U.S. consumers spent $1.7 trillion online during two years of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-February 2022), $609 billion more than in the two preceding years combined, reported Adobe Tuesday. Demand remained strong in 2021 with $885 billion in online spend, up 8.9% year over year, it said: “As the digital economy shifts to more personalized customer experiences, Adobe expects the annual online spend in the U.S. to surpass $1 trillion for the first time in 2022.” Of the $1.7 trillion spent by consumers, $32 billion was due to higher prices, said Adobe. Online inflation, first observed in June 2020, has persisted for 21 consecutive months, it said. “The impact was most notable in 2021, where $22 billion of e-commerce growth was driven by higher prices compared to just $4.7 billion in 2020.” In the first two months of 2022, $3.8 billion in e-commerce growth was driven by higher prices, said Adobe. But inflation didn't deter demand, it said. Online spending in January and February topped $138 billion, up 13.8% from the first two months of 2021, it said: “Adobe expects consumers could pay as much as $27 billion more online for the same amount of goods due to inflation.”

States can’t bring antitrust claims against Facebook’s years-old acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram, Facebook argued Monday in a lawsuit from 48 state attorneys general (see 2201140061). The company cited a district court ruling that federal antitrust law’s four-year statute of limitations provides a “generous” guideline for laches in its filing against lead plaintiff New York before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in docket 21-7078. The company argued Instagram and WhatsApp wouldn’t have achieved their growth without Facebook’s promotion and investment. “Subjecting Facebook to an equitable remedy now for these long-ago applications of the policies would be presumptively prejudicial,” it argued, seeking affirmation of the district court decision.

The tech industry’s lawsuit against a Texas social media law is scheduled for oral argument the week of May 9, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Sunday in docket 21-51178 (see 2203030063).

Two weeks into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, “we don't know how this evolves going forward, and it's really too early to tell what the overall impact of this on our business will be,” Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal told a Morgan Stanley investment conference Thursday. “In this moment that reminds us why public conversation is important in the world,” said Agrawal: “It gives us this opportunity to showcase the value of Twitter to all of these people, but it also has us feel this immense responsibility.” Twitter has been “doing work proactively to be prepared for this moment” for years, he said. In 2019, it banned all ads from “state-affiliated media organizations,” and two years ago it started “labeling and de-amplifying all state-affiliated media entities,” he said: “We've been very, very transparent about any attempt that we've seen from state actors to manipulate the conversation on Twitter.” Former Chief Technology Officer Agrawal took over as Twitter CEO in November after Jack Dorsey abruptly left the company (see 2111290038).

Texas’ social media law doesn’t violate the First Amendment, Florida and 10 other states said Wednesday in an amicus brief filed with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in docket 21-51178 (see 2203030063). When a social media platform creates a forum for billions of speakers, the First Amendment doesn’t prohibit laws that “regulate the manner in which the platform hosts those messages,” the states said. Regulation becomes problematic only when it “curtails” the host’s “own message.” Texas’ law doesn’t do that, they said: “It permits social media platforms to say whatever they like; they simply must not stifle the speech of others in darkness.” The First Amendment doesn’t prohibit such a neutral disclosure regime, they argued. NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association sued to block the law, claiming First Amendments violations. The associations are suing against a similar law in Florida (see 2111150066). Joining Florida in the filing in support of Texas are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana and South Carolina.

The FTC and DOJ’s Antitrust Division will host an enforcers' summit April 4, the commission announced Thursday. FTC Chair Lina Khan, DOJ Antitrust Division Chief Jonathan Kanter and senior staff will discuss “modernizing merger guidelines and interagency collaboration,” the FTC said. The hybrid event will include in-person and virtual participation from international enforcers and state attorneys general. The agencies announced the joint merger guidelines review in January (see 2201180073).

Google signed a definitive agreement to buy cybersecurity platform Mandiant for $5.4 billion in an all-cash deal, said the buyer Tuesday. Mandiant will join Google Cloud when the transaction closes later this year, it said. “Organizations are facing cybersecurity challenges that have accelerated in frequency, severity and diversity, creating a global security imperative,” said Google. “The cloud represents a new way to change the security paradigm by helping organizations address and protect themselves against entire classes of cyber threats.”

Authorities arrested a man who committed cryptocurrency securities fraud by misrepresenting the size and profitability of Ormeus Coin, DOJ announced Tuesday. John Albert Loar Barksdale, 40, falsely claimed that Ormeus “was secured by a $250 million cryptocurrency mining operation, which would have been one of the largest such operations in the world, and that its mining revenues exceeded $5 million on a monthly basis,” the department said. According to DOJ, he raised $70 million from more than 8,000 investors “through a web of lies, which he spread through in-person roadshows, social media, and even a jumbotron in Times Square.” He faces up to five years in prison for securities fraud and up to 20 years for additional charges of conspiracy and wire fraud. The company didn't comment.

Congress shouldn’t include a bill that aims to combat counterfeit e-commerce goods in its China package (see 2201310033), said tech groups, consumer advocates and academics Tuesday in letters to congressional leaders. The Stopping Harmful Offers on Platforms by Screening Against Fakes in E-commerce (Shop Safe) Act would require foreign sellers on e-commerce platforms to accept personal jurisdiction in the U.S. and allow themselves to be served in a lawsuit. Platforms would have to make reasonable efforts to screen for sellers who are likely to sell counterfeit goods. The bill would “benefit foreign luxury brands, but harm smaller U.S. companies and consumers,” some 40 groups wrote. The Computer & Communications Industry Association, the Center for Democracy & Technology, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, NetChoice, Public Knowledge, the R Street Institute, Re:Create and Twitter signed. Academics with trademark expertise sent a separate letter saying the bill “would curtail many existing online marketplace offerings that currently give consumers greater choices and spur price competition that reduces consumer costs.” CCIA President Matt Schruers called it a “radical shift” in U.S. policy.

Ohio’s content moderation bill “conflicts with the First Amendment,” the Computer & Communications Industry Association said Tuesday as the state’s House Civil Justice Committee considered legislation at a hearing. Introduced by Republican Reps. Scott Wiggam and Al Cutrona, HB-441 would allow social media users to sue platforms for viewpoint discrimination, similar to laws passed in Texas and Florida. It lists deplatforming and other restrictions to user interaction as potential forms of censorship. There was no discussion on the bill in its fifth hearing Tuesday. The committee “has been repeatedly cautioned that its content moderation bill conflicts with the First Amendment by forcing private companies to carry speech,” said CCIA State Policy Director Alyssa Doom in an emailed statement.