[{"titre":"“Who Dunnit?” Part 2: Persons & Machines Under UPL Laws","pubDate":"Sat, 31 Oct 2026 07:56:19 +0100","id":3254674,"description":"The globe-trotting Law via the Internet Conference returned to Canada on October 13 and 14 in Montreal. It was just in time for CanLII’s 25th anniversary , convened under the theme of Trusted Past, Open Future to share developments and trends in the delivery of legal information across the world. On day one, University of Ottawa law professor Amy Salyzyn updated us on her research inventorying direct-to-public digital legal tools in Canada. The inventory is not new (it started in 2016, with updates in 2019, 2021, and 2023)—but it has certainly grown. In 2023, 118 tools were cataloged (you can . . . [more] The post “Who Dunnit?” Part 2: Persons & Machines Under UPL Laws appeared first on Slaw","source":"Slaw","url":"https://www.slaw.ca/2026/10/30/who-dunnit-part-2-persons-machines-under-upl-laws/"},{"id":3248553,"pubDate":"Thu, 29 Oct 2026 07:58:22 +0100","titre":"France: three overlapping woes are fuelling a generation of discontent","description":"KEY TAKEAWAYS The French high schooler-led uprising is not a sign of a generational struggle pitting the young against baby boomers. The uprisings indicate a state of discontentment reflecting three grievances: failings within the education system, eco-anxiety and concerns over employment in the age of AI. Far from demanding a break with the established order, young protesters are simply asking for the right to live a good and fair life... like their predecessors before them. Rarely has Freud’s Civilization and Its Discontents seemed so relevant to the times in which we are living. Although the discontents we are currently witnessing do not necessarily affect society as a whole, they are certainly impacting an entire generation born in the 21st century, as well as their parents and their social environment. Admittedly, we know that generations are not homogeneous and that any attempt to generalise is an oversimplification. Nevertheless, the high schoolers that are taking to the streets to protest in this day and age belong to a relatively homogeneous age cohort. You would be forgiven for thinking that the current unrest is the result of a clash of generations. From the outside, it is often viewed as a generational tug of war between a struggling young population and the rest: an aging but relatively prosperous Europe . Criticism is, without doubt, being directed at “baby-boomers” or those born during the thirty years following World War II (which were marked by economic prosperity and low unemployment, conditions that now seem a world away today). The problem lies elsewhere Nevertheless, this is not a generational conflict, and the fact that a substantial proportion of parents , as well as the majority of the population , share the students’ demands shows that the problem lies elsewhere. These demands are nothing new, and they help explain why many parents joined their children during the first demonstrations, along with teachers, to show their support over deteriorating conditions in high schools. The students and their initial demands were hijacked by more politically radical movements, some even revolutionary or anarchist, as well as opportunistic groups that took advantage of the disorder to loot shops and businesses, without any tangible political agenda. According to an official report dated October 14, 2026, “937 law enforcement officers, 248 students and 149 members of educational staff have been injured since the beginning of the high school student movement.” The demonstrations on October 18 resulted in more than 1,800 arrests . The proliferation of various groups with overlapping demands muddles the student movements’ original message, leaving us with little more than the smouldering remnants of a battlefield. Nevertheless, it is the central concerns of these students that I wish to explore here. Ultimately, this movement appears to lie at the intersection of several anxiety-inducing issues. Rather than speaking of a convergence of struggles, we should speak of a convergence of anxieties. Three sources of anxiety The movement appears to reflect the convergence of three factors that are also sources of concern: the perceived deterioration of public education ecological anxiety the new difficulties young people face in the labour market, particularly those associated with the development of artificial intelligence (AI). These three factors provide fertile ground for psychosocial anxiety. The high school students’ main demands appear legitimate and concern improving working conditions: replacing absent teachers, shortening excessively long school days, reducing the number of students per class, repairing and maintaining infrastructure, and improving or abolishing Parcoursup , the widely criticised higher education admissions platform that is often difficult to understand. These demands echo the broader perception that conditions in the French school