Tag Archives: Company Legal & Law Matters

Google wants to put the consequences of its Epic antitrust ruling on pause during appeal

Posted on by

Update, October 18, 5PM ET: District Judge James Donato has granted an administrative stay. This effectively puts Donato's prior order, which was due to come into effect shortly, on pause until the 9th Circuit's resolves Google's stay motion. In a statement given to Engadget, a Google spokesperson said: 

"We’re pleased with the District Court’s decision to temporarily pause the implementation of dangerous remedies demanded by Epic, as the Court of Appeal considers our request to further pause the remedies while we appeal. These remedies threaten Google Play’s ability to provide a safe and secure experience and we look forward to continuing to make our case to protect 100 million U.S. Android users, over 500,000 U.S. developers and thousands of partners who have benefited from our platforms.”

The original story follows.

Google has formally filed a motion [PDF] asking the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to put a pause on the order that forces the company to open the Play store to competitors. If you'll recall, Google lost an antitrust lawsuit filed by Epic Games after a federal jury found that the company held an illegal monopoly on app distribution and in-app billing services for Android devices. Earlier this month, US District Judge James Donato ordered Google to allow third-party app stores access to the Google Play app catalog and to make those stores downloadable from its storefront. Now, Google is asking the court for a stay on that order while it's appealing the Epic antitrust lawsuit decision, saying that it will expose 100 million Android users in the US to "substantial new security risks."

The company called the order "harmful and unwarranted" and said that if it's allowed to stand, it will threaten Google's ability to "provide a safe and trusted used experience." It argued that if it makes third-party app stores available for download from Google Play, people might think that the company is vouching for them, which could raise "real risks for [its] users." Those app stores could have "less rigorous protections," Google explained, that could expose users to harmful and malicious apps. 

It also said that giving third-party stores access to the Play catalog could harm businesses that don't want their products available alongside inappropriate or malicious content. Giving third-party stores access to its entire library could give "bad-intentioned" stores a "veneer of legitimacy." Moreover, it argued that allowing developers to link out from their apps "creates significant risk of deceptive links," since bad actors could use the feature for phishing attacks to compromise users' devices and steal their data. 

One of court's main proposed changes is to allow developers to remove Google Play billing as an option, allowing them to offer their apps to Android users without having to pay the company a commission. However, Google said that by allowing developers to remove its billing system, it could "force an option that may not have the safeguards and features that users expect." 

In its filing, Google emphasized that the three weeks the court gave it to make these sweeping changes is too short for a "Herculean task." It creates an "unacceptable risk of safety" that could lead to major issues affecting the functionality of users' Android devices, it said. The company also questioned why the court sided with Epic in its antitrust lawsuit, whereas it sided with Apple in a similar case also filed by the video game company. "It is pause-inducing that Apple, which requires all apps go through its proprietary App Store, is not a monopolist, but Google — which built choice into the Android operating system so device makers can preinstall and users can download competing app stores — was condemned for monopolization."

Epic Games provided Engadget with the following statement: "The jury’s verdict and the court’s injunction were clear: Google’s anticompetitive Play Store practices are illegal. Google is merely fear mongering and falsely using security as a pretext to delay the changes mandated by the court. This is Google’s last ditch effort to protect their control over Android and continue extracting exorbitant fees. The court’s injunction must go into effect swiftly so developers and consumers can benefit from competition in the mobile ecosystem."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/google-wants-to-put-the-consequences-of-its-epic-antitrust-ruling-on-pause-during-appeal-020354621.html?src=rss

NLRB accuses Apple of illegally restricting employee Slack and social media use

Posted on by

The National Labor Relations Board has accused Apple of infringing on its employees’ rights to advocate for better working conditions. In a complaint spotted by Reuters, the agency alleges Apple illegally fired an employee who had used Slack to advocate for workplace changes at the company. Separately, the NLRB accuses Apple of forcing another worker to delete a social media post.

The case stems from a 2021 complaint filed by #AppleToo co-organizer Janneke Parrish. In October of that year, Apple fired Parrish for allegedly sharing confidential information, a claim she denies. Per the complaint, Parrish used Slack and public social media posts to advocate for permanent remote work.

