Of course telecom companies are suing the FTC to block the new ‘click-to-cancel’ rule

An industry group representing telecom providers like Comcast and Charter has sued the FTC to block the recently-ratified “click-to-cancel” rule, as reported by Reuters. The NCTA, formerly known as the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, filed the suit with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans on the grounds that the rule oversteps the FTC’s authority.

The Interactive Advertising Bureau, which represents the online advertising industry, and the Electronic Security Association, which represents the home security industry, are also involved in the lawsuit. The groups call the FTC ruling “arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion.” There’s also language in the suit that suggests that jumping through annoying hoops to cancel a subscription is actually helpful to consumers, according to USA Today. So this little mom and pop trade organization is just looking out for us, the little guy. I’m practically glowing with appreciation.

For news junkies, the lawsuit’s venue may have raised some eyebrows. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans is widely considered to be the nation’s most right-leaning appeals court, so it’s where giant corporations and political entities like to drop suits like this.

Judges from this court temporarily banned the White House, FBI and the Surgeon General from urging social media companies to take down posts filled with misinformation. The court also invalidated a ban on bump stocks, limited access to the abortion pill mifepristone and made it difficult to fund the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB.)

Several of these decisions were reversed by the Supreme Court, so the 5th Circuit is actually markedly more conservative than even SCOTUS. To that end, 12 of the 17 judges on the court were appointed by Republican presidents, with six being appointed by former President Trump. The NCTA and its industry partners have been accused by consumer advocacy groups of “venue shopping” by selecting a federal appeals court that would likely look favorably on the suit.

“The big businesses that deploy deceptive subscription models to trap customers are trying to sue their way out of this regulation to lower costs for millions of consumers,” Liz Zelnick, director for the watchdog group Accountable.US said in a statement published by USA Today. “We’ve seen this movie before, with big industry players venue shopping in a corporate-friendly jurisdiction regardless of the impact on Americans.”

The FTC ratified the “click-to-cancel” rule on October 16 in a vote that went down along party lines. Simply put, this ruling requires providers to make it as easy to cancel a subscription as it is to sign up for one. It prohibits companies from misrepresenting their recurring services and memberships.

“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.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/of-course-telecom-companies-are-suing-the-ftc-to-block-the-new-click-to-cancel-rule-153728158.html?src=rss

EU fines LinkedIn $334 million for violating the GDPR

LinkedIn is facing a €310 million ($334 million) fine in the EU after the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) determined it had improperly conducted behavioral analyses of its members' personal data for targeted advertising. This decision argues that LinkedIn violated the GDPR by not obtaining proper consent, demonstrating legitimate interest or showing a contractual necessity to process the data it and third-parties collected. 

The DPC also reprimanded LinkedIn and handed down an order for it to collect all data in a compliant manner. "The lawfulness of processing is a fundamental aspect of data protection law and the processing of personal data without an appropriate legal basis is a clear and serious violation of a data subjects’ fundamental right to data protection," DPC Deputy Commissioner Graham Doyle stated. 

The decision stems from a 2018 complaint by the French non-profit organisation, La Quadrature Du Net, and an initial inquiry examining whether LinkedIn processed the personal data of its users lawfully, fairly and transparently. The matter was originally raised with the French Data Protection Authority and then transferred to the DPC as LinkedIn's European base is Ireland. 

A LinkedIn spokesperson shared a statement with Engadget in response to the decision: "Today the Irish Data Protection Commission (IDPC) reached a final decision on claims from 2018 about some of our digital advertising efforts in the EU. While we believe we have been in compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), we are working to ensure our ad practices meet this decision by the IDPC's deadline."

Update, October 24 2024, 9:12AM ET: This article has been updated to include a statement from LinkedIn. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/eu-fines-linkedin-334-million-for-violating-the-gdpr-123053773.html?src=rss

Apple, Goldman Sachs fined $89 million for misleading Apple Card customers

The Apple Card has landed Apple and Goldman Sachs in hot water. In a press release spotted by The Verge, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) said it was fining the two companies a combined $89 million over practices involving the Apple Card.

