A federal appeals court rejected T-Mobile's attempt to overturn $92 million in fines for selling customer location information to third-party firms. From a report: The Federal Communications Commission last year fined T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon, saying the carriers illegally shared access to customers' location information without consent and did not take reasonable measures to protect that sensitive data against unauthorized disclosure. The fines relate to sharing of real-time location data that was revealed in 2018, but it took years for the FCC to finalize the penalties.

The three carriers appealed the rulings in three different courts, and the first major decision was handed down Friday. A three-judge panel at the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled unanimously against T-Mobile and its subsidiary Sprint. "Every cell phone is a tracking device," the ruling begins. "To receive service, a cell phone must periodically connect with the nearest tower in a wireless carrier's network. Each time it does, it sends the carrier a record of the phone's location and, by extension, the location of the customer who owns it. Over time, this information becomes an exhaustive history of a customer's whereabouts and 'provides an intimate window into [that] person's life.'"

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Adweek: Meta wanted advertisers to believe its ecommerce ad product, Shops ads, was outperforming the competition, per a whistleblower complaint filed in a U.K. court. The former employee alleges the social media giant artificially inflated return on ad spend (ROAS) by counting shipping fees as revenue, subsidizing bids in ad auctions, and applying undisclosed discounts. The complaint, viewed by ADWEEK, was filed with the London Central Employment Tribunal on Wednesday (August 20) by Samujjal Purkayastha, a former product manager on Meta's Shops ads team. The document claims Meta artificially inflated performance metrics to push brands toward its fledgling ecommerce ad product.

The company's motivation, the complaint says, was in part to combat Apple's 2021 privacy changes that cut the troves of iOS tracking information that had long powered Meta's ad machine. Meta's former chief financial officer (CFO), David Wehner, said the changes would cost "on the order of $10 billion" in losses during the company's Q4 2021 earnings call. User purchases on Facebook or Instagram Shops pages would provide more first-party data, however. Purkayastha, who joined Meta (then Facebook) in 2020 as a product manager on the Facebook Artificial Intelligence Applied Research team, was reassigned to the Shops Ads team in March 2022 and remained at the company until Feb. 19, 2025, when he was terminated.

He alleged that during internal reviews in early 2024, Meta data scientists found the return on ad spend (ROAS) from Shops ads had been inflated between 17% and 19%. This discrepancy stemmed from Meta counting shipping fees and taxes as part of a sale, even though that money never went to merchants, he alleged. The company's other ad products exclude those figures, in line with competitors like Google, the complaint reads. Without including the fees and taxes, Shops ads performed no better than Meta's traditional ads, Purkayastha claimed. "This was significant," the complaint reads. "In addition to the ROAS performance metric being overstated by nearly a fifth, it meant that, rather than having exceeded our primary target, the Shops Ads team had in fact missed it once the figure was reduced to take account of the artificial inflation." Purkayastha raised these concerns with senior leadership in multiple meetings between 2022 and 2024, and is now seeking interim relief through his employment tribunal filing to have his former position reinstated.

A Meta spokesperson told ADWEEK the company is "actively defending these proceedings," adding that "allegations related to the integrity of our advertising practices are without merit and we have full confidence in our performance review processes."

Last week, following a recent U.S. Customs ruling, Apple reintroduced blood oxygen monitoring to certain Apple Watch models in the U.S., sidestepping an ITC import ban stemming from its legal dispute with medical device maker Masimo. Today, Masimo fired back with a new lawsuit against the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 9to5Mac reports: The company says US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) overstepped its authority and violated due process when it reversed its earlier decision on August 1 and allowed Apple to restore the feature. Moreover, Masimo says it found out about the decision when Apple publicly announced the return of the feature: "It has now come to light that CBP thereafter reversed itself without any meaningful justification, without any material change in circumstances, and without any notice to Masimo, let alone an opportunity for Masimo to be heard. CBP changed its position on Apple's watch-plus-iPhone redesign through an ex parte proceeding. Specifically, on August 1, 2025, CBP issued an 3 ex parte ruling permitting Apple to import devices that, when used with iPhones already in the United States, perform the same functionality that the ITC found to infringe Masimo's patents. Masimo only discovered this ruling on Thursday, August 14, 2025, when Apple publicly announced it would be reintroducing the pulse oximetry functionality through a software update."