She also shared open letters critical of the tech giant, distributed a pay equity survey, and recounted instances of sexual and racial discrimination at Apple. According to the labor board, Apple’s policies bars employees from creating Slack channels without first obtaining permission from a manager. Instead, workers must direct their workplace concerns to either management or a “People Support” group the company maintains. An example of the type of concerns some employees used Slack to voice can be seen in a 2021 tweet from former Apple employee Ashley Gjøvik.

“We look forward to holding Apple accountable at trial for implementing facially unlawful rules and terminating employees for engaging in the core protected activity of calling out gender discrimination and other civil rights violations that permeated the workplace,” Parrish’s lawyer, Laurie Burgess, told Reuters.

Apple disputes Parrish's claims. "We are and have always been deeply committed to creating and maintaining a positive and inclusive workplace. We take all concerns seriously and we thoroughly investigate whenever a concern is raised and, out of respect for the privacy of any individuals involved, we do not discuss specific employee matters," an Apple spokesperson told Engadget. "We strongly disagree with these claims and will continue to share the facts at the hearing."

Provided Apple does not settle with the agency, an initial hearing is scheduled for February with an administrative judge. The NLRB is looking to force the company to change its policy and reimburse Parrish for the financial hardships she suffered due to her firing. Last week, the NLRB accused Apple of forcing employees to sign illegal and overly broad confidentially, non-disclosure and non-compete agreements.

Update 7:09PM ET: Added comment from Apple. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/nlrb-accuses-apple-of-illegally-restricting-employee-slack-and-social-media-use-200059723.html?src=rss

Xbox gamers will soon be able to buy games from the Xbox Android app

Posted on by

Starting in November, Xbox players will be able to play and purchase games directly from the Xbox App on Android. Sarah Bond, the president of Xbox at Microsoft, has made the announcement on X, with a comment that the "court's ruling to open up Google's mobile store in the US will allow more choice and flexibility." She's talking about the ruling on Google's four-year antitrust battle with Epic Games that was recently handed down by US District Judge James Donato. The judge issued a permanent injunction that would force Google to give third-party app stores access to the Play library and to make Android apps available on alternative storefronts. 

As CNBC notes, players can download games to their Xbox consoles through the Android app, and Game Pass Ultimate subscribers can also stream games on their phones. However, they can't buy games straight from the app. After the court's ruling, Google won't be able to require developers to use its billing system and will be not be allowed to prohibit devs from telling people about more affordable payment options. Microsoft will be able to offer titles for purchase without having to pay Google a commission, which was most likely the reason why Xbox didn't sell games within its Android app. 

Epic's lawsuit against Google has been going on for years. In 2023, a federal jury sided with the plaintiff and found that Google held an illegal monopoly on app distribution and in-app billing services for Android devices. When Judge Donato handed down his ruling, Google told Engadget that it's going to appeal the decision, because it "fails to take into account that Android is an open platform and developers have always had many options in how to distribute their apps."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/xbox/xbox-gamers-will-soon-be-able-to-buy-games-from-the-xbox-android-app-120001529.html?src=rss

More than a dozen states sue TikTok, alleging that it’s designed to addict kids

Posted on by

Fourteen states have just filed lawsuits against TikTok that claim the social media platform damages the mental health of young users and collects their data without consent. Each lawsuit was filed individually. The suits, which are led by the attorneys general of New York and California, say the platform violated the law by “falsely claiming its platform is safe for young people.”

The lawsuits spotlight what the plaintiffs call “addictive” features. These include the kinds of things present with many modern social media apps, like 24/7 notifications and autoplay videos. However, the lawsuit also focuses on “dangerous TikTok challenges.” There have been plenty of these, from challenges that task people with taking an excessive amount of Benadryl to messing with an electrical outlet.

“Young people are struggling with their mental health because of addictive social media platforms like TikTok,” New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. “TikTok claims that their platform is safe for young people, but that is far from true.”

It’s worth noting that the aforementioned challenges were issued by other TikTok users, and not by the platform itself. However, the suits do attempt to illustrate TikTok's “underlying business model”, which is accused of “maximizing young users’ times on the platform so the company can boost revenue from selling targeted ads.”

The various lawsuits even suggest that TikTok allows for the sexual exploitation of its younger users, via a proprietary currency and a live streaming component. The TikTok Live platform is technically only for adults, but one of the suits alleges "lax age verification measures incentivize US minors to lie about their age to gain access."

