The pandemic brought about a shift in how investments are discussed online and has increased the influence social media has on the market. Social media is playing a larger role in the way ordinary retail investors understand and interact with today’s markets. Whether with investments in cryptocurrencies, NFT projects, or traditional security exchanges, social media’s influence has grown drastically in all spaces. What became clear in 2021 with the WallStreetBets GameStop stock rally is that social media allows for investors to band together, learn from one another, and take advantage of markets in novel ways.

As a follow up to our previous posts on digital assets and social media, the Federal Trade Commission recently published a Consumer Protection Data Spotlight on June 3, 2022.  In the post, the FTC provides insights on the fraud reports submitted to the FTC from January 1, 2021 to March 31, 2022.  According to the FTC, the fraud reports show that social media and digital assets are a “combustible combination for fraud” with nearly half of those who reported losing cryptocurrency to a scam saying that it “started with an ad, post, or message on a social media platform.”  Since the start of 2021, more than 46,000 people reported losing over $1 Billion of cryptocurrency to scams, and during the reporting period, nearly four out of every ten dollars that was lost to a fraud that originated on social media was lost in crypto.  This report is another example of agencies and courts taking note, and informing the public that the connection between social media and digital asset fraud is direct, and significant.

On May 23, 2022, the Eleventh Circuit upheld an injunction on parts of Florida’s controversial social media “censorship” law, S.B. 7072, in NetChoice, LLC v. Att’y Gen., Fla.  In a 67-page opinion, the three-judge panel held that large swaths of the law’s provisions were unconstitutional, finding that social media companies are private actors and government regulation of content-moderation policies “unconstitutionally burden[ed]” their First Amendment rights.

On April 5, 2022, the Canadian Heritage Minister, Pablo Rodriguez, tabled Bill C-18 (Online News Act): An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada.  Bill C-18 requires digital media platforms (e.g., social media services, search engines) to compensate media outlets for news content made available on their platforms.  Under Bill C-18, news content is made available if a platform reproduces news content or facilitates access to news content in any way.

Companies—especially those based outside the U.S.—sometimes ask why it is so difficult to bring a lawsuit based on something posted on social media.  A recent federal court case from California can help show how courts view these actions.  Prehired, LLC, v. Provins, No. 2:22-cv-00384-TLN-AC (E.D. Cal. April 12, 2022) (2022 WL 1093237).

Frogbikes Limited (“Frogbikes”), a British bicycle manufacturer, has filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia claiming that defendant Frog Scooters, Inc. (“Frog Scooters”) has infringed Frogbikes’ “FROG” trademarks (the “FROG Marks”) with the use of the term “frog” and its stylized “Frog” mark in connection with its scooter rental business.  The dispute arises from Frog Scooters’ geographic expansion from Europe to the U.S., where Frogbikes alleges it was already conducting business under the FROG Marks.

In December 2021, our post Federal Reserve and social media, highlighted sections of the Federal Reserve Financial Stability Report which demonstrated the Fed’s focus on the role of social media and retail investors in equity market volatility.  In March 2022, the Board of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) followed suit, and also turned their attention to the role of social media and retail investors.  The IOSCO Retail Market Conduct Task Force Consultation Report aimed to set out a toolkit of proposed policy and enforcement measures with guidance to help mitigate the potential risks of retail investor harm posed by online and cross-border marketing and distribution, and digital offerings.  The findings of the report demonstrate both the global nature and the importance of these issues.

In June of 2021, Canada’s Parliament passed Bill C-10: An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts (Bill C-10). Bill C-10 was drafted in response to recommendations made by the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel suggesting reforms of Canada’s broadcasting system to account for digital media. Although Bill C-10 received its third reading, the Senate did not provide approval before Parliament’s dissolution following the 2021 snap election.

In February of this year, the Federal Government revived the contents of Bill C-10, by introducing Bill C-11: the Online Streaming Act (Bill C-11, or the Act).

In December 2021, our post Increased Likelihood of US Social Media Regulation discussed the rising momentum to reform Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which is often used to protect social media giants from liability for content posted on their platforms by third parties. Recently, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas expressed displeasure over the lack of guidance surrounding Section 230’s scope and hinted that reform may be close.