FTC ratifies ‘click-to-cancel’ rule, making it easier for consumers to end subscriptions

The Federal Trade Commission has made it easier for consumers to cancel subscriptions. In a decision that went down along party lines, the agency voted to ratify a “click-to-cancel” rule that will require providers to make it as easy to cancel a subscription as it is to sign up for one. First proposed last year, the rulemaking prohibits companies from misrepresenting their recurring services and memberships, as well as failing to clearly disclose any material terms related to those offerings.

“Too often, businesses make people jump through endless hoops just to cancel a subscription,” said Chair Lina Khan. “The FTC’s rule will end these tricks and traps, saving Americans time and money. Nobody should be stuck paying for a service they no longer want.”

After considering more than 16,000 comments on the matter, the FTC decided not to write the final rulemaking as originally proposed. Most notably, the agency scrapped a proposal that would have required companies to provide consumers with annual reminders for subscription renewals. It also won’t mandate a rule that would have forced sellers to obtain the consent of those seeking to cancel a subscription before telling them about potential modifications to their plan or reasons why they should continue paying for a service.

A separate statement issued by Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter (PDF link) provides insight into the decision. Essentially, the agency felt the FTC Act doesn’t give it the authority to require a renewal notice. I’ll note here that the dissenting opinion (PDF link), written by Republican Commissioner Melissa Holyoak, contends that the entire rulemaking is overly broad, and accuses the Democratic majority of attempting to push through the change before next month's election.

“Americans understand the importance and value of such a requirement; many have discovered that they or their parents had been paying for years or even decades for a service wholly unused, such as a dial-up internet service from the 1990s,” Slaughter writes in her statement. “… Of course, we are always mindful that our authority under the FTC Act to issue rules under section 18 has limits; sometimes, as here, those limits prevent us from codifying in a rule practices that we might, as a matter of policy, prefer to require explicitly.”

Slaughter points out that state and federal lawmakers do have the authority to mandate renewal notices, and notes some states, such as Virginia, have even recently gone down that path. “The comment record compiled in this rulemaking proceeding strongly supports the wisdom of federal and state legislators’ carefully considering adopting such a law,” Slaughter writes.

Provided there’s no legal challenge to the FTC’s decision, today’s rulemaking will go into effect 180 days after it is published in the Federal Register. When the agency moved to ban noncompete clauses earlier this year, a federal judge in Texas issued a nationwide injunction. That decision is still stuck in legal limbo. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/ftc-ratifies-click-to-cancel-rule-making-it-easier-for-consumers-to-end-subscriptions-160752238.html?src=rss

X is back in Brazil after a five-week ban

X is coming back online in Brazil after officials lifted a ban that took the service offline for five weeks. Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes said Tuesday that regulators could “take steps to resume the platform's service” as the company had complied with the court’s demands.

The order for now ends a long-running dispute between Elon Musk’s X and Moraes. Moraes had demanded X block certain accounts in Brazil, which the company had described as “censorship orders.” The dispute also ensnared Starlink, which had its Brazilian bank accounts frozen after X initially refused to cooperate with the Supreme Court’s demands. The company eventually relented by blocking the accounts in question and paying close to $5 million in fines.

“X is proud to return to Brazil. Giving tens of millions of Brazilians access to our indispensable platform was paramount throughout this entire process,” the company wrote in a statement. “We will continue to defend freedom of speech, within the boundaries of the law, everywhere we operate.”

While the standoff is now over, X’s outage in Brazil helped boost at least one rival: Bluesky. The service, which began as a project at Twitter under former CEO Jack Dorsey, said it added more than 2 million new users in the days immediately following the ban.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-is-back-in-brazil-after-a-five-week-ban-231406758.html?src=rss

The White House has started posting on Reddit

Social media can play a critical role in spreading information (and misinformation) during a crisis. In an effort to promote the former and curb the latter, the White House has started getting active on Reddit. 

