Two parallel developments suggest that Europe is drawing clearer boundaries around both AI ownership and data protection. One comes from the Council and the other from a German court, and both signal a more cautious approach toward redefining legal fundamentals in the name of innovation or administrative simplification. 1. Digital omnibus leak: Member States cut the core of the proposed GDPR reform A leaked Council compromise draft removes entirely the proposed redefinition of “personal data” under the GDPR, and that alone underscores how controversial the Digital Omnibus has become. What happened? In November 2025, the European Commission launched the Digital Omnibus, with one of its central ambitions
Artificial intelligence is entering a decisive phase in Europe. Despite the EU’s ambitious AI Act framework, key guidance remains pending while enforcement scrutiny intensifies and AI adoption accelerates. 1. EU AI Act: a strict framework struggling to keep pace While Europe’s ambition to regulate AI is unquestioned, recent developments signal that the legal framework is struggling to keep pace with both the rapid evolution of the technology and its own aspirations. 1.1. Missed Guidance and Growing Uncertainty The European Commission missed a key deadline on 2 February, when it failed to publish a comprehensive list of use cases to help businesses distinguish between high-risk and non-high-risk
On 6 January 2026, the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan signed a Decree declaring 2026 the Year of Digitalization and Artificial Intelligence. At present, the legislative framework in this area is actively being developed. For instance, a unified conceptual document on the development of digitalisation and artificial intelligence, Digital Qazaqstan, in which all initiatives and projects will be combined into a nationwide strategy is currently being developed. The Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 230-VIII entered into force on 18 January 2025 (the "Law"), and the Digital Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan will take effect on 11 July 2026. There is also ongoing work to align existing legislative acts with the Digital
Layoffs have reached historic highs this year, and the AI arms race could be partly to blame. In the United States, over one million jobs were cut between January and October, up 65% from the same period in 2024, according to a report by outplacement specialists Challenger, Gray & Christmas. From Amazon and UPS to Microsoft and Meta, a growing number of companies are restructuring their workforce as they adopt AI at scale. These decisions raise a broader question: how far and how fast can companies go when replacing human work with artificial intelligence? While automation at scale is not a one-size-fits-all solution, the hard truth is that the skills and jobs needed in the future of work are still largely unknown. As
Europe has just introduced two significant developments that will directly affect how companies build, deploy, and oversee AI in 2026. One strengthens reporting. The other reshapes key compliance deadlines. 1. The AI act whistleblower tool is live—and it changes the game The EU’s new AI Act Whistleblower Tool is officially online, allowing any individual professionally connected to an AI model provider to flag risky or unlawful practices linked to general-purpose AI models and certain regulated AI systems. Reports can be submitted anonymously, in any EU language together with supporting documents via a secure inbox that also supports follow-up questions. While the AI Office will maintain strict
For years, proxy advisors Institutional Shareholder Services (“ISS”) and Glass Lewis & Co. (“Glass Lewis”) have shaped voting behaviour at annual general meetings (“AGMs”) of publicly listed companies, including in Austria, through their uniform “benchmark” voting recommendations. This approach, it appears, will soon be history. What’s new Beginning in 2027, Glass Lewis will discontinue its long-standing practice of issuing single, default “benchmark” voting recommendations and instead collaborate with institutional clients to create fully customised voting policies supported by company-specific research reports ahead of AGMs. Glass Lewis aims to have all clients transitioned
Competition and regulatory authorities across Europe are showing renewed vigilance toward the pharmaceutical sector—a field shaped by the intersection of competition law, regulatory frameworks, consumer protection, and IP. Recent cases illustrate that investigations in this area are increasingly complex and precedent driven, offering valuable guidance on how authorities assess commercial behaviour. Sun Wave Pharma case – the Romanian Competition Council unveils unfair competition practices In May 2025, the Romanian Competition Council (“RCC”) announced the conclusion of its investigation into Sun Wave Pharma S.R.L., a major player in the food supplements market in Romania. The inquiry focused on allegations
As Europe moves ahead with the AI Act, the European Commission has made clear that there will be “no stop the clock, no grace period, and no pause”, despite calls from major tech players such as Google, Meta, Mistral, and ASML to delay implementation. The timeline remains firm: core provisions apply from February 2025, general-purpose model rules from August 2025, and high-risk AI obligations from August 2026. The message is clear: the Commission intends to keep its ambitious AI timeline on track, while it looks to streamline other digital obligations for companies. Against this backdrop, the GDPR may also be entering a new chapter. Nearly seven years after its adoption, a leaked draft of the Digital Omnibus package
This shift introduces complex legal and compliance challenges under EU law, particularly around data collection, processing, and sharing. Key frameworks such as the GDPR and ePrivacy Directive govern issues like user consent, data transparency, access, and deletion. Manufacturers must embed privacy by design and strengthen cybersecurity. How does the GDPR impact data collection in infotainment systems? Infotainment, telematics, and autonomous features gather vast user data - raising critical questions of control, purpose, and protection. The Data Act grants users broader rights to access and share vehicle data, while public safety tools like eCall must still ensure compliance with data
The Ministry of Investments, Regional Development and Informatization of the Slovak Republic has submitted a proposal to amend the Act on Information Technologies in Public Administration. Its aim is to strengthen the management of the state's digital assets, increase cybersecurity resilience, and introduce clear rules for the use of artificial intelligence in public administration. From the state’s perspective, this is an ambitious reform, but for IT solution suppliers, it introduces numerous negative consequences that fundamentally change the existing contractual practices and business environment. Below is a summary of the key changes and their practical impacts on businesses. 1. Special copyright regime for public
We are pleased to release our Franchising Law Handbook—a comprehensive guide developed by Kinstellar’s team of IP and competition law experts across our jurisdictions. The initiative was led by Partner Natalia Kirichenko to support businesses navigating the increasingly complex and fast-evolving legislation in this field. According to the US Department of Commerce, franchising contributes around USD 2.3 trillion to the global economy annually, making it a powerful model for business expansion across various sectors. This Handbook brings together the expertise of our lawyers across multiple jurisdictions, offering practical insights into key legal frameworks and regulatory requirements. It is designed to serve as
On April 29, 2025, the President of Ukraine signed Law No. 4362-IX “On the Repeal of the Law of Ukraine ‘On the Protection of Intellectual Property Interests during Martial Law Imposed in Connection with the Armed Aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine’.” According to the adopted amendments, the temporary legal mechanisms, introduced in 2022 to support intellectual property rights holders in the context of the war, will expire on May 31, 2025. This means the abolition of the suspension of deadlines for taking actions related to the protection of intellectual property, including the deadlines for the renewal of the relevant certificates, patents and for filing oppositions to applications. Annual