Once live, users can receive currency from viewers. The suit suggests that this practice “enables other serious harms to minors including sexual exploitation" and that "TikTok is fully aware that these features combine to create an environment where children are often sexually exploited by users but has chosen to turn a blind eye in favor of increasing its profitability." 

The suits also accuse TikTok and parent company ByteDance of collecting the data of young users without consent. This is not a new complaint, as the Department of Justice filed a suit back in August that charged TikTok of collecting the personal information of children on the platform and failing to comply with requests for that data to be deleted. Texas also recently sued the platform for violating child privacy laws.

Today’s suits seek to impose financial penalties on the platform, including “the disgorgement of all profits resulting from the fraudulent and illegal practices, and to collect damages for users that have been harmed.”

TikTok has responded to the suits, saying "we strongly disagree with these claims." The platform went on to call the claims "inaccurate and misleading." It listed all of the various "robust safeguards" it has put in place to protect kids, including "default screentime limits, family pairing, and privacy by default for minors under 16." 

This is all happening as parent company ByteDance faces a decision to either sell TikTok to a non-Chinese buyer or experience a nationwide ban. The current deadline for this decision is January 17, but the company’s lawyers recently argued that the terms of this law were unconstitutional.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation provided Engadget with the following statement from the organization's free speech and transparency litigation director, Aaron Mackey:

We’re still reviewing the complaints filed by the attorneys general, but at first blush, we’re troubled. Social media algorithms aren’t inherently evil – they can sift through vast amounts of data to present users with content they’ll find relevant, entertaining, and educational. The states' claims regarding features like autoplay and endless scrolling are really just a smokescreen for their distaste for First Amendment-protected content. We doubt the attorneys general would sue if TikTok presented an endless scroll of high school math problems or excerpts from classic literature. Parents and minors, not states, should decide when and how young people use TikTok. Finally, the complaint's troubling allegations about TikTok processing user data without appropriate consent shows once again the need for strong privacy first legislation to protect all users.

Update October 8, 3:18PM ET: Added the EFF's statement.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/more-than-a-dozen-states-sue-tiktok-alleging-that-its-designed-to-addict-kids-151242893.html?src=rss

X reportedly paid its Brazil fines to the wrong bank, causing further delay in reinstatement case

Posted on by

Despite the company’s recent decision to abide by the demands of the Brazilian Supreme Court, X still isn’t back online in Brazil — and according to Reuters, that’s at least in part because it paid its fines to the wrong bank. After weeks being banned in Brazil, X in late September named a legal representative for the country as ordered, and took down accounts the court accused of spreading misinformation and hate speech. Its final hurdle was to pay off the fines that it had racked up, reportedly amounting to roughly $5 million.

Citing Friday court filings, Reuters reports that X says it’s paid the fines and requested to have services restored. But, Justice Alexandre de Moraes said the funds went to the wrong bank, and the decision will have to wait until they’ve been transferred. X maintains that it paid its fines correctly, according to Reuters. X has been banned in Brazil since the end of August. While the company initially resisted the court’s orders, it recently changed its tune and said it was working with the Brazilian government to get the platform back online in the country.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-reportedly-paid-its-brazil-fines-to-the-wrong-bank-causing-further-delay-in-reinstatement-case-164959494.html?src=rss

X lost a court battle after trying to claim ‘Twitter ceased to exist’

Posted on by

X has lost a legal fight in Australia in which the company tried to avoid a $400,000 fine by claiming that Twitter no longer exists. The creative legal argument, first spotted by ArsTechnica, came amid a more than year-long dispute with Australia’s eSafety Commission.

The commission had asked the company, then known as Twitter, to provide details about its handling of child sexual exploitation on the platform last February. In its response, X failed to answer a number of questions and left “some sections entirely blank,” the commission said in a statement last year. As a result, the eSafety Commission slapped the company with a more than $415,000 fine for non-compliance.

It was an attempt to fight that fine that led to X’s claim that it shouldn’t be responsible since Twitter had “ceased to exist.” From the court filing:

X Corp submitted that, on and from 15 March 2023, Twitter Inc ceased to be a person, and therefore ceased to be a provider of a social media service. It was submitted that Twitter Inc therefore lacked capacity to comply with the notice, and that X Corp was not obliged to prepare any report in Twitter Inc’s place, as X Corp was not the same person as the provider to whom the notice was issued.