The CFPB says Apple failed to send “tens of thousands” of disputed card transactions to Goldman Sachs. When it finally sent the transactions to the investment bank, Goldman Sachs failed to follow “numerous federal requirements for investigating the disputes,” according to the CFPB’s announcement.

Apple and Goldman are also accused of misleading customers about the Apple Card. Some consumers believed they could make interest-free payments to purchase an Apple device with the credit card but interest charges still showed up on their bill “because they were not automatically enrolled as expected.”

Apple is also accused of keeping its interest-free payment option off of its website if the customer wasn’t using a Safari browser. The CFPB also says Goldman Sachs misled customers about the application of some refunds that racked up additional interest charges.

The CFPB has ordered Goldman Sachs to pay at least $19.8 million in redress funds and a $45 million civil money penalty. The company is also required to present a “credible plan” to comply with laws before launching any new credit card product. Apple also received a $25 million civil money penalty that will go to the CFPB’s victims relief fund.

Apple and Goldman Sachs introduced the Apple Card in 2019, advertising it as a product that could “help customers lead a healthier financial life.”. Four years later, a report from the Wall Street Journal said that Goldman Sachs was starting to have doubts about the consumer lending industry and thought the venture may have been a mistake.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/apple-goldman-sachs-fined-89-million-for-misleading-apple-card-customers-192538650.html?src=rss

A federal ban on fake online reviews is now in effect

Be warned, online merchants who see no issue in publishing phony reviews from made-up customers: that practice is no longer allowed. A federal ban on fake online reviews has taken effect.

The Federal Trade Commission issued a final rule on the purchase and sale of online reviews back in August and it came into force 60 days after it was published in the Federal Register. The agency's commissioners voted unanimously in favor of the regulation.

The rule bans businesses from creating, buying or selling reviews and testimonials attributed to people who don't exist, including those that are AI generated. False celebrity endorsements aren't allowed and companies can't pay or otherwise incentivize genuine customers to leave positive or negative reviews.

Certain reviews and testimonials written by people who have close ties with a company without a disclaimer is a no-no. There are restrictions on soliciting reviews from close relatives of employees too.

The rule includes limitations on the suppression of negative reviews from customers. It also prohibits people from knowingly selling or buying fake followers and views to inflate the influence or importance of social media accounts for commercial purposes.

Fines for violating these measures could prove extremely costly. The maximum civil penalty for each infraction is currently $51,744.

“Fake reviews not only waste people’s time and money, but also pollute the marketplace and divert business away from honest competitors,” FTC Chair Lina Khan said when the rule was finalized. “By strengthening the FTC’s toolkit to fight deceptive advertising, the final rule will protect Americans from getting cheated, put businesses that unlawfully game the system on notice, and promote markets that are fair, honest and competitive.”

The rule is a positive move for consumers, with the idea that reviews should be more trustworthy in the future. In a separate victory for consumer rights, the FTC recently issued a final rule to make it as easy for people to cancel a subscription as it is to sign up for one.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/a-federal-ban-on-fake-online-reviews-is-now-in-effect-191746690.html?src=rss

More than 10,500 artists sign open letter protesting unlicensed AI training

Some of the biggest names in Hollywood, literature and music have issued a warning to the artificial intelligence industry. The Washington Post reports that more than 10,500 artists have signed an open protest letter objecting to AI developers’ “unlicensed use” of artists’ work to train their models.

“The unlicensed use of creative works for training generative AI is a major, unjust threat to the livelihoods of the people behind those works, and must not be permitted,” the one sentence letter reads.

The letter has support from some huge names across the film, television, music and publishing industries. Some of the more famous signatures include actors Julianne Moore, Rosario Dawson, Kevin Bacon and F. Murray Abraham, as well as former Saturday Night Live star Kate McKinnon, author James Patterson and Radiohead frontman Thom Yorke.

The unauthorized use of their work to train AI models has been an area of major concern among creatives. The SAG-AFTRA union and Writers Guild of America recently held industry-wide strikes demanding better protections for their work and livelihood against the use of AI in studio projects.

