Tag Archives: Company Legal & Law Matters

X sues advertisers for ‘illegal boycott’ of the platform

Posted on by

X, whose top executives have long railed against advertisers who fled the platform amid concerns over hate speech, is now also suing them. X has filed an antitrust lawsuit against the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) and several of its members, including Mars, Unilever and CVS Health, CEO Linda Yaccarino said in an open letter shared on X.

According to Yaccarino, the group engaged in an “illegal boycott” of X. “The consequence - perhaps the intent - of this boycott was to seek to deprive X’s users, be they sports fans, gamers, journalists, activists, parents or political and corporate leaders, of the Global Town Square,” she wrote.

As Axios points out, GARM is part of the World Federation of Advertisers (which is also named in the lawsuit) and was created to come up with brand safety guidelines for online advertisers. The lawsuit alleges that the group “conspired, along with dozens of non-defendant co-conspirators, to collectively withhold billions of dollars in advertising revenue from Twitter.”

GARM didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

It’s not the first time X has filed a lawsuit against a group that Musk has accused of stoking an advertiser exodus from the platform. The company previously sued the Center Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), an anti-hate group that published research showing that X failed to take down hateful posts shared by premium subscribers. That lawsuit was later dismissed by a judge who said X was trying to “punish” the group for sharing unflattering research. X is also suing Media Matters, a watchdog group that published a report showing X had displayed ads alongside anti-Semitic content.

“We tried being nice for 2 years and got nothing but empty words,” Musk, who nearly a year ago publicly told advertisers to “go fuck themselves," wrote in a post on Tuesday. “Now, it is war.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/x-sues-advertisers-for-illegal-boycott-of-the-platform-173100888.html?src=rss

The Morning After: US judge rules that Google ‘is a monopolist’ in search

Posted on by

A federal judge ruled that Google has illegally abused its monopoly over the search industry. The ruling follows a 10-week trial held in 2023, which followed a 2020 lawsuit.

Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia wrote in the ruling that the company had acted “to maintain its monopoly.”

The lawsuit claimed that Google illegally acted to maintain its dominant position in search through behavior like paying Apple, Samsung and Mozilla billions of dollars a year to be the default search engine on smartphones, browsers and elsewhere. The DOJ argued Google is responsible for almost 90 percent of web searches.

Mehta has not imposed any remedies on Google yet, but he could demand it change how it operates or even sell parts of the business. Google plans to appeal.

— Mat Smith

Neuralink successfully implants its chip into a second patient’s brain

NVIDIA’s AI team reportedly scraped YouTube, Netflix videos without permission

Elon Musk drags OpenAI into federal court

​​You can get these reports delivered daily direct to your inbox. Subscribe right here!

Apple dropped the fifth developer beta, and with it comes a few changes to Safari and Photos. Specifically, Apple’s browser gets Distraction Control. It’s not quite an ad blocker, but it could be even more useful for sites with video embeds, moving elements and other chaos. Press the Page Menu button in the Search field (where the Reader and Viewer buttons are) and tap Hide Distracting Items to select which parts of a page you want to filter out. If something you’ve chosen to block, like a headline or an ad, changes in any way, it will resurface upon your next visit.

Apple also used the update to rewind its Photos app redesign, something I wasn’t super keen on in my preview of the iOS beta.

Continue reading.

TMA
HBO

HBO has released the first teaser for The Last of Us season two. It starts with Joel (Pedro Pascal) in conversation with a new character played by Catherine O’Hara (seemingly his therapist), reckoning with his past actions. It’s set to broadcast in 2025.

Watch here.

TMA
Engadget

I won’t be taking questions at this time.

Continue reading.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/the-morning-after-us-judge-rules-that-google-is-a-monopolist-in-search-111531098.html?src=rss

Google ‘is a monopolist’ in search, US judge rules in antitrust case

Posted on by

Google is in deep trouble after a federal judge ruled that the company illegally abused a monopoly over the search industry. The ruling follows a 10-week trial held in 2023 that stemmed from a 2020 lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice and several states. 

“Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia wrote in the ruling. "It has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act."

Mehta has not imposed any remedies on Google at the time of writing. The judge may order Google to change how it operates or even sell parts of its business. 

The lawsuit claimed that Google illegally acted to maintain its dominant position in search through a number of actions, such as paying the likes of Apple, Samsung and Mozilla billions of dollars per year to be the default search engine on their phones and web browsers. The DOJ argued that Google facilitates almost 90 percent of web searches and that by paying to be the default option, it prevented rivals from achieving the kind of scale needed to compete. As such, Google is deemed to benefitted in terms of both revenue and data collection.