The company is now asking the court for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block the CBP's decision, and reinstate the original ruling that "determined that Apple's redesigned watches could be imported only to the extent the infringing functionality was completely disabled." As reported by Bloomberg Law, Masimo says the following in its supporting brief: "Each passing day that this unlawful ruling remains in effect irreparably deprives Masimo of its right to be free from unfair trade practices and to preserve its competitive standing in the U.S. marketplace." Masimo further argues that CBP's move "effectively nullified" the ITC's exclusion order against Apple. Apple's appeal of that ban is still pending before the Federal Circuit.

A 22-year-old Oregon man has been charged with operating one of the most powerful botnets ever recorded. The network, known as Rapper Bot, launched over 370,000 DDoS attacks worldwide, including against X, DeepSeek, U.S. tech firms, and even Defense Department systems. It was allegedly operated by Ethan Foltz of Eugene, Oregon. The Wall Street Journal reports: Foltz faces a maximum of 10 years in prison on a charge of abetting computer intrusions, the Justice Department said in a news release. Rapper Bot was made up of tens of thousands of hacked devices and was capable of flooding victims' websites with enough junk internet traffic to knock them offline, an attack known as a distributed denial of service, or DDoS.

In February, the networking company Nokia measured a Rapper Bot attack against a gaming platform at 6.5 trillion bits per second, well above the several hundred million bits a second of the average high-speed internet connection. "This would place Rapper Bot among the most powerful DDoS botnets to have ever existed," said a criminal complaint that the prosecutors filed Tuesday in a federal court in Alaska. Investigators said Rapper Bot's attacks were so powerful that they were able to overwhelm all but the most robust networks.

Foltz allegedly rented out Rapper Bot to paying customers, including gambling website operators who would use the network in extortion attempts, according to the complaint. The botnet was used to launch more than 370,000 attacks in 80 countries, including China, Japan and the U.S., prosecutors said. It launched its attacks from hacked routers, digital video recorders and cameras, not from computers. [...] "At its height, it mobilized tens of thousands of devices, many with no prior role in DDoS," said Jerome Meyer, a researcher with Nokia's Deepfield network-analysis division. "Taking it down removes a major source of the largest attacks we see."

FTC, in a press release Wednesday: The Federal Trade Commission today sued the operators of LA Fitness and other gyms over allegations they make it exceedingly difficult for consumers to cancel their gym memberships and related services that continued indefinitely unless cancelled. The agency is seeking a court order prohibiting the allegedly unfair conduct and money back for consumers harmed by the difficulty in cancelling memberships.

"The FTC's complaint describes a scenario that too many Americans have experienced -- a gym membership that seems impossible to cancel," said Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection. "Tens of thousands of LA Fitness customers reported difficulties -- cancellation was often restricted to specific times or required speaking to specific managers who were often not present or available. The FTC will not hesitate to act on behalf of consumers when it believes companies are stifling consumers' ability to choose which recurring charges they want to keep."

In a pair of class actions filed this week, passengers from each coast quibbled with United Airlines and Delta Air Lines' policies charging extra for window seats that are not actually beside windows, instead offering a view of a blank aircraft wall. From a report: "Delta indicated to the plaintiff and class members that the particular seats they chose had a 'window'; even though Delta knew full well they did not," the plaintiffs taking on Delta said in an 18-page complaint filed in federal court in New York, accusing the airline of false advertising and deceptive business practices.

Half of Delta's fleet of nearly 1,000 aircraft comprises Boeing 737s, Boeing 757s and Airbus A321s -- all of which have at least one wall-adjacent seat with no window, according to the plaintiffs. It's where vertical air conditioning riser ducts are located, making putting a window there impossible, the competing Alaska Airlines explains on its website. But unlike Alaska and others, the plaintiffs complain, Delta advertises the seats as having a window, offering them as a "window seat" option on its seat map during checkout.

