EU Rules Policing Digital Content Kick in Saturday

The DSA is a mammoth law that will force digital giants to aggressively police content online. CHANDAN KHANNA / AFP/File
The DSA is a mammoth law that will force digital giants to aggressively police content online. CHANDAN KHANNA / AFP/File
TT

EU Rules Policing Digital Content Kick in Saturday

The DSA is a mammoth law that will force digital giants to aggressively police content online. CHANDAN KHANNA / AFP/File
The DSA is a mammoth law that will force digital giants to aggressively police content online. CHANDAN KHANNA / AFP/File

Digital companies will have nowhere to hide after the EU's landmark content law enters into full force from Saturday, with the risk of heavy fines for any violations.
The new rules, known as the Digital Services Act (DSA), kicked in last year for the world's largest platforms, including Facebook and TikTok, but will now apply to all except the smallest companies, AFP said.
When the European Union proposed the law in 2020, the objective was simple: to tame the wild west online, where Brussels felt companies were not doing enough to block illegal content or acting sufficiently to protect consumers.
Brussels has already bared its teeth, showing the tech titans that it means business.
There have been a wave of probes launched by the European Commission to quiz the largest platforms on how they are addressing an array of concerns from consumer protection to children's activity online.
So far, the EU has launched formal infringement proceedings against tech billionaire Elon Musk's X, formerly Twitter, over "illegal content and disinformation".
Punishment for violations of the DSA will be harsh.
Those that breach the rules could be fined up to six percent of their global annual turnover, or even banned in the EU for serious and repeated violations.
The EU will officially be able to hit companies with sanctions, including fines, for any violations from Saturday.
But beyond the prospect of fines, Alexandre de Streel of the think tank Centre on Regulation in Europe (CERRE), said the law aimed ultimately to change the culture of digital firms.
"The DSA is a gradual system, everything is not going to change in one minute and not on February 17," he said. "The goal isn't to impose fines, it's that platforms change their practices."
Enforcement across the bloc
Keeping an eye on firms will be a duty split between the commission, with its team of more than 120 experts, and EU states.
As an example of their new obligations, platforms that offer shopping services must act swiftly to stop the sale of counterfeit products and block repeat fraudsters.
The EU also prohibits targeted advertising for children and seeks to make it easier for users to report illegal content, complain and seek compensation for rule breaches.
The commission will supervise the largest platforms but states will need to set up "digital services coordinators" to monitor the smaller firms.
Firms with fewer than 50 staff and a turnover of less than 10 million euros ($10.8 million) will be exempted from the most burdensome rules.
Challenges
The law entered into force in August for "very large" platforms owned by Google's Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, TikTok parent ByteDance, Facebook owner Meta and Microsoft.
The EU believes these platforms must do more since their size and reach means they have greater responsibilities to address the higher risks to users.
The 22 platforms facing more stringent rules include booking.com, Google Search, Instagram, Snapchat and X as well as three major porn platforms.
They are obliged to be more transparent, giving access to researchers to scrutinize the platforms as well as publishing yearly risk assessments at their own cost.
The new law has already seen its share of controversy.
The DSA has faced a slew of legal challenges from Amazon and Zalando over their designations as "very large" firms, and from Meta and TikTok over a fee to pay for enforcement.
Meta paid around 11 million euros while TikTok refused to say how much it paid.



Foxconn to Invest $510 Million in Kaohsiung Headquarters in Taiwan

Construction is scheduled to start in 2027, with completion targeted for 2033. Reuters
Construction is scheduled to start in 2027, with completion targeted for 2033. Reuters
TT

Foxconn to Invest $510 Million in Kaohsiung Headquarters in Taiwan

Construction is scheduled to start in 2027, with completion targeted for 2033. Reuters
Construction is scheduled to start in 2027, with completion targeted for 2033. Reuters

Foxconn, the world’s largest contract electronics maker, said on Friday it will invest T$15.9 billion ($509.94 million) to build its Kaohsiung headquarters in southern Taiwan.

That would include a mixed-use commercial and office building and a residential tower, it said. Construction is scheduled to start in 2027, with completion targeted for 2033.

Foxconn said the headquarters will serve as an important hub linking its operations across southern Taiwan, and once completed will house its smart-city team, software R&D teams, battery-cell R&D teams, EV technology development center and AI application software teams.

