The US Supreme Court on Monday (Jun 29) handed President Donald Trump sweeping powers to fire members of certain independent agencies at will. The court ruled that job protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission are unconstitutional and swept aside a 90-year-old precedent that had allowed Congress to shield officials.The decision gives the president far greater control over boards and commissions that were designed to function independently from the White House. And that, in practical terms, could change how a long list of federal agencies function. The case began with Rebecca Slaughter, an FTC commissioner whom Trump first appointed during his first term and who was later reappointed by President Joe Biden.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/us-supreme-court-makes-it-easier-to-deport-green-card-holders-what-does-it-mean-for-indians-wion-horizons-1782271724642">US Supreme Court makes it easier to deport Green Card holders: What does it mean for Indians? | WION Horizons</a>In March 2025, she was told her continued service was inconsistent with the Trump administration's priorities and was removed without cause. That clashed with the law that created the FTC in 1914, which says commissioners can be removed only for inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office.Slaughter challenged the firing in court and won at the district court level. The appeals court in Washington later agreed she could remain in her post. But the Supreme Court stepped in last year and allowed Trump to remove her while the broader legal fight moved forward.<h2>What the court said</h2>The ruling was 6 to 3. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority, with the other conservative justices joining him. Roberts said officials who exercise executive power on the president's behalf must remain accountable to him, and that means they must be removable by him as well."Subordinates who exercise the President's power are subject to removal by him," Roberts wrote. "Then, and only then, can they remain accountable to the President, and the President to the people."The court found that the modern FTC "unquestionably" exercises executive power, and therefore cannot be insulated from presidential control in the way Congress had intended.Meanwhile, the three liberal justices dissented, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor even read a summary of her dissent from the bench, a sign of how sharply divided the court was.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/welcome-but-be-good-trump-unveils-passport-featuring-his-image-ahead-of-america-s-250th-anniversary-click-here-to-see-1782526269530">'Welcome, but be good!': Trump unveils passport featuring his image ahead of America's 250th anniversary. Click here to see</a><h2>What this means beyond the FTC</h2>The decision is likely to ripple far beyond the trade commission. Congress has created more than two dozen multi-member agencies whose leaders can be removed only for cause, usually in cases of inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance. Now, agencies such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the National Labor Relations Board may face new pressure under the court's ruling.In a dissenting opinion joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sotomayor warned that the majority was effectively rewriting how government works."Put simply, today the majority reshapes our Government," she wrote. "Dozens of independent commissions are now likely to become purely executive agencies, shifting tremendous power over broad swaths of American life into the President's hands."<h2>Trump lauds 'Greatest Increase in Presidential Power'</h2>Trump, unsurprisingly, celebrated the ruling. He called it the "Greatest Increase in Presidential Power in the last 100 years. Such a Monumental Ruling at such an important time!".

The US Supreme Court has handed President Donald Trump sweeping new authority to fire members of certain independent federal agencies, overturning key parts of a 90-year-old precedent that limited presidential control.

The US Supreme Court on Monday (Jun 29) handed President Donald Trump sweeping powers to fire members of certain independent agencies at will. The court ruled that job protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission are unconstitutional and swept aside a 90-year-old precedent that had allowed Congress to shield officials. The decision gives the president far greater control over boards and commissions that were designed to function independently from the White House. And that, in practical terms, could change how a long list of federal agencies function. The case began with Rebecca Slaughter, an FTC commissioner whom Trump first appointed during his first term and who was later reappointed by President Joe Biden. Also read | US Supreme Court makes it easier to deport Green Card holders: What does it mean for Indians? | WION Horizons In March 2025, she was told her continued service was inconsistent with the Trump administration's priorities and was removed without cause. That clashed with the law that created the FTC in 1914, which says commissioners can be removed only for inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office. Slaughter challenged the firing in court and won at the district court level. The appeals court in Washington later agreed she could remain in her post. But the Supreme Court stepped in last year and allowed Trump to remove her while the broader legal fight moved forward. What the court said The ruling was 6 to 3. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority, with the other conservative justices joining him. Roberts said officials who exercise executive power on the president's behalf must remain accountable to him, and that means they must be removable by him as well. "Subordinates who exercise the President's power are subject to removal by him," Roberts wrote. "Then, and only then, can they remain accountable to the President, and the President to the people." The court found that the modern FTC "unquestionably" exercises executive power, and therefore cannot be insulated from presidential control in the way Congress had intended. Meanwhile, the three liberal justices dissented, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor even read a summary of her dissent from the bench, a sign of how sharply divided the court was. Also read | 'Welcome, but be good!': Trump unveils passport featuring his image ahead of America's 250th anniversary. Click here to see What this means beyond the FTC The decision is likely to ripple far beyond the trade commission. Congress has created more than two dozen multi-member agencies whose leaders can be removed only for cause, usually in cases of inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance. Now, agencies such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the National Labor Relations Board may face new pressure under the court's ruling. In a dissenting opinion joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sotomayor warned that the majority was effectively rewriting how government works. "Put simply, today the majority reshapes our Government," she wrote. "Dozens of independent commissions are now likely to become purely executive agencies, shifting tremendous power over broad swaths of American life into the President's hands." Trump lauds 'Greatest Increase in Presidential Power' Trump, unsurprisingly, celebrated the ruling. He called it the "Greatest Increase in Presidential Power in the last 100 years. Such a Monumental Ruling at such an important time!".

The US Supreme Court has handed President Donald Trump sweeping new authority to fire members of certain independent federal agencies, overturning key parts of a 90-year-old precedent that limited presidential control.

US Supreme Court hands Trump 'greatest increase in presidential power' in 90 years. What can the POTUS do now?

Do you find yourself disappointed by dating apps, yet find yourself swiping right and left for hours, only to face disappointment?&nbsp;Many of us have found themselves stuck in this loop, and a proposed class-action lawsuit filed on Valentine's Day alleges that dating apps, specifically those owned by Match Group, are to blame.&nbsp;

It claims that apps, including Tinder and Hinge, are designed to addict users and keep them in a "perpetual pay-to-play loop."&nbsp;

<h2>Driving addiction</h2>

The lawsuit, filed in California district court, claims that the apps' hidden algorithms drive users' addiction. This is in sharp contrast to the company's claim that its products are meant to help people find offline relationships.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/luxury-bazaar-ceo-roman-sharf-bags-trump-autographed-never-surrender-sneakers-for-9000-691723">Luxury Bazaar CEO Roman Sharf bags Trump-autographed ‘Never Surrender’ sneakers for $9,000</a>

According to the lawsuit, users are baited into continually upgrading their subscriptions and paying for bonus features that promise a better chance at finding love but only serve to boost the company's profits. The apps allegedly use dopamine-manipulating techniques to gamify romance and dating, encouraging compulsive use.

As per CBS News, six plaintiffs have alleged that the apps are in violation of consumer protection and other laws.

<h2>'Ridiculous' lawsuit</h2>

Match Group has dismissed the lawsuit as "ridiculous" and with "zero merit", stating that its business model is not based on advertising or engagement metrics.&nbsp;

The company Match Group, in a statement to the CBS Moneywatch said that they "actively strive to get people on dates every day and off our apps. Anyone who states anything else doesn't understand the purpose and mission of our entire industry."

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/social-media-pushing-youngsters-towards-more-misogynistic-content-finds-study-687528">Social media pushing youngsters towards more misogynistic content, finds study</a>

The lawsuit also accuses Match Group of using "dark patterns," web design features meant to trick people into buying things or paying for services they didn't intend to buy. This practice has been cracked down on by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the past — it ordered communications provider Vonage to pay customers nearly $100 million in October.

The lawsuit comes at a time when states are targeting tech companies like Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, for harming young users with addictive features on their social media apps, exacerbating mental health issues.

(With inputs from agencies)

Do you find yourself disappointed by dating apps, yet find yourself swiping right and left for hours, only to face disappointment? Many of us have found themselves stuck in this loop, and a proposed class-action lawsuit filed on Valentine's Day alleges that dating apps, specifically those owned by Match Group, are to blame.

