The Commission and the European Board for Digital Services have announced the integration of the revised voluntary Code of conduct on countering illegal hate speech online + (“Code of Conduct+”) into the framework of the Digital Services Act (“DSA”). Article 45 of the DSA states that, where significant systemic risks emerge under Article 34(1) (concerning the obligation on very large online platforms (“VLOPs”) and very large online search engines (“VLOSEs”) to identify, analyse, and assess systemic risks), and concern several VLOPs or VLOSEs, the Commission may invite VLOPs and VLOSEs to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including commitments to take risk mitigation measures and to report on those measures and their outcomes. The Code of Conduct+ was adopted in this context. VLOPs and VLOSEs’ adherence to the Code of Conduct+ may be considered as a risk mitigation measure under Article 35 DSA, but participation in and implementation of the Code of Conduct+ “should not in itself presume compliance with [the DSA]” (Recital 104).

The Code of Conduct+—which builds on the Commission’s original Code of Conduct on countering illegal hate speech online, published in 2016—seeks to strengthen how Signatories address content defined by EU and national laws as illegal hate speech. Adhering to the Code of Conduct+’s commitments will be part of the annual independent audit of VLOPs and VLOSEs required by the DSA (Art. 37(1)(b)), but smaller companies are free to sign up to the Code as well.Continue Reading Introduction of the Revised Code of Conduct+ and the Digital Services Act

The UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) recently announced a new online tracking strategy, which aims to ensure a “fair and transparent online world where people are given meaningful control over how they are tracked online.”

Online advertising is one of the ICO’s current areas of strategic focus (others areas of focus include AI and children’s privacy). The ICO has identified four key areas of concern—all of which the ICO states mean that individuals do not have sufficient control over their personal data:

  • “deceptive or absent choice” regarding non-essential cookies and tracking technologies;
  • “uninformed choice,” which refers to organizations not providing appropriate information to individuals;
  • “undermined choice,” where individuals’ choices are not respected and they are surprised about how their data is used; and
  •  “irrevocable choice,” meaning that individuals cannot effectively change their minds after they have made a choice over how their personal data is processed.

Having identified these areas of concern, the ICO states that it will take the following actions in 2025:Continue Reading ICO announces its online tracking strategy for 2025

Yesterday, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released the agenda for its February Open Meeting, which is scheduled for February 27, 2025.  This is the first agenda released by the FCC under new Chairman Brendan Carr.  The agenda items on which the commissioners will vote at the meeting will include the following:

  • A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking input on proposed updates to 10-year-old service specific AWS-3 bidding rules to fulfill the agency’s “statutory obligation to initiate an auction of licenses for the AWS-3 spectrum in the Commission’s inventory by June 23, 2026.”  Proceeds from the auction will support the program that reimburses advanced communications service providers for the cost of removing and replacing Huawei Technologies or ZTE Corporation equipment and services in their networks.
  • A Notice of Inquiry seeking comment on the potential for freeing up additional mid-band spectrum in the Upper C-band for new services, including whether authorization and transition mechanisms similar to those used in the successful 3.7 GHz Service transition could be applied.  The NOI will solicit comments on the parameters for new opportunities in the Upper C-band, the potential need for amending the U.S. Table, and the current and future needs of existing operators while considering the impact on aviation radio altimeters.  It also will invite detailed proposals on transition mechanics and structure, and requests technical and economic data on the costs and benefits of authorizing new services in the Upper C-band.

Continue Reading FCC to Tackle Robust Agenda at February Open Meeting

On February 6, the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy (“OSTP”) and National Science Foundation (“NSF”) issued a Request for Information (“RFI”) seeking public input on the “Development of an Artificial Intelligence Action Plan.”  The RFI marks a first step toward the implementation of the Trump Administration’s January 23 Executive Order 14179, “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence” (the “EO”).  Specifically, the EO directs Assistant to the President for Science & Technology (and OSTP Director nominee) Michael Kratsios, White House AI & Crypto Czar David Sacks, and National Security Advisor Michael Waltz to “develop and submit to the President an action plan” to achieve the EO’s policy of “sustain[ing] and enhance[ing] America’s global AI dominance” to “promote human flourishing, economic competitiveness, and national security.” Continue Reading Trump Administration Seeks Public Comment on AI Action Plan

On January 29, Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced the Decoupling America’s Artificial Intelligence Capabilities from China Act (S. 321), one of the first bills of 119th Congress to address escalating U.S. competition with China on artificial intelligence.  The new legislation comes just days after Chinese AI company DeepSeek launched its R1 AI model with advanced capabilities that has been widely viewed as a possible turning point in the U.S.-China AI race.  If enacted, S. 321 would impose sweeping prohibitions on U.S. imports and exports of AI and generative AI technologies and R&D to and from China and bar U.S. investments in AI technology developed or produced in China.  The bill, which was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, had no cosponsors and no House companion at the time of introduction.