An analysis of Rotten Tomatoes data reveals average Tomatometer scores have climbed steadily since Fandango's 2016 acquisition of the review aggregation platform. The average number of reviewers per mainstream film release increased by 40 to 70 critics following the purchase. New additions to the critic pool include smaller outlets such as Denerstein Unleashed and KKFI-FM Kansas City. Prior to 2016, critic and audience scores demonstrated stable correlation year-over-year. Post-acquisition data shows the two metrics diverged sharply as Tomatometer ratings rose.

Fandango, America's largest movie-ticketing platform, is partially owned by NBCUniversal and Warner Bros. Discovery. In 2023 Vulture reported PR firms court reviewers from smaller outlets to secure higher Tomatometer scores before film releases.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission sued ticket reseller Key Investment Group for evading purchasing limits to buy up thousands of tickets to live events including Taylor Swift's Eras tour and resell them at a markup, according to a complaint filed in Maryland federal court on Monday. From a report: The Baltimore, Maryland-based company, which operates ticket resale sites including TotalTickets.com, used thousands of Ticketmaster accounts, including fake or purchased accounts, the FTC said.

Ticketmaster faced intense criticism after its botched 2022 sale of tickets to Swift's much-hyped Eras tour, when billions of requests from Swift fans, bots and ticket resellers overwhelmed its website and the company canceled a planned ticket sale to the general public.

For one Swift concert in Las Vegas in March 2023, Key Investment Group and its affiliates used 49 different accounts to purchase 273 tickets and evade a 6-ticket purchase limit, netting more than $119,000 in revenue on resales, the FTC said on Monday. The company made more than $1.2 million reselling 2,280 Swift concert tickets it purchased in 2023, the agency said.

The women-only dating-advice app Tea "has been hit with 10 potential class action lawsuits in federal and state court," NBC News reported last week, "after a data breach led to the leak of thousands of selfies, ID photos and private conversations online." The suits could result in Tea having to pay tens of millions of dollars in damages to the plaintiffs, which could be catastrophic for the company, an expert told NBC News... One of the suits lists the right-wing online discussion board 4chan and the social platform X as defendants, alleging that they allowed bad actors to spread users' personal information.
But meanwhile, a new competing app for men called "TeaOnHer" has already been launched. And it was also found to have enormous security flaws, reports TechCrunch, that "exposed its users' personal information, including photos of their driver's licenses and other government-issued identity documents..." [W]hen we looked at the TeaOnHer's public internet records, it had no meaningful information other than a single subdomain, appserver.teaonher.com. When we opened this page in our browser, what loaded was the landing page for TeaOnHer's API (for the curious, we uploaded a copy here)... It was on this landing page that we found the exposed email address and plaintext password (which wasn't that far off from "password") for [TeaOnHer developer Xavier] Lampkin's account to access the TeaOnHer "admin panel"... This API landing page included an endpoint called /docs, which contained the API's auto-generated documentation (powered by a product called Swagger UI) that contained the full list of commands that can be performed on the API [including administrator commands to return user data]...

While it's not uncommon for developers to publish their API documentation, the problem here was that some API requests could be made without any authentication — no passwords or credentials were needed...

The records returned from TeaOnHer's server contained users' unique identifiers within the app (essentially a string of random letters and numbers), their public profile screen name, and self-reported age and location, along with their private email address. The records also included web address links containing photos of the users' driver's licenses and corresponding selfies. Worse, these photos of driver's licenses, government-issued IDs, and selfies were stored in an Amazon-hosted S3 cloud server set as publicly accessible to anyone with their web addresses. This public setting lets anyone with a link to someone's identity documents open the files from anywhere with no restrictions...

The bugs were so easy to find that it would be sheer luck if nobody malicious found them before we did. We asked, but Lampkin would not say if he has the technical ability, such as logs, to determine if anyone had used (or misused) the API at any time to gain access to users' verification documents, such as by scraping web addresses from the API. In the days since our report to Lampkin, the API landing page has been taken down, along with its documentation page, and it now displays only the state of the server that the TeaOnHer API is running on as "healthy."
The flaws were discovered while TeaOnHer was the #2 free app in the Apple App Store, the article points out. And while these flaws "appear to be resolved," the article notes a larger issue. "Shoddy coding and security flaws highlight the ongoing privacy risks inherent in requiring users to submit sensitive information to use apps and websites,"

And TeaOnHer also had another authentication issue. A female reporter at Cosmopolitan also noted Friday that TeaOnHer "lets you browse through profiles before your verifications are complete. So literally anyone (like myself) can read reviews..."

