Leading French publishers and authors have filed a lawsuit against Meta, alleging the tech giant used their copyrighted content to train its artificial intelligence systems without permission.
The National Publishing Union (SNE), the National Union of Authors and Composers (SNAC), and the Society of Men of Letters (SGDL) argue that Meta’s actions constitute significant copyright infringement and economic ‘parasitism.’ The complaint was lodged earlier this week in a Paris court.
This lawsuit is the first of its kind in France but follows a wave of similar actions in the US, where authors and visual artists are challenging the use of their works by companies like Meta to train AI models.
As the issue of AI-generated content continues to grow, these legal actions highlight the mounting concerns over how tech companies utilise vast amounts of copyrighted material without compensation or consent from creators.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
The US power industry is experiencing a surge in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) as record demand for electricity, particularly from AI-driven data centres, fuels heightened interest in power generation assets.
Industry experts predict 2025 will be a bumper year for such deals, with assets in high demand due to massive projections for future consumption. Notable transactions, such as Constellation Energy’s $16.4 billion acquisition of Calpine, highlight the sector’s boom in early 2025.
Private equity firms, pension funds, and other institutional investors are rapidly deploying capital into the power sector, with over $330 billion in capital waiting to be invested in infrastructure.
Many of these firms are targeting not only operational companies but also firms that manufacture energy equipment, positioning themselves to profit from the ongoing expansion of the power grid to meet AI-related demand.
While the US M&A frenzy contrasts with a broader slowdown in the market, the momentum in the power sector is expected to continue.
Challenges such as material shortages and regulatory uncertainties, particularly surrounding tariffs on essential materials, may impact future projects.
However, the increasing value of power infrastructure makes these challenges more manageable for investors keen to tap into the growing market.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
Indian authorities have arrested Aleksej Besciokov, an administrator of the Russian cryptocurrency exchange Garantex, at the request of the US.
Besciokov, a Russian resident and Lithuanian national, was taken into custody in Kerala on charges of money laundering and violating sanctions. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) said he was planning to flee India, and Washington is expected to seek his extradition.
The arrest follows a joint operation by the US, Germany, and Finland to dismantle Garantex’s online infrastructure.
The exchange, under US sanctions since 2022, has processed at least $96 billion in cryptocurrency transactions since 2019. The US Justice Department recently charged two administrators, including Besciokov, with operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business.
Experts warn that sanctioned exchanges often attempt to bypass restrictions by setting up new entities. Blockchain research firm TRM Labs called the Garantex takedown a significant step in combating illicit finance but emphasised the need for continued vigilance against evasion tactics.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
Singapore prosecutors revealed on Thursday that a fraud case involving local firms accused of illegally supplying US servers to Malaysia involves transactions worth $390 million.
Three men—Singaporeans Aaron Woon and Alan Wei, along with Chinese national Li Ming—have been charged with deceiving tech giants Dell and Super Micro by misrepresenting the servers’ final destination.
The case has been linked to Chinese AI firm DeepSeek, which is under US scrutiny over the potential use of banned Nvidia chips.
While Singapore authorities confirmed the servers may have contained Nvidia components, they did not specify whether these were the restricted high-end semiconductors subject to US export controls.
Singapore’s Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam declined to comment on the alleged connection.
Prosecutors claim Wei paid himself tens of millions in dividends, while Woon received a multimillion-dollar bonus. Singaporean authorities are investigating a wider network of 22 individuals and companies suspected of similar fraudulent practices, with six additional arrests made.
The accused are set to reappear in court on May 2, while Malaysian authorities are also probing potential legal violations.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
Elea, a Hamburg-based startup, is harnessing the power of AI to tackle inefficiencies in healthcare, starting with pathology labs.
The company’s AI operating system replaces outdated systems, offering a voice-powered solution that automates tasks such as report transcription and data handling.
Elea’s tool promises to significantly reduce the time it takes for labs to generate reports, with initial results showing a reduction from weeks to just a few days.
The AI system is designed to integrate seamlessly into existing lab processes, acting as an all-in-one solution that coordinates tasks traditionally managed by separate systems.
Elea’s cloud-based platform uses speech-to-text and text-to-structure technologies to automate everything from report writing to handling laboratory equipment, streamlining operations and reducing human error.
Founded in 2024, Elea has already secured a partnership with a major German hospital group, and it plans to expand internationally, particularly into the US The company recently raised €4 million in seed funding to support its growth.
