Australia to Amend Law to Regulate Digital Payments Like Apple, Google Pay 

An illuminated Google logo is seen inside an office building in Zurich, Switzerland December 5, 2018. (Reuters)
An illuminated Google logo is seen inside an office building in Zurich, Switzerland December 5, 2018. (Reuters)
TT

Australia to Amend Law to Regulate Digital Payments Like Apple, Google Pay 

An illuminated Google logo is seen inside an office building in Zurich, Switzerland December 5, 2018. (Reuters)
An illuminated Google logo is seen inside an office building in Zurich, Switzerland December 5, 2018. (Reuters)

Australia's government said on Monday it would bring Apple Pay, Google Pay and other digital payment services under the same regulatory umbrella as credit cards and other payments as part of legislation set to be introduced to parliament this week.

Digital wallets from the likes of Apple, Google and WeChat developer Tencent have exploded in popularity but are not captured by Australian payments law.

The legislation, first flagged last month, will broaden the legislation that empowers the Reserve Bank of Australia to regulate payments so that it applies to new and emerging technology.

"We are modernizing Australia's payments system to ensure it meets the needs of our economy now and into the future," Treasurer Jim Chalmers said in a statement.

"We want to make sure the increasing use of digital payments occurs in a way that helps promote greater competition, innovation and productivity across our entire economy."

Legislation is set to be introduced on Wednesday or Thursday, according to Chalmers' office.

Regulators are responding to the rapid growth of digital wallets, especially among the young. Transactions from a digital wallet hit 35% of all card transactions in the June quarter, up from 10% in early 2020.

Two-thirds of Australians aged between 18 and 29 use mobile payments. Before the pandemic it was less than 20%.

The amendments will also give a relevant minister power to subject a system or platform to special oversight in the event it presents a risk of "national significance."



TikTok Must Face Lawsuit over 10-year-old Girl's Death, US Court Rules

A view shows the office of TikTok after the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the US assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. REUTERS/Mike Blake
A view shows the office of TikTok after the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the US assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. REUTERS/Mike Blake
TT

TikTok Must Face Lawsuit over 10-year-old Girl's Death, US Court Rules

A view shows the office of TikTok after the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the US assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. REUTERS/Mike Blake
A view shows the office of TikTok after the US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that would give TikTok's Chinese owner ByteDance about six months to divest the US assets of the short-video app or face a ban, in Culver City, California, March 13, 2024. REUTERS/Mike Blake

A US appeals court has revived a lawsuit against TikTok by the mother of a 10-year-old girl who died after taking part in a viral "blackout challenge" in which users of the social media platform were dared to choke themselves until they passed out, Reuters reported.

While a federal law typically shields internet companies from lawsuits over content posted by users, the Philadelphia-based 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled the law does not bar Nylah Anderson's mother from pursuing claims that TikTok's algorithm recommended the challenge to her daughter.

US Circuit Judge Patty Shwartz, writing for the three-judge panel, said that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 only immunizes information provided by third parties and not recommendations TikTok itself made via an algorithm underlying its platform.

She acknowledged the holding was a departure from past court rulings by her court and others holding that Section 230 immunizes an online platform from liability for failing to prevent users from transmitting harmful messages to others.

But she said that reasoning no longer held after a US Supreme Court ruling in July on whether state laws designed to restrict the power of social media platforms to curb content they deem objectionable violate their free speech rights.

In those cases, the Supreme Court held a platform's algorithm reflects "editorial judgments" about "compiling the third-party speech it wants in the way it wants." Shwartz said under that logic, content curation using algorithms is speech by the company itself, which is not protected by Section 230.

"TikTok makes choices about the content recommended and promoted to specific users, and by doing so, is engaged in its own first-party speech," she wrote.

TikTok did not respond to requests for comment.

Tuesday's ruling reversed a lower-court judge's decision dismissing on Section 230 grounds the case filed by Tawainna Anderson against TikTok and its Chinese parent company ByteDance.

She sued after her daughter Nylah died in 2021 after attempting the blackout challenge using a purse strap hung in her mother's closet.

"Big Tech just lost its 'get-out-of-jail-free card,'" Jeffrey Goodman, the mother's lawyer, said in a statement.

U.S. Circuit Judge Paul Matey, in a opinion partially concurring with Tuesday's ruling, said TikTok in its "pursuit of profits above all other values" may choose to serve children content emphasizing "the basest tastes" and "lowest virtues."

"But it cannot claim immunity that Congress did not provide," he wrote.