violation
Latest
FDA criticizes Juul for telling students its e-cigs are ‘totally safe’
In a letter published today, the US Food and Drug Administration criticized Juul for telling students that its vaping products are "totally safe" and "99% safer than cigarettes." According to the letter, Juul portrayed its products as "modified risk tobacco products." That is, Juul presented its vaping products as having "a lower risk of tobacco-related disease or are less harmful than one or more other commercially marketed tobacco products." Such claims can only be made with FDA approval, which Juul did not have.
Embedding a tweet could violate copyright
If you've ever embedded a tweet on your blog, that could be a copyright violation, according to a New York federal court ruling. Numerous sites, including Time, Yahoo (which is part of Oath, Engadget's parent company) and Breitbart published stories with an embedded tweet containing an image of NFL star Tom Brady. The tweet was posted by another party, but the photographer who took the photo accused the news sites of copyright infringement for embedding it. The judge agreed, saying their actions "violated plaintiff's exclusive display right."
The thing you'd worry about happening in an Airbnb happened
Airbnb has been slapped with a lawsuit by a woman who alleges that the apartment that she rented was equipped with a spy camera. Yvonne Schumacher says that her and her partner spotted a light peeping from behind a bookshelf in the living room only after a few days of staying on the property. They found a wide-angle lens camera that was being controlled remotely and was capable of picking up audio and recording at night. By this point, however, the pair had already done what normal people do when they think they're in the private space.
Comcast fined $33 million for publishing unlisted numbers
Comcast will pay $33.4 million in restitution after California found that the firm had broadcast the personal details of customers who paid for unlisted service. The issue centers around 75,000 users whose names, numbers and addresses were available in the company's online directory. Rubbing more salt into the wound, this data was also made available in several rural telephone books and, critically, via nationwide directory assistance. If you're asking us, publishing the names, addresses and phone numbers of people online, in print and on the internal directory seems like it's stretching the definition of "unlisted."
PayPal's failure to spot sanctioned accounts just cost it $7.7 millon
PayPal has has agreed to pay the US Department of the Treasury $7.7 million, after the financial giant processed transactions for a number of companies and individuals on the US sanctions list. A total of 486 violations of US regulations had apparently been committed by PayPal "for several years" after repeated failures in the firm's screening process, a reports explains. While the severity of each instance will vary, the Treasury highlighted a number that relate to Turkish national Kursud Zafer Cire -- an individual on the list after suspected involvement in the movement of weapons of mass destruction. The Treasury's report states that Risk Operations Agents at PayPal manually overrode at least four alerts flagging Cire as blacklisted -- resulting in transactions totalling over $7,000. Since 2013, PayPal has introduced a "long term solution" that checks for violations in real time. An investment we imagine that's a little more cost effective, than predicting future malware.
Sprint fined $7.5 million for violating your 'Do Not Call' requests
Sprint's bank account is going to be a bit lighter thanks to the FCC's recent announcement that the telco has failed to comply with customer "do-not-call" requests. The Now Network has to pay a $7.5 million fine (the largest ever) for violating your pleas for its unwanted phone-and-text telemarketing to stop, with acting chief of the enforcement bureau saying the settlement "leaves no question that protecting consumer privacy remains a top priority." What's more, the carrier also has to follow a two-year plan to ensure that it keeps following government requirements to protect said privacy. This follows a 2011 settlement that cost Sprint $400,000. Back then, it said that the do-not-call violations were the result of a server failing to process the consumer requests. This time, Sprint tells CNET that the errors were of the "technical and inadvertent human" variety, and that there's been a significant capital investment to ensure they don't happen again in the future. [Image credit: Jamie Squire/Getty Images]
Foxconn violates labor policy for PS4: Interns work overtime, night shifts
Foxconn, a prolific and controversial electronics manufacturing company in China, had student interns work night shifts and overtime to assemble Sony's PlayStation 4 console, in violation of the company's labor policy. Foxconn investigated violation claims that surfaced in China yesterday and confirmed that the students were working against internal regulations. "Immediate actions have been taken to bring that campus into full compliance with our code and policies," Foxconn said in a statement to Quartz. Foxconn said it will reinforce "the policies of no overtime and no night shifts for student interns." Foxconn noted that intern work is voluntary and students can stop at any time. The students, engineering majors from the Xi'an Institute of Technology, were at Foxconn to earn six credits for the school's internship program. Though students were able to walk away from the internship, if they did, they wouldn't receive their hours and would be unable to graduate as planned. Sony told MCV that Foxconn has been fully compliant with the Sony Supplier Code of Conduct. Many interns were assigned to menial tasks unrelated to their fields of study, including one finance and accounting major whose job was to glue together parts of the PS4, Games in Asia reported. Update: Games in Asia clarified that it was unclear if the students were paid for their work at Foxconn, or if they were compensated solely in credit hours. The story reflects this information.
