Policy

microsoft-risks-huge-fine-over-“possibly-abusive”-bundling-of-teams-and-office

Microsoft risks huge fine over “possibly abusive” bundling of Teams and Office

A screen shows a virtual meeting with Microsoft Teams at a conference on January 30, 2024 in Barcelona, Spain.

Enlarge / A screen shows a virtual meeting with Microsoft Teams at a conference on January 30, 2024 in Barcelona, Spain.

Microsoft may be hit with a massive fine in the European Union for “possibly abusively” bundling Teams with its Office 365 and Microsoft 365 software suites for businesses.

On Tuesday, the European Commission (EC) announced preliminary findings of an investigation into whether Microsoft’s “suite-centric business model combining multiple types of software in a single offering” unfairly shut out rivals in the “software as a service” (SaaS) market.

“Since at least April 2019,” the EC found, Microsoft’s practice of “tying Teams with its core SaaS productivity applications” potentially restricted competition in the “market for communication and collaboration products.”

The EC is also “concerned” that the practice may have helped Microsoft defend its dominant market position by shutting out “competing suppliers of individual software” like Slack and German video-conferencing software Alfaview. Makers of those rival products had complained to the EC last year, setting off the ongoing probe into Microsoft’s bundling.

Customers should have choices, the EC said, and seemingly at every step, Microsoft sought instead to lock customers into using only its software.

“Microsoft may have granted Teams a distribution advantage by not giving customers the choice whether or not to acquire access to Teams when they subscribe to their SaaS productivity applications,” the EC wrote. This alleged abusive practice “may have been further exacerbated by interoperability limitations between Teams’ competitors and Microsoft’s offerings.”

For Microsoft, the EC’s findings are likely not entirely unexpected, although Tuesday’s announcement must be disappointing. The company had been hoping to avoid further scrutiny by introducing some major changes last year. Most drastically, Microsoft began “offering some suites without Teams,” the EC said, but even that wasn’t enough to appease EU regulators.

“The Commission preliminarily finds that these changes are insufficient to address its concerns and that more changes to Microsoft’s conduct are necessary to restore competition,” the EC said, concluding that “the conduct may have prevented Teams’ rivals from competing, and in turn innovating, to the detriment of customers in the European Economic Area.”

Microsoft will now be given an opportunity to defend its practices. If the company is unsuccessful, it risks a potential fine up to 10 percent of its annual worldwide turnover and an order possibly impacting how the leading global company conducts business.

In a statement to Ars, Microsoft President Brad Smith confirmed that the tech giant would work with the commission to figure out a better solution.

“Having unbundled Teams and taken initial interoperability steps, we appreciate the additional clarity provided today and will work to find solutions to address the commission’s remaining concerns,” Smith said.

The EC’s executive vice-president in charge of competition policy, Margrethe Vestager, explained in a statement why the commission refuses to back down from closely scrutinizing Microsoft’s alleged unfair practices.

“We are concerned that Microsoft may be giving its own communication product Teams an undue advantage over competitors by tying it to its popular productivity suites for businesses,” Vestager said. “And preserving competition for remote communication and collaboration tools is essential as it also fosters innovation” in these markets.

Changes coming to EU antitrust law in 2025

The EC initially launched its investigation into Microsoft’s allegedly abusive Teams bundling last July. Its probe came after Slack and Alfaview makers complained that Microsoft may be violating Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), “which prohibits the abuse of a dominant market position.”

Nearly one year later, there’s no telling when the EC’s inquiry into Microsoft Teams will end. Microsoft will have a chance to review all evidence of infringement gathered by EU regulators to form its response. After that, the EC will review any additional evidence before making its decision, and there is no legal deadline to complete the antitrust inquiry, the EC said.

It’s possible that the EC’s decision may come next year when the EU is preparing to release new guidance to more “vigorously” and effectively enforce TFEU.

Last March, the EC called for stakeholder feedback after rolling out “the first major policy initiative in the area of abuse of dominance rules.” The initiative sought to update TFEU for the first time since 2008 based on reviewing relevant case law.

“A robust enforcement of rules on abuse of dominance benefits both consumers and a stronger European economy,” Vestager said at that time. “We have carefully analyzed numerous EU court judgments on the application of Article 102, and it is time for us to start working on guidelines reflecting this case law.”

Microsoft risks huge fine over “possibly abusive” bundling of Teams and Office Read More »

julian-assange-to-plead-guilty-but-is-going-home-after-long-extradition-fight

Julian Assange to plead guilty but is going home after long extradition fight

Plea deal —

“Julian is free!” wife wrote after Assange struck deal with US government.

Julian Assange in an airplane seat, looking out the window.

Enlarge / Julian Assange in an airplane in a photo posted by WikiLeaks on June 25, 2024.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has agreed to plead guilty to a single criminal charge, ending a long extradition battle with the United States government. Assange will reportedly avoid further jail time and be allowed to return to his home country of Australia.

