penalty
Latest
SEC fines Block.one $24 million for unregistered ICO worth billions
Blockchain technology company Block.one has been fined $24 million by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for running an unregistered ICO (initial coin offering). According to the SEC, the company conducted the ICO between June 2017 and June 2018, raising several billion dollars' worth of digital assets, but did not register it as a securities offerings as stipulated by federal securities law. The SEC says this meant investors were not given the information they needed to make informed decisions.
Facebook's FTC punishment could involve 20 years of oversight
Facebook and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are edging closer to negotiating the tech giant's multibillion dollar penalty for security failures. Reuters reports that the deal "could be a month away" and could put the company under 20 years of privacy oversight.
Google could face a massive EU Android competition fine in July
Judgement on Google's ongoing antitrust Android case could be passed as soon as next month, according to people familiar with the issue, and it seems that things aren't looking good for the company. The Financial Times and Politico report that while the size of the potential fine is unclear, it's likely to be higher than the $2.8 billion Google was hit with last year in a separate case, and could be as high as $11 billion, since the European Commission has the power to impose fines up to 10 percent of a business' global turnover.
Intel escapes €1.06bn antitrust fine... for the time being
The highest court in the European Union has ordered a €1.06 billion ($1.4 billion) antitrust fine against Intel be re-examined, heralding a victory for other technology companies currently facing similar investigations from Europe. In 2009, the European Commission found that Intel had "harmed" its rivals by giving incentives to computer makers Dell, Lenovo and HP for using its microprocessor chips instead of those from rival AMD. Intel appealed, but the fine was upheld in 2014.
Zarhym explains Blizzard's player monitoring systems
Senior Community Rep Zarhym has taken to the forums to wax lyrical about the ways Blizzard monitors player behavior in WoW. He's responding specifically to player concerns about the reporting system, and how it doesn't allow a specific option to report griefers who do things like start an encounter in the Raid Finder and then leave. The OP asserts that this indicates that Blizzard just doesn't care about this sort of behavior. Zarhym steps in to clarify that, firstly, Blizzard definitely cares about that sort of action. They care so much, in fact, that since Wrath of the Lich King, when the Dungeon Finder first appeared, Blizzard has had, and augmented, a system to monitor exactly that sort of behavior. Of course, as with any system designed to automatically punish players, which could potentially be gamed, they can't go into great detail about the workings of the system itself. But what it essentially does is monitor vote-kicks initiated, vote-kicks received, early departures and the like, and penalizes the player with more onerous deserter debuffs and such. Hit the break for Zarhym's post in full.
AMD cuts silicon wafer order by three quarters, gets a nasty fine
If you're in need of a concrete example of how the chip-making industry is trickier than ever, and how it rewards scale at the expense of flexibility, then please, look no further. AMD has just significantly reduced its order for silicon wafers from its old mate Globalfoundries, in an effort to avoid the inventory surpluses and write-downs that have recently plagued its balance sheet. Instead of buying the originally agreed $500 million-worth of cake trays this quarter, it's now committed to spending just $115 million. Except it was never, ever gonna be that simple. In lieu of reneging on its contract at short notice, AMD will have to pay Globalfoundries a $320 million penalty on top, bringing the final cost of the deal to just $65 million less than what it would have paid for the full order. On the plus side, of course, that's still a major saving for a company which is going through an intense rough patch (to say the least) and trying to cling to every dime. Besides, AMD managed to get out of paying the fee as a lump sum, while also reducing its obligations for 2013 and agreeing to pay Globalfoundries less for R&D once it shifts to a more standard 28nm process -- so it can't entirely have run out of clout.
Google to pay $22.5 million to settle FTC charges over tracking cookies in Apple's Safari browser
Google has agreed to pay a $22.5 million penalty to settle its dispute with the FTC, over the company's role in bypassing browser settings in Apple's Safari web browser. Although it stated that it wouldn't use tracking cookies or targeted ads in the web browser, a loophole was discovered, violating a previous privacy settlement between the FTC and Google. According to the commission, the company exploited an exception in the browser's default settings, adding a temporary cookie that could temporarily open up access to all cookies from the DoubleClick domain. While the exploit was patched by Google, for a limited time, it was able to track Safari users that had explicitly opted out. The FTC's full statement is right after the break.