14 months ago a jury ruled against Boeing, awarding $81 million in damages to failed electric airplane startup Zunum. "Zunum alleged that Boeing, while ostensibly investing seed money to get the startup off the ground, stole Zunum's technology and actively undermined its attempts to build a business," the Seattle Times reported at the time.

But two months later that verdict was overturned, Reuters reports, with U.S. District Judge James Robart deciding that Zunum "did not adequately identify its secrets or show that they derived their value from being kept secret."

And then three days ago a U.S. appeals court reinstated the original $81 million award, reversing that district judge's decision and "rejecting his finding that the information Boeing allegedly stole was not entitled to trade-secret protection." [T]he district court erred in concluding that "Zunum failed to identify any of its alleged trade secrets with sufficient particularity"... Here, the court rejected Zunum's repeated attempts to introduce comprehensive trade secret definitions into evidence and instead provided the jury with a court-created exhibit enumerating Zunum's alleged trade secrets with a short description of each. Zunum's witnesses identified the trade secrets by number, provided a basic explanation of each, and used exhibits and demonstratives to exemplify information comprising specific trade secrets.
"internal Boeing communications introduced at trial suggesting that Boeing intended to modify its own in-house designs, methods, and strategies to incorporate information from certain Zunum trade secrets..." according to the new ruling. "Under the parties' agreement, Boeing was not permitted to use Zunum's confidential information for any reason other than to manage its investment in Zunum."

Reuters adds that "A spokesperson for Boeing declined to comment on the appeals court's decision"

One final note: The appeals court also ordered the case to be assigned to a new judge after Robart revealed that his wife had acquired Boeing stock through a retirement savings account during the litigation.
Judge Robart had called that an "error". (And judicial ethics experts interviewed by Business Insider in 2024 "characterized Robart's trades and delayed disclosure to the parties as a minor issue," they reported Thursday.)

But Thursday's ruling notes that the delayed disclosure "taken together with the district court's consistent rulings in Boeing's favor during and after trial, could give an objective observer reason to question the district judge's impartiality in further proceedings."

Duolingo's stock peaked at $529.05 on May 16th. Three months later, it's down 38% — with that drop starting shortly after backlash to the CEO's promise to make it an "AI-first" company.

Yet "The backlash against Duolingo going 'AI-first' didn't even matter," TechCrunch wrote August 7th, noting Duolingo's stock price surged almost 30% overnight. That surge vanished within two days — and instead of a 30% surge, Duolingo now shows a 5% drop over the last eight days.

Yahoo Finance blames the turnaround on OpenAI's GPT-5 demo, "which demonstrated, among many other things, its ability to create a language-learning tool from a short prompt." OpenAI researcher Yann Dubois asked the model to create an app to help his partner learn French. And in a few minutes GPT-5 churned out several iterations, with flashcards, a progress tracker, and even a simple snake-style game with a French twist, a mouse and cheese variation to learn new vocab....

[Duolingo's] corporate lawyers, of course, did warn against this in its annual 10-K, albeit in boilerplate language. Tucked into the risk factors section, Duolingo notes, "It is possible that a new product could gain rapid scale at the expense of existing brands through harnessing a new technology (such as generative AI)." Consider this another warning to anyone making software. [The article adds later that "Rapid development and fierce competition can leave firms suddenly behind — perceived as under threat, inferior, or obsolete — from every iteration of OpenAI's models and from the moves of other influential AI players..."]

