This article was originally published on September 18, 2023 in Westlaw Today and is republished here with permission.
Ketan Bhirud, Drew Mann and Trey Smith of Troutman Pepper discuss the Federal Trade Commission’s role in competition enforcement, contextualize the FTC’s analysis of the generative AI industry and provide key takeaways for stakeholders to consider during a period of regulatory uncertainty.
This summer, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois further bolstered Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act’s (BIPA) nearly unfettered private right of action in Lewis v. Maverick Transportation. In a simple but firm four-page ruling, Judge Rosenstengel denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss, holding that a cause of action under BIPA does not require a plaintiff to plead that data collected is used for identification purposes. The ruling serves to highlight the apparent lack of any real technical defenses to the statute — making it imperative that companies focus on strict compliance before they find themselves in court.
This article was originally published on September 7, 2023 in Reuters and is republished here with permission.
State Attorneys General (AGs) uniquely wield power to enforce the law, direct policy, and effectuate political goals. Exercising their civil prosecutorial authority, State AGs have redefined priorities of paramount concern to CEOs and in-house legal counsel that impact the corporate and commercial landscape.
On May 5, 2023, New York Attorney General (AG) Letitia James introduced legislation to regulate businesses engaged in digital asset-related activities “from or within the State of New York.” Titled the “Crypto Regulation, Protection, Transparency, and Oversight Act” (the CRPTO Act or the Act), AG James has called the proposal “the strongest and most comprehensive set of regulations on cryptocurrency in the nation.”
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission is in the process of shaping new regulatory standards for sports wagering in Massachusetts, following the state’s adoption last summer of the Massachusetts Sports Wagering Act, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 23N, which legalized sports betting in the Commonwealth.
The Massachusetts Gaming Commission recently issued decisions resulting in fines for three of the state’s sports betting operators — MGM Springfield, Plainridge Park Casino, and Encore Boston Harbor. These operators were found to have violated Gaming Commission regulations prohibiting wagers on regular season games of collegiate teams from Massachusetts unless part of a tournament.
The rapid advancement of generative artificial intelligence (AI) raises important competition concerns, prompting the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to analyze potential risks and propose solutions. In its recent June 29 blog post, the FTC highlighted the need for proactive measures to address competition issues in the evolving generative AI industry. This article analyzes the FTC’s blog post, summarizing its key points and offering insights into the potential implications for stakeholders.
The world of sports gambling has undergone a transformative shift in recent years, with the widespread legalization of betting in numerous states. The Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling striking down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) paved the way for the rapid expansion of legalized gambling, sportsbooks, and mobile gaming. As the realm of sports wagering continues to evolve, it becomes crucial for governing bodies to adapt and establish comprehensive guidelines to preserve the integrity of collegiate athletics.
On June 2, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced modifications to its in-house adjudicative proceedings of agency challenges to mergers and acquisitions by reducing the decision-making power held by administrative law judges (ALJs). This change will affect how the agency’s antitrust challenges are decided. Even though the previous process had been in place for decades, the FTC was not required to receive public comment because the change affects only internal procedures.
The federal government, the District of Columbia, and each of the 50 states have Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) laws that allow individuals to file requests for specific public documents with government agencies and quickly receive them unless the documents are subject to statutory exemptions. As most federal and state FOIA statutes were originally passed in the late 1960s, they impose some duties upon government agencies that many believe no longer make sense in the digital era.