The profile was created on January 7, 2021, the day after insurrectionists stormed the Capitol in Washington DC. However, today was the first time the account did any public posting. All of the posts from the White House profile today have been sharing information related to relief efforts in response to Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton, which have been causing devastation along the east coast of the US. So far, the content shared on Reddit is very similar to what the official White House team is posting on X.

While today is the debut of a non-partisan White House account, federal officials have taken to the subreddits in the past. Barack Obama hosted an AMA on the platform during his tenure, but it was under his own account rather than through the auspices of the office.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/the-white-house-has-started-posting-on-reddit-230533023.html?src=rss

X is reportedly now complying with orders from Brazil’s Supreme Court

X is reportedly reversing course after weeks of refusing to comply with conditions set by the Brazilian Supreme Court that would allow it to operate in the country again. According to The New York Times, the company’s lawyers said in a Friday court filing that X has named a legal representative in Brazil as demanded by justice Alexandre de Moraes and removed accounts that the judge had identified as a threat to democracy, along with paying the fines it owed. But, the publication also reports that the Brazil Supreme Court has said X did not submit all the necessary paperwork, and now has five days to do so.

The paperwork X failed to submit is that which would prove it formally appointed a legal representative in Brazil, as required by Brazilian law, according to Reuters. X named Rachel de Oliveira Conceicao as its new legal representative in the filing on Friday. The company has been working to restore service to users in Brazil after it was blocked at the end of August, and briefly came back online earlier this week using Cloudflare’s DNS. But, it said that this was “inadvertent and temporary.” In a statement, an X spokesperson said at the time, “While we expect the platform to be inaccessible again in Brazil soon, we continue efforts to work with the Brazilian government to return very soon for the people of Brazil.”

Brazil has threatened X and Starlink with daily fines of nearly $1 million if they do not comply with the ban in the country. Justice Moraes also made it so users in Brazil could be fined roughly $8,900 if caught using a VPN to access X. The company’s latest move is a step toward resolving the issue and potentially bringing X back to Brazil legally.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-is-reportedly-now-complying-with-orders-from-brazils-supreme-court-170651920.html?src=rss

Tesla Semi fire required 50,000 gallons of water to extinguish

California firefighters needed to spray 50,000 gallons of water to extinguish a roadside Tesla Semi fire, the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) announced in a preliminary report. Crews also used an aircraft to drop fire retardent in the "immediate area as a precautionary measure," according to the agency.

The crash happened at 3:13 AM on August 19 on the I80 freeway east of Sacramento. The tractor-trailer departed the roadway while navigating a curve, struck a traffic delineator and eventually hit a tree. The driver was uninjured but taken to hospital as a precaution.

Tesla Semi fire required 50,000 gallons of water to extinguish
California Highway Patrol

The Tesla Semi's large 900kWh battery caught fire and reached a temperature of 1,000 degrees F while spewing toxic fumes. It continued to burn into the late afternoon as firefighters dowsed it with water to cool it down (Tesla sent a technical expert to assess high-voltage hazards and fire safety). It wasn't until 7:20 PM (over 16 hours after the crash) that the freeway was reopened. 

All of that caught the attention of the NTSB, which sent a team of investigators, mainly to examine the fire risks posed by large lithium-ion battery packs. The agency — which can only make safety recommendations and has no enforcement authority — said that "all aspects of the crash remain under investigation while the NTSB determines the probable cause." 

Given the long road shutdown time, dangerously hot fire and toxic fumes, the accident is likely to provoke a lot of discussion in and out of government. The NTSB concluded in 2021 that battery fires pose a risk to emergency responders and that manufacturers' guidelines around such fires were inadequate. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/transportation/evs/tesla-semi-fire-required-50000-gallons-of-water-to-extinguish-120006477.html?src=rss

A new report raises concerns about the future of NASA

A concerning report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) expresses some serious concerns about the future of America’s space exploration agency.