Google Buzz settlement approved by FTC, yearly privacy audits incoming
Mountain View's lawyers can collectively breathe a sigh of relief, as the FTC has accepted an earlier proposal relating to Buzz's numerous privacy violations. The service -- which already settled one suit and is scheduled for rendezvous with the grim reaper -- was singled out by the commission for misleading users by partially opting them in, even after they had explicitly declined to do so. As punishment, Google will be required to field yearly audits from an independent party for the next twenty years (!). Don't mess with the law government, kids.
Senator Schumer blasts OnStar for 'brazen' privacy violation, calls for FTC investigation
Last week, OnStar issued a privacy notice informing customers that it would continue to collect data on vehicles still connected to its servers, even for those who have already canceled their subscriptions. The move elicited a chorus of protests from Democratic privacy advocates in the Senate, including Chris Coons, Al Franken and, most recently, Charles Schumer, who wrote a letter to the FTC yesterday calling for an investigation into what he sees as a bold violation of consumer rights. "By tracking drivers even after they've canceled their service, OnStar is attempting one of the most brazen invasions of privacy in recent memory," the New York Senator said. "I urge OnStar to abandon this policy and for FTC to immediately launch a full investigation to determine whether the company's actions constitute an unfair trade practice." Find out more about OnStar's new policy, after the break.
Twidroyd and UberTwitter (now called UberSocial) back online
We know you had a rough weekend, managing your micro-bloggin' and social networkin' with a web interface of all things, so we'll keep this one short and sweet: the kids at UberMedia have their once-banned apps back online! That includes Twidroyd and UberTwitter -- the latter being renamed UberSocial, but one of a few changes that the company made to ensure that it wasn't violating Twitter's usage policies. If only everything could be resolved this quickly, right?
Twitter suspends UberTwitter and Twidroyd for 'violating' its policies (update: apps are fixed, should be live soon)
Without elaborating, Twitter has just posted a help document titled "I'm Having Problems Logging In to UberTwitter or twidroyd" that gives little hope for an immediate fix: turns out the company has outright suspended both apps -- among the most popular Twitter apps for the BlackBerry / iPhone and Android platforms, respectively -- for "violating [its] policies." They go on to say that they suspend "hundreds" of apps on a daily basis for policy violations, but decided to call out these two in particular because of the high number of users potentially affected. Considering the popularity factor, we imagine this'll be solved one way or another before too long -- but in the meantime, you might want to fall back to the official apps for all three platforms. [Thanks to everyone who sent this in] Update: We've received a statement on the issue from Twitter, which says that the violations here "include, but aren't limited to, a privacy issue with private Direct Messages longer than 140 characters, trademark infringement, and changing the content of users' Tweets in order to make money." Follow the break for the full text. Update 2: Pocket-lint says that Echofon is also suspended. Things are getting pretty serious here. Update 3: UberMedia -- which owns UberTwitter, Twidroyd, and Echofon -- has said that it has "completed the changes, and new apps are currently being posted to their respective stores." They've apparently gotten an assurance from Twitter that the apps will be flipped back on as soon as the changes are live. Oh, also: UberTwitter will become UberSocial, which must be the "trademark infringement" Twitter was referring to.