Do you find yourself disappointed by dating apps, yet find yourself swiping right and left for hours, only to face disappointment? Many of us have found themselves stuck in this loop, and a proposed class-action lawsuit filed on Valentine's Day alleges that dating apps, specifically those owned by Match Group, are to blame. It claims that apps, including Tinder and Hinge, are designed to addict users and keep them in a "perpetual pay-to-play loop." Driving addiction The lawsuit, filed in California district court, claims that the apps' hidden algorithms drive users' addiction. This is in sharp contrast to the company's claim that its products are meant to help people find offline relationships. Also read | Luxury Bazaar CEO Roman Sharf bags Trump-autographed ‘Never Surrender’ sneakers for $9,000 According to the lawsuit, users are baited into continually upgrading their subscriptions and paying for bonus features that promise a better chance at finding love but only serve to boost the company's profits. The apps allegedly use dopamine-manipulating techniques to gamify romance and dating, encouraging compulsive use. As per CBS News, six plaintiffs have alleged that the apps are in violation of consumer protection and other laws. 'Ridiculous' lawsuit Match Group has dismissed the lawsuit as "ridiculous" and with "zero merit", stating that its business model is not based on advertising or engagement metrics. The company Match Group, in a statement to the CBS Moneywatch said that they "actively strive to get people on dates every day and off our apps. Anyone who states anything else doesn't understand the purpose and mission of our entire industry." Also read | Social media pushing youngsters towards more misogynistic content, finds study The lawsuit also accuses Match Group of using "dark patterns," web design features meant to trick people into buying things or paying for services they didn't intend to buy. This practice has been cracked down on by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the past — it ordered communications provider Vonage to pay customers nearly $100 million in October. The lawsuit comes at a time when states are targeting tech companies like Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, for harming young users with addictive features on their social media apps, exacerbating mental health issues. (With inputs from agencies)

Swipe right for addiction? Lawsuit claims dating apps Tinder and Hinge designed to keep users swiping

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has initiated an investigation into OpenAI, the creator of the popular ChatGPT bot, to determine whether the company has violated consumer protection laws and put personal reputations and data at risk.

As per a Washington Post report, the agency has sent a 20-page demand for records to OpenAI, requesting information on how the company addresses risks associated with its AI models. This regulatory action represents the most significant threat thus far to OpenAI's business in the United States.

<h2>FTC demands from OpenAI</h2>

In its Civil Investigative Demand, the FTC has requested detailed descriptions of any complaints received by OpenAI regarding its products making false, misleading, disparaging, or harmful statements about individuals.

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/elon-musk-launches-long-teased-chatgpt-rival-xai-614844">Elon Musk launches AI firm ‘xAI’, likely to come up with ChatGPT rival</a>

The agency is also investigating whether the company engaged in unfair or deceptive practices that caused reputational harm to consumers. For example, radio host Mark Walters has filed a defamation lawsuit against OpenAI, claiming that the ChatGPT language model falsely accused him of defrauding and embezzling funds from the Second Amendment Foundation.

Additionally, the FTC is seeking records related to a security incident disclosed by OpenAI in March, which involved a bug in the company's systems leading to the exposure of payment-related information and chat history data. The AI company has also been asked to disclose the impact of the security incident and the measures taken to mitigate it. The FTC aims to determine whether OpenAI's data security practices comply with consumer protection laws.

The investigation also focuses on potential consumer protection abuses, requesting details on how well consumers understand the accuracy and reliability of outputs generated by OpenAI's AI tools.

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/elon-musk-expects-fully-autonomous-tesla-vehicles-later-this-year-612751">Elon Musk expects fully autonomous self-driving Tesla vehicles 'later this year'</a>

Further, the FTC has also called for comprehensive information regarding OpenAI's products and their advertising methods. The commission has also requested details regarding OpenAI's policies and procedures for releasing new products, specifically asking for a list of instances where the company withheld a large language model due to safety concerns.

Additionally, OpenAI has been asked to provide a detailed description of the data used to train its products, as well as information on refining the models to address their tendency to generate fictitious responses.

<h2>OpenAI, ChatGPT and FTC</h2>

OpenAI's ChatGPT has been hailed as the fastest-growing consumer app in history by analysts. Its success has triggered a competition among Silicon Valley companies to develop competing chatbots.

While the administration and Congress work to establish new regulations for AI, the FTC has repeatedly emphasised that existing consumer protection laws apply to AI. &nbsp;

The FTC's demands to OpenAI mark the agency's first steps toward enforcing these warnings. The agency has been vocal about taking action on AI, highlighting potential threats and issuing warnings through speeches, blog posts, op-eds, and news conferences. The agency has cautioned against AI scams, the use of generative AI for manipulative purposes, and the exaggeration of AI product capabilities.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has initiated an investigation into OpenAI, the creator of the popular ChatGPT bot, to determine whether the company has violated consumer protection laws and put personal reputations and data at risk.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has initiated an investigation into OpenAI, the creator of the popular ChatGPT bot, to determine whether the company has violated consumer protection laws and put personal reputations and data at risk. As per a Washington Post report, the agency has sent a 20-page demand for records to OpenAI, requesting information on how the company addresses risks associated with its AI models. This regulatory action represents the most significant threat thus far to OpenAI's business in the United States. FTC demands from OpenAI In its Civil Investigative Demand, the FTC has requested detailed descriptions of any complaints received by OpenAI regarding its products making false, misleading, disparaging, or harmful statements about individuals. Also read | Elon Musk launches AI firm ‘xAI’, likely to come up with ChatGPT rival The agency is also investigating whether the company engaged in unfair or deceptive practices that caused reputational harm to consumers. For example, radio host Mark Walters has filed a defamation lawsuit against OpenAI, claiming that the ChatGPT language model falsely accused him of defrauding and embezzling funds from the Second Amendment Foundation. Additionally, the FTC is seeking records related to a security incident disclosed by OpenAI in March, which involved a bug in the company's systems leading to the exposure of payment-related information and chat history data. The AI company has also been asked to disclose the impact of the security incident and the measures taken to mitigate it. The FTC aims to determine whether OpenAI's data security practices comply with consumer protection laws. The investigation also focuses on potential consumer protection abuses, requesting details on how well consumers understand the accuracy and reliability of outputs generated by OpenAI's AI tools. Also read | Elon Musk expects fully autonomous self-driving Tesla vehicles 'later this year' Further, the FTC has also called for comprehensive information regarding OpenAI's products and their advertising methods. The commission has also requested details regarding OpenAI's policies and procedures for releasing new products, specifically asking for a list of instances where the company withheld a large language model due to safety concerns. Additionally, OpenAI has been asked to provide a detailed description of the data used to train its products, as well as information on refining the models to address their tendency to generate fictitious responses. OpenAI, ChatGPT and FTC OpenAI's ChatGPT has been hailed as the fastest-growing consumer app in history by analysts. Its success has triggered a competition among Silicon Valley companies to develop competing chatbots. While the administration and Congress work to establish new regulations for AI, the FTC has repeatedly emphasised that existing consumer protection laws apply to AI. The FTC's demands to OpenAI mark the agency's first steps toward enforcing these warnings. The agency has been vocal about taking action on AI, highlighting potential threats and issuing warnings through speeches, blog posts, op-eds, and news conferences. The agency has cautioned against AI scams, the use of generative AI for manipulative purposes, and the exaggeration of AI product capabilities. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

OpenAI faces regulatory threat as FTC investigates potential violations of consumer protection laws

Twitter has urged a US federal court to amend or terminate an order of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that lets it monitor the social media app’s data security practices.

Elon Musk’s lawyers have claimed that once the 52-year-old billionaire took over the company last year in March, the FTC intensified its investigation into the company which “has spiralled out of control and become tainted by bias,” AP news agency reported.