AUO, LG, Toshiba pay $571 million to settle LCD price fixing lawsuit, broken record keeps skipping
The way LCD price fixing lawsuits keep popping up and settling in short order, you'd think they were going out of style. The latest motley group to face a reckoning includes AU Optronics, LG and Toshiba, the combination of which has agreed to pay a total of $571 million to eight separate American states to either avoid the legal wrath of a class action lawsuit or to pay an outstanding fine. Allegedly, the trio kept LCD prices artificially high between 1996 and 2006, hiking the prices of PCs and TVs in the process. There's a slight twist here: while keeping the display builders honest is the primary goal, the class action status will net some direct rewards for the public. Americans who claim to have been wronged in the scandal can get "at least" $25, which goes a lot further towards buying an LCD than it did six years ago.
Weibo services 'punished' for Beijing coup rumors, comments temporarily disabled
For a country who doesn't really do April Fools' Day, you know China means business when it lays the smackdown on its weibo services. Here's the background story: about a week ago there was a rumor on the Chinese web about a military coup on one of the main streets in Beijing, and coincidentally I was in town around the time (for the Windows Phone launch). Funnily enough, I wasn't aware of this at all until my taxi driver in Hong Kong asked me about my visit, as he claimed that the passenger he picked up beforehand was actually a Chinese military officer who had several intense phone calls about said coup.But of course, nothing actually happened. In fact, the guards at Tiananmen Square and the Forbidden City were pretty relaxed when I visited on that very day. As for the rumormongers, the Chinese government announced through Xinhua that 16 websites have been shut down and six people have been detained, while local microblogging platforms Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo have been "criticized and punished accordingly," though it didn't elaborate on the details. All we know is that comments under each weibo post are now disabled until local time 8pm on April 3rd, during which these two companies can, in their own words, clean up the mess. Well, at least we now know where to draw the line for China's April Fools'.
Nokia penalised for texting tips to Aussie users, regrets not adding unsubscribe option
Here's a bit of bad news for those who actually enjoy receiving Nokia's regular tips via SMS: Reuters reports that the Australian Communications and Media Authority has slapped the Finnish company a hefty A$55,000 ($58,000) fine, with the reason being that there was no way to unsubscribe from said messages. This kind of flaw sure is a surprise at this day and age, but Nokia's already taken action by simply axing this spammy service entirely in Australia, while at the same time "ramping it down elsewhere" just to be safe, according to Reuters. If Pope Benedict is still going about his texting business over there, we sure hope he won't be next on the Aussie naughty list. [Image credit: Ester Inbar]
Golf revises its rules to account for HDTV, DVR technology
You can watch the currently underway Masters Tournament this year in high definition and even 3D, but it will be a little harder to be a part of the action from your couch thanks to just-enacted rules by the United States Golf Association. Recently there have been multiple incidents of players being disqualified for not reporting breaches of the rules that were spotted and called out by viewers at home, equipped with HDTVs and DVRs able to detect minor infractions that might have otherwise been missed during play. Two examples specifically referenced are Padraig Harrington's disqualification at Abu Dhabi after his ball moved slightly when he replaced his marker (would be a penalty, but not a DQ now) and when Camilo Villegas moved a divot as his shot was rolling (still a DQ.) The rules are on the USGA website but you'll have to pardon us, we have some calls to make to David Stern about exactly how many steps you can take without dribbling the ball.
The Daily Grind: To die, to sleep no more...
There's one way in which MMOs universally mirror life -- in the words of William Shatner, you are going to die. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but sooner or later your character is going to expire. Unwanted aggro, environmental damage, unmatched PvP, misuse of skills, healer AFK... there are a lot of ways you can bite the dust time and again. Of course, death in real life is a lot more permanent than that of an MMO -- but dying still carries consequences, ranging from losing your hard-won equipment to a slightly longer delay before your next level. On the one hand, harsher penalties make cheating death that much more satisfying, and they help encourage teamwork and community in hopes of avoiding that fate. On the other hand, you are going to get hit by those harsh penalties sooner or later, and it makes experimentation much less feasible when you're constantly on guard for death. Where do you prefer a game's death penalty? Do you want to cautiously avoid falling, or would you rather get hit with a slap on the wrist so you can get back in the game quickly?
Dell fined $30,000 by Taiwan government over pricing mishaps
Let this be a lesson for all you kids thinking about opening some online shop with a funky database: pricing errors can cost ya, especially if you're doing business in Taiwan. After a couple of downright embarrassing slip-ups on Dell's Taiwanese web store, followed by a failure to compensate those who got orders in appropriately, Taiwan's government has levied a NT$1,000,000 fine (that's just over 30 grand in Greenbacks) on the computer giant. The actual details of the penalty are somewhat vague, but it seems as if the fine will be imposed until Dell decides to "take consumer rights seriously." In other words, Dell's stuck paying up unless it flips a 180 real quick and honors the flood of purchases made at rock-bottom prices. C'mon Dell, do the right thing. Or write the check -- evidently it's totally your call.[Via Engadget Chinese, image courtesy of AdRants]
Drugs aren't bad in EVE, m'kay?