There are also several lawsuits currently in courts accusing some AI developers of using copyrighted content without permission or proper compensation.On Monday, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post sued Perplexity AI for violating their copyright protections. Music labels like Universal, Warner and Sony sued the makers of the Suno and Uido AI music makers back in June for violating its copyright protections on a “massive scale.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/more-than-10500-artists-sign-open-letter-protesting-unlicensed-ai-training-174544491.html?src=rss

Wall Street Journal and New York Post are suing Perplexity AI for copyright infringement

The Wall Street Journal's parent company, Dow Jones, and the New York Post are suing AI-powered search startup Perplexity for using their content to train its large language models. Both News Corp. publications are accusing Perplexity of copyright infringement for using their articles to generate answers to people's queries, thereby taking traffic away from the publications' websites. "This suit is brought by news publishers who seek redress for Perplexity’s brazen scheme to compete for readers while simultaneously freeriding on the valuable content the publishers produce," the publishers wrote in their complaint, according to the Journal

In their lawsuit, the publications argued that Perplexity can serve users not just snippets of copyrighted articles, but the whole thing, especially for those paying for its premium subscription plan. They cited an instance wherein the service allegedly served up the entirety of a New York Post piece when the user typed in "Can you provide the fultext of that article." In addition, the publications are accusing Perplexity of harming their brand by citing information that never appeared on their websites. The company's AI can hallucinate, they explained, and add incorrect details. In one instance, it allegedly attributed quotes to a Wall Street Journal article about the US arming Ukraine-bound F-16 jets that were never in the piece. The publications said they sent a letter to Perplexity in July to raise these legal issues, but the AI startup never responded.  

Various news organizations have sued AI companies in the past for copyright infringement. The New York Times, as well as The Intercept, Raw Story and AlterNet, sued OpenAI for using their content to train its LLMs. In its lawsuit, the Times said OpenAI and Microsoft "seek to free-ride" on its massive investment in journalism. Condé Nast previously sent a cease-and-desist letter to Perplexity to demand that it stop using its publications' articles as responses to users' queries. And in June, Wired reported that Amazon had started investigating the AI company over reports that it scrapes websites without consent. 

News Corp. is asking the court to prohibit Perplexity from using its publications' content without permission, and it's also asking for damages of up to $150,000 for each incident of copyright infringement. Whether the company is willing to negotiate a content agreement remains to be seen — News Corp. struck a licensing deal with OpenAI earlier this year, which allows the ChatGPT owner to use its websites' articles for training over the next five years in exchange for a reported $250 million.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/wall-street-journal-and-new-york-post-are-suing-perplexity-ai-for-copyright-infringement-050135219.html?src=rss

Apple will launch a Business Caller ID service next year

Apple introduced some new tools to its Apple Business Connect program that could be useful for the everyday consumer. The most notable update is the introduction of Business Caller ID. When this feature rolls out next year, companies of any size can register to have their name, logo and department appear when they contact customers. In practice, that can help people distinguish between a phone call from a legitimate business and spam.

Apple Business Connect allows companies to have more control over how they appear within different apps across the Apple ecosystem. In 2023, Apple offered businesses customization for their listings in Maps, Messages, Siri and Wallet. Today's updates make Business Connect branding tools available to any company, including those without a brick-and-mortar location. In addition to the eventual rollout of Business Caller ID, the program is also adding brand info within the Mail and Phone apps. Participating companies can also add their logo to the Tap to Pay feature for contactless payments.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/mobile/smartphones/apple-will-launch-a-business-caller-id-service-next-year-223913262.html?src=rss

FCC launches a formal inquiry into why broadband data caps are terrible

The Federal Communications Commission announced that it will open a renewed investigation into broadband data caps and how they impact both consumer experience and company competition. The FCC is soliciting stories from consumers about their experiences with capped broadband service. The agency also opened a formal Notice of Inquiry to collect public comment that will further inform its actions around broadband data caps.