The FTC has been monitoring Twitter since it gave consent to the order in 2011 following allegations of security data lapses. But the lawyers have claimed bias once Musk bought the company.

It comes after reports in March revealed that FTC was probing Musk's mass layoffs at Twitter and trying to obtain his internal communications as part of ongoing oversight into the social media company's privacy and cybersecurity practices, according to documents described in a congressional report.

In May 2022, Twitter paid nearly $150 million for violating the 2011 consent order, about five months before Musk took over.

An updated version established new procedures requiring the company to implement an enhanced privacy-protection program as well as beefing up information security.

<h2>'FTC pummeling Twitter'</h2>

In the filing, Twitter, whose corporate name was changed to X Corp last year, claimed that the FTC has “pummelled” the company with “burdensome letters and requests for depositions,” issuing demands for information as frequently as one letter every other week.

The FTC wanted to depose Musk on July 25, the filing states, but FTC Chair Lina Khan declined to meet with him personally until Twitter complied with the information requests.

According to Twitter’s plea, FTC issued 16 demand letters to X Corp. since Musk took charge of Twitter, compared to around 28 demand letters it issued in the last 10 years, AP news agency reported.

<h2>Stay on deposition&nbsp;</h2>

Twitter has sought intervention of the US District Court for the Northern District of California, seeking a protective order and relief from the consent order.

It also seeks a stay that would prevent the FTC from deposing Musk.

“X Corp has responded to this avalanche of demands as best it can, responding promptly to FTC inquiries and producing more than 22,000 documents to date,” the filing states.

"The FTC’s overreach has now culminated in a demand to depose Musk, who is not, and never has been, a party to the consent order."

A hearing date is listed for August 17, but the filing states that a hearing may occur on such other date and time as the court may order.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

Twitter has urged a US federal court to amend or terminate an order of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that lets it monitor the social media app’s data security practices.

Twitter has urged a US federal court to amend or terminate an order of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that lets it monitor the social media app’s data security practices. Elon Musk’s lawyers have claimed that once the 52-year-old billionaire took over the company last year in March, the FTC intensified its investigation into the company which “has spiralled out of control and become tainted by bias,” AP news agency reported. The FTC has been monitoring Twitter since it gave consent to the order in 2011 following allegations of security data lapses. But the lawyers have claimed bias once Musk bought the company. It comes after reports in March revealed that FTC was probing Musk's mass layoffs at Twitter and trying to obtain his internal communications as part of ongoing oversight into the social media company's privacy and cybersecurity practices, according to documents described in a congressional report. In May 2022, Twitter paid nearly $150 million for violating the 2011 consent order, about five months before Musk took over. An updated version established new procedures requiring the company to implement an enhanced privacy-protection program as well as beefing up information security. 'FTC pummeling Twitter' In the filing, Twitter, whose corporate name was changed to X Corp last year, claimed that the FTC has “pummelled” the company with “burdensome letters and requests for depositions,” issuing demands for information as frequently as one letter every other week. The FTC wanted to depose Musk on July 25, the filing states, but FTC Chair Lina Khan declined to meet with him personally until Twitter complied with the information requests. According to Twitter’s plea, FTC issued 16 demand letters to X Corp. since Musk took charge of Twitter, compared to around 28 demand letters it issued in the last 10 years, AP news agency reported. Stay on deposition Twitter has sought intervention of the US District Court for the Northern District of California, seeking a protective order and relief from the consent order. It also seeks a stay that would prevent the FTC from deposing Musk. “X Corp has responded to this avalanche of demands as best it can, responding promptly to FTC inquiries and producing more than 22,000 documents to date,” the filing states. "The FTC’s overreach has now culminated in a demand to depose Musk, who is not, and never has been, a party to the consent order." A hearing date is listed for August 17, but the filing states that a hearing may occur on such other date and time as the court may order. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE

Twitter pleads US federal court to end FTC oversight before Elon Musk’s deposition

The US Federal Trade Commission believes that Amazon is doing just that, and according to reports, Amazon rewards its online merchants who utilise its logistics services and penalises those who don't. As a result, the US FTC may sue Amazon, among other things.

US antitrust regulator plans to target Amazon's online marketplace

The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said on Thursday (March 9) that it is expected to vote on March 16 on whether to send demands for information about deceptive advertising to eight social media and video streaming companies.&nbsp;

According to a statement released by the FTC, "the Commission will vote on whether to issue 6(b) Orders to eight social media and video streaming platforms concerning how they monitor and review deceptive advertising on their platforms."

The FTC said that these orders would examine the ad review practices of the companies and if any measures were taken to detect, prevent and reduce deceptive advertising on their platforms. This would include advertising related to fraudulent healthcare products, financial scams, and fake goods, the commission added.&nbsp;

The social media and video streaming companies that would receive the demands have not been identified yet.&nbsp;

Also on March 16, the FTC would vote on issuing demands for information to five business credit reporting agencies concerning how they collect data and market their products.&nbsp;

"A business credit report can affect a small business in many ways, including potentially impacting the terms on which it can obtain goods, services, and equipment necessary for the operation of the business. This study will provide the public with information about an industry that has a significant impact on small businesses, but that currently has little publicly available data about it," Thursday's statement read.&nbsp;

The above developments come after the FTC asked Twitter to turn over some internal communications related to the owner Elon Musk and other detailed information about business decisions as part of an investigation into the social media giant.&nbsp;

The commission has sent over a dozen letters to Twitter and its lawyers since Musk became the owner in October last year. One of the requests was that the social media giant identified all journalists who were granted access to company records. The FTC also wants Musk to testify in connection with the investigation.&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said on Thursday (March 9) that it is expected to vote on March 16 on whether to send demands for information about deceptive advertising to eight social media and video streaming companies.

The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said on Thursday (March 9) that it is expected to vote on March 16 on whether to send demands for information about deceptive advertising to eight social media and video streaming companies. According to a statement released by the FTC, "the Commission will vote on whether to issue 6(b) Orders to eight social media and video streaming platforms concerning how they monitor and review deceptive advertising on their platforms." The FTC said that these orders would examine the ad review practices of the companies and if any measures were taken to detect, prevent and reduce deceptive advertising on their platforms. This would include advertising related to fraudulent healthcare products, financial scams, and fake goods, the commission added. The social media and video streaming companies that would receive the demands have not been identified yet. Also on March 16, the FTC would vote on issuing demands for information to five business credit reporting agencies concerning how they collect data and market their products. "A business credit report can affect a small business in many ways, including potentially impacting the terms on which it can obtain goods, services, and equipment necessary for the operation of the business. This study will provide the public with information about an industry that has a significant impact on small businesses, but that currently has little publicly available data about it," Thursday's statement read. The above developments come after the FTC asked Twitter to turn over some internal communications related to the owner Elon Musk and other detailed information about business decisions as part of an investigation into the social media giant. The commission has sent over a dozen letters to Twitter and its lawyers since Musk became the owner in October last year. One of the requests was that the social media giant identified all journalists who were granted access to company records. The FTC also wants Musk to testify in connection with the investigation. WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

US FTC considering probe of deceptive advertising on social media

The Federal Trade Commission, a US regulator, on Thursday proposed to ban non-compete clauses stating that employer restriction suppresses wages artificially for workers who are interested in changing employments.&nbsp;

The proposal would bar businesses from signing non-compete agreements with employees and the employers will have to rescind any such existing clauses.&nbsp;

As per the FTC, around 30 million Americans are currently working under such agreements. It stated that the proposal can increase the wages of employees by around $300 billion per year.

ALSO READ| <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-govt-to-turn-away-cubans-nicaraguans-and-haitians-at-us-border-549845">Biden govt to turn away Cubans, Nicaraguans and Haitians at US border</a>

FTC chairperson Lina Khan said, “The freedom to change jobs is core to economic liberty and to a competitive, thriving economy.”&nbsp;

"Non-competes block workers from freely switching jobs, depriving them of higher wages and better working conditions, and depriving businesses of a talent pool that they need to build and expand," she stated.

