Media Matters and the FTC are clashing over the agency's requested stay of a preliminary injunction in a federal probe over advertiser boycotts. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia earlier this month granted the left-leaning journalism watchdog group a preliminary injunction against the agency's civil investigative demand (CID) in the probe (see 2508180026). The FTC last week asked the court to stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal. It told the court (docket 1:25-cv-01959) it has issued 17 CIDs to advertising trade associations, brand safety rating organizations and advocacy groups like Media Matters as it investigates whether online advertisers or ad agencies coordinated the placement of ads in ways that had certain news outlets or platforms rated not "brand suitable" or "brand safe." The preliminary injunction impedes the FTC investigation by barring it from determining whether Media Matters has any information relevant to the investigation into advertiser boycotts, the agency said.
A federal judge ruled Monday that New Jersey’s Daniel’s Law isn't preempted by the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), refusing to dismiss two voter registration record websites from a consolidated constitutionality case about the statute. However, Judge Harvey Bartle found for the U.S. District Court for New Jersey that the state law is inconsistent with a provision of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and dismissed part of the complaint.
The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) fails to establish how federal law preempts a state social media law that would prohibit kids 13 and younger from creating social media accounts, Florida argued Thursday in asking a federal court to dismiss some of the organization's amended complaint in case 4:24-cv-00438.
A bevy of entities, including advocacy organizations and media groups like the New York Times, filed amicus briefs earlier this week that blasted California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code (AADC) Act for infringing on privacy and First Amendment rights, with some saying the statute reigns in nearly every form of online content including news sites.
The Commerce Department Aug. 21 released a notice announcing the beginning of administrative reviews for certain firms subject to antidumping and countervailing duty orders with July anniversary dates. Producers and exporters subject to any of these administrative reviews on China or Vietnam must submit their separate rate certifications or applications by Sept. 5 to avoid being assigned high China-wide or Vietnam-wide rates.
NetChoice lacks standing to challenge the Ohio Social Media Parental Notification Act, nor does the law violate the First Amendment, said Attorney General Dave Yost (R) in a brief filed Tuesday. He asked the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse an April decision by the U.S. District Court for Southern Ohio to enjoin the law (see 2504180031).
Google and YouTube will pay a combined $30 million to resolve a children's privacy lawsuit that alleged the companies collected personal data and information without consent and used it to deliver targeted ads in violation of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), California privacy laws and other similar state laws (see 2505120037)
The Commerce Department issued antidumping and countervailing duty orders on certain brake drums from China (A-570-174/C-570-175) and Turkey (A-549-853/C-549-854). The orders set permanent antidumping and countervailing duties that will remain in place unless revoked by Commerce, which may take place only under certain conditions, such as a sunset or changed circumstances review. Commerce will now begin conducting annual administrative reviews, if requested, to determine final assessments of AD/CVD on importers and make changes to cash deposit rates.
Texas’ claims that an Allstate subsidiary collected and shared Texans' driving data with the insurer are based on assumptions, not facts or evidence, the subsidiary, Arity 875, said in an appeals court brief August 4. As such, Arity, a data analytics company, urged the Texas 15th Court of Appeals to drop it from a lawsuit.
CAMDEN, N.J. -- A federal judge raised doubts Monday that the Communications Decency Act gives data brokers immunity from New Jersey’s Daniel’s Law. In an oral argument at the U.S. District Court for New Jersey, Judge Harvey Bartle heard preemption arguments from various data brokers sued by Atlas Data Privacy under the 2020 state law, which is aimed at protecting the personal information of judicial and law enforcement officers, child protective investigators and certain family members.