Assange won’t have to travel to the continental United States. He is scheduled to plead guilty tomorrow in US District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, a US territory in the western Pacific Ocean.

In a court filing in Saipan, the US government said:

We appreciate the Court accommodating these plea and sentencing proceedings on a single day at the joint request of the parties, in light of the defendant’s opposition to traveling to the continental United States to enter his guilty plea and the proximity of this federal US District Court to the defendant’s country of citizenship, Australia, to which we expect he will return at the conclusion of the proceedings.

During the Wednesday hearing, “we anticipate that the defendant will plead guilty to the charge in the Information of conspiring to unlawfully obtain and disseminate classified information relating to the national defense of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 793(g), and be sentenced by the Court for that offense,” the US said.

Assange on a plane

Assange was flying to Saipan today, according to his wife, Stella Assange. “Saipan is a remote US overseas territory. He will be entering the United States. Julian won’t be safe until he lands in Australia,” she wrote.

Stella Assange wrote in an earlier post that “Julian is free!!!!” and thanked his supporters. She also announced a fundraising campaign to cover $520,000 “which he is obligated to pay back to the Australian government,” saying that he “was not permitted to fly commercial airlines or routes to Saipan and onward to Australia.”

The US unsealed a 2018 indictment against Assange in 2019, right after British police arrested him on behalf of US authorities. Assange went into hiding in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London in 2012, but the Ecuadorian government revoked his asylum after seven years.

The New York Times reported that Assange “is expected to be sentenced to about five years, the equivalent of the time he has already served in Britain.” The NYT cited a law enforcement official who is familiar with the terms of the deal.

Failed extradition attempts

In 2010, Assange’s WikiLeaks released classified documents leaked by Chelsea Manning. As Bloomberg wrote yesterday, “Assange was charged with encouraging and assisting Manning in obtaining around 750,000 classified or sensitive documents, one of the largest leaks of state secrets in US history. The original charges—17 related to espionage and one to computer misuse—carried a maximum penalty of 175 years in prison if he was found guilty on all counts in the US, although sentences for federal crimes are typically less than that.”

In 2021, a British judge rejected the US government’s request to extradite Assange, saying that he would be at greater risk of suicide in the American prison system. The US won an appeal of that ruling but legal proceedings continued. In March 2024, Assange was granted another reprieve by the High Court in London.

“Negotiations toward a plea agreement heated up in recent months after US President Joe Biden said he was considering a request from the Australian government to strike a deal that would allow Assange to return home,” Bloomberg wrote.

Stella Assange said she will seek a pardon for her husband after his guilty plea. “The fact that there is a guilty plea under the Espionage Act in relation to obtaining and disclosing national defense information is obviously a very serious concern for journalists and national security journalists in general,” she said, according to Reuters.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wrote, “The Australian Government has consistently said that Mr. Assange’s case has dragged on for too long and that there is nothing to be gained by his continued incarceration. We want him brought home to Australia.”

Julian Assange to plead guilty but is going home after long extradition fight Read More »

music-industry-giants-allege-mass-copyright-violation-by-ai-firms

Music industry giants allege mass copyright violation by AI firms

No one wants to be defeated —

Suno and Udio could face damages of up to $150,000 per song allegedly infringed.

Michael Jackson in concert, 1986. Sony Music owns a large portion of publishing rights to Jackson's music.

Enlarge / Michael Jackson in concert, 1986. Sony Music owns a large portion of publishing rights to Jackson’s music.

Universal Music Group, Sony Music, and Warner Records have sued AI music-synthesis companies Udio and Suno for allegedly committing mass copyright infringement by using recordings owned by the labels to train music-generating AI models, reports Reuters. Udio and Suno can generate novel song recordings based on text-based descriptions of music (i.e., “a dubstep song about Linus Torvalds”).

The lawsuits, filed in federal courts in New York and Massachusetts, claim that the AI companies’ use of copyrighted material to train their systems could lead to AI-generated music that directly competes with and potentially devalues the work of human artists.

Like other generative AI models, both Udio and Suno (which we covered separately in April) rely on a broad selection of existing human-created artworks that teach a neural network the relationship between words in a written prompt and styles of music. The record labels correctly note that these companies have been deliberately vague about the sources of their training data.

Until generative AI models hit the mainstream in 2022, it was common practice in machine learning to scrape and use copyrighted information without seeking permission to do so. But now that the applications of those technologies have become commercial products themselves, rightsholders have come knocking to collect. In the case of Udio and Suno, the record labels are seeking statutory damages of up to $150,000 per song used in training.

In the lawsuit, the record labels cite specific examples of AI-generated content that allegedly re-creates elements of well-known songs, including The Temptations’ “My Girl,” Mariah Carey’s “All I Want for Christmas Is You,” and James Brown’s “I Got You (I Feel Good).” It also claims the music-synthesis models can produce vocals resembling those of famous artists, such as Michael Jackson and Bruce Springsteen.