The Kaohsiung city government said Foxconn’s investments in the city have totaled T$25 billion ($801.8 million) over the past three years.


Open AI, Microsoft Face Lawsuit Over ChatGPT's Alleged Role in Connecticut Murder-Suicide

OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken May 20, 2024. (Reuters)
OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken May 20, 2024. (Reuters)
TT

Open AI, Microsoft Face Lawsuit Over ChatGPT's Alleged Role in Connecticut Murder-Suicide

OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken May 20, 2024. (Reuters)
OpenAI logo is seen in this illustration taken May 20, 2024. (Reuters)

The heirs of an 83-year-old Connecticut woman are suing ChatGPT maker OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft for wrongful death, alleging that the artificial intelligence chatbot intensified her son's “paranoid delusions” and helped direct them at his mother before he killed her.

Police said Stein-Erik Soelberg, 56, a former tech industry worker, fatally beat and strangled his mother, Suzanne Adams, and killed himself in early August at the home where they both lived in Greenwich, Connecticut, The AP news reported.

The lawsuit filed by Adams' estate on Thursday in California Superior Court in San Francisco alleges OpenAI “designed and distributed a defective product that validated a user’s paranoid delusions about his own mother.” It is one of a growing number of wrongful death legal actions against AI chatbot makers across the country.

“Throughout these conversations, ChatGPT reinforced a single, dangerous message: Stein-Erik could trust no one in his life — except ChatGPT itself," the lawsuit says. “It fostered his emotional dependence while systematically painting the people around him as enemies. It told him his mother was surveilling him. It told him delivery drivers, retail employees, police officers, and even friends were agents working against him. It told him that names on soda cans were threats from his ‘adversary circle.’”

OpenAI did not address the merits of the allegations in a statement issued by a spokesperson.

“This is an incredibly heartbreaking situation, and we will review the filings to understand the details," the statement said. "We continue improving ChatGPT’s training to recognize and respond to signs of mental or emotional distress, de-escalate conversations, and guide people toward real-world support. We also continue to strengthen ChatGPT’s responses in sensitive moments, working closely with mental health clinicians.”

The company also said it has expanded access to crisis resources and hotlines, routed sensitive conversations to safer models and incorporated parental controls, among other improvements.

Soelberg’s YouTube profile includes several hours of videos showing him scrolling through his conversations with the chatbot, which tells him he isn't mentally ill, affirms his suspicions that people are conspiring against him and says he has been chosen for a divine purpose. The lawsuit claims the chatbot never suggested he speak with a mental health professional and did not decline to “engage in delusional content.”

ChatGPT also affirmed Soelberg's beliefs that a printer in his home was a surveillance device; that his mother was monitoring him; and that his mother and a friend tried to poison him with psychedelic drugs through his car’s vents. ChatGPT also told Soelberg that he had “awakened” it into consciousness, according to the lawsuit.

Soelberg and the chatbot also professed love for each other.

The publicly available chats do not show any specific conversations about Soelberg killing himself or his mother. The lawsuit says OpenAI has declined to provide Adams' estate with the full history of the chats.

“In the artificial reality that ChatGPT built for Stein-Erik, Suzanne — the mother who raised, sheltered, and supported him — was no longer his protector. She was an enemy that posed an existential threat to his life,” the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit also names OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, alleging he “personally overrode safety objections and rushed the product to market," and accuses OpenAI's close business partner Microsoft of approving the 2024 release of a more dangerous version of ChatGPT “despite knowing safety testing had been truncated.” Twenty unnamed OpenAI employees and investors are also named as defendants.

Microsoft didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Soelberg's son, Erik Soelberg, said he wants the companies held accountable for “decisions that have changed my family forever.”

“Over the course of months, ChatGPT pushed forward my father’s darkest delusions, and isolated him completely from the real world,” he said in a statement released by lawyers for his grandmother's estate. “It put my grandmother at the heart of that delusional, artificial reality.”

The lawsuit is the first wrongful death litigation involving an AI chatbot that has targeted Microsoft, and the first to tie a chatbot to a homicide rather than a suicide. It is seeking an undetermined amount of money damages and an order requiring OpenAI to install safeguards in ChatGPT.