system have deteriorated and that the system is relatively inefficient compared with those of neighbouring countries.","url":"https://theconversation.com/france-three-overlapping-woes-are-fuelling-a-generation-of-discontent-295102","source":"The Conversation – Articles (FR)"},{"source":"Slaw","url":"https://www.slaw.ca/2026/10/28/the-invisible-law-library-making-legal-information-visible-through-outreach/","description":"This submission is part of a column swap with the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) bimonthly member magazine, AALL Spectrum . Published six times a year, AALL Spectrum is designed to further professional development and education within the legal information industry. Slaw and the AALL Spectrum board have agreed to hand-select several columns each year as part of this exchange. Maria spent three weeks searching Google for divorce forms. She reworked an old petition a relative had filed 15 years ago and later paid for updated forms online that were actually available for free elsewhere. By the time she . . . [more] The post The Invisible Law Library: Making Legal Information Visible Through Outreach appeared first on Slaw","titre":"The Invisible Law Library: Making Legal Information Visible Through Outreach","id":3246890,"pubDate":"Wed, 28 Oct 2026 13:54:22 +0100"},{"url":"https://www.callacbd.ca/CALL-Blog/13645841","source":"Canadian Association of Law Libraries / L'Association canadienne des bibliothèques de droit CALL/ACBD Blog","pubDate":"Mon, 26 Oct 2026 07:55:57 +0100","id":3241547,"titre":"New International Opportunity for Law Librarians / Nouvelle initiative internationale pour les bibliothécaires de droit","description":"Le texte français suit. The Professional Development Committees of the British and Irish Association of Law Librarians (BIALL) and the Canadian Association of Law Libraries (CALL/ACBD) are delighted to announce a new exciting initiative coming soon – the International Law Librarian Pen Pal Programme. This informal programme aims to support professional development by connecting law librarians from BIALL and CALL who are interested in sharing experiences, perspectives, and ideas across jurisdictions. Participants will be paired with a law librarian from the partner organisation and invited to connect once a month, primarily by email. Those who prefer may also choose to meet online. Each month, the Professional Development Committees will suggest a discussion topic to help structure conversations, while leaving participants free to explore related areas of shared interest. The programme is intended to: Encourage international peer-to-peer learning Foster professional connections between law librarians in the UK, Ireland, and Canada Provide a relaxed space to discuss current challenges and opportunities in law librarianship The time commitment is intentionally flexible, and the scheme is suitable for librarians at all career stages. Further details, including registration, pairing arrangements, and the first discussion theme, will be shared once the programme begins. Les comités de perfectionnement professionnel de la British and Irish Association of Law Librarians (BIALL) et de l’Association canadienne des bibliothèques de droit (CALL/ACBD) sont ravis d’annoncer le lancement imminent d’une nouvelle initiative très intéressante : le programme international de correspondance entre bibliothécaires de droit (International Law Librarian Pen Pal Programme). Ce programme informel vise à soutenir le perfectionnement professionnel en mettant en relation des bibliothécaires de droit de la BIALL et de la CALL/ACBD souhaitant partager leurs expériences, leurs points de vue et leurs idées avec des collègues d’autres pays. Chaque participant.e sera jumelé.e avec un.e bibliothécaire de droit de l’organisation partenaire et invité.e à échanger une fois par mois, principalement par courriel. Les personnes pourront également choisir d’échanger en ligne si elles le souhaitent. Tous les mois, les comités de perfectionnement professionnel proposeront un thème de discussion afin d’orienter les conversations, tout en laissant aux participant.e.s la liberté d’explorer des sujets connexes suscitant un intérêt commun. Le programme vise à : Favoriser l’apprentissage entre pairs à l’échelle internationale ; Renforcer les liens professionnels entre les bibliothécaires de droit au Royaume-Uni, en Irlande et au Canada ; Offrir un espace décontracté pour échanger sur les défis et les débouchés actuels dans le domaine de la bibliothéconomie juridique. Le temps à consacrer à ce programme est très flexible, et l’initiative s’adresse aux bibliothécaires d’horizons professionnels variés. De plus amples renseignements, notamment sur l’inscription, les modalités de jumelage et le thème de la première discussion, seront communiqués dès le lancement du"},{"url":"https://www.callacbd.ca/CALL-Blog/12098999","source":"Canadian Association of Law Libraries / L'Association canadienne des bibliothèques de droit CALL/ACBD