The FTC stated that the measure will not apply to other restrictions in employment like non-disclosure agreements.&nbsp;

However, the proposal received the US Chamber of Commerce's scathing response which called it "blatantly unlawful" in its statement.

WATCH|&nbsp;WION Fineprint | Massive hike in U.S. Visa fees expected

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/wion-fineprint-massive-hike-in-us-visa-fees-expected-549823/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Senior vice president of the business lobby Sean Heather said, "Since the agency's creation over 100 years ago, Congress has never delegated the FTC anything close to the authority it would need to promulgate such a competition rule. The Chamber is confident that this unlawful action will not stand."

FTC Commissioner Christine Wilson, who voted against the proposed rule, said that the measure is a "radical departure from hundreds of years of legal precedent" that appeared unsupported by evidence, predicting it will "lead to protracted litigation in which the Commission is unlikely to prevail."

(With inputs from agencies)

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

The Federal Trade Commission, a US regulator, on Thursday proposed to ban non-compete clauses stating that employer restriction suppresses wages artificially for workers who are interested in changing employments.

The Federal Trade Commission, a US regulator, on Thursday proposed to ban non-compete clauses stating that employer restriction suppresses wages artificially for workers who are interested in changing employments. The proposal would bar businesses from signing non-compete agreements with employees and the employers will have to rescind any such existing clauses. As per the FTC, around 30 million Americans are currently working under such agreements. It stated that the proposal can increase the wages of employees by around $300 billion per year. ALSO READ| Biden govt to turn away Cubans, Nicaraguans and Haitians at US border FTC chairperson Lina Khan said, “The freedom to change jobs is core to economic liberty and to a competitive, thriving economy.” "Non-competes block workers from freely switching jobs, depriving them of higher wages and better working conditions, and depriving businesses of a talent pool that they need to build and expand," she stated. The FTC stated that the measure will not apply to other restrictions in employment like non-disclosure agreements. However, the proposal received the US Chamber of Commerce's scathing response which called it "blatantly unlawful" in its statement. WATCH| WION Fineprint | Massive hike in U.S. Visa fees expected Senior vice president of the business lobby Sean Heather said, "Since the agency's creation over 100 years ago, Congress has never delegated the FTC anything close to the authority it would need to promulgate such a competition rule. The Chamber is confident that this unlawful action will not stand." FTC Commissioner Christine Wilson, who voted against the proposed rule, said that the measure is a "radical departure from hundreds of years of legal precedent" that appeared unsupported by evidence, predicting it will "lead to protracted litigation in which the Commission is unlikely to prevail." (With inputs from agencies)

US regulator proposes to ban non-compete clauses with workers

In order to settle charges for not passing on tips to drivers, Amazon is going to pay around US$62 million. &nbsp;

According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), even though it promised shoppers and drivers, Amazon didn't pass on tips to drivers for more than two years. &nbsp;

The tech giant didn't stop taking the tips until 2019, when the company found out about the FTC's investigation. The theft did not go unnoticed by Amazon's drivers. Many expressed anger and confusion to the company but, rather than coming clean, Amazon took several steps to mislead its drivers and conceal the theft by sending them canned responses that repeated the company's lies.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/amazon-ceo-jeff-bezos-to-step-down-360973">Also read | Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos to step down</a>

Founded in 2015, Amazon's Flex business allowed people to deliver Amazon packages through their own cars. The drivers were independent workers and not Amazon employees.&nbsp;

At first, Amazon promised workers that they would be paid US$18 to US$25 per hour for their services. They were to also receive 100 per cent of tips given to them by the customers on the app, according to the complaint. But in 2016, the company started paying drivers a lower hourly rate and used the tips to make up for the difference. The FTC said, Amazon didn't disclose the change to drivers, and the tips it took from drivers amounted to US$61.7m ($85.8m).&nbsp; 
 
Watch: Indian govt issues notice to Amazon, Flipkart over non-compliance

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/indian-govt-issues-notice-to-amazon-flipkart-over-non-compliance-336060/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In a statement, Seattle-based Amazon.com Inc. said that the way it reported pay to workers was clear. But the company said it "added additional clarity in 2019" and is "pleased to put this matter behind us."&nbsp;

The FTC said the money Amazon will pay for the settlement will go to delivery drivers whose tips were taken.&nbsp;

In order to settle charges for not passing on tips to drivers, Amazon is going to pay around US$62 million. According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), even though it promised shoppers and drivers, Amazon didn't pass on tips to drivers for more than two years.

In order to settle charges for not passing on tips to drivers, Amazon is going to pay around US$62 million. According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), even though it promised shoppers and drivers, Amazon didn't pass on tips to drivers for more than two years. The tech giant didn't stop taking the tips until 2019, when the company found out about the FTC's investigation. The theft did not go unnoticed by Amazon's drivers. Many expressed anger and confusion to the company but, rather than coming clean, Amazon took several steps to mislead its drivers and conceal the theft by sending them canned responses that repeated the company's lies. Also read | Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos to step down Founded in 2015, Amazon's Flex business allowed people to deliver Amazon packages through their own cars. The drivers were independent workers and not Amazon employees. At first, Amazon promised workers that they would be paid US$18 to US$25 per hour for their services. They were to also receive 100 per cent of tips given to them by the customers on the app, according to the complaint. But in 2016, the company started paying drivers a lower hourly rate and used the tips to make up for the difference. The FTC said, Amazon didn't disclose the change to drivers, and the tips it took from drivers amounted to US$61.7m ($85.8m). Watch: Indian govt issues notice to Amazon, Flipkart over non-compliance In a statement, Seattle-based Amazon.com Inc. said that the way it reported pay to workers was clear. But the company said it "added additional clarity in 2019" and is "pleased to put this matter behind us." The FTC said the money Amazon will pay for the settlement will go to delivery drivers whose tips were taken.

Amazon to pay US$62 million to settle charges for not passing on tips

America's Federal Trade Commission(FTC) reached a settlement with Flo Health after it allegedly shared personal user data with third-party marketing services including <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-bans-stop-the-steal-phrase-ahead-of-joe-bidens-inauguration-356224">Facebook's </a>analytics division, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/google-to-pay-ftc-170-million-for-illegally-collecting-sharing-data-from-kids-on-youtube-247626">Google’s</a> analytics division, Google’s Fabric service, AppsFlyer, and Flurry.

The Flo app which tracks period and fertility among women has over 100 million users allegedly included information to third parties on whether users were ovulating.

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-has-banned-donald-trump-indefinitely-says-mark-zuckerberg-355214">FTC</a> has proposed Flo Health, Inc to obtain an "independent review of its privacy practices" and get app users’ consent before sharing their health information. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Andrew Smith, director of the FTC’s bureau of consumer protection said: “Apps that collect, use, and share sensitive health information can provide valuable services, but consumers need to be able to trust these apps,” adding,"We are looking closely at whether developers of health apps are keeping their promises and handling sensitive health information responsibly.”

According to the complaint received by the FTC, Flo disclosed sensitive health information, such as a user’s pregnancy to third parties in the form of “app event”.

The FTC alleged that Flo violated the "EU-US Privacy Shield" and "Swiss-US Privacy Shield" frameworks.

The FTC also issued guidance to consumers about health apps, with tips for consumers on how to select and use these types of apps while reducing privacy risks.&nbsp;

The FTC asked Flo to notify affected users about the disclosure of their personal information and instruct any third party that received users’ health information to destroy data.

America's Federal Trade Commission(FTC) reached a settlement with Flo Health after it allegedly shared personal user data with third-party marketing services including Facebook's analytics division, Google’s analytics division, Google’s Fabric service, AppsFlyer, and Flurry.

