Disney announced a new rule intended to curb password sharing among its streaming subscribers, following through on plans initially shared last month in an earnings call. Today's blog post from the company explained that Disney+ is getting a Paid Sharing feature. For an additional $7 a month on Disney+ Basic or $10 a month on Disney+ Premium, an account holder can provide access to their plan to one person outside their household, dubbed an Extra Member. Paid Sharing is rolling out today in the US, Canada, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Europe and Asia-Pacific.
With the upcoming price increases — $10 a month for Basic and $16 a month for Premium — the Extra Member route is still cheaper than buying a separate Disney+ plan. However, the Paid Sharing option comes with several caveats. For starters, only one Extra Member is allowed per account. And if your plan is part of a Disney Bundle, you don't have access to the Extra Member feature at all. Ditto for any subscribers billed through Disney's partners, meaning bundle customers are out of luck. The post says those restrictions apply "at this time," but doesn't give any hint as to whether the company is considering a policy change in the future.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/streaming/disney-account-sharing-crackdown-starts-today-in-the-us-201102641.html?src=rss
Disney announced a new rule intended to curb password sharing among its streaming subscribers, following through on plans initially shared last month in an earnings call. Today's blog post from the company explained that Disney+ is getting a Paid Sharing feature. For an additional $7 a month on Disney+ Basic or $10 a month on Disney+ Premium, an account holder can provide access to their plan to one person outside their household, dubbed an Extra Member. Paid Sharing is rolling out today in the US, Canada, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Europe and Asia-Pacific.
With the upcoming price increases — $10 a month for Basic and $16 a month for Premium — the Extra Member route is still cheaper than buying a separate Disney+ plan. However, the Paid Sharing option comes with several caveats. For starters, only one Extra Member is allowed per account. And if your plan is part of a Disney Bundle, you don't have access to the Extra Member feature at all. Ditto for any subscribers billed through Disney's partners, meaning bundle customers are out of luck. The post says those restrictions apply "at this time," but doesn't give any hint as to whether the company is considering a policy change in the future.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/streaming/disney-account-sharing-crackdown-starts-today-in-the-us-201102641.html?src=rss
Mozilla is the latest company to get in trouble with the EU. Austrian advocacy group Noyb has filed a complaint against Mozilla for setting a Privacy Preserving Attribution (PPA) feature to default without informing its users. Noyb claims the setting impacts millions of Europeans.
According to Mozilla, PPA involves websites asking Firefox to remember ads they show and to potentially generate an interest report. Firefox creates the data but then submits it to an aggregation service, where the report is combined with similar ones. The company claims individual's browsing activity isn't shared with any third-parties, making it a safer system.
Noyb's complaint alleges that this still interferes with EU users' GDPR-confirmed rights — while taking a dig at widespread tracking being the "norm" in the US. "Mozilla has just bought into the narrative that the advertising industry has a right to track users by turning Firefox into an ad measurement tool," said Felix Mikolasch, a data protection lawyer at Noyb, in a statement. "While Mozilla may have had good intentions, it is very unlikely that 'privacy preserving attribution' will replace cookies and other tracking tools. It is just a new, additional means of tracking users." Users wanting to turn PPA off must navigate to the browser's settings and click opt-out in a sub-menu.
The complaint ends with Noyb requesting that the Austrian data protection authority investigates Mozilla's privacy settings. It also states that Mozilla should alert users about its data processing steps, use an opt-in system and delete "unlawfully" processed data. Noyb has previously lodged complaints against tech companies such as Microsoft, Meta and OpenAI.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/mozilla-faces-a-privacy-complaint-over-firefoxs-tracking-134047980.html?src=rss
Governor Gavin Newsom has signed California's "click to cancel" Assembly Bill 286 into law to make it easier for consumers to opt out of subscriptions. The bill, introduced in April 2024, forces companies that permit online or in-app sign-ups to allow for online or in-app unsubscribing as well.
"AB 2863 is the most comprehensive ‘Click to Cancel’ legislation in the nation, ensuring Californians can cancel unwanted automatic subscription renewals just as easily as they signed up — with just a click or two,” said California Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo.
Like many, you may have signed up for a thing online and when you go to cancel it, are presented with a phone number. You then have to spend an hour on hold before being allowed to convince the person on the other end of a line that you can cancel a subscription that took five seconds to sign up for. California's new bill is designed to kibosh that sort of behavior, though companies have until mid-2025 to comply.
Adobe is one of the more notable examples of this behavior, particularly since its subscriptions can cost $60 per month. Earlier this year, the FTC sued the company over early termination fees and roadblocks to unsubscribing, calling the practices "illegal."
The FTC has proposed a similar law last year that would apply across the US, but the finalized rule is still to come. Meanwhile, if you're having trouble cancelling a subscription Engadget created a guide on how to do so with commonly used plans.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/californias-click-to-cancel-subscription-bill-is-signed-into-law-123058770.html?src=rss
Governor Gavin Newsom has signed California's "click to cancel" Assembly Bill 286 into law to make it easier for consumers to opt out of subscriptions. The bill, introduced in April 2024, forces companies that permit online or in-app sign-ups to allow for online or in-app unsubscribing as well.