Blog","id":3241454,"pubDate":"Mon, 26 Oct 2026 07:55:47 +0100","titre":"Adapting the SALI Legal Taxonomy to the Canadian Environment","description":"From time to time, this blog will highlight initiatives, ideas, or activities coming from members, committees or special interest groups (SIGs). Today: Adapting the SALI Taxonomy to the Canadian Legal Environment , b y Michael McAlpine , Manager, Information, Research & Knowledge at Siskinds (London, Ontario) On September 28 th , the Knowledge Management Special Interest Group of CALL met to discuss and learn about the Legal Matter Specification Standard developed by the SALI Alliance . The SALI Alliance (Standards Advancement for the Legal Industry) is a non-profit organization open to all stakeholders in the legal community. Members include law firms, companies, legal service providers, legal industry associations and academic institutions. Founding sponsors are the Legal Marketing Association (LMA) and the Association of Legal Administrators (ALA). Guest speaker Jim Hannigan spoke about the history of the taxonomy and the current uses of it in the legal industry. Michael McAlpine then discussed the work done by the SALI Canadian Working Group to adapt the taxonomy to the Canadian legal environment . There was a general discussion about the uses of the taxonomy and efforts to implement it in law firms. First released in 2019, the SALI taxonomy was developed in order to provide a standard method for describing legal matters and associated documents. Version 2.0 was released at the end of 2020 and represented a significant expansion of the code set. Organizations and individuals around the globe continue to contribute to its development and growth. The SALI taxonomy is extensible and can work in conjunction with other standards (eg, NAICS, UTBMS codes). SALI is an open, free and party neutral that can be used by law firms, vendors and others in the legal industry to ensure matters and documents are described consistently. SALI has been endorsed by several large law firms and by vendors such as Fastcase, NetDocuments and Reynen Court. Some of the core attributes of the current standard are: Area of Law: Each matter can be assigned a primary and secondary area of law. Primary areas include topics such as Corporate Law, Constitutional and Human Rights, Personal and Family Law, and Food and Drug Law. Secondary areas are more specific and include topics such as Corporate Governance, Accident Benefits Law, and Labour Law. Service: The Services attribute is a central feature of the taxonomy. Examples of services are Transaction, Advisory, or Dispute. Services provide more detail to a matter description than just relying solely on Area of Law. Player Role: The Role attribute is what makes SALI party neutral. Roles include Appellant, Respondent, Acquiror or Acquiree. Other attributes that can be used to describe a matter or client include Industry, Legal Entity, Location, or Trial Type. The KM SIG will next meet on November 30 th to discuss website monitoring applications. If you would like an invitation, please contact Michael"},{"description":"FTC wants your feedback about proposed Made in USA Rule lfair June 22, 2020 | 4:04PM FTC wants your feedback about proposed Made in USA Rule By Lesley Fair If your clients are interested in Made in USA issues – and you know they are – there are two developments at the FTC they need to know about. First, the FTC just announced a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for a Made in USA Labeling Rule . You’ll want to read the notice in detail, but the proposed Rule would apply to labels on products that make unqualified Made in USA claims. (In FTC parlance, an “unqualified” claim is a broad representation made without limitations.) The proposed Rule would incorporate established guidance already set forth in FTC decisions and orders and in the agency’s 1997 Enforcement Policy Statement on U.S. Origin Claims . Consistent with that guidance, the proposed Rule would prohibit marketers from making unqualified MUSA claims on labels unless: Final assembly or processing of the product occurs in the United States; All significant processing that goes into the product occurs in the United States; and All or virtually all ingredients or components of the product are made and sourced in the United States. The proposed Rule wouldn’t change or affect any other existing federal or state law or regulation relating to country-of-origin labels, but it suggests one notable modification: The proposed Rule would allow the FTC to seek civil penalties for violations. Once the proposed Rule is published in the Federal Register, we invite you to file a public comment either online or on paper. (Thanks for following the instructions for submitting comments included in the notice of proposed rulemaking.) Development #2 is that the FTC just issued a staff report on last fall’s Made in USA workshop convened to consider consumer perception of Made in USA claims and to discuss the agency’s