America's Federal Trade Commission(FTC) reached a settlement with Flo Health after it allegedly shared personal user data with third-party marketing services including Facebook's analytics division, Google’s analytics division, Google’s Fabric service, AppsFlyer, and Flurry. The Flo app which tracks period and fertility among women has over 100 million users allegedly included information to third parties on whether users were ovulating. The FTC has proposed Flo Health, Inc to obtain an "independent review of its privacy practices" and get app users’ consent before sharing their health information. Andrew Smith, director of the FTC’s bureau of consumer protection said: “Apps that collect, use, and share sensitive health information can provide valuable services, but consumers need to be able to trust these apps,” adding,"We are looking closely at whether developers of health apps are keeping their promises and handling sensitive health information responsibly.” According to the complaint received by the FTC, Flo disclosed sensitive health information, such as a user’s pregnancy to third parties in the form of “app event”. The FTC alleged that Flo violated the "EU-US Privacy Shield" and "Swiss-US Privacy Shield" frameworks. The FTC also issued guidance to consumers about health apps, with tips for consumers on how to select and use these types of apps while reducing privacy risks. The FTC asked Flo to notify affected users about the disclosure of their personal information and instruct any third party that received users’ health information to destroy data.

America's FTC reaches settlement with Flo health app after breach in women's health data

Facebook has confirmed that its executives including CEO Mark Zuckerberg are fielding questions from the US Federal Trade Commission (FDC).

FTC questions Facebook on business practices & prior acquisitions

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/latest-world-news-facebook-and-twitter-decline-pelosis-plea-to-remove-doctored-clip-posted-by-donald-trump-279743">Facebook </a>Inc&nbsp;said on Friday it was allowing US-based political candidates to run branded content on its social networking platforms, but the content would not be catalogued in its advertising library.

Political campaigns and groups can now use the social media company's branded content tool, which allows influencers to more clearly tag in an official sub-header that the post is a paid partnership.

The change came after US&nbsp;Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg this week paid popular meme accounts on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-federal-trade-commission-probes-facebooks-acquisition-practices-report-240072">Facebook</a>-owned Instagram to post content about the billionaire former New York mayor.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/latest-world-news-facebook-and-twitter-decline-pelosis-plea-to-remove-doctored-clip-posted-by-donald-trump-279743">Facebook and Twitter decline Pelosi's plea to remove clip posted by Donald Trump</a>

The strategy of paying social media influencers to spread political messages or make content is gathering momentum ahead of the 2020 race, but rules around the practice have been hazy.

"After hearing from multiple campaigns, we agree that there's a place for branded content in political discussion on our platforms," a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-federal-trade-commission-probes-facebooks-acquisition-practices-report-240072">Facebook </a>spokesman said in a statement.

To use Facebook's branded content tool, political campaigns or groups must be authorized as political advertisers through the company's ID verification process.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/latest-world-news-stephen-king-leaves-facebook-after-citing-misleading-information-and-of-lack-of-privacy-for-reasons-of-departure-278282">Stephen King leaves Facebook citing misleading information and lack of privacy</a>

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/latest-world-news-stephen-king-leaves-facebook-after-citing-misleading-information-and-of-lack-of-privacy-for-reasons-of-departure-278282">Facebook </a>does not make money from branded or sponsored content, for which brands directly pay creators, so they do not count this as advertising. It does, however, ask content creators to comply with regulations to disclose paid partnerships.

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-federal-trade-commission-probes-facebooks-acquisition-practices-report-240072">Federal Trade Commission</a> requires social media influencers and content creators to clearly label sponsored posts. This week, the FTC announced it would be seeking public comment on how effective these rules are and whether it should make changes.

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-federal-trade-commission-probes-facebooks-acquisition-practices-report-240072">Federal Election Commission</a> says paid public online communications containing "express advocacy" must have a disclaimer, but it does not have explicit rules about social media influencers.

In December 2019, former FEC chair Ellen Weintraub acknowledged in a statement that its 2006 internet disclaimer regulations were written "several eons ago."

Facebook said sponsored content from political advertisers will not be included in its Ad Library, a database maintained to provide transparency around political and other advertising, unless the creator pays to promote the post using the company's advertising tools.

Bloomberg's Democratic rival Senator Elizabeth Warren criticized the fact that sponsored posts would not be publicly tracked.

"Refusing to catalogue paid political ads because the Bloomberg campaign found a workaround means there will be less transparency for the content he is paying to promote," Warren said in a tweet. "Mike Bloomberg cannot be allowed to buy an election with zero accountability."

The Bloomberg campaign, which has been waging a huge digital campaign to try and beat Republican President Donald Trump in November, told Reuters this week that it thought its "meme strategy" would be effective.

"The campaign was explicitly clear that these posts were ads and sponsored content," said Sabrina Singh, a spokeswoman for the Bloomberg campaign, in a statement on Friday. "We went above and beyond to follow Instagram's rules and the text of the post clearly shows these are the campaign's paid ads."

A Facebook spokesman told Reuters that the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/news-update-breaking-Bloomberg-is-a-loser-says-Trump-sparking-fight-on-Twitter">Bloomberg </a>campaign was not the only political campaign that had asked about the company's policies regarding sponsored content.

Facebook Inc said on Friday it was allowing US-based political candidates to run branded content on its social networking platforms, but the content would not be catalogued in its advertising library.

Facebook Inc said on Friday it was allowing US-based political candidates to run branded content on its social networking platforms, but the content would not be catalogued in its advertising library. Political campaigns and groups can now use the social media company's branded content tool, which allows influencers to more clearly tag in an official sub-header that the post is a paid partnership. The change came after US Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg this week paid popular meme accounts on Facebook-owned Instagram to post content about the billionaire former New York mayor. Also read: Facebook and Twitter decline Pelosi's plea to remove clip posted by Donald Trump The strategy of paying social media influencers to spread political messages or make content is gathering momentum ahead of the 2020 race, but rules around the practice have been hazy. "After hearing from multiple campaigns, we agree that there's a place for branded content in political discussion on our platforms," a Facebook spokesman said in a statement. To use Facebook's branded content tool, political campaigns or groups must be authorized as political advertisers through the company's ID verification process. Also read: Stephen King leaves Facebook citing misleading information and lack of privacy Facebook does not make money from branded or sponsored content, for which brands directly pay creators, so they do not count this as advertising. It does, however, ask content creators to comply with regulations to disclose paid partnerships. The Federal Trade Commission requires social media influencers and content creators to clearly label sponsored posts. This week, the FTC announced it would be seeking public comment on how effective these rules are and whether it should make changes. The Federal Election Commission says paid public online communications containing "express advocacy" must have a disclaimer, but it does not have explicit rules about social media influencers. In December 2019, former FEC chair Ellen Weintraub acknowledged in a statement that its 2006 internet disclaimer regulations were written "several eons ago." Facebook said sponsored content from political advertisers will not be included in its Ad Library, a database maintained to provide transparency around political and other advertising, unless the creator pays to promote the post using the company's advertising tools. Bloomberg's Democratic rival Senator Elizabeth Warren criticized the fact that sponsored posts would not be publicly tracked. "Refusing to catalogue paid political ads because the Bloomberg campaign found a workaround means there will be less transparency for the content he is paying to promote," Warren said in a tweet. "Mike Bloomberg cannot be allowed to buy an election with zero accountability." The Bloomberg campaign, which has been waging a huge digital campaign to try and beat Republican President Donald Trump in November, told Reuters this week that it thought its "meme strategy" would be effective. "The campaign was explicitly clear that these posts were ads and sponsored content," said Sabrina Singh, a spokeswoman for the Bloomberg campaign, in a statement on Friday. "We went above and beyond to follow Instagram's rules and the text of the post clearly shows these are the campaign's paid ads." A Facebook spokesman told Reuters that the Bloomberg campaign was not the only political campaign that had asked about the company's policies regarding sponsored content.

Facebook allows US political candidates to run sponsored content

Swiss drugmaker Roche plans to complete its $4.3 billion takeover of gene therapy specialist <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science-tech/amazon-awarded-worlds-smartest-company-1588?first_load=no">Spark Therapeutics</a> on Tuesday after U.S. and British authorities ruled the deal would not hurt competition in haemophilia A treatment.