"AB 2863 is the most comprehensive ‘Click to Cancel’ legislation in the nation, ensuring Californians can cancel unwanted automatic subscription renewals just as easily as they signed up — with just a click or two,” said California Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo.
Like many, you may have signed up for a thing online and when you go to cancel it, are presented with a phone number. You then have to spend an hour on hold before being allowed to convince the person on the other end of a line that you can cancel a subscription that took five seconds to sign up for. California's new bill is designed to kibosh that sort of behavior, though companies have until mid-2025 to comply.
Adobe is one of the more notable examples of this behavior, particularly since its subscriptions can cost $60 per month. Earlier this year, the FTC sued the company over early termination fees and roadblocks to unsubscribing, calling the practices "illegal."
The FTC has proposed a similar law last year that would apply across the US, but the finalized rule is still to come. Meanwhile, if you're having trouble cancelling a subscription Engadget created a guide on how to do so with commonly used plans.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/californias-click-to-cancel-subscription-bill-is-signed-into-law-123058770.html?src=rss
X has published its most detailed accounting of its content moderation practices since Elon Musk’s takeover of the company. The report, X’s first in more than a year, provides new insight into how X is enforcing its rules as it struggles to hang on to advertisers who have raised concerns about toxicity on the platform.
The report, which details content takedowns and account suspensions from the first half of 2024, shows that suspensions have more than tripled since the last time the company shared data. X suspended just under 5.3 million accounts during the period, compared with 1.6 million suspensions during the first six months of 2022.
In addition to the suspensions, X says it “removed or labeled” more than 10.6 million posts for violating its rules. Violations of the company’s hateful conduct policy accounted for nearly half of that number, with X taking action on 4.9 million such posts. Posts containing abuse and harassment (2.6 million) and violent content (2.2 million) also accounted for a significant percentage of the takedowns and labels.
While these numbers don’t tell a complete story about the state of content on X — the company doesn’t distinguish between posts it removes and those that it labels, for example — it shows that hateful, abusive and violent content are among the biggest issues facing the platform. Those are also the same issues numerous advertisers and civil rights groups have raised concerns about since Musk’s takeover of the company. In the report, X claims that rule-breaking content accounted for less than 1 percent of all posts shared on the platform.
X
The numbers also suggest there have been significant increases in this type of content since Twitter last shared numbers prior to Musk’s takeover. For example, in the last half of 2021, the last time Twitter shared such data, the company reported it suspended about 1.3 million accounts for terms of service violations and “actioned” about 4.3 million.
X previously published an abbreviated report in a 383-word blog post last April, which shared some stats on content takedowns, but offered almost no details on government requests for information or post removals. The new report is a significant improvement on that front. It says that X received 18,737 government requests for information, with the majority of the requests coming from within the EU and a reported disclosure rate of 53 percent. X also received 72,703 requests from governments to remove content from its platform. The company says it took action in just over 70 percent of cases. Japan accounted for the vast majority of those requests (46,648), followed by Turkey (9,364).
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-just-released-its-first-full-transparency-report-since-elon-musk-took-over-110038194.html?src=rss
X has published its most detailed accounting of its content moderation practices since Elon Musk’s takeover of the company. The report, X’s first in more than a year, provides new insight into how X is enforcing its rules as it struggles to hang on to advertisers who have raised concerns about toxicity on the platform.
The report, which details content takedowns and account suspensions from the first half of 2024, shows that suspensions have more than tripled since the last time the company shared data. X suspended just under 5.3 million accounts during the period, compared with 1.6 million suspensions during the first six months of 2022.
In addition to the suspensions, X says it “removed or labeled” more than 10.6 million posts for violating its rules. Violations of the company’s hateful conduct policy accounted for nearly half of that number, with X taking action on 4.9 million such posts. Posts containing abuse and harassment (2.6 million) and violent content (2.2 million) also accounted for a significant percentage of the takedowns and labels.
While these numbers don’t tell a complete story about the state of content on X — the company doesn’t distinguish between posts it removes and those that it labels, for example — it shows that hateful, abusive and violent content are among the biggest issues facing the platform. Those are also the same issues numerous advertisers and civil rights groups have raised concerns about since Musk’s takeover of the company. In the report, X claims that rule-breaking content accounted for less than 1 percent of all posts shared on the platform.
X
The numbers also suggest there have been significant increases in this type of content since Twitter last shared numbers prior to Musk’s takeover. For example, in the last half of 2021, the last time Twitter shared such data, the company reported it suspended about 1.3 million accounts for terms of service violations and “actioned” about 4.3 million.
X previously published an abbreviated report in a 383-word blog post last April, which shared some stats on content takedowns, but offered almost no details on government requests for information or post removals. The new report is a significant improvement on that front. It says that X received 18,737 government requests for information, with the majority of the requests coming from within the EU and a reported disclosure rate of 53 percent. X also received 72,703 requests from governments to remove content from its platform. The company says it took action in just over 70 percent of cases. Japan accounted for the vast majority of those requests (46,648), followed by Turkey (9,364).