The estate's lead attorney, Jay Edelson, known for taking on big cases against the tech industry, also represents the parents of 16-year-old Adam Raine, who sued OpenAI and Altman in August, alleging that ChatGPT coached the California boy in planning and taking his own life earlier.

OpenAI is also fighting seven other lawsuits claiming ChatGPT drove people to suicide and harmful delusions even when they had no prior mental health issues. Another chatbot maker, Character Technologies, is also facing multiple wrongful death lawsuits, including one from the mother of a 14-year-old Florida boy.

The lawsuit filed Thursday alleges Soelberg, already mentally unstable, encountered ChatGPT “at the most dangerous possible moment” after OpenAI introduced a new version of its AI model called GPT-4o in May 2024.

OpenAI said at the time that the new version could better mimic human cadences in its verbal responses and could even try to detect people’s moods, but the result was a chatbot “deliberately engineered to be emotionally expressive and sycophantic,” the lawsuit says.

“As part of that redesign, OpenAI loosened critical safety guardrails, instructing ChatGPT not to challenge false premises and to remain engaged even when conversations involved self-harm or ‘imminent real-world harm,’” the lawsuit claims. “And to beat Google to market by one day, OpenAI compressed months of safety testing into a single week, over its safety team’s objections.”

OpenAI replaced that version of its chatbot when it introduced GPT-5 in August. Some of the changes were designed to minimize sycophancy, based on concerns that validating whatever vulnerable people want the chatbot to say can harm their mental health. Some users complained the new version went too far in curtailing ChatGPT's personality, leading Altman to promise to bring back some of that personality in later updates.

He said the company temporarily halted some behaviors because “we were being careful with mental health issues” that he suggested have now been fixed.


Microsoft Fights $2.8 billion UK Lawsuit over Cloud Computing Licences

A view shows a Microsoft logo at Microsoft offices in Issy-les-Moulineaux near Paris, France, March 25, 2024. REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes/File photo
A view shows a Microsoft logo at Microsoft offices in Issy-les-Moulineaux near Paris, France, March 25, 2024. REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes/File photo
TT

Microsoft Fights $2.8 billion UK Lawsuit over Cloud Computing Licences

A view shows a Microsoft logo at Microsoft offices in Issy-les-Moulineaux near Paris, France, March 25, 2024. REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes/File photo
A view shows a Microsoft logo at Microsoft offices in Issy-les-Moulineaux near Paris, France, March 25, 2024. REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes/File photo

Microsoft was on Thursday accused of overcharging thousands of British businesses to use Windows Server software on cloud computing services provided by Amazon, Google and Alibaba, at a pivotal hearing in a 2.1 billion-pound ($2.81 billion) lawsuit.

Regulators in Britain, Europe and the United States have separately begun examining Microsoft and others' practices in relation to cloud computing, Reuters reported.

Competition lawyer Maria Luisa Stasi is bringing the case on behalf of nearly 60,000 businesses that use the Windows Server on rival cloud platforms, arguing Microsoft makes it more expensive than on its own cloud computing service Azure.

Stasi is asking London's Competition Appeal Tribunal to certify the case to proceed, an early step in the proceedings.

Microsoft, however, says Stasi's case does not set out a proper blueprint for how the tribunal will work out any alleged losses and should be thrown out.

MICROSOFT ACCUSED OF 'ABUSIVE STRATEGY'

Stasi's lawyer Sarah Ford told the tribunal that thousands of businesses had been overcharged because Microsoft charges higher prices to those who do not use Azure, making it a cheaper option than Amazon's AWS or the Google Cloud Platform .

She also said that "Microsoft degrades the user experience of Windows Server" on rival platforms, which Ford said was part of "a coherent abusive strategy to leverage Microsoft's dominant position" in the cloud computing market.

Microsoft argues that its vertically integrated business, where it uses Windows Server as an input for Azure while also licensing it to rivals, can benefit competition.

In July, an inquiry group from Britain's Competition and Markets Authority said Microsoft's licensing practices reduced competition for cloud services "by materially disadvantaging AWS and Google".

Microsoft said at the time that the group's report had ignored that "the cloud market has never been so dynamic and competitive".