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/facebook-shares-fall-over-possible-us-antitrust-move-268567">Federal Trade Commission</a> (FTC) and Britain's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) approved the deal on Monday without demanding asset sales.

Roche is buying U.S.-based Spark to expand in gene therapy and boost its haemophilia A portfolio, where the Basel-based company's existing drug Hemlibra will surpass $1 billion sales in 2019.

Regulators had feared Roche might sabotage Spark's haemophilia program to benefit Hemlibra, but came to another conclusion.

"The evidence developed during staff's investigation did not indicate that Roche would have the incentive to delay or terminate Spark's developmental effort for its haemophilia A gene therapy," the FTC said after its 5-0 approval vote.

Clearance for Roche to buy Spark helps reduce the chance the Swiss drugmaker will be eclipsed in one of the industry's most dynamic and potentially profitable areas, as it was by Merck and Bristol-Myers Squibb in immune therapies for cancer.

"That's why the market was increasingly worried that the deal announced in February was taking so long," said Michael Nawrath, an analyst at Zuercher Kantonalbank.

The deal follows Novartis's $8.7 billion takeover&nbsp;of gene therapy specialist AveXis in 2018.

Beyond haemophilia, Spark is also working on gene therapies for Pompe and Huntington's diseases, among others.

With the deal, Roche agreed to pay more than twice the US company's closing price on Feb. 22. As of Tuesday, Roche held more than 60% of Spark shares.

"Following completion of the merger, Spark will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche," Roche said.

Lucrative, competitive

Hemophilia A, where sufferers lack a protein needed for blood clotting, has traditionally been one of the most expensive - and for companies, lucrative - treatment areas.

Traditional treatments can in some cases run into millions of dollars annually.

Spark's haemophilia A treatment is up against a crowded pool of gene therapy hopefuls, something the FTC said influenced its decision not to block the deal.

Biomarin Pharmaceutical is seen filing for approval this year, while Sangamo Therapeutics Inc and <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/pfizer-decides-not-to-split-into-two-6818">Pfizer Inc</a> are steadily producing data from studies.

"As the other companies endeavour to bring their gene therapies to market, Roche would have the incentive to accelerate, rather than decelerate, the development of Spark’s gene therapy," the FTC said.

Roche stock eased 0.2 per cent&nbsp;in early trading.

Swiss drugmaker Roche plans to complete its $4.3 billion takeover of gene therapy specialist Spark Therapeutics on Tuesday after U.S. and British authorities ruled the deal would not hurt competition in haemophilia A treatment.

Swiss drugmaker Roche plans to complete its $4.3 billion takeover of gene therapy specialist Spark Therapeutics on Tuesday after U.S. and British authorities ruled the deal would not hurt competition in haemophilia A treatment. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Britain's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) approved the deal on Monday without demanding asset sales. Roche is buying U.S.-based Spark to expand in gene therapy and boost its haemophilia A portfolio, where the Basel-based company's existing drug Hemlibra will surpass $1 billion sales in 2019. Regulators had feared Roche might sabotage Spark's haemophilia program to benefit Hemlibra, but came to another conclusion. "The evidence developed during staff's investigation did not indicate that Roche would have the incentive to delay or terminate Spark's developmental effort for its haemophilia A gene therapy," the FTC said after its 5-0 approval vote. Clearance for Roche to buy Spark helps reduce the chance the Swiss drugmaker will be eclipsed in one of the industry's most dynamic and potentially profitable areas, as it was by Merck and Bristol-Myers Squibb in immune therapies for cancer. "That's why the market was increasingly worried that the deal announced in February was taking so long," said Michael Nawrath, an analyst at Zuercher Kantonalbank. The deal follows Novartis's $8.7 billion takeover of gene therapy specialist AveXis in 2018. Beyond haemophilia, Spark is also working on gene therapies for Pompe and Huntington's diseases, among others. With the deal, Roche agreed to pay more than twice the US company's closing price on Feb. 22. As of Tuesday, Roche held more than 60% of Spark shares. "Following completion of the merger, Spark will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Roche," Roche said. Lucrative, competitive Hemophilia A, where sufferers lack a protein needed for blood clotting, has traditionally been one of the most expensive - and for companies, lucrative - treatment areas. Traditional treatments can in some cases run into millions of dollars annually. Spark's haemophilia A treatment is up against a crowded pool of gene therapy hopefuls, something the FTC said influenced its decision not to block the deal. Biomarin Pharmaceutical is seen filing for approval this year, while Sangamo Therapeutics Inc and Pfizer Inc are steadily producing data from studies. "As the other companies endeavour to bring their gene therapies to market, Roche would have the incentive to accelerate, rather than decelerate, the development of Spark’s gene therapy," the FTC said. Roche stock eased 0.2 per cent in early trading.

Roche to complete $4.3 billion Spark deal as regulators give all clear

Facebook's stock dropped almost 3 per cent on Friday in regular trading after news reports suggested that the US FTC may take anti-trust action to prevent <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/facebook-no-longer-among-glassdoors-top-10-workplaces-267599">Facebook from integrating</a> its disparate messaging apps.

The reports said the Federal Trade Commission(FTC) may seek a court injunction that would block Facebook's "interoperability" plans for Facebook messenger, Whatsapp and Instagram, which involves revising them to use the same underlying software.

Facebook has been planning to integrate the app since early 2019. Federal regulators are concerned that Facebook's plan could make it hard to break up the company should the FTC find that necessary.

An additional investigation had revealed that Facebook has been buying small app developers and IT firms that could pose a threat to the firm's market share.

Facebook has been charged with taking higher stake in all those firms to kill competition not only in the United States but in other parts of the world as well. The company is facing similar charges in the European Union as well, meanwhile, Facebook has denied the charges.

Facebook's stock dropped almost 3 per cent on Friday in regular trading after news reports suggested that the US FTC may take anti-trust action to prevent Facebook from integrating its disparate messaging apps.

Facebook's stock dropped almost 3 per cent on Friday in regular trading after news reports suggested that the US FTC may take anti-trust action to prevent Facebook from integrating its disparate messaging apps. The reports said the Federal Trade Commission(FTC) may seek a court injunction that would block Facebook's "interoperability" plans for Facebook messenger, Whatsapp and Instagram, which involves revising them to use the same underlying software. Facebook has been planning to integrate the app since early 2019. Federal regulators are concerned that Facebook's plan could make it hard to break up the company should the FTC find that necessary. An additional investigation had revealed that Facebook has been buying small app developers and IT firms that could pose a threat to the firm's market share. Facebook has been charged with taking higher stake in all those firms to kill competition not only in the United States but in other parts of the world as well. The company is facing similar charges in the European Union as well, meanwhile, Facebook has denied the charges.

Facebook shares fall over possible US antitrust move

The US government today imposed $5 billion fine on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-should-not-be-trusted-with-crazy-cryptocurrency-plan-us-senators-236538">Facebook </a>as part of its privacy probe.

Despite repeated promises to its billions of users worldwide that they could control how their personal information is shared, Facebook undermined consumers' choices," FTC chairman Joe Simons said in a statement.

The Federal Trade Commission said the penalty was the largest ever imposed on any company for violating consumers' privacy and one of the largest penalties ever assessed by the US government for any violation.

The FTC asked the social network company to&nbsp;"submit to new restrictions and a modified corporate structure."

The FTC voted 3-2 along party lines to adopt the settlement, which requires court approval.

The probe focused on whether <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/in-a-world-first-facebook-to-give-data-on-hate-speech-suspects-to-french-courts-230477">Facebook's data-sharing </a>violated a 2011 consent agreement between Facebook and the regulator which then widened to include other privacy allegations.

Facebook faces further scrutiny including anti-trust probes.&nbsp;

The FTC said Zuckerberg or others filing a false certification could face civil and criminal penalties.

Facebook&nbsp;also is barred from asking for email passwords to other services when consumers sign up.