"Those search access points are preset with a 'default' search engine," the ruling reads. "The default is extremely valuable real estate. Because many users simply stick to searching with the default, Google receives billions of queries every day through those access points. Google derives extraordinary volumes of user data from such searches. It then uses that information to improve search quality."

According to Mehta, Google has acknowledged that losing its position as the default search engine on various platforms would harm its bottom line. "For instance, Google has projected that losing the Safari default would result in a significant drop in queries and billions of dollars in lost revenues," the ruling states. 

Google released the following statement from Kent Walker, President of Global affairs, on X regarding the judge's decision:

"This decision recognizes that Google offers the best search engine, but concludes that we shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available. We appreciate the Court’s finding that Google is ‘the industry’s highest quality search engine, which has earned Google the trust of hundreds of millions of daily users,’ that Google ‘has long been the best search engine, particularly on mobile devices,’ ‘has continued to innovate in search’ and that ‘Apple and Mozilla occasionally assess Google’s search quality relative to its rivals and find Google’s to be superior.’ Given this, and that people are increasingly looking for information in more and more ways, we plan to appeal. As this process continues, we will remain focused on making products that people find helpful and easy to use.”

During the trial, Google argued that its significant slice of market share was due to having a better product that consumers appreciated. 

In addition, the DOJ claimed that Google held a monopoly over ads that appear in search results. It argued that Google artificially inflated the prices of ads beyond what they'd cost in a free market.

In his ruling, Mehta agreed that "Google has exercised its monopoly power by charging supracompetitive prices for general search text ads. That conduct has allowed Google to earn monopoly profits." However, the judge added that Google does not hold monopoly power in the broader market of search advertising.

Meanwhile, Mehta declined to impose sanctions on Google for failing to preserve employee chat messages that may have been pertinent to the case. The ruling notes that, since 2008, Google deletes chat messages between its employees by default after 24 hours.

"The court’s decision not to sanction Google should not be understood as condoning Google’s failure to preserve chat evidence," Mehta wrote. "Any company that puts the onus on its employees to identify and preserve relevant evidence does so at its own peril. Google avoided sanctions in this case. It may not be so lucky in the next one."

Google and the DOJ are set to return to federal court in September over an ad tech case.

Update, August 5 2024, 4:40PM ET: This story was updated to include Google's statement on the ruling.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/google-is-a-monopolist-in-search-us-judge-rules-in-antitrust-case-193358356.html?src=rss

CrowdStrike says Delta’s woes aren’t its fault after massive IT outage

Posted on by

CrowdStrike has taken a lot of flak over the enormous IT outage that brought much of the planet's computer systems to a halt last month. One thing that the company isn't willing to accept full blame for though is Delta's severe flight troubles.

Delta CEO Ed Bastian said last week the company had "no choice" but to seek damages. The airline canceled more than 5,000 flights and said it was looking at a cost of over $500 million in lost revenue and compensation to passengers.

However, CrowdStrike claims it offered Delta assistance several times only to be rebuffed. "CrowdStrike worked tirelessly to help its customers restore impacted systems and resume services to their customers," CrowdStrike lawyer Michael Carlinsky wrote in a letter to his counterpart at Delta. "Within hours of the incident, CrowdStrike reached out to Delta to offer assistance and ensure Delta was aware of an available remediation. Additionally, CrowdStrike's CEO personally reached out to Delta's CEO to offer onsite assistance, but received no response."

Carlinsky goes on to state that if Delta does pursue legal action, it will have to explain "why Delta's competitors, facing similar challenges, all restored operations much faster" and why it rejected free onsite help from CrowdStrike technicians "who assisted many other customers to restore operations much more quickly than Delta." The lawyer adds that CrowdStrike's liability is contractually capped "in the single-digit millions."

CrowdStrike's public relations team made similar comments last week about Delta turning down "our repeated efforts to assist it in a speedy recovery.” However, a formal letter from the company's lawyer holds a bit more weight, especially amid the threat of legal action.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/transportation/crowdstrike-says-deltas-woes-arent-its-fault-after-massive-it-outage-181803828.html?src=rss

Elon Musk drags OpenAI into federal court

Posted on by

Here we go again. Elon Musk has filed another lawsuit against OpenAI and the company's CEO Sam Altman, two months after withdrawing a previous one. Musk once again alleges that OpenAI breached its founding commitments by putting commercial concerns ahead of the public good.

