Technology

On 19 May 2026, the European Commission published its long-awaited draft, non-binding guidelines on the classification of high-risk AI systems (“HRAIs”) under the EU AI Act (the “Guidelines”). Across three documents—covering general principles, high-risk classification in the context of regulated products (Annex I), and high-risk use cases (Annex III)—the Commission sets out its approach to one of the AI Act’s central questions: when does an AI system fall within the high-risk regime (and, just as importantly, when does it not)?

Rather than restating every aspect of the Guidelines, this post highlights a number of interpretative points likely to matter most in practice.

Continue Reading EU AI Act Update: The European Commission Publishes Draft Guidelines on HRAIs
On 29 April 2026, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) updated its guidance on the use of storage and access technologies (i.e., cookies and other technologies that store or access information stored on users’ devices) under Regulation 6 of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003 (“PECR”). These updates follow on the heels of two public consultations about the clarity of this guidance. We set out details of three of the most relevant updates for private companies below. Perhaps the most interesting element of the updated guidance, however, is an indication that the ICO is intending to follow through on its plan to enable the use of information storage / access technologies for “privacy-preserving” advertising purposes without consent. The ICO has not made explicit changes to its guidance, and the consultation response reiterates that the use of information storage / access technologies for online advertising—including related activities like frequency capping and ad measurement—currently requires consent under Regulation 6 of PECR. However, the ICO states that it will soon submit evidence to the UK Government on advertising-related activities that could be exempt from the PECR consent requirement, which the Government may then use to amend PECR to introduce statutory exemptions. It remains to be seen what the ICO will propose, but this could make it easier to engage in certain ad-related activities in the UK. … Continue Reading Three notable changes to the UK ICO’s guidance on cookies, and a hint of a more permissive approach to advertising cookies in the future

U.S. state lawmakers have introduced more than 40 bills across at least 24 states to regulate personalized algorithmic pricing in 2026 thus far, already outpacing the number of personalized algorithmic pricing bills introduced in all of 2025.  While their definitions and scope vary, the 2026 bills broadly refer to “personalized…

Continue Reading State Lawmakers Introduce New Wave of Personalized Algorithmic Pricing Bills

On 20 January 2026, the European Commission published a proposal for a Regulation to update and replace the Cybersecurity Act (Regulation 2019/881). The proposal—known as the Cybersecurity Act 2 (CSA2)—forms part of a wider package aimed at modernizing and streamlining the EU’s cybersecurity framework and is closely linked to the…

Continue Reading European Commission Proposes Cybersecurity Act 2: New EU Supply Chain Rules and Certification Reforms

On 8 October 2025, the European Commission published its Apply AI Strategy (the “Strategy”), a comprehensive policy framework aimed at accelerating the adoption and integration of artificial intelligence (“AI”) across strategic industrial sectors and the public sector in the EU.

The Strategy is structured around three pillars: (1) introducing sectoral flagships to boost AI use in key industrial sectors; (2) addressing cross-cutting challenges; and (3) establishing a single governance mechanism to provide sectoral stakeholders a way to participate in AI policymaking.

The Apply AI Strategy is accompanied by the AI in Science Strategy, and it will be complemented by the Data Union Strategy (which is anticipated later this year).

Continue Reading European Commission Publishes Apply AI Strategy to Accelerate Sectoral AI Adoption Across the EU

On July 23, the White House released its AI Action Plan, outlining the key priorities of the Trump Administration’s AI policy agenda.  In parallel, President Trump signed three AI executive orders directing the Executive Branch to implement the AI Action Plan’s policies on “Preventing Woke AI in…

Continue Reading Trump Administration Issues AI Action Plan and Series of AI Executive Orders

On June 22, Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) signed the Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (“TRAIGA”) (HB 149) into law.  The law, which takes effect on January 1, 2026, makes Texas the second state to enact comprehensive AI consumer protection legislation, following the 2024 enactment of the Colorado…

Continue Reading Texas Enacts AI Consumer Protection Law

“Session replay” software is one of many website analytics tools targeted in wiretapping suits under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”).  Last month, a California federal court confirmed one of the many reasons why the use of this software does not violate CIPA section 631: A defendant cannot “read” (or attempt to read) session replay data “in transit,” as CIPA requires, because “events recorded by” this software “do not become readable content until after they are stored and reassembled into a session replay.”  Torres v. Prudential Financial, Inc., 2025 WL 1135088 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2025). 

Continue Reading Court Grants Summary Judgment: Website Vendor Cannot Read “Session Replay” Data “In Transit” Under CIPA

Plaintiffs’ lawyers have continued to bring privacy claims targeting businesses that use vendors to help provide beneficial chat features on their website, as we last reported here.  Late last year, a Southern District of California judge dismissed another set of privacy claims challenging the routine use of these vendor services by Tonal, a popular smart home gym company named as the sole defendant in the lawsuit.  Jones v. Tonal Systems, Inc., 751 F. Supp. 3d 1025 (S.D. Cal. 2024).

Plaintiff Julie Jones, a California resident, claimed that she had visited Tonal’s website and used its chat feature to communicate with a Tonal customer service representative.  This chat feature allegedly incorporated an API run by another company to create and store transcripts of website visitors’ chats with Tonal’s customer service representatives.  According to the complaint, this alleged conduct constituted wiretapping, which Tonal purportedly aided and abetted in violation of Sections 631 and 632.7 of the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”).  Plaintiff also asserted other privacy claims based on the same alleged conduct, including the California Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) and the California Constitution’s right to privacy provision.

The Court granted Tonal’s motion to dismiss each of plaintiff’s claims on multiple grounds.

Continue Reading Another California Court Rejects Privacy Claims Targeting Online Chat Feature

Website analytics and advertising tools, such as pixels, are regularly targeted in lawsuits brought under various wiretap laws, including the federal Wiretap Act and the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”).  We cover significant developments and trends in website wiretapping lawsuits on Inside Class Actions.  Over the last several months, we have featured posts discussing an important decision from Massachusetts’ highest court about the availability of website wiretap suits under Massachusetts law, an opinion from a California court about a new “pen register” theory under CIPA, and more.  These posts, and other highlights, include the following:

Continue Reading Website Wiretapping Litigation: Recent Decisions and Developments