Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Meta Stock Dips Amid Senate Proposal to Tackle Scam Ads Online

Published

on

META Stock Card

TLDR

  • Meta stock dropped 1.7% following the introduction of the Senate’s SCAM Act, which targets scam ads on social media platforms.
  • The SCAM Act proposes stricter regulations, requiring Meta to verify advertisers and giving enforcement power to the FTC and state attorneys general.
  • Meta is facing increased scrutiny from both U.S. regulators and international challenges, particularly from India’s Supreme Court regarding WhatsApp data.
  • Despite embracing artificial intelligence, Meta’s reliance on ad revenue remains crucial, and stricter regulations could hinder its growth.
  • The tech sector as a whole is grappling with fears that AI tools may erode profit margins, impacting major players like Meta.

Meta Platforms’ stock dropped 1.7% to $679.86 on Wednesday morning, marking another volatile session for the parent company of Facebook and Instagram. The decline followed news of a proposed bipartisan Senate bill, aiming to curb scam ads online. The bill, called the Safeguarding Consumers from Advertising Misconduct Act (SCAM Act), has raised concerns among investors, adding to the growing uncertainty surrounding Meta’s future.


META Stock Card
Meta Platforms, Inc., META

New Senate Bill Raises Concerns for Meta’s Ad Business

The SCAM Act targets deceptive advertising practices and would impose stricter regulations on social media platforms. If passed, the bill would force platforms like Meta to verify advertisers, which could lead to increased screening costs and potential delays in onboarding new advertisers. The bill also grants enforcement powers to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and state attorneys general, placing further pressure on the advertising ecosystem.

Investors are closely monitoring the situation, with many worried about the impact on Meta’s core revenue stream advertising. While the company has embraced artificial intelligence in its efforts to diversify its business model, ad sales still play a crucial role in its financial performance. The bill’s focus on tightening the regulatory framework for online ads has raised concerns that it could slow Meta’s ad revenue growth.

Meta Stock Faces Broader Market Pressures

Meta’s stock is also facing broader market pressures, which have affected the technology sector as a whole. The rise of artificial intelligence has led to fears of increased competition and shrinking profit margins for established tech companies. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq both experienced significant declines this week, partly driven by concerns about AI’s impact on the industry.

Meta is grappling with these challenges at a time when the company is ramping up its spending on AI. Last week, Meta raised its capital expenditure forecast for 2026 to between $115 billion and $135 billion. CEO Mark Zuckerberg described 2026 as a pivotal year for the company as it seeks to invest heavily in “personal superintelligence.”

Advertisement

Despite these ambitious plans, Meta faces mounting risks from stricter regulations in both the U.S. and abroad. On Tuesday, India’s Supreme Court signaled that it might reinstate a ban on WhatsApp sharing user data with other Meta companies. India is Meta’s largest market by user count, and any further restrictions on its operations there could severely impact the company’s prospects.

Traders are left wondering how much of this proposed legislation will become law, and what the timeline might look like. Bills like the SCAM Act often undergo revisions before they are passed, with potential delays affecting near-term investor sentiment. Meanwhile, ongoing court battles, particularly in India, add to the uncertainty surrounding Meta’s future.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Judge Rules Jenner’s Memecoin Not a Security; Lawsuit Dismissed

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

A California federal judge has cleared Caitlyn Jenner of a class-action push stemming from her JENNER memecoin, ruling that the token does not meet the basic securities requirements under U.S. law. In a Thursday order, U.S. District Judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr. said the plaintiffs failed to plausibly plead that JENNER tokens were investment contracts because the venture did not pool investor money or use funds to develop a related product or technology.

Defendants stated that “the $JENNER token is a memecoin on the Ethereum blockchain intended solely for entertainment purposes,” and that its value would increase because Jenner would use her fame and influence to promote it, increasing demand. Promotion alone, however, does not establish a common enterprise absent pooling or a structure linking investor fortunes.

The case traces back to November 2024, when a group of JENNER memecoin buyers filed suit against Jenner and her late manager, Sophia Hutchins, alleging an unregistered securities offering and that investors lost thousands as the token’s price collapsed. The plaintiffs claimed that Jenner’s campaign-promised activities and fee mechanics would drive a return for investors. In May 2025, Blumenfeld had already tossed the suit for failure to state a claim, and an amended complaint was filed later that month, led by Lee Greenfield, a UK citizen who said he had invested more than $40,000.

In the amended filing, plaintiffs argued that investors pooled their assets as Jenner promised that once the token reached a market value of $50 million, a 3% transaction fee would fund token buybacks, marketing, donations to a political campaign, and a separate token representing ownership in Jenner’s Olympic gold medal. Blumenfeld pointed out that the amended complaint heavily focused on donations to Donald Trump’s campaign but did not clearly explain how such donations would deliver a financial return to investors. He also noted that the plan to distribute fractional ownership in the gold medal was announced after most purchases and was never executed.

The judge declined to give the class another chance to amend the complaint and indicated that claims tied to contracts and common-law fraud under California law would be more appropriate in state court. The decision leaves the securities-related claims resolved in federal court, while signaling that related state-law claims may proceed separately on different grounds.

Advertisement

JENNER first surfaced on the Solana blockchain via the memecoin creatorPump.fun in May 2024. The project quickly found itself embroiled in controversy after Jenner and other celebrities behind memecoin launches claimed they were allegedly scammed by Sahil Arora, a figure linked to the project’s early promotion efforts. Jenner subsequently relaunched JENNER on Ethereum, a move that investors said diluted the value of the original Solana token, which had peaked at nearly $7.5 million in June 2024 before retreating sharply.