The Lawbringer: 5 ways trade chat can get you in trouble
Pop law abounds in The Lawbringer, your weekly dose of WoW, the law, video games and the MMO genre. Running parallel to the games we love and enjoy is a world full of rules, regulations, pitfalls and traps. How about you hang out with us as we discuss some of the more esoteric aspects of the games we love to play? There's this place downtown that I know. You've probably been warned about it -- a seedy place of corruption, danger, intrigue, questionable math, and Tempest Keep runs where the Ashes of Al'ar are on reserve. You'll never be able to link Thunderfury last. This article is not for the faint of heart, so if you are easily offended, I would advise turning around 180 degrees and walking away. We're talking trade chat. This week, we talk about five ways trade chat can get you into some trouble with Blizzard. From naming violations to impersonating and scamming players, you can strand yourself out on some pretty thin ice with the GMs at Blizzard by violating the Terms of Use. For the sake of everyone else in game, don't.
Rambus victorious in patent fight with NVIDIA, can expect neat wad of cash for its troubles
So what if Rambus doesn't really produce anything tangible these days? We're hearing the "innovation" business is going really well for the company that recently celebrated its 1,000th patent, and now there's a nice big windfall in its near future as well. The US International Trade Commission has handed down a ruling agreeing with a previous judgment that NVIDIA infringed on three Rambus patents in the design of its memory controllers, with the ultimate outcome being a ban on importing such infringing goods into the country. Of course, that's the one thing we're sure won't be happening, but NVIDIA will now have to sign up for a license to Rambus' precious IP portfolio, which might be a tad bit costly given that GeForce, Quadro, nForce, Tesla and Tegra chips are named as being in violation -- aside from Ion, that's pretty much NVIDIA's whole hardware business.[Thanks, Marc]Update: NVIDIA, unsurprisingly, has said it will appeal the ruling. [Thanks, Xero2]
Joojoo terms of sale violate PayPal rules
It would seem that the Fusion Garage lawyers have become so embroiled in the Michael Arrington litigation that they've neglected to read the PayPal User Agreement. There in section II, subsection 4, dubbed "Prohibited Transactions," it states that the seller agrees "not to use [his] PayPal account to sell goods with delivery dates delayed more than 20 days from the date of payment." Why does that matter -- well, because the sole means to purchase the Joojoo at present is by placing an 8 to 10 week pre-order, payable exclusively through PayPal. We shouldn't jump to conclusions though -- maybe Fusion Garage freed itself from the pesky rules by offering to sell a few special edition PayPads?
Forum post of the day: Winning isn't everything
I love most of the battlegrounds. Oddly enough, even as Horde, Alterac Valley is my favorite. Warsong Gulch is the exception. Maybe because of it's small team size, it seems really difficult to get organized and the games drag out. Now I don't necessarily need honor from WSG, but I do need marks for some of my gear. Should I just go in with the intention of getting a single mark, offer no resistance to the opposing team, and collect my singular mark. That's not my style. I'm in it to win it like Yzerman. Aparently not every feels the same as I do. Pigskin of Medivh is unimpressed with mark farming. Even if it's a premade losing team, there are still often folks who get pugged into their groups who can't do much alone when they lack the support of their team. She's hoping for a response from Blizzard.
Buying gold is not a victimless crime
For many reasons I've never felt compelled to buy gold or pay for leveling on World of Warcraft. So I had no idea how the process worked. We got a tip from Kyron of Andorhal about a friend whose account was hacked. In addition to having all of his gear and gold stripped from his characters, he had 2 emails in the inbox for cheap items that he'd purchased off the auction house that the hacker had purchased for 500 gold a piece. They recorded the name of the seller from the auction house and confronted him when he next came online. It turns out that person wasn't a gold seller but a gold buyer. He'd been told to put Coarse Thread on the AH at the 500 gold rate and would receive his gold when the hacker purchased the ridiculously priced item. I didn't know how gold-buying worked, but this sounds like a way to exchange gold easily. This is something that blizzard could check into pretty easily. While sometimes players make strange prices in order to dupe would-be buyers, something like Coarse Thread would go unnoticed because most players wouldn't look for such items on the auction house.