This time around, though, the suit has been filed in federal court rather than in a state court. That's because the new filing alleges that OpenAI violated federal racketeering laws by conspiring to defraud Musk, according to his lawyer, Marc Toberoff. “The previous suit lacked teeth — and I don’t believe in the tooth fairy,” Toberoff told The New York Times. “This is a much more forceful lawsuit.”

The latest suit claims that Altman and fellow OpenAI founder Greg Brockman knowingly misled Musk when the trio (and others) formed the company. It alleges that Altman and Brockman walked back on their pledge to open source OpenAI's tech by instead granting Microsoft an exclusive license to it. Microsoft has invested billions of dollars into OpenAI's for-profit subsidiary and holds a 49 percent stake (the FTC is said to be investigating those business dealings).

Furthermore, Musk has asked the court to determine whether OpenAI has achieved artificial general intelligence (AGI), a form of AI that's the equivalent of a human brain. Altman said in January that AGI could be developed in the “reasonably close-ish future.”

Per the suit, Microsoft's contract with OpenAI stipulates that once the latter has reached AGI, it can no longer use the company's tech. If OpenAI has reached AGI in the eyes of the court, then its pact with Microsoft should be declared null and void, according to the filing.

Musk filed the original suit in February. He withdrew it in June, one day before a judge was set to rule on OpenAI's request to dismiss it, but did not provide a reason for doing so.

In a response to the original suit, which it claimed was "incoherent," OpenAI says it aimed to serve the public good by creating AGI. It claims that it needed far more resources than initially thought to do so. The company added that it (and Musk) agreed that a for-profit arm was required to accrue enough resources. However, the parties disagreed on how to go about this, according to OpenAI. The company said Musk wanted full control or for OpenAI to merge with Tesla. Musk ultimately left OpenAI and eventually went on to start his own AI company, xAI.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-drags-openai-into-federal-court-152709507.html?src=rss

The Morning After: Meta is reportedly offering millions to get Hollywood voices into its AI projects

Posted on by

According to Bloomberg and The New York Times, Meta is in talks with the likes of Keegan-Michael Key, Awkwafina and Dame Judi Dench, among others, for its AI projects. The company apparently intends to incorporate their voices into a conversational generative AI-slash-digital assistant called MetaAI, which is rumored to be like Siri and Google Assistant, which could live within Facebook, Meta hardware, and all the other parts of the multimillion-dollar social network company.

The actors’ representatives are still negotiating for stricter limits, though SAG-AFTRA has reportedly agreed on terms with Meta. SAG-AFTRA, if you recall, fought for provisions to protect actors from the threat of job loss due to AI.

Didn’t Meta already do something like this? Yes. During its Connect event last year, the company also introduced a chatbot platform with 28 “characters” voiced by celebrities, including Snoop Dogg, Paris Hilton, Dwyane Wade and Kendall Jenner. However, those celebrity chatbots’ pages have since disappeared, and The Information reports that Meta has just quietly scrapped that project.

This appears to be more central to Meta’s AI ambitions.

— Mat Smith

What to expect from Google’s Pixel 2024 event

Apple apologizes for another ad that missed the mark

OpenAI is looking into text watermarking for ChatGPT, which could expose cheating students

Nintendo profits fall 55 percent as people save their cash for the Switch 2

Say goodbye to Boomerang, the streaming service dedicated to classic cartoons

​​You can get these reports delivered daily direct to your inbox. Subscribe right here!

Payments relating to a class action lawsuit filed in 2018 over Apple’s butterfly MacBook keyboards have reportedly begun. The settlement website now states that payments for approved claims will go out in August, and claimants will receive checks. For some, it could mean a check of up to $395.

After Apple introduced the butterfly keyboard in 2015, complaints arose over “sticky” and unresponsive keys. A lawsuit filed in 2018 accused Apple of knowing its keyboards had problems and concealing this from consumers. While Apple denied the lawsuit’s allegations of defective keyboards, it agreed to pay $50 million as part of a settlement. It also started phasing out the keyboard design in 2019.

Continue reading.

A guest who appeared on a podcast to boast about a hack-and-payback scheme involving his victims’ social media accounts is now facing the wrath of the FBI. It received a tip about Qibaa’s alleged extortion scheme on April 1, pointing to his appearance on the No Jumper podcast. Qibaa outlined a financial scheme using over 200 victims’ social media accounts, in which he would lock them out of their pages and charge them to regain access. He added he made about $600,000 a month.