Made in USA enforcement program. Dive into the report for the details, but according to the one panelist who provided survey evidence on how consumers understand Made in USA claims, a 2013 study suggests that almost 3 in 5 Americans agree that “Made in America” means that all parts of a product, including any natural resources it contains, originated in the United States. According to that same study, one third of consumers believe that 100% of a product must originate in a country for it to be called “made” in that country. The report cites those statistics in support of long-standing guidance in the FTC’s Enforcement Policy Statement on U.S. Origin Claims that at least a significant minority of consumers are likely to be deceived by an unqualified Made in USA claim for a product incorporating more than a trivial amount of foreign content.","pubDate":"Mon, 05 Oct 2026 08:07:08 +0200","id":3197412,"titre":"FTC wants your feedback about proposed Made in USA Rule","url":"https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog/2020/06/ftc-wants-your-feedback-about-proposed-made-usa-rule","source":"FTC USA Business Blog Posts"},{"description":"Governor Newsom has signed California's AB 2244 , which creates the country's first voluntary non-ultraprocessed food certification program. By June 1, 2029, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) must develop a system to accredit independent certification agents that can certify food products as “Non-Ultraprocessed Certified.” The “Non-Ultraprocessed Certified” seal (proposed previously to be “California Certified”) may only be used for foods that do not qualify as an ultraprocessed food (UPF), UPF of concern, or a restricted food, as defined by California's UPF standards introduced in 2025. The program will allow certified products to display the seal on their packaging and will require manufacturers to recertify their products every three years. CDPH must create and maintain a public database of these certified products. Under the law, retailers with more than 25 individual non-UPF-certified product types and who generate more than $10 million in sales annually will be required to prominently display products with the seal. Earlier versions of the bill included tighter mandates for how these products are displayed and promoted, but these were removed from the final version. Governor Newsom signed AB 2244 along with other legislation that promote a “holistic healthcare strategy,” including AB 2030 (prohibiting the sale of over-the-counter diet pills or dietary supplements for weight loss or muscle building to persons under 18) and SB 869 (requiring disclosures on restaurant menus for high added sugar content). Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor and report on developments in food-related","titre":"Governor Newsom Signs Bill for Non-UPF Certification Program","id":3192489,"pubDate":"Fri, 02 Oct 2026 08:01:24 +0200","source":"The Daily Intake","url":"https://www.dailyintakeblog.com/2026/10/governor-newsom-signs-bill-for-non-upf-certification-program/"},{"url":"https://hal.science/hal-05733006v1","source":"Annuaire français de droit international","description":"The Framework Convention on AI builds on international human rights law to establish a legal instrument aimed at ensuring respect for fundamental rights and principles recognised by States in the context of the development and use of AI. It is therefore in line with international and European ethical frameworks on AI. At the same time, it is a unique text, the first multilateral treaty applicable to activities within the AI lifecycle. This raises questions about its contribution to the contemporary co-construction of global AI governance. To this end, this contribution offers a systematic and contextual legal analysis of the main provisions of the text, examining first the holistic scope of the Framework Convention on AI and secondly its high-level normative substance. The analysis shows that the Convention is the result of a global political compromise, which makes it a text with modest and uncertain legal scope, especially with regard to persons affected by AI. At the same time, the legal methodology it adopts, which is based on transnational normative interoperability rather than legal harmonisation, offers an interesting prospect for ‘soft’ global legal coherence in the protection of human rights, democracy and the rule of law in AI context. In particular, it could help to standardise at the international level the principle of risk and impact management of AI on fundamental rights and","pubDate":"Thu, 01 Oct 2026 08:21:30 +0200","id":3189681,"titre":"[hal-05733006] The Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law: a unique tool for cross-border regulatory interoperability"},{"url":"https://hal.science/hal-05678079v1","source":"revue JDSAM","id":3005970,"pubDate":"Sat, 04 Jul 2026 07:41:47 +0200","titre":"[hal-05678079] Introduction to Special End-of-Life Issue: ‘Reflecting on the need for an