There's also irony in the wild swings. Part of Duolingo's successful quarter stemmed from the business's efficient use of AI. Gross margins, the company said, outperformed management expectations due to lower AI costs. And AI conversational features have become part of the company's learning tools, helping achieve double-digit subscriber growth... But the enthusiasm for AI, which led to the initial stock bump this week, also led to the clawback. AI giveth and taketh away.
Meanwhile, this week a blog announced it was "able to activate a long-rumored Practice feature" hidden in Google Translate, notes PC Magazine, with the blogger even sharing a screen recording of "AI-led features within Translate" showing its ability to create personalized lessons. "Google's take on Duolingo is effectively ready for release," the Android Authority blog concluded. "Furthermore, the fact that a Telegram user spotted this in their app suggests that Google is already testing this in a limited fashion."

Duolingo's CEO revisited the backlash to his original "AI-first" promise today in a new interview today with the New York Times, emphasizing his hope that AI would only reduce the company's use of contractors. "We've never laid off any full-time employees. We don't plan to...." But: In the next five years, people's jobs will probably change. We're seeing it with many of our engineers. They may not be doing some rote tasks anymore. What will probably happen is that one person will be able to accomplish more, rather than having fewer people.

NYT: How are you managing that transition for employees?

Every Friday morning, we have this thing: It's a bad acronym, f-r-A-I-days. I don't know how to pronounce it. Those mornings, we let each team experiment on how to get more efficient to use A.I.
Yesterday there was also a new announcement from attorneys at Pomerantz LLP, which calls itself "the oldest law firm in the world dedicated to representing the rights of defrauded investors."

The firm announced it was investigating "whether Duolingo and certain of its officers and/or directors have engaged in securities fraud or other unlawful business practices."

After leaving a nearly 10-year position as a product marketing engineer at Intel, Varun Gupta was charged with possessing trade secrets. He was facing a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, a $250,000 fine and three years of supervised release, according to Oregon's U.S. Attorney's Office.

Portland's KGW reports: While still employed at Intel, Varun Gupta downloaded about 4,000 files, which included trade secrets and proprietary materials, from his work computer to personal portable hard drives, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Oregon. While working for Microsoft, between February and July 2020, Gupta accessed and used information during ongoing negotiations with Intel regarding chip purchases, according to a sentencing memo. Some of the information containing trade secrets included a PowerPoint presentation that referenced Intel's pricing strategy with another major customer, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Oregon in a sentencing memo.

Intel raised concerns in 2020, and Microsoft and Intel launched a joint investigation, the sentencing memo says. Intel filed a civil lawsuit in February 2021 that resulted in Gupta being ordered to pay $40,000.
Tom's Hardware summarizes the trial: Oregon Live reports that the prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney William Narus, sought an eight-month prison term for Gupta. Narus spoke about Gupta's purposeful and repeated access to secret documents. Eight months of federal imprisonment was sought as Gupta repetitively abused his cache of secret documents, according to the prosecutor.

For the defense, attorney David Angeli described Gupta's actions as a "serious error in judgment." Mitigating circumstances, such as Gupta's permanent loss of high-level employment opportunities in the industry, and that he had already paid $40,000 to settle a civil suit brought by Intel, were highlighted.

U.S. District Judge Amy Baggio concluded the court hearing by delivering a balance between the above adversarial positions. Baggio decided that Gupta should face a two-year probationary sentence [and pay a $34,472 fine — before heading back to France]... The ex-tech exec and his family have started afresh in La Belle France, with eyes on a completely new career in the wine industry. According to the report, Gupta is now studying for a qualification in vineyard management, while aiming to work as a technical director in the business.

hackingbear shares a report from Bloomberg: Top U.S. chip-equipment supplier Applied Materials was sued by a rival in China over alleged trade secret theft, a further escalation in the technology war between the world's two largest economies. Beijing E-Town Semiconductor Technology Co. filed a lawsuit with the Beijing Intellectual Property Court against Applied Materials, according to a company statement (PDF) to the Shanghai Stock Exchange. The Chinese chip-gear maker alleged that the Santa Clara, California-based company illegally obtained, used and revealed its core technologies related to the application of plasma source in treating the surface of wafers, the statement said. The court has filed the case but has not begun a trial, E-Town added.