Elea is betting on a gradual scaling strategy, aiming to improve productivity in pathology labs before potentially expanding its AI tools to other areas of healthcare, such as radiology.
Despite potential challenges, including accuracy concerns and data privacy, Elea is confident in its ability to revolutionise lab work.
By focusing on operational workflows, the German company hopes to improve both the speed and reliability of healthcare services, offering a glimpse into the future of AI in the medical field.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy criticised Verizon on Tuesday for delays in its $2.4 billion, 15-year contract with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), saying the company is ‘not moving fast enough.’
As the FAA works to upgrade ageing air traffic control systems, Duffy stressed the need for multiple companies to contribute to the effort, adding that the American public ‘can’t wait 10 or 12 years’ for improvements.
Verizon defended its progress, stating it is actively working with FAA technology teams and is open to collaborating with other firms offering complementary services.
Meanwhile, SpaceX’s Starlink denied reports that it aims to take over the FAA contract, saying it could be a partial solution but has no plans to replace Verizon’s role.
The FAA has been testing Starlink terminals in Alaska to improve weather data access, while the Government Accountability Office warns that one-third of US air traffic control systems are outdated and unsustainable.
Some Democrats have suggested shifting the FAA contract to Starlink due to Elon Musk’s ties to Donald Trump, but no official decisions have been made.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
Eurozone finance ministers have raised concerns over the United States’ shift towards embracing cryptocurrencies, warning that it could pose risks to Europe’s monetary sovereignty and financial stability.
The discussion follows President Donald Trump’s executive order to establish a strategic reserve of cryptocurrencies using government-owned tokens, signalling a major policy shift from the previous administration.
Officials stressed the importance of accelerating the European Central Bank‘s plans to launch a digital euro to maintain control over the region’s financial system.
The head of the European Stability Mechanism, Pierre Gramegna, warned that the United States stance could encourage major technology firms to relaunch digital payment systems using dollar-backed stablecoins, potentially challenging the euro’s dominance in the global financial system.
Eurozone leaders are concerned that a resurgence of stablecoin-based payment platforms could undermine the euro and increase reliance on US-backed digital assets.
Policymakers emphasised that Europe must take proactive steps to safeguard its financial autonomy, ensuring that the euro remains a strong and stable currency in an increasingly digital economy.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
The Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the Digital Services Act (DSA) are two major regulatory frameworks introduced by the EU to create a fairer and safer digital environment. While both fall under the broader Digital Services Act package, they serve distinct purposes.
The DMA focuses on ensuring fair competition by regulating large online platforms, known as gatekeepers, which have a dominant influence on digital markets. It prevents these companies from engaging in monopolistic practices, such as self-preferencing their own services, restricting interoperability, or using business data unfairly. The goal is to create a more competitive landscape where smaller businesses and consumers have more choices.
On the other hand, the DSA is designed to make online spaces safer by holding platforms accountable for illegal content, misinformation, and harmful activities. It imposes stricter content moderation rules, enhances transparency in digital advertising, and ensures better user rights protection. Larger platforms with significant user bases face even greater responsibilities under this act.
The key difference in regulation is that the DMA follows an ex-ante approach, meaning it imposes strict rules on gatekeepers before unfair practices occur. The DSA takes an ex-post approach, requiring platforms to monitor risks and take corrective action after problems arise. This means the DMA enforces competition while the DSA ensures online safety and accountability.
A key component of the DSA Act package is its emphasis on transparency and user rights. Platforms must explain how their algorithms curate content, prevent the use of sensitive data for targeted advertising, and prohibit manipulative design practices such as misleading cookie banners. The most powerful platforms, classified as Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) or Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs), are also required to assess and report on ‘systemic risks’ linked to their services, including threats to public safety, democratic discourse, and mental well-being. However, these reports often lack meaningful detail, as illustrated by TikTok’s inadequate assessment of its role in election-related misinformation.
Enforcement is critical to the success of the DSA. While the European Commission directly oversees the largest platforms, national regulators, known as Digital Services Coordinators (DSCs), play a key role in monitoring compliance. However, enforcement challenges remain, particularly in countries like Germany, where understaffing raises concerns about effective regulation. Across the EU, over 60 enforcement actions have already been launched against major tech firms, yet Silicon Valley’s biggest players are actively working to undermine European rules.
Together, the DMA and the DSA reshape how Big Tech companies operate in the EU, fostering competition and ensuring a safer and more transparent digital ecosystem for users.