interdisciplinary, collaborative approach to bettering end-of-life care and research’","description":"Advances in medical technology as well as changing individual and societal perceptions of death and dying mean that death, as an event, and dying, as a process, have fundamentally changed. In addition, we know that the process of dying and death, at least in a healthcare context, is different based on where it happens, to whom it happens, and why it happens. We know that the process remains heavily medicalised, with calls to understand dying and death more relationally, culturally, socially, and philosophically. There is a great benefit in disciplines working together to promote cross-jurisdictional perspectives and methodologies, and to prioritise interdisciplinary thinking and research on end-of-life issues, for the benefit of society, the individual, healthcare professionals, and healthcare itself. Our contribution to this special issue on end-of-life for the Journal de Droit de la Santé et de l’Assurance Maladie serves a small part in this bigger goal for an interdisciplinary approach to end-of-life discourse and research. It brings together perspectives from 9 jurisdictions, from 17 academics from the disciplines of law, medicine, philosophy, criminology, sociology, to contribute to one very important end-of-life choice: assisted dying and assisted death. A ‘good-quality death’ depends on our relationships, achievements, values and the meaning we create. A good-quality death is not necessarily one without sadness or loss. Rather, it is a death marked by dignity, minimal suffering, and respect for personal autonomy. Good, quality end-of-life care and death need a deeper theoretical foundation, including consideration on concepts such as life cycles, changing relationships between the living and the dead, new technologies and new ways of dealing with the body and death, and cultural attitudes to death and dying. The contributions in this issue are based on a workshop that was hosted by the Brocher Fondation in January 2025 in Geneva, Switzerland led by the two of us. Following our Brocher-sponsored workshop, and having discussed the idea as early as the summer of 2022 (when we first met), we decided to establish the European End-of-Life Research Network (EuEOLNet), a Network that brings together scholars from across Europe to exchange on end-of-life. Specifically on the matter of assisted dying and assisted death, an increase in regulation of this end-of-life choice can be noted globally, including in Europe. Regulated access to a form of assisted death in Europe is, at the time of writing, available in Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Portugal, Spain and Slovenia. In practically all jurisdictions, it is a form of medical-assisted dying. Discussion is underway in many jurisdictions, including France, Germany, Italy, England and Wales, Scotland, the Isle of Man and Jersey, the Czech Republic. With this special issue, we aim to share the latest developments on assisted dying regulation in some selected jurisdictions and comment on its key regulatory features and"},{"description":"Officials in Florida are urging a federal judge to dismiss UPSIDE Food's (UPSIDE) constitutional challenge to the state's cultivated meat ban, SB 1084 , arguing that the company's claim is vague and unsubstantiated. UPSIDE claims that the ban was enacted for discriminatory purposes in violation of the Dormant Commer Clause. The company's complaint cites to public comments made by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Florida Ag Commissioner Wilton Simpson that claimed the out-of-state cultivated meat industry threatens Florida's in-state conventional meat and agricultural industries. UPSIDE argues that these comments demonstrate Florida's sole intent in enacting the ban was to protect the state's cattle industry. While the court previously denied UPSIDE's motion for a preliminary injunction and rejected its claim that the Poultry Products Inspection Act preempted the law, as we reported last year , it allowed the company to proceed with its constitutional challenges to the law. Florida's SB 1084, the nation's first state-wide cultivated meat ban, was enacted in May 2024. The law defines cultivated meat as “any meat or food product produced from cultured animal cells” and makes it unlawful for any manufacturer to sell, hold, or distribute cultivated meat in Florida. UPSIDE received federal approval from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to sell a cultivated chicken product in 2022. Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor and relay developments in this","titre":"Florida Officials Urge Federal Judge to Dismiss Constitutional Challenge to Cultivated-Meat Ban","id":3004078,"pubDate":"Fri, 03 Jul 2026 07:58:41 +0200","source":"The Daily Intake","url":"https://www.dailyintakeblog.com/2026/07/florida-officials-urge-federal-judge-to-dismiss-constitutional-challenge-to-cultivated-meat-ban/"},{"description":"The Federal Trade Commission will co-host a workshop on May 14-15, 2026, with George Mason University Law School’s Institute for Consumer Financial Choice (ICFC) focusing on developments in the financial services marketplace in the five years since the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Taskforce on Federal Consumer Financial Law. The event’s first day, which will be led by the FTC, will feature opening remarks   from Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, as well as ICFC Co-Directors   Todd Zywicki and Tom Miller.   It will also include two panel discussions focused on innovations in the financial services marketplace and on the implications for consumers, businesses, and regulators of new products and tech applications. The second day, led by the ICFC, will feature three panel discussions focused on the findings of a report from the Taskforce on Federal Consumer Financial Law. The event is free and open to the public and will take place in person at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School at  3301 Fairfax Drive Arlington, Va. 22201 .  Registration is required to attend in person. The event will also be livestreamed: May 14 livestream May 15","titre":"FTC to Co-Host Workshop on Financial Services with Institute for Consumer Financial Choice on May 14-15","pubDate":"Fri, 08 May 2026 08:06:06 +0200","id":2872878,"source":"Federal Trade Commission - Protecting America's Consumers","url":"https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/05/ftc-co-host-workshop-financial-services-institute-consumer-financial-choice-may-14-15"},{"titre":"EDPB conference on cross-regulatory cooperation: what we learned","pubDate":"Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:08:47 +0100","id":2780286,"description":"Brussels, 23 March - On 17 March 2026, the EDPB conference “Cross-regulatory interplay and cooperation in the EU: a data protection perspective” took place in Brussels. The event showcased high-level discussions, featuring contributions from representatives of key EU institutions, European Data Protection Authorities, academia and industry.  Key takeaways from the panel discussions Throughout the day, three panels were held, focusing on 1) data protection and competition , 2) the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the GDPR , and 3) the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the GDPR .  During the first panel , speakers emphasised the critical need for cooperation between regulatory bodies in the fields of data protection and competition and shared views on what regulators in the two fields can learn from each other, especially in the aftermath of the Bundeskartellamt ruling. A speaker emphasized that regulators should align their approaches and recognize synergies between the two fields, such as protecting consumers and data subjects. Others pointed out that fixing harm to end users does not always solve competition issues, and that data protection should be considered in competition analysis only when relevant, on a case-by-case basis. Panellists also highlighted the need to cooperate not just on individual cases, but on broader concepts and legal principles.  In this context, the EDPB has recently agreed to develop joint guidelines with the European Commission to address the interplay between competition law and data protection. The discussions in the second panel centred on the joint guidelines on the DMA and the GDPR , which were developed by the European Commission and the EDPB and recently underwent public consultation. The joint guidelines are an unprecedented work and a good example of regulatory cooperation paving the way for further examples ahead, in line with the  EDPB Strategy 2024-2027 and  Helsinki Statement ’s objectives to strengthen cross-regulatory cooperation. A crucial goal of the guidelines is the development of a coherent and compatible interpretation of the DMA and the GDPR while respecting the regulatory competences. It was emphasised that these guidelines help break silos, strengthen consistency, and provide further clarity and legal certainty. All of this contributes to easier compliance, which is valued by stakeholders and increases trust. At the same time, certain speakers suggested improvements to the final version of the guidelines, bearing in mind the DMA should not be given primacy over the GDPR and that the measures companies have to comply with should be proportionate.  Other examples of cooperation in this domain were also mentioned, such as the participation in the High Level Group for the Digital Markets Act and specific instances of cooperation on concrete cases.  The last panel of the day explored how the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the GDPR interact. Panellists provided the example of the protection of minors: age   verification should be effective yet fully in line with data protection legislation.  