The NASEM report was written by a panel of aerospace experts and lays out what it sees as a possible "hollow future” for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). It addresses issues of underfunding due to “declining long-term national emphasis on aeronautics and civil space,” an assertion that NASA itself is aware of and agrees with. The report also notes that NASA’s problems extend far beyond having enough funding to carry out its missions and operations.

Some of the report’s “core findings” suggest areas of concern that could affect the space agency’s future. These include a focus on “short-term measures without adequate consideration for longer-term needs and implications,” reliance on “milestone-based purchase-of-service contracts” and inefficiency due to “slow and cumbersome business operations.” The report also raised concerns about the current generation of talent being siphoned off by private aerospace companies, and the next generation of engineers not receiving an adequate foundation of knowledge due to our underfunded public school systems. Finally the report states bluntly that NASA’s infrastructure “is already well beyond its design life.”

These and other issues could lead to even more serious problems. Norman Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive and the report’s lead author, told The Washington Post that reliance on the private sector could further erode NASA's workforce, reducing its role to one of oversight instead of problem-solving.

Congress could allocate more funds to NASA to address these concerns but that’s not likely since it’s constantly struggling to prevent government shutdowns. Instead, Augustine says NASA could focus on prioritizing its efforts on more strategic goals and initiatives.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/science/space/a-new-report-raises-concerns-about-the-future-of-nasa-184643260.html?src=rss

Utah judge blocks law preventing youth from accessing social media freely

On Tuesday, Chief US District Judge Robert Shelby granted a preliminary injunction to block Utah from limiting the social media usage of minors. Republican Governor Spencer Cox had signed the Utah Minor Protection in Social Media Act earlier in March. It was supposed to take effect on October 1, but the court’s decision to block the law is a victory for young social media users in Utah.

This isn’t the first time Utah’s governor has attempted to limit social media use among the youths in the state. Last year, he signed two bills that required parents to grant permission for teens to create social media accounts, and these accounts had limitations like curfews and age verification. He replacing the older laws in March due to lawsuits challenging their legality.

Under the law, social media companies would have been forced to verify the age of all users. If a minor registers for an account, they are subject to various limitations. The content they share would be seen only by connected accounts. Additionally, minor accounts could not be searched for or messaged by non-followers or friends, effectively nonexistent to strangers.

The primary reason for the preliminary injunction is due to NetChoice’s claim that the law constitutes a violation of the First Amendment. NetChoice is a trade association formed by tech giants such as X (formerly Twitter), Snap, Meta and Google. The association has managed to win in court battles and block similar laws entirely or in part in states like Arkansas, California and Texas.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/utah-judge-blocks-law-preventing-youth-from-accessing-social-media-freely-160008587.html?src=rss

Utah judge blocks law preventing youth from accessing social media freely

On Tuesday, Chief US District Judge Robert Shelby granted a preliminary injunction to block Utah from limiting the social media usage of minors. Republican Governor Spencer Cox had signed the Utah Minor Protection in Social Media Act earlier in March. It was supposed to take effect on October 1, but the court’s decision to block the law is a victory for young social media users in Utah.

This isn’t the first time Utah’s governor has attempted to limit social media use among the youths in the state. Last year, he signed two bills that required parents to grant permission for teens to create social media accounts, and these accounts had limitations like curfews and age verification. He replacing the older laws in March due to lawsuits challenging their legality.

Under the law, social media companies would have been forced to verify the age of all users. If a minor registers for an account, they are subject to various limitations. The content they share would be seen only by connected accounts. Additionally, minor accounts could not be searched for or messaged by non-followers or friends, effectively nonexistent to strangers.