The argument isn’t exactly new for the Elon Musk-owned entity. CEO Linda Yaccarino has also repeatedly claimed that X is a “brand new company” in a bid to avoid scrutiny. She repeated the line multiple times earlier this year while testifying at a Senate hearing on child safety issues.

Australia federal Judge Michael Wheelahan, however, found the claim unconvincing, saying that X’s argument required “leaps in logic that were not supported by adequate explanation.” X didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a statement, eSafety Commissioner Inman Grant cheered the decision. “Had X Corp’s argument been accepted by the Court it could have set the concerning precedent that a foreign company’s merger with another foreign company might enable it to avoid regulatory obligations in Australia,” Grant said.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-lost-a-court-battle-after-trying-to-claim-twitter-ceased-to-exist-203030765.html?src=rss

EU court rules social networks can’t use personal data forever

Posted on by

Once again, the European Union has issued a ruling preventing Meta from going too crazy with user information. The top court in the EU ruled that limits must be put in place for how long Meta and other social media networks can use people’s information for ad targeting strategies.

TechCrunch reported that the EU’s highest court sided with an earlier opinion published in April by a court adviser. The previous ruling also urged for limits on the amount of time companies could retain customers’ personal data for the purpose of targeting advertising.

The rulings referred its retention guidelines to the bloc’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) established by the EU in 2018. Recital 65 of the GDPR establishes a person’s “right to be forgotten” and the right to rectification and erasure of personal data. Failure to comply with the GDPR could result in a 4 percent global annual turnover penalty, a number that could reach into the billions for a social media mega-corporation like Meta. Last year, Meta had to pay a $414 million fine (or approximately €390 million) for illegally requiring users of its social media outlets like Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp to accept personalized ads.

The EU and Meta along with other big tech companies like Apple and Google have tangled over the use of personal data in relation to the Digital Markets Act. Meta is currently awaiting a fine ruling for violating the EU’s Digital Markets Act when it required users to pay to prohibit the company from collecting and sharing their personal data. Last year, the EU’s Court of Justice ruled that Meta needed to obtain consent before delivering personal ads to users in the region.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/eu-court-rules-social-networks-cant-use-personal-data-forever-193013206.html?src=rss

159 employees leave WordPress founder’s company after extortion lawsuit

Posted on by

The feud between WP Engine and Matt Mullenweg, WordPress co-founder and Automattic CEO, recently came to a head when the web hosting service sued the latter, accusing him of "abuse of power, extortion and greed." In a new blog post, Mullenweg said his opponent's attacks on him and his company have been effective enough so that "a good chunk of [his] Automattic colleagues disagreed with [him and his] actions." As a response, he created a "buy-out package" that offered employees $30,000 or six months of salary, whichever is higher, if they resign. A total of 159 people, or 8.4 percent of the company, took the offer. 

Most of the employees who left came from the company's Ecosystem / WordPress business, while the rest came from the division working on apps like Tumblr and Cloudup. As TechCrunch notes, Mullenweg gave the event a positive spin and exclaimed that "the other 91.6 percent gave up $126 million of potential severance to stay!" 

Mullenweg called WP Engine a "cancer to WordPress" and accused the company of violating WordPress’ trademarks. He said they offered WP Engine the option to "pay a direct licensing fee, or make in-kind contributions to the open source project," but the company refused. WP Engine argued that its use of the WordPress trademark was legal. In response, the WordPress Foundation changed its trademark policy page to say that the "WP" abbreviation is indeed not covered by the WordPress trademark, but to please not use it "in a way that confuses people." It named WP Engine outright and even said that the company has "never once even donated to the WordPress Foundation, despite making billions of revenue on top of WordPress." The WordPress co-founder also banned WP Engine from accessing some of WordPress' plug-ins and themes, which broke a lot of the websites it's hosting. 

WP Engine accused Mullenweg of demanding eight percent of the company’s monthly revenue as royalty and of libel, slander, as well as of violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and IRS fraud. In a statement, Automattic's lawyer Neal Katyal said he stayed up all night reading the complaint and found the whole thing "meritless." He added that he's looking "forward to the federal court’s consideration of [the] lawsuit."

