case, brought by Swedish investment firm E. Ohman JFonder AB, alleges that the company understated the role of crypto-related sales in its revenue growth in 2017 and 2018, misinforming investors about the volatility in its business.

Observers say these cases could further empower businesses by limiting legal risks from private litigation, especially as the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) faces resource limitations. With recent Supreme Court rulings constraining regulatory bodies, private securities lawsuits may become an increasingly critical tool for investors. David Shargel, a legal expert, notes that as agencies’ enforcement powers weaken, the role of private litigation to hold companies accountable may expand.

Lawsuit over Google Play gift card scams dismissed

A federal judge has dismissed a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming Google illegally profited from scams involving Google Play gift cards. The plaintiff, Judy May, alleged she lost $1,000 after a scammer posed as a government official, instructing her to purchase Google Play gift cards to claim grant money. She argued that Google should have warned consumers about such scams on the card packaging.

However, Judge Beth Labson Freeman ruled that Google was not responsible for May’s losses, as the tech giant neither caused her financial harm nor knowingly benefited from the stolen funds. Freeman also dismissed claims that Google’s 15% to 30% commission on purchases using the gift cards was linked to the initial fraud.

The Federal Trade Commission reported that Americans lost $217 million to gift card fraud in 2023, with Google Play cards implicated in roughly 20% of reported cases. Though May’s case was dismissed, the judge allowed her the option to refile.

Vodafone and Three Merger nears approval with consumer safeguards

The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has indicated that a proposed merger between Vodafone and Three could proceed, contingent on the companies making commitments to protect consumer prices and enhance the nation’s 5G infrastructure. The regulator, initially concerned that combining the two networks could lead to higher costs and reduced competition, has now concluded that these issues could be mitigated if Vodafone and Three agree to specific remedies.

Vodafone has responded positively to the CMA’s findings, expressing optimism that the proposal offers a clear path to regulatory approval. The telecom giants have emphasised that the merger would benefit both consumers and businesses, with plans to bring advanced 5G access to schools, hospitals, and other vital sectors across the UK.

The CMA’s investigation, which began in January, is now focused on ensuring the merged entity honors price promises on certain data plans for at least three years. Additionally, the companies would be required to maintain existing deals with smaller Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs) like Sky Mobile, Lyca, and Lebara. Industry analysts see the CMA’s conditional support as a positive step, potentially leading to a stronger three-player market alongside existing competitors EE and O2.

With public feedback on the proposal open until 12 November, a final decision is expected from the CMA by 7 December.

Alleged bitcoin inventor Craig Wright accused of court contempt

Craig Wright, the Australian computer scientist who claims to be Bitcoin’s creator, now faces potential contempt of court charges in the UK. Wright recently filed a $1.2B lawsuit against Block, a payments firm founded by Jack Dorsey, despite an injunction barring him from bringing new claims based on his disputed identity as “Satoshi Nakamoto.” A UK court previously found “overwhelming evidence” against Wright’s authorship of Bitcoin’s founding document and accused him of fabricating evidence on a “grand scale.”

Wright was previously referred to UK prosecutors for potential perjury, following a court decision to block him from further lawsuits tied to his claim of creating Bitcoin. Jonathan Hough, a lawyer for the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA), argued that Wright’s lawsuit against Block violates the court’s injunction. Wright, appearing by videolink, denied being in contempt but stated he would amend his lawsuit if necessary.

The court will hold a hearing in December to determine if Wright is indeed in contempt. In the meantime, his $1.2B lawsuit against Block has been temporarily halted pending further legal review.