Trump and Silicon Valley’s fight against EU regulations
The close relationship between Donald Trump and the Silicon Valley tech elite has significantly influenced US policy towards European digital regulations. Since Trump’s return to office, Big Tech executives have actively lobbied against these regulations and have urged the new administration to defend tech firms from what he calls EU ‘censorship.’
Joel Kaplan, Meta’s chief lobbyist, has gone as far as to equate EU regulations with tariffs, a stance that aligns with the Trump administration’s broader trade war strategy. The administration sees these regulations as barriers to US technological dominance, arguing that the EU is trying to tax and control American innovation rather than foster its own competitive tech sector.
Figures like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg have aligned themselves with Trump, leveraging their influence to oppose EU legislation such as the DSA. Meta’s controversial policy changes and Musk’s X platform’s lax approach to content moderation illustrate how major tech firms are resisting regulatory oversight while benefiting from Trump’s protectionist stance.
The White House and the House Judiciary Committee have raised concerns that these laws unfairly target American technology companies, restricting their ability to operate in the European market.
Brendan Carr, chairman of the FCC, has recently voiced strong concerns regarding the DSA, which he argues could clash with America’s free speech values. Speaking at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Carr warned that its approach to content moderation might excessively limit freedom of expression. His remarks reflect a broader criticism from US officials, as Vice President JD Vance had also denounced European content moderation at a recent AI summit in Paris, labelling it as ‘authoritarian censorship.’
These officials argue that the DMA and the DSA create barriers that limit American companies’ innovations and undermine free trade. In response, the House Judiciary Committee has formally challenged the European Commission, stating that certain US products and services may no longer be available in Europe due to these regulations. Keep in mind that the Biden administration also directed its trade and commerce departments to investigate whether these EU laws restrict free speech and recommend countermeasures.
Recently, US President Donald Trump has escalated tensions with the EU threatening tariffs in retaliation for what he calls ‘overseas extortion.’ The memorandum signed by Trump on 21 February 2025, directs the administration to review EU and UK policies that might force US tech companies to develop or use products that ‘undermine free speech or foster censorship.’ The memo also aims at Digital Services Taxes (DSTs), claiming that foreign governments unfairly tax US firms ‘simply because they operate in foreign markets.’
EU’s response: Digital sovereignty at stake
However, the European Commission insists that these taxes are applied equally to all large digital companies, regardless of their country of origin, ensuring fair contributions from businesses profiting within the EU. It has also defended its regulations, arguing that they promote fair competition and protect consumer rights.
EU officials see these policies as fundamental to Europe’s digital sovereignty, ensuring that powerful tech firms operate transparently and fairly in the region. As they push back against what they see as US interference and tensions rise, the dispute over how to regulate Big Tech could shape the future of digital markets and transatlantic trade relations.
Eventually, this clash could lead to a new wave of trade conflicts between the USA and the EU, with potential economic and geopolitical consequences for the global tech industry. With figures like JD Vance and Jim Jordan also attacking the DSA and the DMA, and Trump himself framing EU regulations as economic warfare, Europe faces mounting pressure to weaken its tech laws. Additionally, the withdrawal of the EU Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive (AILD) following the Paris AI Summit and JD Vance’s refusal to sign a joint AI statement raised more concerns about Europe’s ability to resist external pushback. The risk that Trump will use economic and security threats, including NATO involvement, as leverage against EU enforcement underscores the urgency of a strong European response.
Another major battleground is the AI regulation. The EU’s AI Act is one of the world’s first comprehensive AI laws, setting strict guidelines for AI transparency, risk assessment, and data usage. Meanwhile, the USA has taken a more industry-led approach, with minimal government intervention.
This regulatory gap could create further tensions as European lawmakers demand compliance from American AI firms. The recent withdrawal of the EU Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive (AILD) under US pressure highlights how external lobbying can influence European policymaking.
However, if the EU successfully enforces its AI rules, it could set a global precedent, forcing US firms to comply with European standards if they want to operate in the region. This scenario mirrors what happened with the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation), which led to global changes in privacy policies.
To counter the growing pressure, the EU remains steadfast – as we speak – in enforcing the DSA, the DMA, and the AI Act, ensuring that regulatory frameworks are not compromised under US influence. Beyond regulation, Europe must also bolster its digital industrial capabilities to keep pace. The EUR 200 billion AI investment is a step in the right direction, but Europe requires more resilient digital infrastructures, stronger back-end technologies, and better support for its tech companies.
