In the second episode of our special 12 Days of Regulatory Insights podcast series, Cole White, a member of Troutman Pepper’s Regulatory Investigation, Strategy, and Enforcement (RISE) practice group, is joined by colleagues Stephen Piepgrass and Mike Yaghi to analyze the rising regulatory scrutiny of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies by state attorneys general (AG).
The Internet of Things (IoT) represents a transformative shift in how consumers interact with technology, integrating physical devices with sophisticated services to create interconnected ecosystems. As the adoption of IoT devices skyrockets, with projections estimating 75 billion connected devices by 2025, the legal landscape surrounding these hybrid transactions — comprising goods, software, and services — remains unsettled. Traditional legal frameworks, such as the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), struggle to address the complexities of IoT transactions. Consumer advocacy groups are increasingly calling for regulatory intervention to protect consumers from emerging issues, considering a legislative landscape that is not keeping pace with rapidly evolving technology.
Among the several provisions on the ballot in the recent election, Missouri citizens voted for Amendment 2, which will legalize online and retails sports betting. The amendment won by a small margin of less than 7,500 votes.
Stephen Piepgrass, practice group leader of the firm’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement Practice Group, appeared in the November 13, 2024 Nasdaq Trade Talks video, “Trends in iGaming, Cyber Security and Regulatory Developments.”
Introduction
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2025 includes a mandate that contractors furnish information and documentation to enable the military to modify and repair equipment and systems. Not surprisingly, industry is pushing back on that mandate. On September 25, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) sent a letter to various industry associations, questioning their motives to prevent a right-to-repair requirement that the Senate included in its proposed defense budget for fiscal year (FY) 2025. Warren also sent a separate letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, expressing concern about contractual restrictions that void contractor warranties when third parties perform repairs and that prevent access to operations, maintenance, integration, and training data.
In this episode of Regulatory Oversight, Clay Friedman, co-leader of the firm’s State Attorneys General team, welcomes Kate Donoven, consumer counsel at the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG). The conversation highlights Kate’s extensive career in consumer protection, her transition to NAAG, and the emerging trends and initiatives in consumer protection.
In this episode of Regulatory Oversight, Stephen Piepgrass is joined by his colleague David Dove to discuss a recent Georgia Supreme Court decision that significantly impacts private companies under Georgia’s Open Records Act.
Published in Law360 on September 27, 2024. © Copyright 2024, Portfolio Media, Inc., publisher of Law360. Reprinted here with permission.
On Sept. 18, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced a settlement with healthcare technology company Pieces Technology pursuant to the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act.
In this episode of Regulatory Oversight, Mike Yaghi welcomes back Brooke Hopkins and Rob Sayegh of Alvarez & Marsal for the second part of their series on ESG compliance. This time, they dive into how companies can gear up for the upcoming Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) requirements in Europe, which will take effect in 2026.
In the first of a two-part series focused on the complexities of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards, Troutman Pepper Partner Mike Yaghi is joined by Brooke Hopkins and Rob Sayegh from Alvarez & Marsal. They dive into the growing importance of ESG, particularly in Europe, where stringent regulations like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) are being implemented. The discussion contrasts this with the ongoing political debate in the U.S., highlighting the need for companies to prepare for upcoming ESG requirements by 2026.