European Consumer Groups Escalate Complaint Against Shein Over Misleading Tactics

Introduction

European consumer organisations are putting the spotlight on Shein’s online practices, with 24 groups from 21 countries, including the Cyprus Consumers Association, filing an official complaint with the European Commission. The complaint, submitted on May 30, 2025, comes amid growing concerns over the platform’s use of deceptive interface techniques designed to boost sales.

Misleading Tactics And Regulatory Response

The complaint alleges that Shein employs a host of so-called “dark patterns” such as fake countdown timers, emotionally manipulative tactics, infinite scrolling, and aggressive marketing warnings about limited stock. These methods, critics argue, contravene the European Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices. In February 2025, the European Commission had already initiated an investigation into Shein’s compliance with EU consumer rights legislation. Following this, the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network, with oversight from the European Commission and contributions from Belgium, France, Ireland, and the Netherlands, instructed the retailer to align its practices with EU law.

Follow THE FUTURE on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, X and Telegram

Evidence Backed By Recent Studies

The Cyprus Consumers Association has underscored that their complaint augments existing findings by providing further evidence of these dark patterns. They warn that without corrective actions from Shein, regulatory authorities may be forced to intervene to prevent consumer harm. This sentiment highlights the growing urgency among regulators to enforce adherence to established consumer protection standards.

Product Safety Concerns

In addition to issues with online practices, separate studies have raised serious concerns regarding the safety of Shein products. For instance, Poland’s Federacja Konsumentow reported that over half of 16 tested Shein items contained unsafe levels of heavy metals. Similarly, Belgium’s Testachats/Testaankoop found hazardous chemicals in children’s clothing, with one item exceeding legal safety thresholds. A May 2025 investigation by Denmark’s Forbrugerradet Taenk revealed PFAS chemicals in waterproof jackets from various platforms, prompting Denmark to decide on a ban of PFAS-containing clothing and footwear starting in 2026.

Conclusion

The actions of these consumer organisations, in tandem with the European Commission and the CPC Network, underscore a resolute commitment to safeguarding consumer rights within the EU. As regulatory hurdles increase, the case against Shein serves as a reminder that adherence to consumer protection laws remains pivotal in maintaining market integrity and public trust.

The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties

Copyright Law Struggles To Keep Up With AI Training

by News Editor

August 24, 2026

Courts Are Still Applying Old Copyright Rules To AI

AI companies train models on enormous amounts of published material, including books, articles and academic research. Whether using that content without authors’ permission violates copyright law remains unresolved.

Much of the debate centres on fair use, which allows copyrighted material to be used without permission in certain circumstances. Courts consider factors such as the purpose of the use, how much material was involved and its impact on the original market.

Follow THE FUTURE on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, X and Telegram

Anthropic Case Sets An Important Precedent

A major case involving Anthropic and a group of authors provided one of the clearest rulings so far. Judge William Alsup found that using copyrighted books to train AI models was lawful, comparing the process to people reading and studying literature before creating something new.

Anthropic was nevertheless ordered to pay $1.5 billion in a settlement. The penalty concerned books the company had obtained from illegal online libraries rather than the AI training itself.

For AI companies, that distinction could prove significant because it separates studying copyrighted material from directly copying it.

Competition Could Be The Key Issue

A case involving Thomson Reuters and Ross Intelligence offers a different perspective. A court ruled that Ross could not claim fair use after using Reuters’ copyrighted material to develop a competing AI-powered legal research platform.

The decision suggests courts may be less willing to consider AI training fair use when copyrighted content is used to build a product that directly competes with the original.

For authors, an unresolved question is whether AI-generated content should be considered competition for the works used to train these models.

The Law Has Yet To Catch Up

US copyright law predates generative AI by decades, leaving courts to apply old principles to new technology. Questions also remain over copyright protection for AI-generated works. In Thaler v. Perlmutter, a court ruled that material created entirely by AI cannot receive copyright protection.

Major AI companies remain involved in copyright litigation, and different courts could reach different conclusions. For now, there is no universal rule: the legality of AI training will depend on the circumstances of each case and how courts ultimately interpret copyright and fair use.

Breaking news