Facebook&nbsp;is barred from using telephone numbers obtained in a security feature, like two-factor authentication, for advertising and must get user consent if it plans to use data from facial recognition technology.

Facebook is set to report earnings on Wednesday with experts keen to watch its share prices today.

The US government today imposed $5 billion fine on Facebook as part of its privacy probe. Despite repeated promises to its billions of users worldwide that they could control how their personal information is shared, Facebook undermined consumers' choices," FTC chairman Joe Simons said in a statement.

The US government today imposed $5 billion fine on Facebook as part of its privacy probe. Despite repeated promises to its billions of users worldwide that they could control how their personal information is shared, Facebook undermined consumers' choices," FTC chairman Joe Simons said in a statement. The Federal Trade Commission said the penalty was the largest ever imposed on any company for violating consumers' privacy and one of the largest penalties ever assessed by the US government for any violation. The FTC asked the social network company to "submit to new restrictions and a modified corporate structure." The FTC voted 3-2 along party lines to adopt the settlement, which requires court approval. The probe focused on whether Facebook's data-sharing violated a 2011 consent agreement between Facebook and the regulator which then widened to include other privacy allegations. Facebook faces further scrutiny including anti-trust probes. The FTC said Zuckerberg or others filing a false certification could face civil and criminal penalties. Facebook also is barred from asking for email passwords to other services when consumers sign up. Facebook is barred from using telephone numbers obtained in a security feature, like two-factor authentication, for advertising and must get user consent if it plans to use data from facial recognition technology. Facebook is set to report earnings on Wednesday with experts keen to watch its share prices today.

US regulator imposes $5 billion fine on Facebook over privacy probe

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/reckitt-picks-pepsico-executive-as-ceo-going-outside-for-first-time-226588">British consumer health giant Reckitt</a> Benckiser announced Thursday it will pay up to $1.4 billion (1.2 billion euros) to settle a dispute with US authorities over the sale and marketing of an opioid addiction treatment.

The case concerns the pharmaceutical company Indivior, which was an RB subsidiary before emerging in 2014.

The US authorities criticised Indivior for having sought to take advantage of the opioid addiction crisis in the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/global-shares-muted-as-prospect-of-sharp-united-states-rate-cut-fades-234064">United States</a> by exaggerating the safety of its drug Suboxone.

RB said it had reached agreements with the US Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to resolve the long-running investigation.

"RB will pay a total of up to $1.4 billion to fully resolve all federal investigations into RB in connection with the subject matter," the firm said in a statement.

The agreements cover the Indivior indictment and claims relating to state Medicaid programmes for those states choosing to participate in the settlement, said the group.

"While RB has acted lawfully at all times and expressly denies all allegations that it engaged in any wrongful conduct, after careful consideration, the board of RB determined that the agreement is in the best interests of the company and its shareholders," a statement said.

"It avoids the costs, uncertainty and distraction associated with continued investigations, litigation and the potential for an indictment."

Indivior was indicted in April over an alleged scheme to push its treatment for opioid addicts and reap billions of dollars from it.

A grand jury in the federal court in Abingdon, Virginia said that Indivior marketed Suboxone Film, an opioid-based drug, as a safe and controllable treatment for opioid and heroin addiction.

But the indictment said that Indivior sought to boost sales by exaggerating the safety of Suboxone Film and connecting patients with doctors who were known to over-prescribe it and other opioids, taking advantage of the country's huge opioid addiction crisis.

Beginning in 2010, the indictment claimed, Indivior told health care providers and programmes that Suboxone Film, which contains the opioid buprenorphine, was better and safer than similar drugs, when in fact it was not.

Indivior left the RB group in 2014. The pharmaceutical company is based in Richmond, Virginia, and is listed on the London Stock Exchange.

In a statement at the time, Indivior called the indictment "wholly unsupported by either the facts or the law".

British consumer health giant Reckitt Benckiser announced Thursday it will pay up to $1.4 billion (1.2 billion euros) to settle a dispute with US authorities over the sale and marketing of an opioid addiction treatment.

British consumer health giant Reckitt Benckiser announced Thursday it will pay up to $1.4 billion (1.2 billion euros) to settle a dispute with US authorities over the sale and marketing of an opioid addiction treatment. The case concerns the pharmaceutical company Indivior, which was an RB subsidiary before emerging in 2014. The US authorities criticised Indivior for having sought to take advantage of the opioid addiction crisis in the United States by exaggerating the safety of its drug Suboxone. RB said it had reached agreements with the US Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to resolve the long-running investigation. "RB will pay a total of up to $1.4 billion to fully resolve all federal investigations into RB in connection with the subject matter," the firm said in a statement. The agreements cover the Indivior indictment and claims relating to state Medicaid programmes for those states choosing to participate in the settlement, said the group. "While RB has acted lawfully at all times and expressly denies all allegations that it engaged in any wrongful conduct, after careful consideration, the board of RB determined that the agreement is in the best interests of the company and its shareholders," a statement said. "It avoids the costs, uncertainty and distraction associated with continued investigations, litigation and the potential for an indictment." Indivior was indicted in April over an alleged scheme to push its treatment for opioid addicts and reap billions of dollars from it. A grand jury in the federal court in Abingdon, Virginia said that Indivior marketed Suboxone Film, an opioid-based drug, as a safe and controllable treatment for opioid and heroin addiction. But the indictment said that Indivior sought to boost sales by exaggerating the safety of Suboxone Film and connecting patients with doctors who were known to over-prescribe it and other opioids, taking advantage of the country's huge opioid addiction crisis. Beginning in 2010, the indictment claimed, Indivior told health care providers and programmes that Suboxone Film, which contains the opioid buprenorphine, was better and safer than similar drugs, when in fact it was not. Indivior left the RB group in 2014. The pharmaceutical company is based in Richmond, Virginia, and is listed on the London Stock Exchange. In a statement at the time, Indivior called the indictment "wholly unsupported by either the facts or the law".

Reckitt pays US 1.4 billion dollar to settle opioid treatment spat

Seven US Senate Democrats asked the Trump administration on Friday to disclose details of possible Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department antitrust investigations into Amazon.com Inc, Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc and Apple Inc.

Reuters and other news outlets reported this month the agencies were gearing up to investigate whether the companies misuse their market power.

The senators led by Senator Amy Klobuchar, a presidential candidate, said in the letters to FTC Chairman Joe Simons and Justice Department antitrust chief Makan Delrahim that "given the silence of the FTC and the Justice Department, the truth is that we still do not know if these investigations have actually been initiated and neither do the American people."

The FTC declined to comment on the letter, while the Justice Department did not immediately comment on Friday.

The letters were also signed by Patrick Leahy, Richard Blumenthal, Tammy Baldwin, Edward Markey, Tina Smith and Cory Booker - another presidential candidate - who said they were encouraged by the media reports of investigations "but also somewhat troubled that such inquiries were not already well underway."

The senators noted that both agencies typically refrain from commenting on investigations that are not public "but these circumstances are far from typical. The significant public interest in and allegations surrounding the business conduct of Big Tech and the leaks concerning the clearance process relating to potential investigations of Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google have made these matters highly unusual."

Reuters reported this month that the Justice Department and FTC met in recent weeks and agreed to give the Justice Department the jurisdiction to undertake potential antitrust probes of Apple and Google, while the FTC was given jurisdiction to look at Amazon and Facebook.

Seven US Senate Democrats asked the Trump administration on Friday to disclose details of possible Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department antitrust investigations into Amazon.