The primary reason for the preliminary injunction is due to NetChoice’s claim that the law constitutes a violation of the First Amendment. NetChoice is a trade association formed by tech giants such as X (formerly Twitter), Snap, Meta and Google. The association has managed to win in court battles and block similar laws entirely or in part in states like Arkansas, California and Texas.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/utah-judge-blocks-law-preventing-youth-from-accessing-social-media-freely-160008587.html?src=rss

US senators urge regulators to probe potential AI antitrust violations

The US government has noticed the potentially negative effects of generative AI on areas like journalism and content creation. Senator Amy Klobuchar, along with seven Democrat colleagues, urged the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Justice Department to probe generative AI products like ChatGPT for potential antitrust violations, they wrote in a press release

"Recently, multiple dominant online platforms have introduced new generative AI features that answer user queries by summarizing, or, in some cases, merely regurgitating online content from other sources or platforms," the letter states. "The introduction of these new generative AI features further threatens the ability of journalists and other content creators to earn compensation for their vital work." 

The lawmakers went on to note that traditional search results lead users to publishers' websites while AI-generated summaries keep the users on the search platform "where that platform alone can profit from the user's attention through advertising and data collection." 

These products also have significant competitive consequences that distort markets for content. When a generative AI feature answers a query directly, it often forces the content creator—whose content has been relegated to a lower position on the user interface—to compete with content generated from their own work.

The fact that AI may be scraping news sites and then not even directing users to the original source could be a form of "exclusionary conduct or an unfair method of competition in violation of antitrust laws," the lawmakers concluded. (That's on top being a potential violation of copyright laws, but that's another legal battle altogether.)

Lawmakers have already proposed a couple of bills designed to protect artists, journalists and other from unauthorized generative AI use. In July, three senators introduced the COPIED Act to combat and monitor the rise of AI content and deepfakes. Later in the month, a group of senators introduced the NO FAKES Act, a law that would make it illegal to make digital recreations of a person's voice or likeness without their consent.

AI poses a particularly large risk to journalism, both local and global, by removing the sources of revenue that allow for original and investigative reporting. The New York Times, for one, cited instances of ChatGPT providing users with "near-verbatim excerpts" from paywalled articles. OpenAI recently admitted that it's impossible to train generative AI without copyrighted materials. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/us-senators-urge-regulators-to-probe-potential-ai-antitrust-violations-110012387.html?src=rss

US senators urge regulators to probe potential AI antitrust violations

The US government has noticed the potentially negative effects of generative AI on areas like journalism and content creation. Senator Amy Klobuchar, along with seven Democrat colleagues, urged the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Justice Department to probe generative AI products like ChatGPT for potential antitrust violations, they wrote in a press release

"Recently, multiple dominant online platforms have introduced new generative AI features that answer user queries by summarizing, or, in some cases, merely regurgitating online content from other sources or platforms," the letter states. "The introduction of these new generative AI features further threatens the ability of journalists and other content creators to earn compensation for their vital work." 

The lawmakers went on to note that traditional search results lead users to publishers' websites while AI-generated summaries keep the users on the search platform "where that platform alone can profit from the user's attention through advertising and data collection." 

These products also have significant competitive consequences that distort markets for content. When a generative AI feature answers a query directly, it often forces the content creator—whose content has been relegated to a lower position on the user interface—to compete with content generated from their own work.

The fact that AI may be scraping news sites and then not even directing users to the original source could be a form of "exclusionary conduct or an unfair method of competition in violation of antitrust laws," the lawmakers concluded. (That's on top being a potential violation of copyright laws, but that's another legal battle altogether.)

Lawmakers have already proposed a couple of bills designed to protect artists, journalists and other from unauthorized generative AI use. In July, three senators introduced the COPIED Act to combat and monitor the rise of AI content and deepfakes. Later in the month, a group of senators introduced the NO FAKES Act, a law that would make it illegal to make digital recreations of a person's voice or likeness without their consent.

AI poses a particularly large risk to journalism, both local and global, by removing the sources of revenue that allow for original and investigative reporting. The New York Times, for one, cited instances of ChatGPT providing users with "near-verbatim excerpts" from paywalled articles. OpenAI recently admitted that it's impossible to train generative AI without copyrighted materials. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/us-senators-urge-regulators-to-probe-potential-ai-antitrust-violations-110012387.html?src=rss