Insights

In our previous client alert, we addressed how algorithms and platform features that rely on user generated speech might not receive Section 230 protections because those features may not be considered platform user content.  In these instances, the platform might not carry user generated water through the pipe, but adds its own to the mixture.  At the same time, if it is true that there is less Section 230 protection, these same elements should then imbue the content with First Amendment protections as the expressive content of the platform.

On August 19, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a proposed Enforcement Policy Statement on personalized pricing — the practice of companies using consumers’ personal data to set individualized prices, discounts, coupons, or other incentives. The proposed statement, which is open for public comment for 30 days following publication in the Federal Register, marks a major step up in the FTC’s focus on data-driven pricing strategies and puts businesses across industries on notice that undisclosed or inadequately disclosed personalized pricing will not be tolerated. Importantly, while the proposed statement is not a binding legal requirement and does not create new legal obligations, it serves as an enforcement warning that the FTC is prepared to use its existing enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act (Section 5) and is also a potential harbinger of rulemaking. Businesses that engage in — or are considering — personalized pricing should carefully assess their disclosure practices and data collection procedures against the standards articulated in this statement.

A Virginia federal court recently delivered a useful reminder for trade secret owners: a missing NDA is not automatically fatal if the company can show it treated the information as genuinely confidential. In WeightPack, Inc. v. Mitchell, No. 3:25-cv-927 (E.D. Va. July 23, 2026), the court denied a former employee’s motion to dismiss trade secret claims under both the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) and the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act (VUTSA). The court held that the employer had plausibly alleged reasonable measures to protect secrecy even though the employee never signed a nondisclosure or confidentiality agreement.

On July 22, 2026, Missouri Attorney General Catherine L. Hanaway filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Kansas City, Missouri, challenging the city’s longstanding Minority and Women Business Enterprise (MWBE) program as unconstitutional. The AG filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri alongside private plaintiffs Charles Cacioppo Jr. and his company, Industrial Salvage and Wrecking Co.

New York is set to become the first state in the nation to restrict algorithmically-driven “addictive” social media features for users under 18. On July 29, 2026, the State published the final rules implementing the Stop Addictive Feeds Exploitation (SAFE) for Kids Act, which takes effect January 25, 2027.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (“Section 230”) protects online platforms from liability for user-generated speech. Based on the premise that platforms generally do not create original content but instead curate their users’ own speech, Section 230’s protections have historically applied to a platform’s algorithmically assembled, selected or sequenced content; algorithms or features that amplified or directed user generated speech to particular users were generally protected. Indeed, the old rule of thumb was the more a platform used algorithms or automation, the more likely user generated speech remained user generated speech. GenAI has the potential to change that calculus. A platform that ingests user generated content and publishes a transformed output, can blur Section 230’s line between publication and creation. The central question is whether Section 230 protects GenAI, which analyzes, but does not alter, user-created content to produce an outcome, and its corresponding outputs.

The rapid buildout of AI infrastructure has placed data centers at the heart of a new and expanding wave of class action litigation. Over the past several months, plaintiffs’ firms with significant experience in mass tort and environmental class actions have begun recruiting plaintiffs and filing lawsuits against data center operators, alleging that noise generated by their facilities — from cooling systems, diesel generators, and HVAC equipment — constitutes a public and private nuisance and reflects actionable negligence. Companies currently operating or constructing data centers near residential communities should treat this as a material and growing legal risk.

On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in West Virginia v. B.P.J. / Little v. Hecox, holding that Title IX permits schools to limit participation in girls’ and women’s sports to students assigned female at birth and that state laws limiting such teams to students assigned female at birth do not violate the federal Equal Protection Clause. The decision provides significant guidance for K-12 schools, colleges and universities, athletic departments, and state policymakers navigating participation rules for school-sponsored athletics.

Following the 10th Circuit's April 21, 2026, decision affirming the disallowance of Liberty Global’s $2.4 billion deduction under the codified economic substance doctrine, I.R.C. § 7701(o), Liberty Global filed a petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc on June 5, 2026. That petition has since drawn significant amicus support from various industry groups representing large taxpayers, as discussed below.

On July 1, 2026, EPA proposed the sixth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 6), which will require public water systems (PWS) to monitor 30 unregulated contaminants — including certain PFAS chemicals — but not microplastics. For now, EPA is using other tools, such as the Contaminant Candidate List (CCL), to learn more about microplastics before requiring PWSs to monitor for them.

A recent enforcement action led by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison along with a bipartisan coalition of state attorneys general signals an accelerating and coordinated crackdown on competitively sensitive information-sharing arrangements.

As schools, athletes, and other entities continue to navigate the boundaries of the House Settlement (In Re College Athlete NIL Litigation, No. 4:20-cv-03919-CW), at least one recent decision made clear a court’s position on what qualifies as an Associated Entity under the settlement. As noted previously, the College Sports Commission (CSC) sent out a rules reminder in January regarding Associated Entities. Under the House Settlement, these entities include those

RICO was built for the mob. But Congress gave trade secret victims access to it in 2016, and a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decision shows that access is real.

A Kansas federal court held that inconsistent enforcement of trade secret rights can defeat a claim under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). In Edelman Financial Engines, LLC v. Mariner Wealth Advisors LLC, No. 2:23-cv-02515-HLT (D. Kan. June 5, 2026), the court applied a selective enforcement theory, holding that when a company does not consistently pursue legal remedies against similarly situated former employees, that inconsistency can be affirmative evidence that it failed to protect its trade secrets. While the selective enforcement theory has appeared in academic hypothetical discussions, the decision appears to be one of the clearest judicial applications of a “selective enforcement” theory in a trade secret case.

When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the FTC's Combating Auto Retail Scams (CARS) Rule in January 2025 on procedural grounds, some dealers may have interpreted the decision as a signal that federal regulatory pressure on the auto industry had eased. Recent developments make clear that such optimism was misplaced.

On May 27, 2026, the California State Assembly advanced AB 2564, which would prohibit surveillance pricing by retailers. Assemblymember Christopher Ward originally introduced AB 2564 on February 20, 2026, to “ensure that people are not being unfairly charged higher prices due to their actual or perceived characteristics.”

From June 11 to July 19, 2026, 16 cities across the United States, Mexico, and Canada will host the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup, the largest in history. For construction firms, vendors, and suppliers, this trinational event has presented a significant commercial opportunity. Yet, cross-border projects involving parties operating under three distinct legal systems — common law in the United States and Canada, and civil law in Mexico — also create fertile ground for commercial disputes. Given the scale, technical complexity, and commercial significance of the FIFA World Cup and all the projects surrounding it, disputes are often unavoidable. As companies navigate intricate contractual obligations across multiple jurisdictions, international arbitration may play a pivotal role in resolving conflicts tied to these major commercial undertakings.

The first applications to lift an automatic suspension under the Procurement Act 2023 (the Act) have recently been decided. In Parkingeye Limited v Velindre University NHS Trust & Anor [2026] EWHC 1019 (TCC), handed down on 1 May 2026, HHJ Keyser KC dismissed applications by two NHS contracting authorities to lift the suspension preventing them from concluding a car park management services contract. This is the first judicial consideration of the new test under section 102(2) of the Act.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently vacated the U.S. Tax Court’s decision in Hyatt Hotels v. Commissioner, a case concerning the taxation of loyalty programs. The Seventh Circuit remanded the case to the Tax Court for further review.

PFAS in cosmetics is quickly becoming one of the highest-stakes compliance issues in the beauty and personal care industry.