Breaking news

Cysec Adopts EBA Guidance On Dual Regulatory Framework For Electronic Money Tokens

by THEFUTURE.TEAM

July 11, 2025

The Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) has formally updated cryptoasset service providers (CASPs) and prospective applicants regarding new guidelines from the European Banking Authority (EBA). The update follows the EBA’s June 10, 2025 opinion, which addresses the regulatory treatment of electronic money tokens (EMTs) under both the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) Regulation and the existing Payment Services Directive (PSD2).

Background And Context

Triggered by the European Commission’s December 2024 request, the EBA provided both short- and long-term recommendations to manage the inherent dual nature of EMTs as regulated under MiCA (Regulation (EU) 2023/1114) and as electronic money under Directive (EU) 2015/2366 (PSD2). The authority’s opinion forms part of a strategic effort to enhance consumer protection and ensure the stability of digital payment systems across the European Union.

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

Eba’s Long-Term Recommendations

In its long-term strategy, the EBA advised EU policymakers to amend the MiCA Regulation to incorporate payment-related obligations for EMTs. These amendments would enhance consumer protection, enforce robust security measures for payments, and introduce capital requirements. As an alternative, the EBA proposed integrating rules for EMTs into the forthcoming legislative processes for PSD3 and Payment Services Regulation (PSR), thereby alleviating the need for CASPs to secure a separate authorisation.

Short-Term Guidance Under The Existing Regulatory Framework

In the interim, as PSD2 remains active, the EBA issued practical guidance to National Competent Authorities (NCAs) to ease the regulatory load on CASPs. Key recommendations include:

Considering the transfer, custody, and administration of EMTs as payment services under PSD2;
Classifying custodial wallets as payment accounts;
Excluding the exchange of crypto-assets for funds or other crypto-assets—as defined by MiCA—from being regarded as payment services, thus avoiding unnecessary secondary authorisation.

Furthermore, a transitional period until March 1, 2026, has been advised for those CASP activities that require PSD2 authorisation. During this phase, entities may either apply for authorisation or collaborate with an existing payment service provider (PSP). For authorised entities or those holding a PSP licence, NCAs are expected to temporarily de-prioritise enforcement of select PSD2 provisions, such as safeguarding requirements and disclosure obligations, while maintaining critical measures like strong customer authentication and fraud reporting.

Implications And Next Steps

CySEC has urged all relevant stakeholders to consult the full EBA opinion to fully understand the legal basis and detailed advice on navigating the complex interplay between MiCA and PSD2. The clarity provided in this guidance underscores the EU’s commitment to a balanced regulatory approach that mitigates risk without stifling innovation in the cryptoasset sector.

Signed by George Theocharides, chairman of the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission, this update marks a significant milestone in regulatory convergence for digital finance across Europe.

The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties

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.