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-just-released-its-first-full-transparency-report-since-elon-musk-took-over-110038194.html?src=rss
One day after X started to come back online for some people in Brazil, the country’s Supreme Court is threatening the social media company and Elon Musk-owned Starlink with hefty daily fines. In a new order posted online, Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered regulators to “reactivate” blocking of X and said that the two companies could be hit with close $1 million a day in fines for not complying.
The latest order from Moraes, who has been publicly sparring with Musk for months, comes after X became accessible again in Brazil for many users on Wednesday. The company said in an earlier statement the change was "an inadvertent and temporary service restoration" that happened as a result of changing network providers.
Following Brazil’s ban last month, X reportedly shifted to using Cloudflare’s servers in the region, which made it more difficult for Brazilian ISPs to carry out the block. The company said Wednesday it made the change in network providers in order to “to provide service to Latin America” and that it expected its service in Brazil to go offline again “soon.”
Now, Moraes says that X could be fined the equivalent of $921,000 a day, beginning September 19, for each day of “non-compliance” with the ban. Starlink, which previously saw its Brazilian bank accounts frozen amid the dispute, faces “joint liability” if X doesn't pay, according to the order. Moraes also ordered the country’s internet regulator to “take immediate measures to prevent access to the platform by blocking the ‘CDN Cloudflare, Fastly and EdgeUno’ servers, and other similar ones, created to circumvent the court order that suspended the operation of the old Twitter in Brazil.”
X didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/brazil-threatens-daily-fines-for-x-and-starlink-for-non-compliance-with-ban-194542476.html?src=rss
Meta is once again at risk of getting fined heavily by the European Commission. The bloc's regulatory arm is preparing its findings that Meta linked its Marketplace service to Facebook to undermine competitors, the Financial Times reports, citing sources familiar with the case.
If found guilty, Meta could be on the hook for 10 percent of its global annual revenue — a number that reached almost $135 billion last year. However, the fine could be much smaller, and Meta will almost certainly appeal it.
The Commission launched its initial probe in 2019, announcing its preliminary findings three years later that "Meta ties its dominant social network Facebook to its online classified ad services called Facebook Marketplace," Margrethe Vestager, executive vice-president in charge of competition policy, stated at the time. "Furthermore, we are concerned that Meta imposed unfair trading conditions, allowing it to use of data on competing online classified ad services. If confirmed, Meta's practices would be illegal under our competition rules." Meta faces other investigations from the Commission into its election policies, addiction and safety concerns for minors and its consent or pay model.
The news comes at a transitionary time for the European Commission, with President Ursula von der Leyen announcing her new team just yesterday. The shakeup for her second term will see Margrethe Vestager, head of competition for the last decade, replaced by Teresa Ribera. Reports that Vestiger would be stepping down this year first surfaced in August.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/meta-could-face-massive-eu-fines-over-marketplace-competition-113033743.html?src=rss
Google is trying to be more transparent about whether a piece of content was created or modified using generative AI (GAI) tools. After joining the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA) as a steering committee member earlier this year, Google has revealed how it will start implementing the group’s digital watermarking standard.
Alongside partners including Amazon, Meta, and OpenAI, Google has spent the past several months figuring out how to improve the tech used for watermarking GAI-created or modified content. The company says it helped to develop the latest version of Content Credentials, a technical standard used to protect metadata detailing how an asset was created, as well as information about what has been modified and how. Google says the current version of Content Credentials is more secure and tamperproof due to stricter validation methods.
In the coming months, Google will start to incorporate the current version of Content Credentials into some of its main products. In other words, it should soon be easier to tell whether an image was created or modified using GAI in Google Search results. If an image that pops up has C2PA metadata, you should be able to find out what impact GAI had on it via the About this image tool. This is also available in Google Images, Lens and Circle to Search.
The company is looking into how to use C2PA to tell YouTube viewers when footage was captured with a camera. Expect to learn more about that later this year.
Google also plans to use C2PA metadata in its ads systems. It didn't reveal too many details about how its plans there other than to say it will use "C2PA signals to inform how we enforce key policies" and do so gradually.
Of course, the effectiveness of this all depends on whether companies such as camera makers and the developers of GAI tools actually use the C2PA watermarking system. The approach isn't going to stop someone from stripping out an image's metadata either. That could make it harder for systems such as Google's to detect any GAI usage.
Meanwhile, throughout this year, we've seen Meta wrangle over how to disclose whether images were created with GAI across Facebook, Instagram and Threads. The company just changed its policy to make labels less visible on images that were edited with AI tools. Starting this week, if C2PA metadata indicates that someone (for instance) used Photoshop's GAI tools to tweak a genuine photo, the "AI info" label no longer appears front and center. Instead, it's buried in the post's menu.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/heres-how-google-will-start-helping-you-figure-out-which-images-are-ai-generated-150219272.html?src=rss