Specifically, S. 321 would prohibit U.S. persons—including any corporation or educational or research institution in the U.S. or controlled by U.S. citizens or permanent residents—from (1) exporting AI or generative AI technology or IP to China or (2) importing AI or generative AI technology or IP developed or produced in China.  In addition, the bill would bar U.S. persons from transferring AI or generative AI research to China or Chinese educational institutions, research institutions, corporations, or government entities (“Chinese entities of concern”), or from conducting AI or generative AI R&D within China or for, on behalf of, or in collaboration with such entities.

Finally, the bill would prohibit any U.S. person from financing AI R&D with connections to China.  The bill specifically prohibits U.S. persons from “holding or managing any interest in” or extending loans or lines of credit to Chinese entities of concern that conduct AI- or generative AI-related R&D, produce goods that incorporate AI or generative AI R&D, assist with Chinese military or surveillance capabilities, or are implicated in human rights abuses. Continue Reading Senator Hawley Introduces Sweeping U.S.-China AI Decoupling Bill

U.S. Secretary of Commerce nominee Howard Lutnick delivered a detailed preview of what to expect from the Trump Administration on key issues around technology, trade, and intellectual property.  At his nomination hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on Wednesday, January 29, Lutnick faced questions from senators about the future of the CHIPS and Science Act, global trade, and particularly U.S. technological competition with China, including export controls and artificial intelligence after the release of China’s AI model “DeepSeek.”  Lutnick, who was introduced by Vice President J.D. Vance, committed to implementing the Trump Administration’s America First agenda. 

If confirmed, Lutnick will lead the Commerce Department’s vast policy portfolio, including export controls for emerging technologies, broadband spectrum access and deployment, AI innovation, and climate and weather issues through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”).  In his responses to senators’ questions, Lutnick emphasized his pro-business approach and his intent to implement President Trump’s policy objectives including bringing manufacturing—particularly of semiconductors—back to the United States and establishing “reciprocity” with China in response to what he called “unfair” treatment of U.S. businesses.Continue Reading What Commerce Secretary Nominee Howard Lutnick’s Confirmation Hearing Tells Us about Technology Policy in the Trump Administration

On 16 January 2025, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) published a position paper, as it had announced last year, on the “interplay between data protection and competition law” (“Position Paper”).

In this blogpost, we outline the EDPB’s position on cooperation between EU data protection authorities (“DPAs”) and competition authorities (“CAs”) in the context of certain key issues at the intersection of data protection and competition law.

Key takeaways

  1. In the interest of coherent regulatory outcomes, the EDPB advocates for increased cooperation between DPAs and CAs.
  2. The Position Paper offers practical suggestions to that end, such as fostering closer personal relationships, mutual understanding, and a shared sense of purpose, as well as more structured mechanisms for regulatory cooperation.
  3. The EDPB is mindful of the Digital Markets Act’s (“DMA”) significance in addressing data protection and competition law risks.

Continue Reading EDPB highlights the importance of cooperation between data protection and competition authorities

On January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration released a memorandum, “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,” to halt agency rulemaking processes (the “EO”).

The EO orders all executive departments and agencies to “not propose or issue any rule in any manner, including by sending a rule to the Office of the Federal Register (the ‘OFR’), until a

Continue Reading Trump Administration Releases “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review” Executive Order

On January 14, 2025, the Biden Administration issued an Executive Order on “Advancing United States Leadership in Artificial Intelligence Infrastructure” (the “EO”), with the goals of preserving U.S. economic competitiveness and access to powerful AI models, preventing U.S. dependence on foreign infrastructure, and promoting U.S. clean energy production to power the development and operation of AI.  Pursuant to these goals, the EO outlines criteria and timeframes for the construction and operation of “frontier AI infrastructure,” including data centers and clean energy resources, by private-sector entities on federal land.  The EO builds upon a series of actions on AI issued by the Biden Administration, including the October 2023 Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy AI and an October 2024 AI National Security Memorandum.Continue Reading Biden Administration Releases Executive Order on AI Infrastructure

On January 3, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced that it reached a settlement with accessiBe, a provider of AI-powered web accessibility software, to resolve allegations that the company violated Section 5 of the FTC Act concerning the marketing and stated efficacy of its software. Continue Reading AI Accessibility Software Provider Settles FTC Allegations