They highlighted the growing need for strong coordination between the two frameworks, including the role of the European Board for Digital Services and other ways for the Commission and the EDPB to work together. A speaker also underlined the challenges and ongoing work on cross-regulatory cooperation from the perspective of a national authority. Another speaker urged regulators to work on building a fully coherent interpretation of the two frameworks and more globally of the digital legislation. Panellists also stressed that emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence are reshaping online ecosystems and, as a result, the role of the DSA and the GDPR.  The panel concluded with a clear message: online safety under the DSA and the lawful processing of personal data are two sides of the same coin, both calling for the DSA and the GDPR to be read coherently.  Highlights from the keynote speeches The event also","source":"EDPB News","url":"https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2026/edpb-conference-cross-regulatory-cooperation-what-we-learned_en"},{"description":"The Federal Trade Commission today moved to block medical device supplier Edwards Lifesciences Corp.’s (Edwards) proposed acquisition of JenaValve Technology, Inc. (JenaValve) due to concerns that the acquisition would limit patient access to lifesaving medical devices used to treat a potentially fatal heart condition. The FTC alleges that over the span of two days in July 2024, Edwards executed agreements to acquire both JenaValve and JC Medical, the two leading companies competing to bring to market transcatheter aortic valve replacement devices that treat a heart condition called aortic regurgitation (TAVR-AR devices). Edwards closed its acquisition of JC Medical in August 2024, and its proposed $945 million acquisition of JenaValve would combine the only two companies with ongoing clinical trials in the United States for a TAVR-AR device. The deal threatens to reduce competition in the TAVR-AR market, likely resulting in reduced innovation, diminished product quality, and potentially increased prices for consumers, according to the complaint. “ Edwards’ attempt to buy the U.S. market for TAVR-AR devices would eliminate the head-to-head competition that has spurred innovation for lifesaving artificial heart valves,” said Daniel Guarnera, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. “The FTC is taking action to stop this anticompetitive deal and ensure that JenaValve and Edwards’ JC Medical subsidiary continue competing to innovate, expand treatment eligibility, and keep down costs. Americans deserve all the benefits that come from competition between medical device makers, just as they do in other markets.” More than 8 million Americans suffer from aortic regurgitation, which occurs when the heart’s aortic valve does not close properly, causing blood to backflow into the heart. Currently, surgical valve replacement via open heart surgery is the only U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved procedure to treat aortic regurgitation, and TAVR-AR devices offer a new and less invasive way to treat the condition. JenaValve is poised to become the first company to bring a TAVR-AR device, called Trilogy, to the commercial market in the United States. If Edwards acquires JenaValve, Edwards would gain control over the two most advanced TAVR-AR devices, the FTC complaint alleges. FDA approval or commercialization of any other TAVR-AR device in the United States by another company, aside from Edwards and JenaValve, is not expected for the foreseeable future. Direct head-to-head competition between Edwards, through its now-subsidiary JC Medical, and JenaValve has driven the two companies to accelerate the development of their TAVR-AR devices, the FTC’s complaint alleges. Ultimately, patients will benefit if JenaValve and Edwards continue to directly compete to complete their separate TAVR-AR device clinical trials, product improvements, and commercialization plans. The competition concerns caused by Edwards’ dual acquisition strategy are predicated on Edwards owning both JenaValve and JC Medical simultaneously, but Edwards has elected to attempt to buy JenaValve while retaining its ownership of JC Medical. Edwards has not been willing to engage on divesting JC Medical to resolve the competition concerns with the proposed JenaValve acquisition, according to the complaint. The Commission vote to issue an administrative complaint and authorize staff to seek a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction was 3-0. The federal court complaint and request for preliminary relief was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to halt the transaction pending an administrative proceeding. NOTE : The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The issuance of the administrative complaint marks the beginning of a proceeding in which the allegations will be tried in a formal","titre":"FTC Challenges Anticompetitive Medical Device Deal","id":2298968,"pubDate":"Thu, 07 Aug 2025 09:48:21 +0200","source":"Federal Trade Commission Concurrence communiqués","url":"https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/08/ftc-challenges-anticompetitive-medical-device-deal"},{"description":"Brussels, 06 May - During its latest plenary, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) adopted an opinion on the European Commission’s draft adequacy decision under the GDPR concerning the European Patent Organisation (EPO) . In addition, the Board adopted an opinion on the European Commission’s proposal to extend the validity of the UK adequacy decisions under the GDPR and the Law Enforcement Directive (LED) . Finally, the EDPB agreed to grant the status of observer to the Personal Data Protection Agency of Bosnia and Herzegovina.   