Articles Posted in E-commerce

In recent years, the convergence of quantum computing and artificial intelligence (“AI”) has ignited a revolution in the world of finance, giving rise to innovative online trading platforms powered by Quantum AI. These platforms hold the promise of faster, more accurate analyses and predictions, potentially transforming the landscape of trading. However, this exciting advancement also brings forth a host of regulatory challenges that must be carefully addressed to ensure fair, transparent, and secure trading environments.

The Rise of Quantum AI in Online Trading

Quantum AI is the amalgamation of quantum computing and artificial intelligence. Quantum computers, which leverage the principles of quantum mechanics, have the potential to process vast amounts of data at unprecedented speeds. When integrated with AI algorithms, they can analyze intricate patterns, predict market trends, and execute trades with a level of precision that was previously unattainable.

The franchise and business opportunity rules mandate sellers to issue a clear and concise disclosure document at least ten days before the consumer pays funds. The document must include the following information:

  1. Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of other purchasers;
  2. Fully-audited financial statement of the seller;

The federal Lanham Act (“Lanham Act”) allows civil actions for false advertising that misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of goods or services. See 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) stating in relevant part as follows:

(1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which: (A) Is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or (B) In commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.

(2) As used in this subsection, the term “any person” includes any State, instrumentality of a State or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Any State, and any such instrumentality, officer, or employee, shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.

It is not legal or ethical to engage in false or misleading advertising for selling products or services. This is especially true when the advertising harms consumers or competitors in violation of state or federal laws.

A business that uses misleading words for the sale of a product or service can be sanctioned by state or federal agencies. The use of keywords like healthy, organic, gluten free, or 100% natural can be deceptive. The usage of false scientific support claims or endorsements may be unethical. The posting of a false or deceptive picture or video can be against the law. There have been instances where the advertiser used a false or misleading color to make its product look different. Also, there have been instances where the advertiser made a false claim that its product contained a certain product or it had clinically proven health benefits to enhance sales.

A business that engages in deceptive pricing by hiding true fees or surcharges can be sanctioned by state or federal agencies. In most cases, the consumers are misled by not knowing the true price of the product or service – e.g., a communication service provider hides the cell phone bill’s real charges from the consumer when signing up for service.

A person can be prosecuted for wire fraud when there is reliable evidence of a scheme to defraud another by using electronic communications such as wire, radio or television. The defendant must be part of a fraudulent scheme and have a specific intent to commit the fraud. In some cases, it could be enough if the defendant fails to disclose material facts to mislead the plaintiff – i.e., the culprit deceives his or her victim. The defendant may be guilty for wire fraud if he or she shows a reckless indifference through his actions.

For example, the defendant may use wire, radio, or television communication to commit the fraudulent scheme be emailing false or misleading bank statements to clients or investors. Historically, these types of violations include telemarketing fraud or internet scams (e.g., phishing). There have been cases where the culprits hack into the plaintiff’s computer and install keyloggers to track their electronic transactions. Then, they extract personal information that would allow them to log into their bank accounts. Or, they can hack into the escrow company’s network to intercept financial information (e.g., bank account number) that allows them to send false wire instructions. So, thereafter, the hackers provide the false wire instructions to the victim who believes he or she is sending the funds to the correct financial institution.

There have been other instances where the defendant’s action constitutes mail or security fraud. Mail fraud is committed when the defendant uses the mail to commit the fraudulent scheme. Security fraud is committed when the defendant engages in a fraudulent scheme for the sale or purchase of securities which is a violation of state and federal laws. Internet fraud is also referred to as “cybercrime” and may include actions that fall under the definition of hacking or phishing schemes to extract private or confidential information. So, in a nutshell, the culprit uses the internet to lure the victim into believing a false fact. Then, once the victim relinquishes access or discloses the private or confidential information, the culprit uses that information to commit a crime such as identity theft. Also, in other cases, the defendant may be prosecuted for real estate fraud when he or she gains unlawful access to the escrow or title company’s network infrastructure. These types of real estate fraudulent schemes are relatively sophisticated and require the rights tools and resources. The stolen funds are usually sent to another bank account that could be located in another state or country. Obviously, the victims will feel helpless when they face these situations and will reach out to government agencies for assistance. In most cases, the victims should also seek assistance from a private law firm that specializes in these matters.

Big data rules and regulations should be enhanced and updated by state and federal legislators simply because big data analytics across all industry sectors is important to improve efficiency. In general, big data analytics is used to predict consumer behaviors so they can be targeted by commercial organizations. This information can be gathered when, for example, the consumer visits an e-commerce website and purchases items. Also, information can be obtained when a consumer applies for a loan through a mortgage lender or financial institution.

Information security is important because in most cases the consumer is not aware that his or her information has been shared, transferred, or sold to another company. Again, the information is used to predict a consumer’s future behavior. The third-party that has access to the consumer’s information can use it to predict that person’s financial capabilities.

First, confidentiality of the information, whether it’s at rest, transit, or use, is crucial. Financial institutions have been targeted by hackers for misconfiguring and mismanaging network vulnerabilities over the years. The failure of using preventive measures such as data encryption plays a key role in this discrepancy. It is challenging to protect large amounts of information that’s in use because it depends on shared computing environments – i.e., wide-area-network that can go across cities or countries. Also, big data is processed on a continuous level that requires a tremendous amount of resources.