Continue reading.

TMA
Game Informer

Game Informer announced its parent company, GameStop, is shutting the magazine after 33 years in the business. The entire website and its archives are gone, redirecting to the magazine’s final statement of thanks to its readers. The publication’s content director, Kyle Hilliard, said on X the bad news about the mass staff layoffs landed right when they were in the middle of creating an issue. Game Informer launched in August 1991 with Sonic the Hedgehog sprinting across its cover.

Continue reading.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/the-morning-after-meta-is-reportedly-offering-millions-to-get-hollywood-voices-into-its-ai-projects-111549125.html?src=rss

Apple has finally started sending out payments from its butterfly keyboard settlement

Posted on by

Payments relating to a class action lawsuit filed in 2018 over Apple’s butterfly MacBook keyboards have reportedly begun to arrive. The settlement website now states that payments for approved claims will go out in August — and sure enough, 9to5Mac’s Michael Burkhardt reports that he received two settlement checks in the mail on Saturday. Just how much eligible MacBook owners will get varies depending on the extent of the repairs their devices needed. But for some, it could mean a check (or multiple) of up to $395.

After Apple introduced the butterfly keyboard in 2015, complaints arose over “sticky” and unresponsive keys, susceptibility to debris and other major issues. The company ultimately started phasing out the design in 2019. The lawsuit filed in 2018 accused Apple of knowing that its keyboards had problems and concealing this from consumers. While Apple denied the lawsuit’s allegations of defective keyboards and did not admit to any wrongdoing, it agreed to pay $50 million as part of a settlement.

Per the settlement website, people who got two or more topcase replacements within four years of purchasing one of the affected MacBooks are expected to get between $300-$395. MacBook owners who got just one topcase replacement could get up to $125. Claimants who only needed keycap replacements will get a maximum of $50. Of course, to receive a payment, you’d need to have filed any claims by the deadlines outlined in the settlement. And, when the settlement was first reached in 2022, Reuters reported that it will only apply to customers who bought the affected laptops in California, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York and Washington. You can find the full details in the case’s FAQ.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apple-has-finally-started-sending-out-payments-from-its-butterfly-keyboard-settlement-210754935.html?src=rss

The Justice Department sues TikTok for breaking child privacy laws

Posted on by

The US Department of Justice is suing TikTok for violating a child privacy law and violating a 2019 agreement with the Federal Trade Commission for previous privacy violations. The lawsuit stems from an earlier investigation into the company by the Federal Trade Commission, which referred its privacy case to the DoJ earlier this year.

The FTC had been looking into whether TikTok had violated the terms of an earlier privacy settlement with Musical.ly, which was acquired by ByteDance prior to the launch of TikTok. According to the FTC, the investigation found that TikTok had “flagrantly” violated both the 2019 settlement and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).

In a statement, the Justice Department also cited TikTok’s collection of personal information about children on its platform and its failure to comply with the requests for the information to be deleted.

From 2019 to the present, TikTok knowingly permitted children to create regular TikTok accounts and to create, view, and share short-form videos and messages with adults and others on the regular TikTok platform. The defendants collected and retained a wide variety of personal information from these children without notifying or obtaining consent from their parents. Even for accounts that were created in “Kids Mode” (a pared-back version of TikTok intended for children under 13), the defendants unlawfully collected and retained children’s email addresses and other types of personal information. Further, when parents discovered their children’s accounts and asked the defendants to delete the accounts and information in them, the defendants frequently failed to honor those requests. The defendants also had deficient and ineffectual internal policies and processes for identifying and deleting TikTok accounts created by children.

In a statement, TikTok said it took issue with the allegations, saying it had previously addressed some of the conduct described by the Justice Department. “We disagree with these allegations, many of which relate to past events and practices that are factually inaccurate or have been addressed,” the company said. “We are proud of our efforts to protect children, and we will continue to update and improve the platform. To that end, we offer age-appropriate experiences with stringent safeguards, proactively remove suspected underage users, and have voluntarily launched features such as default screentime limits, Family Pairing, and additional privacy protections for minors.”

The lawsuit comes at a particularly inconvenient time for TikTok, which is set to face off with the Justice Department in federal court next month over a law that aims to force ByteDance to sell the app or face a ban in the United States.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/the-justice-department-sues-tiktok-for-breaking-child-privacy-laws-190456433.html?src=rss

Apple is fighting Tencent and ByteDance over in-app payments in China

Posted on by

Apple has been pressuring ByteDance and Tencent to close loopholes in China that funnel customers to external payment systems for making in-app purchases, according to a report by Bloomberg. Anyone living in the West knows the drill here. Apple wants that 30 percent commission.