Seven US Senate Democrats asked the Trump administration on Friday to disclose details of possible Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department antitrust investigations into Amazon.com Inc, Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc and Apple Inc. Reuters and other news outlets reported this month the agencies were gearing up to investigate whether the companies misuse their market power. The senators led by Senator Amy Klobuchar, a presidential candidate, said in the letters to FTC Chairman Joe Simons and Justice Department antitrust chief Makan Delrahim that "given the silence of the FTC and the Justice Department, the truth is that we still do not know if these investigations have actually been initiated and neither do the American people." The FTC declined to comment on the letter, while the Justice Department did not immediately comment on Friday. The letters were also signed by Patrick Leahy, Richard Blumenthal, Tammy Baldwin, Edward Markey, Tina Smith and Cory Booker - another presidential candidate - who said they were encouraged by the media reports of investigations "but also somewhat troubled that such inquiries were not already well underway." The senators noted that both agencies typically refrain from commenting on investigations that are not public "but these circumstances are far from typical. The significant public interest in and allegations surrounding the business conduct of Big Tech and the leaks concerning the clearance process relating to potential investigations of Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google have made these matters highly unusual." Reuters reported this month that the Justice Department and FTC met in recent weeks and agreed to give the Justice Department the jurisdiction to undertake potential antitrust probes of Apple and Google, while the FTC was given jurisdiction to look at Amazon and Facebook.

US Senate Democrats ask for details on antitrust probes into Big Tech

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/mark-zuckerbergs-deepfake-video-posted-on-instagram-226388">Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg</a> did not knowingly violate an agreement with the regulator supervising the company's management of users' personal data, the social media giant said Wednesday as it addressed an issue that has been under federal investigation for the past year.

Facebook was required to provide the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with emails, some from 2012, suggesting that Zuckerberg was personally aware of but neglected to address the fact that external applications had access to massive amounts of personal data without Facebook users' knowledge, the Wall Street Journal reported.

The newspaper added that it did not have access to the documents but that anonymous sources had described their contents.

"We have fully cooperated with the FTC's investigation to date and provided tens of thousands of documents, emails and files," said a Facebook spokesperson.

"At no point did Mark or any other Facebook employee knowingly violate the company's obligations under the FTC consent order nor do any emails exist that indicate they did."

The FTC reopened investigations into whether Facebook violated a 2011 settlement with the regulator on protecting user data following revelations last year that personal data from tens of millions of users was hijacked by the political consultancy Cambridge Analytica as it worked on Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

The 2011 court-approved agreement required Facebook to notify users when it shares data with third parties and bars the social network from deceptive practices.

The investigation could result in a record fine running into billions of dollars.

Despite the controversies, some 2.7 billion people use at least one of the "family" of the company's applications, including the core Facebook network, Instagram, and messaging applications WhatsApp and Messenger.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg did not knowingly violate an agreement with the regulator supervising the company's management of users' personal data, the social media giant said Wednesday as it addressed an issue that has been under federal investigation for the past year.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg did not knowingly violate an agreement with the regulator supervising the company's management of users' personal data, the social media giant said Wednesday as it addressed an issue that has been under federal investigation for the past year. Facebook was required to provide the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with emails, some from 2012, suggesting that Zuckerberg was personally aware of but neglected to address the fact that external applications had access to massive amounts of personal data without Facebook users' knowledge, the Wall Street Journal reported. The newspaper added that it did not have access to the documents but that anonymous sources had described their contents. "We have fully cooperated with the FTC's investigation to date and provided tens of thousands of documents, emails and files," said a Facebook spokesperson. "At no point did Mark or any other Facebook employee knowingly violate the company's obligations under the FTC consent order nor do any emails exist that indicate they did." The FTC reopened investigations into whether Facebook violated a 2011 settlement with the regulator on protecting user data following revelations last year that personal data from tens of millions of users was hijacked by the political consultancy Cambridge Analytica as it worked on Donald Trump's presidential campaign. The 2011 court-approved agreement required Facebook to notify users when it shares data with third parties and bars the social network from deceptive practices. The investigation could result in a record fine running into billions of dollars. Despite the controversies, some 2.7 billion people use at least one of the "family" of the company's applications, including the core Facebook network, Instagram, and messaging applications WhatsApp and Messenger.

Facebook says CEO did not ignore personal data issues

The US Department of Justice is preparing an antitrust investigation of Internet titan <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/google-facebook-twitter-rapped-for-not-doing-enough-in-european-union-fake-news-fight-219412">Google</a>, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

The Journal cited unnamed sources close to the matter as saying the department would look into Google practices related to web search and other businesses.

Justice Department officials share antitrust oversight with the Federal Trade Commission, which conducted a wide-ranging investigation of its own into Alphabet-owned Google that ended in 2013 with no action taken.

Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A new investigation would come as backlash grows against major tech companies that dominate key segments of the online economy.

Democratic presidential candidate <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/elizabeth-warren-builds-largest-united-states-presidential-campaign-staff-210823">Elizabeth Warren</a> has argued that big firms such as Facebook, Google and Apple should be broken up through antitrust enforcement.

Alphabet's profit in the first three months of this year sagged under the weight of a hefty antitrust fine in the European Union.

Alphabet said profit in the first quarter fell 29 per cent to $6.7 billion on revenue that climbed 17 per cent to $36.3 billion.

The earnings took a hit from a European Commission fine that amounted to $1.7 billion at the end of March, according to the quarterly update.

Google's lucrative advertising platform remained the largest revenue driver for Alphabet, delivering more than $30 billion in revenue, but costs rose sharply as well.

But Google continues to face pressure around the world from regulators, notably in Europe amid multiple investigations over alleged abuse of its dominance in internet search, advertising and its mobile system.

Watch: Google introduced two new privacy features

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/google-introduced-two-new-privacy-features-217180/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The latest fine imposed by Brussels cited Google's AdSense advertising service, saying it illegally restricted client websites from displaying messages from ad service rivals.

Google is separately working to satisfy EU regulators investigating its hugely popular Android devices following a $5 billion fine last year.

Google earlier this year said it would offer smartphone users five browsers and search engines as part of the company's effort to meet EU competition concerns.

Brussels accused Google of using the Android system's dominance of smartphones and tablets to promote the use of its own Google search engine and Chrome browser and shut out rivals.

In the United States, Google has been a target of President Donald Trump and his allies who have accused the search giant of "bias" and silencing conservative voices, claims denied by the Silicon Valley firm.

The US Department of Justice is preparing an antitrust investigation of Internet titan Google, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday. The Journal cited unnamed sources close to the matter as saying the department would look into Google practices related to web search and other businesses.

The US Department of Justice is preparing an antitrust investigation of Internet titan Google, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday. The Journal cited unnamed sources close to the matter as saying the department would look into Google practices related to web search and other businesses. Justice Department officials share antitrust oversight with the Federal Trade Commission, which conducted a wide-ranging investigation of its own into Alphabet-owned Google that ended in 2013 with no action taken. Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A new investigation would come as backlash grows against major tech companies that dominate key segments of the online economy. Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren has argued that big firms such as Facebook, Google and Apple should be broken up through antitrust enforcement. Alphabet's profit in the first three months of this year sagged under the weight of a hefty antitrust fine in the European Union. Alphabet said profit in the first quarter fell 29 per cent to $6.7 billion on revenue that climbed 17 per cent to $36.3 billion. The earnings took a hit from a European Commission fine that amounted to $1.7 billion at the end of March, according to the quarterly update. Google's lucrative advertising platform remained the largest revenue driver for Alphabet, delivering more than $30 billion in revenue, but costs rose sharply as well. But Google continues to face pressure around the world from regulators, notably in Europe amid multiple investigations over alleged abuse of its dominance in internet search, advertising and its mobile system. Watch: Google introduced two new privacy features × The latest fine imposed by Brussels cited Google's AdSense advertising service, saying it illegally restricted client websites from displaying messages from ad service rivals. Google is separately working to satisfy EU regulators investigating its hugely popular Android devices following a $5 billion fine last year. Google earlier this year said it would offer smartphone users five browsers and search engines as part of the company's effort to meet EU competition concerns. Brussels accused Google of using the Android system's dominance of smartphones and tablets to promote the use of its own Google search engine and Chrome browser and shut out rivals. In the United States, Google has been a target of President Donald Trump and his allies who have accused the search giant of "bias" and silencing conservative voices, claims denied by the Silicon Valley firm.

US preparing antitrust probe of Google: Report