Applied Materials earlier hired two employees from E-Town's fully owned US subsidiary, Mattson, and they were privy to the Beijing company's proprietary plasma technologies, the filing said. Applied Materials filed a patent application crediting the duo as inventors with the National Intellectual Property Administration in China after the two joined the Santa Clara company, the Beijing firm said, alleging that the content revealed trade secrets co-owned by E-Town and Mattson. "The patent application violated the rules of China's Anti-Unfair Competition Law, and it infringes on trade secrets, and has caused significant damage to the plaintiff's intellectual property and economic interests,â E-Town said in the filing, adding that Applied Materials is also suspected of marketing and selling the technologies involved in the case to Chinese customers. E-Town is asking the court to demand that Applied Materials stop using its trade secrets and destroy related materials. It's also seeking about 100 million yuan ($13.9 million) in recompense for damage.

Apple has reintroduced blood oxygen monitoring to certain Apple Watch models in the U.S. by shifting the feature's calculations to the paired iPhone, sidestepping an ITC import ban stemming from its legal dispute with medical device maker Masimo. TechCrunch reports: Blood oxygen data will be measured and calculated on the user's paired iPhone, and results can be viewed in the Respiratory section of the Health app. This means users won't be able to view the data on their Apple Watch, as they'll need to do so on their iPhone. Apple says the update announced today is enabled by a recent U.S. Customs ruling, which means that the tech giant is allowed to import Apple Watches with the redesigned Blood Oxygen feature.

The change doesn't affect previously sold models with the original version of the feature or units bought outside the U.S. The redesigned feature only applies to Apple Watches that were sold after the ITC import ban took effect in early 2024. These users can access the redesigned Blood Oxygen feature through an iPhone and Apple Watch software update coming on Thursday.

New York Attorney General Letitia James has sued Zelle's parent company, Early Warning Services, alleging it knowingly enabled over $1 billion in fraud from 2017 to 2023 by failing to implement basic safeguards. CNBC reports: "EWS knew from the beginning that key features of the Zelle network made it uniquely susceptible to fraud, and yet it failed to adopt basic safeguards to address these glaring flaws or enforce any meaningful anti-fraud rules on its partner banks," James' office said in the release. The lawsuit alleges that Zelle became a "hub for fraudulent activity" because the registration process lacked verification steps and that EWS and its partner banks knew "for years" that fraud was spreading and did not take actionable steps to resolve it, according to the press release.

James is seeking restitution and damages, in addition to a court order mandating that Zelle puts anti-fraud measures in place. "No one should be left to fend for themselves after falling victim to a scam," James said in the release. "I look forward to getting justice for the New Yorkers who suffered because of Zelle's security failures." A Zelle spokesperson called the lawsuit a "political stunt to generate press" and a "copycat" of the CFPB lawsuit, which was dropped in March.

"Despite the Attorney General's assertions, they did not conduct an investigation of Zelle," the spokesperson said. "Had they conducted an investigation, they would have learned that more than 99.95 percent of all Zelle transactions are completed without any report of scam or fraud -- which leads the industry."

Terraform Labs founder Do Kwon pleaded guilty in U.S. federal court to conspiracy to defraud and wire fraud over the $40 billion collapse of TerraUSD and Luna in 2022. Reuters reports: Kwon, 33, who co-founded Singapore-based Terraform Labs and developed the TerraUSD and Luna currencies, entered the plea at a court hearing in New York before U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer. He had pleaded not guilty in January to a nine-count indictment charging him with securities fraud, wire fraud, commodities fraud and money laundering conspiracy.

Accused of misleading investors in 2021 about TerraUSD - a so-called stablecoin designed to maintain a value of $1 - Kwon pleaded guilty to the two counts under an agreement with the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's office, which brought the charges. He faces up to 25 years in prison when Engelmayer sentences him on December 11, though prosecutor Kimberly Ravener said the government had agreed to advocate for a prison term of no more than 12 years provided he accepts responsibility for his crimes. "I made false and misleading statements about why it regained its peg by failing to disclose a trading firm's role in restoring that peg," Kwon said in court. "What I did was wrong."

ole_timer shares a report from the New York Times: Investigators have uncovered evidence that Russia is at least partly responsible for a recent hack of the computer system that manages federal court documents, including highly sensitive records with information that could reveal sources and people charged with national security crimes, according to several people briefed on the breach. It is not clear what entity is responsible, whether an arm of Russian intelligence might be behind the intrusion or if other countries were also involved, which some of the people familiar with the matter described as a yearslong effort to infiltrate the system. Some of the searches included midlevel criminal cases in the New York City area and several other jurisdictions, with some cases involving people with Russian and Eastern European surnames.

