A fast fashion retailer Shein has escalated its legal battle against rival Temu by filing a lawsuit accusing Temu of operating as an unlawful enterprise. The allegations against Temu include counterfeiting, theft of trade secrets, and manipulating sellers on its platform. Shein claims Temu exerts complete control over its sellers, even preventing them from removing products after admitting to intellectual property infringement.
The lawsuit is part of an ongoing feud between the two budget retailers, which have exchanged legal threats before. Temu had previously accused Shein of pressuring manufacturers to cut ties with it, while Shein claimed Temu encouraged false statements by influencers. Both companies are known for aggressive tactics to dominate the US market, where Temu has recently overtaken Shein in sales.
Shein’s latest lawsuit also highlights its own struggle to improve its reputation as it prepares to go public in the US. The company, notorious for poor working conditions and accusations of copying independent designers, now accuses Temu of similar practices. Both retailers are heavily reliant on the Chinese supply chain and exploit trade loopholes to maintain their competitive pricing.
Meanwhile, Shein itself faces a class action lawsuit, accused of large-scale copyright infringement against small designers and artists. Despite these legal challenges, Shein continues to battle Temu in a race to the bottom in the competitive world of fast fashion.
Google must now contend with a class action lawsuit accusing it of collecting data through Chrome without user consent. A US federal appeals court has revived the case, overturning a 2022 decision that had dismissed it. The court highlighted the need for a closer examination of Google’s privacy disclosures to determine whether users genuinely understood and consented to the data collection.
The lawsuit, originally filed in 2020, alleges that Google collected user data from Chrome even when they did not enable Chrome sync. Plaintiffs argue that browsing history, IP addresses, and unique browser identifiers were shared without explicit permission. Google has maintained that users consented by accepting its privacy policy, a stance previously upheld by a lower court.
However, the recent ruling suggests that the lower court may have overlooked whether users truly grasped the implications of their agreement with Google. The case will now return to the lower courts for further consideration. Google remains confident in its position, stating that Chrome Sync provides seamless functionality across devices while maintaining clear privacy controls.
Despite the ongoing legal challenge, Google spokesperson José Castañeda has emphasised that upcoming changes to Chrome’s sync feature, which will no longer be necessary for accessing saved information, are unrelated to the lawsuit.
A federal judge in Dallas has blocked the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) ban on noncompete agreements, which would have made it difficult for workers to join competing employers or start their own businesses. The ruling, issued by US District Judge Ada Brown, prevents the ban from taking effect on 4 September, although the FTC may still appeal the decision. Judge Brown stated that the FTC had exceeded its authority, calling the ban ‘unreasonably overbroad’ and potentially causing ‘irreparable harm.’
The FTC has expressed disappointment with the ruling, emphasising its commitment to challenging noncompete agreements that they argue restrict economic freedom, hinder innovation, and depress wages. The agency is considering an appeal, which would go to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. In the meantime, the FTC will have to address noncompete issues on a case-by-case basis.
The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by tax firm Ryan LLC, supported by the US Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable, which argued that the ban would make it harder for companies to retain talent. Despite the FTC’s claim that the ban would enable the creation of over 8,500 new businesses annually, the judge’s decision has put the nationwide ban on hold.
Elon Musk’s media platform X announced last Saturday that it would cease operations in Brazil immediately, citing ‘censorship orders’ from Brazilian judge Alexandre de Moraes. According to X, de Moraes allegedly threatened to arrest one of the company’s legal representatives in Brazil if they did not comply with orders to remove certain content from the platform. X shared images of a document purportedly signed by the judge, stating that the representative, Rachel Nova Conceicao, would face a daily fine and possible arrest if the platform did not comply.
Due to demands by “Justice” @Alexandre in Brazil that would require us to break (in secret) Brazilian, Argentinian, American and international law, 𝕏 has no choice but to close our local operations in Brazil.
In response, X decided to close its operations in Brazil to protect its staff, although the service remains available to Brazilian users. The Brazilian Supreme Court, where de Moraes serves, declined to comment on the authenticity of the document shared by X.
After a four-year absence, Fortnite is once again available on iPhones across the European Union, thanks to new regulations under the EU’s Digital Markets Act. This development comes as Epic Games, the US based creator of Fortnite, has finally overcome legal challenges that led to the game’s removal from Apple’s App Store in 2020. At the time, the game was banned due to a dispute over in-app payment commissions, which led to a series of lawsuits against Apple and Google.
With the new law in place, Epic Games can relaunch Fortnite on iPhones within the EU, although Apple continues to block access outside Europe. Epic’s CEO, Tim Sweeney, expressed gratitude towards the European Commission for enforcing the regulations, ensuring that tech giants couldn’t hinder competition in the digital market. Alongside Fortnite, Epic’s mobile game store is also launching with other popular titles like Rocket League Sideswipe and Fall Guys.