Update October 4, 2024, 1:57PM ET: We updated the post to attribute the quote at the end to Automattic's lawyer.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/159-employees-leave-wordpress-founders-company-after-extortion-lawsuit-133040801.html?src=rss

Texas is suing TikTok for allegedly violating its new child privacy law

Posted on by

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against TikTok claiming the company violated a new child privacy law in the state. It's set to be the first test of Texas’ Securing Children Online Through Parental Empowerment (SCOPE) Act since it went into effect just over a month ago.

Under the law, parts of which were struck down by a federal judge, social media platforms are required to verify the ages of younger users and offer parental control features, including the ability for parents to opt their children out of data collection.

Paxton alleges that TikTok’s existing parental control features are insufficient. "However, Defendants do not provide the parents or guardians of users known to be 13 to 17 years old with parental tools that allow them to control or limit most of a known minor’s privacy and account settings,” the lawsuit states. “For example, parents or guardians do not have the ability to control Defendants’ sharing, disclosing, and selling of a known minor’s personal identifying information, nor control Defendants’ ability to display targeted advertising to a known minor."

The lawsuit also argues that the app’s “Family Pairing” tool isn’t “commercially reasonable” because it requires parents to make their own TikTok account and because teens are free to deny their parents’ requests to set up the monitoring tool. TikTok didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The app already prohibits most targeted advertising to anyone younger than 18.

"We strongly disagree with these allegations and, in fact, we offer robust safeguards for teens and parents, including family pairing, all of which are publicly available," the company said in a statement shared on X. "We stand by the protections we provide families."

The lawsuit adds to TikTok’s growing legal challenges in the United States. The company is currently fighting a law that could result in a total ban of the app in the United States. It’s also facing a separate Justice Department lawsuit related to child privacy.

Update, October 3, 2024, 8:05 PM ET: This story has been updated to add a statement from TikTok. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/texas-is-suing-tiktok-for-allegedly-violating-its-new-child-privacy-law-235432146.html?src=rss

WordPress founder sued for alleged libel and attempted extortion

Posted on by

The WP Engine web hosting service is suing WordPress co-founder Matt Mullenweg and his company Automattic. This follows a public feud over the WordPress trademark. The federal lawsuit accuses Mullenweg of “abuse of power, extortion and greed.”

This is the latest volley in an ongoing battle between WordPress and WP Engine, but it requires a bit of background. WordPress is the backend that powers a large chunk of the internet, around 40 percent of websites. Users can build a website from the ground up using WordPress or opt for an easier plug-and-play solution offered by third-party providers like WP Engine.

Mullenweg, who runs his own provider called Automattic, began loudly criticizing WP Engine back in September, calling it a “cancer to WordPress.” He said that the third-party provider’s name has confused customers into thinking it's actually part of WordPress. He also accused WP Engine of turning off certain features to save money.

WP Engine responded with a cease-and-desist letter and a request to withdraw the aforementioned comments, according to reporting by TechCrunch. It also said that its use of the WordPress trademark was legal under fair use. It went on to claim that Mullenweg threatened to take a “scorched earth nuclear approach” against WP Engine unless it agreed to pay “a significant percentage of its revenues for a license to the WordPress trademark.”

After this, the WordPress Foundation changed its Trademark Policy page and accused WP Engine of “never once” donating to the open-source arm of the foundation, “despite making billions of revenue on top of WordPress.” He went as far as to suggest that WP Engine covered up trademark abuse by editing websites. 

Mullenweg also banned WP Engine from accessing certain resources, like some plug-ins and themes. WP Engine powers over 200,000 websites and this move allegedly broke a lot of them. In response, the company wrote that Mullenweg’s “unprecedented and unwarranted action interferes with the normal operation of the entire WordPress ecosystem, impacting not just WP Engine and our customers.”

On October 1, WP Engine announced that it had developed its own solution that allowed consumers to access all of the missing themes and plug-ins. It followed that with today’s lawsuit, which accuses Mullenweg of demanding eight percent of the company’s monthly revenue as a royalty payment. The suit also alleges that Mullenweg and Automattic participated in libel, slander, violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and IRS fraud.

“Matt Mullenweg’s conduct over the last ten days has exposed significant conflicts of interest and governance issues that, if left unchecked, threaten to destroy that trust,” WP Engine said in a statement. “WP Engine has no choice but to pursue these claims to protect its people, agency partners, customers and the broader WordPress community.” Mullenweg and Automattic have yet to respond to today’s developments.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/wordpress-founder-sued-for-alleged-libel-and-attempted-extortion-152957987.html?src=rss