The court’s ruling highlights a central challenge in memecoin litigation: promotional activity alone does not automatically create a securities partnership or an investment contract unless funds are pooled and a plausible path to investor returns can be demonstrated. The decision does not provide a broad endorsement of memecoins as safe investments, but it narrows the legal route for investors who relied primarily on celebrity promotion to claim securities violations.

For investors and builders in the memecoin ecosystem, the ruling reinforces the importance of transparent token mechanics and verifiable fundraising structures. It also underscores that, even in high-profile celebrity launches, the line between entertainment-focused tokens and regulated securities remains a contested frontier—one that regulators continue to scrutinize, particularly as new token categories emerge and promotional campaigns accelerate.

Key takeaways

  • The court dismissed the federal securities claims against Caitlyn Jenner in the JENNER memecoin case, ruling the token did not plausibly constitute an investment contract because funds were not pooled and no related product or technology was developed with investor money.
  • The decision preserves the possibility that related California-law claims could proceed in state court, though the federal securities case is resolved on the merits for now.
  • The amended complaint failed to convincingly connect promised uses of a 3% fee and public donations to tangible financial returns for investors, according to the judge’s order.
  • JENNER originated on Solana in May 2024, later migrated to Ethereum after controversies and claims of misrepresentation, with the token peaking at about $7.5 million in mid-2024 before collapsing.
  • The ruling underscores that promotional activity alone is insufficient to show a common enterprise or an investment contract; structure and fund flows matter significantly in securities analyses of memecoins.

Context and implications for the memecoin landscape

The ruling arrives at a time of heightened regulatory attention toward memecoins and celebrity-led token launches. While it narrows the scope for investors to pursue federal securities claims in similar cases, it does not absolve promoters from potential liability on other legal grounds. The case illustrates that courts will closely examine whether investor money was actually pooled and whether a credible pathway exists for investors to obtain a financial return, beyond hype and promotional activity.

Looking ahead, observers will watch whether California state courts continue to pursue related contract or fraud theories and how parties might frame future campaigns to balance promotional potential with clear, investor-centric tokenomics. As the ecosystem evolves, the balance between creative branding and legally compliant fundraising remains a central concern for issuers, platforms, and legal counsel navigating a rapidly shifting regulatory environment.

Advertisement

Readers should monitor developments around memecoin regulation, enforcement actions, and any new guidance from U.S. authorities as they analyze cases where celebrity-led launches intersect with traditional securities law principles. The outcome in this case serves as a notable data point in the broader discourse on what constitutes a security in the fast-moving world of blockchain-enabled hype tokens.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Caitlyn Jenner Memecoin Not a Security, Judge Rules

Published

on

Court, Memecoin

US media personality and former Olympian Caitlyn Jenner has escaped a class-action lawsuit after a federal judge ruled her memecoin was not a security under US law.

California federal judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr. wrote in an order on Thursday that the lawsuit failed to plausibly plead that Caitlyn Jenner (JENNER) tokens were investment contracts, as they didn’t pool investor money or use funds to develop “any related product or technology.”

“Defendants stated that ‘[t]he $JENNER token is a memecoin on the Ethereum blockchain intended solely for entertainment purposes,’ and that its value would increase because Jenner would use her fame and influence to promote it, increasing demand,” the order said.

“Promotion alone, however, does not establish a common enterprise absent pooling or a structure linking investor fortunes,” it added.

Advertisement

A group of JENNER memecoin buyers first sued Jenner and her late manager, Sophia Hutchins, in November 2024, claiming they lost thousands of dollars as the token’s price collapsed and that JENNER was an unregistered securities offering.

Court, Memecoin
Caitlyn Jenner, pictured at a conference in 2017, was sued by a group of buyers of her memecoin that claimed they lost thousands of dollars. Source: Web Summit

Blumenfeld tossed the suit in May 2025 for failure to state a claim, and the group filed an amended complaint later that same month, led by Lee Greenfield, a UK citizen who claimed he lost more than $40,000 investing in JENNER.

The amended complaint had argued that investors had pooled their assets as Jenner promised that once the token reached a market value of $50 million, a 3% transaction fee would fund token buybacks, marketing, donations to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and a token for ownership in Jenner’s Olympic gold medal.

Blumenfeld wrote that the amended complaint heavily focused on planned donations to Trump, but didn’t explain how investors believed that doing so would provide a financial return to them.

“Nor is it clear that the alleged plan to distribute fractionalized ownership interests in Jenner’s gold medal has any bearing on Greenfield’s claim, since the plan was not announced until August 2024—after the last of his purchases—and was never executed,” he added.

Advertisement

Related: TRUMP whales load up as Mar-a-Lago luncheon approaches

Blumenfeld denied allowing the class group another chance to amend the lawsuit and added that claims regarding contracts and common law fraud under California law were best sent to state court.

JENNER was first launched on the Solana blockchain via the memecoin creator Pump.fun in May 2024. It was soon embroiled in controversy after Jenner and other memecoin launching celebrities claimed they were scammed by Sahil Arora, a claimed collaborator on the tokens.

Jenner relaunched the token on Ethereum, which investors claimed diminished the value of the original Solana token. The token has since essentially lost all of its value after hitting a peak value of nearly $7.5 million in June 2024.

Advertisement

Magazine: Memecoins: Betrayal of crypto’s ideals… or its true purpose?