One of the interesting features of EVE Online is that it has a drug trade in which players are actively engaged. Rather than merely being an illegal commodity, drugs -- called boosters -- enhance the performance of EVE's pilots, albeit with some potential side effects. To understand boosters though, we'll need to look into the game's setting a bit first. The thing to remember is that as a player, you're a capsuleer. You're not standing on the bridge of your ship barking orders at subordinates. Rather, you're floating inside a metallic capsule deep within your ship. Your mind is interfaced with the ship you pilot via neural implants, thus your vessel is an extension of your body and its senses; you regulate the ship's activities merely by thinking about them. Not all people in EVE's setting of New Eden have the raw potential to become a capsuleer, making your character one of the elite. However, when faced with others of your caliber in combat, every possible edge you can gain over rival capsuleers helps. That's where boosters come in... they're your edge. Boosters augment aspects of your mental processes and thus provide certain bonuses when piloting your ship.
The death penalty and you
No no no, we're not talking about that death penalty. We're talking about the MMO death penalties that seem to cause people to outright quit games. It's a tedious line between what's a good death penalty and what's a bad one; and no one seems to have found the perfect fit just yet.Snipehunter at Dopass.com has the opinion that Age of Conan's tombstone debuff death penalty is too punishing. His argument is that applying a debuff to a player just means that their chances of successfully removing the tombstone from where they died (and subsequently removing the debuff) are now worse. If they couldn't kill the monster the first time round, how can they kill it with the debuff in place?
Forum post of the day: Docking DKP
To function properly, all guilds must have rules for participation, gear, and general order. Since the ancient MMORPG days, many guilds have assigned Dragon Kill Points (DKP) to players for their participation in raids and events. The points are turned in for gear rewards from raids. Some guilds dock DKP for members that do not meet their standards. Aerte of Blackrock has questioned the wisdom of his guild's policy on this practice for a member that had regularly violated the rules. The conundrum begins with the statement. "Recently we had a member quit who during the course of his rather brief stay managed to have about 130 DKP docked for various infractions. Not showing up specced properly, gems unacceptable, enchants unacceptable or non-existent, bad attitude....etc..." The original poster expressed that this may not be the best way to keep players in line.
O2 threatened with hilarious penalty for poor 3G coverage
So the UK's Ofcom (that's Office of Communications, for those not in the know), in awarding its coveted 3G licenses, required that those five licensees all cover at least 80 percent of its population by December 31, 2007. Four of those five companies -- Vodafone, T-Mobile, Orange, and 3 -- were able to meet that deadline; meanwhile, O2 has been holding down last place with a measly 75.69 percent blanketed with its high speed data, which leaves the Telefonica subsidiary about 2.5 million Britons short of its obligation. So when a government body is dealing with a huge, multinational corporation that's failing to hold up its end of the bargain, you'd think that there'd be some massive fine levied, right? Not exactly. First of all, Ofcom's extending O2's deadline out to the end of June, and if they're still not at 80 percent, the penalty will be to reduce the term of O2's 3G license by a mere four months. Oh, and the license doesn't even expire until 2021. Way to put your foot down, Ofcom.
Mobile speed cameras to suprise chatty motorists with penalties
Nowadays, we're lucky to be able to so much as breathe air while driving without getting penalized. As of late, motorists in South Yorkshire have quite the incentive to keep their phone conversations under wraps while in transit. Mobile speed cameras, traditionally used to catch speeders, will be used by police to catch unsuspecting chit-chatters in the act, who would later receive an unexpected notice showing 3 points on their license and a demand for £60, which was recently, and perhaps not-so-coincidentally, increased from £30. "If officers using mobile cameras see someone using a hand-held phone, whether with their own eyes or through the lens of their camera, then they are fair game." There's been no word on plans for similar implementation within the automated camera system, but "that is not to say that we can't change the policy," states Meredydd Hughes, the head of roads policing for the Association of Chief Constables. Drivers may soon feel compelled to throw down some cash for a headset, although there's even been speculation on the perils of hands-free yapping -- looks like a good tint-job's the last resort... and how about some spinners while you're at it?[Via Textually]