Return of the Revenge of the Community Policing and Naming Policy Argument: The Addon
You might recall, if you've followed WoW Insider in the past few months, that I've been a relatively strong advocate of the making sure naming and RP server policies are enforced and have felt that if the community's going to be made to it, we should get better tools for the job. While I even got in a very productive conversation with Belfaire about it, I'm not holding my breath on a lot of my proposed tools and reforms seeing the light of day. After all, I work for WoW Insider, not Blizzard itself, and hey, not everyone agrees with me on how this stuff should work. Which is cool. Variety is the spice of life and all. That said, for policy reporting curmudgeons like myself, Wachunga of the Maelstrom server has created a pretty good tool: the NameViolation addon.
Apple hit with two new class-action lawsuits
Apple, despite (or because of) all its successes and odds-beating triumphs, still can't shake the occasional class-action suit being thrown its way. This week is no different, as the company sees not one, but two separate claims laid on its doorstep. The first hails from Florida, where two righteous citizens have filed suit against Apple alleging the company has "recklessly disregarded" consumers' rights. According to the suit, a law which prevents credit card information from being displayed on receipts has been ignored by the company, and if Apple is found to be in the wrong, it could be responsible for compensation to any buyer affected by its practices (that means you). The second suit comes from a man in Michigan, who claims that the Cupertino computer-maker has violated patents he owns for the inclusion of status lights on rechargeable laptop batteries. If his claim proves successful, Apple could find themselves accounting for lost profits and paying triple the awarded amount for the patent infringement. Of course, Steve Jobs loses money like that in-between his sofa cushions... right?
Nintendo finally hit with Wiimote lawsuit
C'mon, was there really any doubt about this one? We've seen everything from TVs to PDAs to windows to humans (and their scams) get jacked up thanks to Nintendo's Wiimote downright neglect, and without further ado, we present the first associated lawsuit. California-based Interlink, a company that manufacturers remote controls and other devices for business presentations, is hitting Nintendo up with a lawsuit claiming that the Wiimote violates its own "Trigger Operated Electronic Device" patent filed back in 2005. While the patent doesn't appear to focus on any kind of snazzy "full motion sensitivity" features like those enjoyed on the big N's controller, it does point out its uses as a pressure-sensitive mouse replacement, which really only relates to the Wiimote via a sweet hack job (or two). Nevertheless, the zany sounding suit may actually have more ground to stand on than we onlookers give it credit for, as we've already seen Sony's battle with Immersion head south. Sure, these filings are a dime a dozen these days, but if the signature piece of Nintendo's latest console gets tagged for royalties, who knows how much those classic title downloads could end up costing.[Via ArsTechnica, thanks Connor]
"Obvious" patent laws could become relaxed, tech firms rejoice
Lawsuits in the technology biz certainly aren't uncommon, and it looks like we may have one more significant ruling about to hit just shortly after CSIRO won its own landmark case. The US Supreme Court justices seem to be viewing earlier, lower cases with a hint of skepticism in regard to decisions that have previously worked to safeguard patented products. While the trial at hand concerns two brake manufacturers -- KSR International and rival Teleflex -- the stipulations could be far reaching; the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit previously ruled that KSR failed to prove that Teleflex (the accuser) "did not encounter teaching, suggestion, or motivation in developing the product." The generally ambiguous test is a thorn in the side of major technology companies getting slapped around by frivolous lawsuits, and Microsoft, IBM, and Cisco Systems have all made time to "submit briefs supporting KSR's stand." Still, the final decision isn't expected for quite some time, so sue-happy firms still have time to submit their counter-briefs, but folks like Vonage and TomTom (just to name a couple) would obviously (ahem) love a victory here.[Via Slashdot]
