The Supreme Court debated the constitutionality of state laws that restrict how social media companies moderate user content, expressing concerns about the potential impact on free speech and expression. The laws in Florida and Texas aim to prevent censorship of conservative messages and require companies like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook to host third-party communications without blocking or removing posts based on political viewpoints. Justices questioned whether these laws would make it impossible for private companies to operate as forums for free speech and expression, and expressed unease about the best approach to take. The case has implications for the political and business arenas, with the Biden administration opposing the state laws and tech firms claiming a First Amendment right to editorially regulate content on their platforms.
Explicit AI-generated images of Taylor Swift circulated on X, sparking concerns about laws and social platforms needing to crack down on AI-generated deepfake porn. Legal experts weigh in on Swift's options for fighting back, citing her right to control the exploitation of her identity and the potential for legal action against the creator of the deepfake photographs. The incident raises broader questions about protecting privacy and preventing the spread of artificially generated fake photos, with potential implications for legislative change.
Over 415,000 pornographic deepfake images were created and uploaded online last year, with only six states having laws against their production and distribution. Victims, including celebrities and ordinary individuals, struggle to have the humiliating content removed from the internet, as perpetrators largely go unpunished. Efforts to pass federal legislation are underway, led by a 14-year-old girl from New Jersey who was depicted in such images, and her mother, who met with members of Congress to push for laws targeting perpetrators. The lack of legislation at the federal level and in many states leaves victims and prosecutors relying on existing laws around cyberbullying, extortion, and harassment, which do not specifically address the creation and sharing of deepfake images.
Pornhub, owned by Aylo, has blocked access to its adult sites in Montana and North Carolina in response to new state laws requiring age verification to view adult content. The company argues that ID checks for each login compromise user safety and privacy and advocates for device-based age verification instead. While lobbying tech giants for a device-based solution, Pornhub is also facing regulatory challenges in the EU, where it has been designated as a "Very Large Online Platform" and must comply with stringent child safety measures. Amidst these challenges, Pornhub has agreed to pay $1.8 million to sex trafficking victims and enhance its content moderation following a federal investigation.
Pornhub has restricted access to its site for users in Montana and North Carolina in response to new age verification laws that require users to provide identification for access. The company, now known as Aylo, is pushing back against these laws, arguing that they lack proper enforcement and could drive users to less compliant sites. The blockage serves as a form of protest against the laws, which have also been adopted in other states and are part of a broader issue Pornhub faces, including accusations of user data abuse in Europe.
The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, claiming that OpenAI's AI models were trained using millions of copyrighted articles from The Times without permission. This has raised significant concerns about copyright laws in relation to AI development. While tech companies like Microsoft are integrating these AI models into their products, media companies are frustrated that their copyrighted content is being used without compensation. The situation highlights the complex balance between protecting copyright and advancing AI technology, with no quick resolution in sight.
Google has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit for $5 billion over allegations that it tracked users' activities even when they were using the "incognito" private browsing mode in Chrome. The lawsuit claimed Google misled users into thinking their internet activities wouldn't be tracked in this mode, but the company continued to collect data through its technologies on various websites. The settlement terms are not yet public and require a judge's approval, with a final settlement agreement expected to be presented by February 24. Google has not commented on the settlement.
Google has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit for $5 billion over allegations that it tracked users' internet activities even when they were using "incognito" mode in its Chrome browser, which was supposed to offer privacy. The lawsuit, filed in 2020, accused Google of misleading users and collecting data through advertising technologies despite the privacy mode. The settlement terms have not been disclosed and await approval by a federal judge, with a final settlement agreement expected by February 24. Google has yet to comment on the settlement.
Google has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit for $5 billion, which accused the tech giant of tracking users' activities even when they were using the 'incognito' mode in Chrome and other browsers. The lawsuit claimed that Google misled users about their privacy, but the terms of the settlement have not been disclosed. The final settlement agreement is expected to be presented to the court by February 24, pending approval by a federal judge. Google has yet to comment on the settlement.
Google has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit for $5 billion, which accused the tech giant of tracking users' internet activities even when they were using the 'incognito' mode in Chrome and other browsers. The lawsuit claimed that Google misled users about their privacy, as its advertising technologies still collected data during private browsing sessions. The settlement terms are not yet public, and a final agreement is expected to be presented to the court by February 24. Google has not commented on the settlement.
Google has agreed to settle a $5 billion lawsuit alleging that it continued to track users even when they were using the 'incognito mode' in Google Chrome, which is supposed to offer privacy. The terms of the settlement have not been disclosed, but the lawsuit sought $5,000 in damages per user for violations of federal wiretapping and California privacy laws. The settlement is pending a judge's approval, expected to be presented in early 2024. This legal issue is one of several recent challenges for Google, including a guilty verdict for maintaining an illegal monopoly over the Google Play Store and an ongoing case with the DOJ regarding alleged monopolistic practices.
Google has agreed to a preliminary settlement in a lawsuit that accused the company of secretly tracking users' internet activity even when they were in "incognito" or private browsing modes. The lawsuit, which sought at least $5 billion in damages, was put on hold by a US district judge after the settlement was announced. The terms of the settlement have not been disclosed, but a formal settlement is expected to be presented for court approval by February 24, 2024. The case, filed in 2020, involved claims that Google's tools allowed the company to collect data on users' personal interests and activities despite privacy settings intended to prevent such tracking.
Google has agreed to settle a consumer privacy lawsuit for allegedly tracking the internet use of people using "Incognito" mode in Chrome and private browsing in other browsers, despite users' expectations of privacy. The lawsuit, which sought at least $5 billion, was put on hold as both parties reached a preliminary settlement, with formal settlement details expected by February 24, 2024. The case, filed in 2020, involved claims of Google violating federal wiretapping and California privacy laws, potentially affecting millions of users since June 1, 2016.