"Restricting consumers' data can cut off small businesses from their customers, slap fees on low-income families and prevent people with disabilities from using the tools they rely on to communicate," FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said. "As the nation’s leading agency on communications, it’s our duty to dig deeper into these practices and make sure that consumers are put first."

This topic has been a hot one of late, and the FCC launched another notice of inquiry about the practice of capping Internet access last year. In April 2024, the agency successfully required that ISPs offer clear information labels on their service plans, detailing additional fees, discounts, and upload and download speeds. Data caps could also come under additional fire as the FCC attempts to restore net neutrality rules, which classify broadband as an essential service. Returning net neutrality has not been a simple journey, however, as the agency faces legal challenges from broadband providers.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/fcc-launches-a-formal-inquiry-into-why-broadband-data-caps-are-terrible-182129773.html?src=rss

Amazon will reportedly merge its pharmacy operations and some grocery-delivery services

Amazon isn’t a stranger to acquiring various companies and services, but it’s finally taking steps to streamline its many acquisitions, as reported by The Information. PillPack, bought by Amazon in 2018, and Amazon Pharmacy, launched in 2020, are slowly being combined into one service. Amazon is also attempting to combine the online components of Whole Foods and Amazon Fresh, albeit in a different manner.

PillPack is a service that sends customers medication packs containing the required pills for a single day’s consumption, while Amazon Pharmacy is geared towards general purchases. One of the planned changes is to allow PillPack users to handle their orders using Amazon Pharmacy accounts. They can also use coupons and Prime discounts on their PillPack purchases. Additionally, Amazon Pharmacy will accept Medicare through PillPack in January.

Although Amazon has plans to expand Amazon Pharmacy to the UK, Canada and Australia, this hasn’t happened yet. The service remains US-only.

Right now, both pharmacy services already ship orders from the same facilities, which is a change from the previous arrangement. PillPack previously had its own facilities, and the change will make same-day deliveries in 20 new cities possible, bringing the total available locations close to 30 from less than 10 right now.

Amazon previously acquired Whole Foods in 2017, but it wasn’t connected to Amazon’s regular grocery deliveries or Amazon Fresh at all. Now, Amazon is placing popular items at Whole Foods and Amazon in Fresh centers in the US, UK, Italy and Spain. Shoppers can now stick to using only Amazon Fresh more often instead of buying from multiple stores at once. One driver can also deliver everything in a single order, which helps Amazon reduce costs.

Additionally, Amazon is testing a mini-warehouse located in a Whole Foods store that lets customers pick up orders. This warehouse stores products like Coca-Cola and Oreos, which aren’t allowed in Whole Foods stores due to policies. Amazon intends to help shoppers avoid visiting multiple stores due to a lack of products, a problem Whole Foods suffers from due to it stocking fewer brands.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/amazon-will-reportedly-merge-its-pharmacy-operations-and-some-grocery-delivery-services-160914672.html?src=rss

Marriott reaches $52 million settlement over years of data breaches

Marriott International is being taken to task after the hotel chain suffered multiple data breaches that exposed sensitive information for more than 344 million customers around the world. First, Marriott agreed to a settlement of $52 million with a group of 50 US attorneys general. According to Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, 131.5 million hotel customers in the states had their information compromised in the attacks on the hotels.

Second, a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission will require Marriott and its Starwood Hotels & Resorts subsidiary to implement a new information security system to protect against future data exposures. The FTC agreement includes measures such as data minimization, account review tools for its loyalty rewards programs and a link for guests to request deletion of their personal information.

Today's settlements center on three separate data breaches at Marriott and Starwood between 2014 and 2020 that allowed malicious actors to access passport information, payment card numbers, loyalty numbers, dates of birth, email addresses and other personal information. But cybersecurity issues have been an ongoing concern for these two businesses over the past decade. Hackers used "social engineering techniques" to access an employee computer and steal about 20GB of customer data. Marriott was also part of a larger attack on Pyramid Hotel Group in 2019. Starwood was victim of a data breach discovered in 2018; the company faced a fine of about $127.3 million in the UK for that incident.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/marriott-reaches-52-million-settlement-over-years-of-data-breaches-181327146.html?src=rss