Currently, the EU is doubling down on its push for digital sovereignty by investing in:
Cloud computing infrastructure to reduce reliance on US providers (e.g., AWS, Microsoft Azure)
AI development and semiconductor manufacturing (through the European Chips Act)
These efforts aim to lessen European dependence on US Big Tech and create a more self-sufficient digital ecosystem.
The future of digital regulations
Despite the escalating tensions, both the EU and the USA recognise the importance of transatlantic tech cooperation. While their regulatory approaches differ significantly, there are areas where collaboration could still prevail. Cybersecurity remains a crucial issue, as both sides face growing threats from several countries. Strengthening cybersecurity partnerships could provide a shared framework for protecting critical infrastructure and digital ecosystems. Another potential area for collaboration is the development of joint AI safety standards, ensuring that emerging technologies are regulated responsibly without stifling innovation. Additionally, data-sharing agreements remain essential to maintaining smooth digital trade and cross-border business operations.
Past agreements, such as the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, have demonstrated that cooperation is possible. However, whether similar compromises can be reached regarding the DMA, the DSA, and the AI Act remains uncertain. Fundamental differences in regulatory philosophy continue to create obstacles, with the EU prioritising consumer protection and market fairness while the USA maintains a more business-friendly, innovation-driven stance.
Looking ahead, the future of digital regulations between the EU and the USA is likely to remain contentious. The European Union appears determined to enforce stricter rules on Big Tech, while the United States—particularly under the Trump administration—is expected to push back against what it perceives as excessive European regulatory influence. Unless meaningful compromises are reached, the global internet may further fragment into distinct regulatory zones. The European model would emphasise strict digital oversight, strong privacy protections, and policies designed to ensure fair competition. The USA, in contrast, would continue to prioritise a more business-led approach, favouring self-regulation and innovation-driven policies.
As the digital landscape evolves, the coming months and years will be crucial in determining whether the EU and the USA can find common ground on tech regulation or whether their differences will lead to deeper division. The stakes are high, affecting not only businesses but also consumers, policymakers, and the broader future of the global internet. The path forward remains uncertain, but the decisions made today will shape the structure of the digital world for generations to come.
Ultimately, the outcome of this ongoing transatlantic dispute could have wide-reaching implications, not only for the future of digital regulation but also for global trade relations. While the US government and the Silicon Valley tech elite are likely to continue their pushback, the EU appears steadfast in its determination to ensure that its digital regulations are enforced to maintain a fair and safe digital ecosystem for all users. As this global battle unfolds, the world will be watching as the EU and USA navigate the evolving landscape of digital governance.
The Trump administration has cut funding for two key cybersecurity initiatives, including one supporting election security, sparking concerns over potential vulnerabilities in future US elections.
The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) announced it would end around $10 million in annual funding to the non-profit Center for Internet Security, which manages election-related cybersecurity programmes.
However, this move comes as part of a broader review of CISA’s election-related work, during which over a dozen staff members were placed on administrative leave.
The decision follows another controversial step by the administration to dismantle an FBI task force that investigated foreign influence in US elections.
Critics warn that reducing government involvement in election security weakens safeguards against interference, with Larry Norden from the Brennan Center for Justice calling the cuts a serious risk for state and local election officials.
The National Association of Secretaries of State is now seeking clarification on CISA’s decision and its wider implications.
CISA has faced Republican criticism in recent years for its role in countering misinformation related to the 2020 election and the coronavirus pandemic. However, previous leadership maintained that the agency’s work was limited to assisting states in identifying and addressing misinformation.
While CISA argues the funding cuts will streamline its focus on critical security areas, concerns remain over the potential impact on election integrity and cybersecurity protections across local and state governments.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
Coinbase has officially registered with India’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), allowing it to offer crypto trading services in the country, the company announced on Tuesday. The US-based exchange plans to launch its initial retail services later this year, followed by further investments and product rollouts. While a specific timeline has not been disclosed, Coinbase sees India as a key market with strong growth potential.
Interest in cryptocurrency has surged in India, particularly among young investors looking to supplement their incomes. Despite a 30% tax on crypto trading gains—one of the highest globally—the sector remains largely unregulated. Other major exchanges operating in the country include CoinDCX, Binance, and KuCoin.
India requires virtual asset service providers to register with the FIU and comply with anti-money laundering regulations. The government is currently reviewing its stance on crypto, influenced by global regulatory trends and recent policy shifts in the US. As the regulatory landscape evolves, Coinbase aims to establish a strong foothold in the Indian market while adhering to local compliance standards.
For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.