Non-fungible tokens (“NFTs”) are unique digital items that have been a focus of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) which is the federal government agency that enforces security regulations to protect investors. NFTs are made out of computer code and recorded on a blockchain ledger that can prove authenticity and ownership of the unique item. As such, they are not interchangeable and can be used to verify ownership of the unique item (e.g., real estate, antique car, painting).

There is argument to be made that they should be considered as commodities pursuant to the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) which yields a catch-all provision for all other goods and articles. The SEC has recently focused on celebrity advertisings on the internet in an effort to encourage the purchase of stocks and other investments. It’s important to note that the advertiser must disclose the nature, source, and compensation received by the advertisement.

The most prominent case that’s applicable in the determination of whether an NFT is a security or an asset is SEC v. W.J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946) which set out the following test: (1) there is an investment of money or some other consideration; (2) in a common enterprise; (3) with a reasonable expectation of profits; and (4) to be derived from someone else’s efforts.

A non-fungible token (“NFT”) is a non-exchangeable unit of data that is stored on a blockchain and is transferrable to another party. In short, blockchain is a type of a digital ledger. NFTs can be related to photos, videos, or audio files. NFTs are not the same as cryptocurrencies because they are uniquely identifiable. In addition, the legal rights granted by NFTs are speculative as they cannot restrict the sharing and copying of digital files and do not convey their copyrights.

The question of whether NFTs are securities or assets revolves on several issues. One issue is whether the item has been “fractionalized” to permit the sharing of its ownership with other parties. It’s important to realize that fractionalization does not make the asset into a security since it depends on its purpose. For example, if an individual decides to fractionalize a personal property to allow shared ownership, the personal property does not automatically convert to a security. As such, the NFT may not constitute a “security” just because it has increased in value. But, if the fractionalization’s purpose is to assign shares to trade in a secondary market, and to provide liquidity, then it would fall under securities laws. Therefore, the test is whether a purchaser has a reasonable expectation of profits that is derived from someone else’s efforts. See Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946) wherein the United States Supreme Court confirmed that an “investment contract” means a contract, transaction, or scheme whereby a person invests his money in a common enterprise and is led to expect profits solely from the efforts of the promoter or a third party, it being immaterial whether the shares in the enterprise are evidenced by formal certificates or by nominal interests in the physical assets employed in the enterprise.

The Securities Act of 1933 (which is codified under 15 U.S.C. §§ 77a, et seq.) defines “security” as any note, stock, treasury stock, security future, security-based swap, bond, debenture, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas, or other mineral rights, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities (including any interest therein or based on the value thereof), or any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege entered into on a national securities exchange relating to foreign currency, or, in general, any interest or instrument commonly known as a “security” or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, receipt for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing.

Social media law comprises of several different components including free speech, privacy, online advertisement, and intellectual property rights. These issues come up regularly during the course of online transactions between parties. The courts have been inundated with social media litigation and have issued their rulings when faced with complicated problems.

The cases that arise on social media platforms involve state and federal laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and Communications Decency Act. In essence, these federal statutes were promulgated to protect copyrights and free speech rights.

According to the United States Copyright Office, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), which amended federal copyright laws, was passed to address important parts of the relationship between copyright and the internet. The three main updates were: (1) establishing protections for online service providers in certain situations if their users engage in copyright infringement, including by creating the notice-and-takedown system, which allows copyright owners to inform online service providers about infringing material so it can be taken down; (2) encouraging copyright owners to give greater access to their works in digital formats by providing them with legal protections against unauthorized access to their works (for example, hacking passwords or circumventing encryption); and (3) making it unlawful to provide false copyright management information (e.g., names of authors and copyright owners, titles of works) or to remove or alter that type of information in certain circumstances.

Social media litigation can be caused or initiated for various reasons related to privacy violations, online defamation, internet harassment, contractual disputes, and intellectual property violations.

Privacy violations take place when a company does not adhere to its terms of use or privacy policy. The terms of use and privacy policy on a website constitutes a legally-enforceable contract. The terms and conditions should be carefully read by visitors because the continued use of the website may constitute implied consent even if the website doesn’t require clicking on a “I Agree” box. Stated otherwise, if you visit a website, you can be bound by its terms and conditions.

Online defamation takes place when a false factual statement, that is not privileged, is published and damages the victim’s reputation in the community. The statement must be a fact and not an opinion. There are several defenses to defamation such as truth and absolute or qualified privilege. Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. According to Civil Code Section 47(a), a privileged publication or broadcast is one made: (1) in the proper discharge of an official duty; (2) in any legislative proceeding; (3) in any judicial proceeding; (4) in any other official proceeding authorized by law; or (5) in the initiation or course of any other proceeding authorized by law and reviewable by mandamus. The concept of “qualified privilege” applies to employers under the following conditions: Employers can make statements about their employees as long as the statement is not malicious and was made to third parties with a common interest in the subject matter. Malice can be proven by showing ill-will, hatred, or lack of reasonable grounds when the statement was made to a third party.