Reporting indicates this pressure campaign began in May. Apple allegedly warned Tencent that it would reject crucial WeChat updates if it didn’t eliminate the ability for users to make payments outside of Apple’s ecosystem. Tencent complied with the original request, issuing an update in July, but Apple went one step further.

WeChat is home to thousands of third-party mini-games and experiences. Apple asked Tencent to disable in-game chat between creators and players, as that's another theoretical loophole that could funnel users to third-party payment systems. Tencent has yet to agree to this request.

Back in June, Apple reportedly did something similar with ByteDance. It threatened to withhold updates of Douyin, which is basically the Chinese version of TikTok, unless it plugged any gaps that steer users away from that much-coveted 30 percent commission. According to Bloomberg, ByteDance has yet to issue a formal response.

These are aggressive moves on the part of Apple. China is the world’s largest smartphone market, sure, but the iPhone isn’t the dominant brand throughout the country. As a matter of fact, the phone failed to crack the top five in sales last quarter and the company recently experienced a 6.5 percent decline in profits.

It’s also worth noting that both ByteDance and Tencent aren’t happy corporate warriors looking out for the little guy. These massive companies levy their own commissions on creators and likely didn’t want Apple cutting into their bottom lines.

An Apple spokesperson was unusually blunt in a statement to Bloomberg, simply saying that company guidelines dictate that the sale of all digital goods must go through its system and that the review team has the power to reject app submissions that violate that policy. Neither Tencent or ByteDance issued a comment to Bloomberg. 

China, like the rest of the world, has been cracking down on walled gardens like Apple’s App Store. Despite the country’s hesitance to continue allowing closed ecosystems controlled by a single entity, Apple CEO Tim Cook is bullish about its prospects in China. “We continue to be confident in the long-term opportunity in China,” he said during a recent earnings call. “I don’t know how every chapter of the book reads, but we’re very confident in the long term.”

Apple is facing numerous legal hurdles all over the world regarding its Hungry Hungry Hippos approach to gobbling up commission fees. The European Commission issued a ruling that dictates it must allow app developers to steer users to payment systems and offers outside of the App Store. The company also faces potential fines from the EU, to the tune of ten percent of global annual revenue. As for the US, Epic sued Apple over its developer transaction fee policy and many other companies have expressed their own concerns. It's also worth nothing that Tencent owns a 40 percent stake in Epic Games. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apple-is-fighting-tencent-and-bytedance-over-in-app-payments-in-china-155949462.html?src=rss

AI startup argues scraping every song on the internet is ‘fair use’

Posted on by

When most tech companies are challenged with a lawsuit, the expected defense is to deny wrongdoing. To give a reasonable explanation of why the business' actions were not breaking any laws. Music AI startups Udio and Suno have gone for a different approach: admit to doing exactly what you were sued for.

Udio and Suno were sued in June, with music labels Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group and Sony Music Group claiming they trained their AI models by scraping copyrighted materials from the Internet. In a court filing today, Suno acknowledged that its neural networks do in fact scrape copyrighted material: "It is no secret that the tens of millions of recordings that Suno’s model was trained on presumably included recordings whose rights are owned by the Plaintiffs in this case." And that's because its training data "includes essentially all music files of reasonable quality that are accessible on the open internet," which likely include millions of illegal copies of songs. 

But the company is taking the line that its scraping falls under the umbrella of fair use. "It is fair use under copyright law to make a copy of a protected work as part of a back-end technological process, invisible to the public, in the service of creating an ultimately non-infringing new product," the statement reads. Its argument seems to be that since the AI-generated tracks it creates don't include samples, illegally obtaining all of those tracks to train the AI model isn't a problem.

Calling the defendants' actions "evading and misleading," the RIAA, which initiated the lawsuit, had an unsurprisingly harsh response to the filing. "Their industrial scale infringement does not qualify as ‘fair use’. There’s nothing fair about stealing an artist’s life’s work, extracting its core value, and repackaging it to compete directly with the originals," a spokesperson for the organization said. "Defendants had a ready lawful path to bring their products and tools to the market – obtain consent before using their work, as many of their competitors already have. That unfair competition is directly at issue in these cases."

Whatever the next phase of this litigation entails, prepare your popcorn. It should be wild.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/ai-startup-argues-scraping-every-song-on-the-internet-is-fair-use-233132459.html?src=rss