Administrators with the court system recently informed Justice Department officials, clerks and chief judges in federal courts that "persistent and sophisticated cyber threat actors have recently compromised sealed records," according to an internal department memo reviewed by The New York Times. The administrators also advised those officials to quickly remove the most sensitive documents from the system. "This remains an URGENT MATTER that requires immediate action," officials wrote, referring to guidance that the Justice Department had issued in early 2021 after the system was first infiltrated. Documents related to criminal activity with an overseas tie, across at least eight district courts, were initially believed to have been targeted. Last month, the chief judges of district courts across the country were quietly warned to move those kinds of cases off the regular document-management system, according to officials briefed on the request. They were initially told not to discuss the matter with other judges in their districts.

Australia's Federal Court ruled Tuesday that Apple and Google violated competition law through anti-competitive app store practices. Judge Jonathan Beach found both companies breached section 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act by misusing market power to reduce competition.

The decision covers class actions representing 15 million consumers and 150,000 developers seeking compensation for inflated prices from 2017-2022, plus separate Epic Games cases. Apple's exclusive iOS App Store and mandatory payment system, along with Google's Play Store billing requirements, were ruled anti-competitive despite security justifications. Compensation amounts will be determined at subsequent hearings, with estimates reaching hundreds of millions of dollars.

The operator of Wikipedia on Monday lost a legal challenge to parts of Britain's Online Safety Act, which sets tough new requirements for online platforms and has been criticized for potentially curtailing free speech. From a report: The Wikimedia Foundation took legal action at London's High Court over regulations made under the law, which it said could impose the most stringent category of duties on Wikipedia.

The foundation said if it was subject to so-called Category 1 duties -- which would require Wikipedia's users and contributors' identities to be verified -- it would need to drastically reduce the number of British users who can access the site. Judge Jeremy Johnson dismissed its case on Monday, but said the Wikimedia Foundation could bring a further challenge if regulator Ofcom "(impermissibly) concludes that Wikipedia is a Category 1 service".

In 2020 a YouTube video used video footage of Steve Wozniak in a scam to steal bitcoin. "Some people said they lost their life savings," Wozniak tells CBS News, explaining why he sued YouTube in 2020 — and where his case stands now: Wozniak's lawsuit against YouTube has been tied up in court now for five years, stalled by federal legislation known as Section 230. Attorney Brian Danitz said, "Section 230 is a very broad statute that limits, if not totally, the ability to bring any kind of case against these social media platforms."

"It says that anything gets posted, they have no liability at all," said Wozniak. "It's totally absolute."

Google responded to our inquiry about Wozniak's lawsuit with a statement from José Castañeda, of Google Policy Communications: "We take abuse of our platform seriously and take action quickly when we detect violations ... we have tools for users to report channels that are impersonating their likeness or business." [Steve's wife] Janet Wozniak, however, says YouTube did nothing, even though she reported the scam video multiple times: "You know, 'Please take this down. This is an obvious mistake. This is fraud. You're YouTube, you're helping dupe people out of their money,'" she said.

"They wouldn't," said Steve...
Today is Steve Wozniak's 75th birthday. (You can watch the interview here.) And the article includes this interesting detail about Woz's life today: Wozniak sold most of his Apple stock in the mid-1980s when he left the company. Today, though, he still gets a small paycheck from Apple for making speeches and representing the company. He says he's proud to see Apple become a trillion-dollar company. "Apple is still the best," he said. "And when Apple does things I don't like, and some of the closeness I wish it were more open, I'll speak out about it. Nobody buys my voice!"

I asked, "Apple listen to you when you speak out?"

"No," Wozniak smiled. "Oh, no. Oh, no."
Wozniak answered questions from Slashdot readers in 2000 and again in 2012.

And he dropped by Slashdot on his birthday to leave this comment for Slashdot's readers...