Globally, Fortnite has also reappeared on Android devices, further expanding its reach. The company aims to add 100 million new mobile users by the end of the year, with plans to collaborate with other developers to offer a broader range of games through independent mobile stores such as AltStore.
This relaunch marks a significant victory for Epic Games, which had 75 million monthly active users in its PC store, now setting its sights on a massive mobile expansion. The return of Fortnite, particularly on iPhones in the EU, is likely to reignite the game’s popularity and player base.
TikTok has contested claims made by the US Department of Justice in a federal appeals court, asserting that the government has inaccurately characterised the app’s ties to China. The company is challenging a law that mandates its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to divest TikTok’s US assets by January 19 or face a ban. TikTok argues that the app’s content recommendation engine and user data are securely stored in the US, with content moderation conducted domestically.
The law, signed by President Joe Biden in April, reflects concerns over potential national security risks, with accusations that TikTok allows Chinese authorities to access American data and influence content. TikTok, however, contends that the law infringes on free speech rights, arguing that its content curation should be protected by the US Constitution.
The legislation also impacts app stores and internet hosting services, barring support for TikTok unless it is sold. The swift passage of the measure in Congress highlights ongoing fears regarding data security and espionage risks associated with the app.
A US judge ordered Google to provide Android users with more ways to download apps outside of its Play Store, following a jury decision in favour of ‘Fortnite’ developer Epic Games in an antitrust case. Epic’s lawsuit accused Google of dominating app distribution and in-app payments on Android devices, urging the court to make it easier for users to access third-party app stores. Google countered that such changes would damage competition, as well as consumer privacy and security.
District Judge James Donato criticised Google’s resistance to Epic’s suggestions, signalling that he will deliver a brief ruling focused on enhancing app distribution options for both users and developers. Donato stressed that Google, deemed a monopolist, must address its anticompetitive behaviour and announced the formation of a three-person committee to monitor the enforcement of the injunction.
Why does this matter?
The following case is part of a wider antitrust examination. Google also faces a separate government lawsuit in Washington, DC, concerning its search engine dominance, where another judge recently ruled against the company. Both cases highlight increasing legal challenges to Google’s business practices. Neither Epic Games nor Google commented on the latest developments.
The US Department of Justice is exploring various options, including potentially breaking up Alphabet’s Google, after a recent court ruling found the tech giant guilty of illegally monopolising the online search market. The ruling was considered a significant victory for federal authorities challenging Big Tech’s dominance, which determined that Google spent billions to establish an illegal monopoly as the world’s default search engine.
Among the remedies the DOJ considers are forcing Google to share data with competitors and implementing safeguards to prevent the company from gaining an unfair advantage in AI products. Discussions have also included the possibility of divesting key assets such as the Android operating system, the AdWords search ad program, and the Chrome web browser.
Why does this matter?
The following case is part of a broader effort by federal antitrust regulators, who have previously taken action against other tech giants like Meta Platforms, Amazon, and Apple, accusing them of maintaining illegal monopolies. Alphabet and the DOJ have not yet commented on the ongoing deliberations.
A federal judge in Texas has recused himself from overseeing a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, against a group of advertisers. US District Judge Reed O’Connor, who was assigned to the case, stepped down after reports surfaced that he owned shares in Tesla, another company owned by Musk. The lawsuit, initiated by X, accuses the World Federation of Advertisers of conspiring to boycott the platform, leading to revenue losses.
Judge O’Connor did not provide a specific reason for his recusal, but the move follows concerns about his potential financial interest in Musk’s companies. According to a recent judicial financial disclosure, O’Connor held between $15,001 and $50,000 in Tesla stock. Judges often recuse themselves from cases with a financial stake in one of the parties involved.
The case has been reassigned to US District Judge Ed Kinkeade in Dallas. The Northern District of Texas, where the case was filed, is known as a preferred venue for conservative lawsuits challenging Democratic policies.
Bluesky, a social media platform, has reported a significant increase in signups in the United Kingdom recently as users look for alternatives to Elon Musk’s X. The increase follows Musk’s controversial remarks on ongoing riots in the UK, which have driven users, including several Members of Parliament, to explore other platforms. The company announced that it had experienced a 60% rise in activity from UK accounts.
Musk has faced criticism for inflaming tensions after riots in Britain were sparked by misinformation surrounding the murder of three girls in northern England. The Tesla CEO allegedly used X to disseminate misleading information to his vast audience, including a post claiming that civil war in Britain was ‘inevitable.’ The case has prompted Prime Minister Keir Starmer to respond and increased calls for the government to accelerate the implementation of online content regulations.
Bluesky highlighted that the UK had the most signups of any country for five of the last seven days. Once supported by Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey, the platform is among the many apps vying to replace Twitter after Musk’s turbulent takeover in late 2022.
As of July, Bluesky’s monthly active user base was approximately 688,568, which is small compared to X’s 76.9 million users, according to Similarweb, a digital market intelligence firm. Despite its smaller size, the recent surge in UK signups to Bluesky appears to be a growing interest in alternative social media platforms.
