Recent policies permitting CMS price setting are hamstringing the U.S. biopharmaceutical industry, as they reduce incentives for pharmaceutical companies to invest in future drug R&D to create life-improving and life-saving medicines.

By deciding not to pursue digital competition regulation, Australia can avoid the problems that are already materializing as a result of ex-ante regimes like the EU’s DMA.

The Center for Data Innovation submitted these comments to the UK government’s Intellectual Property Office, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, and Department for Culture, Media and Sport on its consultation on proposed changes to the UK’s copyright regime, the Copyright, Design, and Patents Act (CDPA) 1988.

The California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) has proposed regulations that would impose new requirements on businesses using automated decision-making technology.

While ITIF commends the MBIE for analyzing the efficacy of its current regime, substantial changes to New Zealand’s competition laws should be a response to clear market failures that improves consumer welfare, and not merely an attempt to keep up with perceived global or regional trends.

Standards Australia should establish age-based guidelines for the metaverse using existing content ratings; require device operating systems to create an opt-in “trustworthy child flag” system; work with global, government-led groups to build voluntary industry standards with a focus on interoperability; and promote digital literacy campaigns for children to operate in the metaverse safely.

By streamlining compliance costs, clarifying definitions, and easing the extraterritorial scope of the legislation, the Cyberspace Administration of China can foster a more business-friendly environment while still ensuring data security for personal information.

Instead of treating Apple as a public utility, the Commission should work to ensure that interoperability requirements align with the broader theoretical framework that orients European competition policy, such as condemning unilateral conduct that may harm rivals only when it does not constitute competition on the merits.

Consumers would benefit directly from more capable spectrum use and commercial offerings, and the home and mobile broadband markets would benefit from a more capable competitor.

Populists argue mergers reduced robust competition that travelers previously enjoyed, allowing the remaining “Big Four” carriers to cut capacity, decrease service quality and raise prices. But that narrative could not be more wrong.