Adequate protection of personal data by the EPO At the European Commission’s request, the Board adopted an opinion on the Commission’s draft adequacy decision regarding the European Patent Organisation (EPO). Once formally adopted by the Commission, this will be the first adequacy decision concerning an international organisation and not a country or a region. An adequacy decision is a key-mechanism in EU data protection legislation which allows the European Commission to determine whether a third country or an international organisation offers an adequate level of data protection. The effect of such a decision is that personal data can flow freely from Europe to that third country or international organisation. EDPB Chair, Anu Talus, said: “The EDPB welcomes the Commission’s initiative to work on the first adequacy decision concerning an international organisation. This decision shows how the legal framework of such organisations can be recognised as ensuring an adequate level of protection on the basis of Art.45 GDPR. The EDPB underlines the importance of ongoing dialogue between the Commission and international organisations, with a view to developing this category of adequacy decisions in addition to those relating to third countries.” In its opinion, the Board positively notes that the EPO data protection framework is largely aligned with the European Union data protection framework, including on data protection rights and principles. This shows that the GDPR and, in particular, its transfer provisions, can facilitate safe data flows from Europe to international organisations, while taking into account their status.   Six-month extension of the UK adequacy decisions The EDPB opinion, requested by the European Commission, addresses the proposed extension of the two UK adequacy decisions under the GDPR and the LED, which are set to expire on 27 June 2025. The opinion only concerns the proposed 6-month extension of these adequacy decisions and does not address the level of protection for personal data afforded in the UK, which will be examined by the EDPB following the Commission’s assessment, and if the renewal of the UK adequacy decisions is proposed. Since the UK‘s data protection reform is still pending in the UK parliament, the EDPB recognises the need for a technical and time-limited extension of the adequacy decisions until 27 December 2025.This will give the European Commission sufficient time to evaluate the updated UK legal framework once it has been adopted.   The EDPB stresses that this extension is exceptional and is due to the ongoing legislative developments in the UK. It should not, in principle, be further prolonged. The Board recalls the validity of its opinions 14/2021 and 15/2021 on the two UK adequacy decisions, adopted in April 2021, and invites the European Commission to take them into account in its future assessments.  The Board also recalls the Commission’s obligation to monitor all relevant developments in the UK during the extension period.   New observer to the EDPB’s activities Finally, EDPB members agreed to grant observer status to the EDPB’s activities to the Bosnia and Herzegovina Data Protection Authority, in line with Art. 8 EDPB Rules of Procedure .","titre":"European Patent Organisation and extension of adequacy decisions for the UK: EDPB adopts opinions","pubDate":"Tue, 06 May 2025 15:51:59 +0200","id":2099053,"source":"EDPB News","url":"https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2025/european-patent-organisation-and-extension-adequacy-decisions-uk-edpb-adopts_en"},{"titre":"Constructing AI Speech","pubDate":"Mon, 24 Jun 2024 18:07:18 +0200","id":1414524,"description":"This Essay advocates for a “legal construction of technology” approach to AI speech, challenging the notion that technology disrupts law and emphasizing how law shapes technology based on societal value. Applying the method to four different legal constructions of AI, the authors examine AI within First Amendment jurisprudence, content moderation, risk regulation, and consumer protection, highlighting the proactive role of legal actors in aligning AI development with democratic values and","source":"Yale Law Journal","url":"http://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/constructing-ai-speech"}]