Reuters claims it’s the first instance of lawsuits specifically targeting music-generating AI, but music companies and artists alike have been gearing up to deal with challenges the technology may pose for some time.

In May, Sony Music sent warning letters to over 700 AI companies (including OpenAI, Microsoft, Google, Suno, and Udio) and music-streaming services that prohibited any AI researchers from using its music to train AI models. In April, over 200 musical artists signed an open letter that called on AI companies to stop using AI to “devalue the rights of human artists.” And last November, Universal Music filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Anthropic for allegedly including artists’ lyrics in its Claude LLM training data.

Similar to The New York Times’ lawsuit against OpenAI over the use of training data, the outcome of the record labels’ new suit could have deep implications for the future development of generative AI in creative fields, including requiring companies to license all musical training data used in creating music-synthesis models.

Compulsory licenses for AI training data could make AI model development economically impractical for small startups like Udio and Suno—and judging by the aforementioned open letter, many musical artists may applaud that potential outcome. But such a development would not preclude major labels from eventually developing their own AI music generators themselves, allowing only large corporations with deep pockets to control generative music tools for the foreseeable future.

Music industry giants allege mass copyright violation by AI firms Read More »

eu-says-apple-violated-app-developers’-rights,-could-be-fined-10%-of-revenue

EU says Apple violated app developers’ rights, could be fined 10% of revenue

Apple and the Digital Markets Act —

EU: Apple fees and rules stop devs from steering users to other sales channels.

Apple logo is displayed on a smartphone with a European Union flag in the background.

Getty Images | SOPA Images

The European Commission today said it found that Apple is violating the Digital Markets Act (DMA) with App Store rules and fees that “prevent app developers from freely steering consumers to alternative channels for offers and content.” The commission “informed Apple of its preliminary view” that the company is violating the law, the regulator announced.

This starts a process in which Apple has the right to examine documents in the commission’s investigation file and reply in writing to the findings. There is a March 2025 deadline for the commission to make a final ruling.

The commission noted that it “can impose fines up to 10 percent of the gatekeeper’s total worldwide turnover,” or up to 20 percent for repeat infringements. For “systematic infringements,” the European regulator could respond by requiring “a gatekeeper to sell a business or parts of it, or banning the gatekeeper from acquisitions of additional services related to the systemic non-compliance.”

Under the DMA, developers must be free “to inform their customers of alternative cheaper purchasing possibilities, steer them to those offers and allow them to make purchases,” the commission said. But Apple’s business terms prevent that, the commission found.

Apple’s rules prevent developers from providing pricing information within their apps and from communicating “with their customers to promote offers available on alternative distribution channels,” the commission said. Apple lets developers include an in-app link that redirects users to a website, but this “link-out process is subject to several restrictions imposed by Apple that prevent app developers from communicating, promoting offers and concluding contracts through the distribution channel of their choice,” the commission said.

Excessive fees

Apple was further accused of charging excessive fees. The commission said that Apple is allowed to charge “a fee for facilitating via the App Store the initial acquisition of a new customer by developers,” but “the fees charged by Apple go beyond what is strictly necessary for such remuneration. For example, Apple charges developers a fee for every purchase of digital goods or services a user makes within seven days after a link-out from the app.”

Apple says it charges a commission of 27 percent on sales “to the user for digital goods or services on your website after a link out… provided that the sale was initiated within seven days and the digital goods or services can be used in an app.”

We contacted Apple today and are waiting for a response. In a statement quoted by the Associated Press, Apple said that during the past few months, it “made a number of changes to comply with the DMA in response to feedback from developers and the European Commission” and will “continue to listen and engage” with regulators.

“We are confident our plan complies with the law and estimate more than 99 percent of developers would pay the same or less in fees to Apple under the new business terms we created,” Apple was quoted as saying. “All developers doing business in the EU on the App Store have the opportunity to utilize the capabilities that we have introduced, including the ability to direct app users to the web to complete purchases at a very competitive rate.”

As reported on Friday, Apple is delaying its Apple Intelligence AI tools and other features in the EU because of what it called “regulatory uncertainties brought about by the Digital Markets Act.”

EU also probes Apple “Core Technology Fee”

The commission today also announced it is starting a separate investigation into Apple’s “contractual requirements for third-party app developers and app stores,” including its “Core Technology Fee.” Apple charges the Core Technology Fee for app installs, whether they are delivered from Apple’s own App Store, from an alternative app marketplace, or from a developer’s own website. The first million installs each year are free, but a per-install fee of €0.50 applies after that.

The commission said it would investigate whether the Core Technology Fee complies with the DMA. This investigation will also probe “Apple’s multi-step user journey to download and install alternative app stores or apps on iPhones,” and the eligibility requirements imposed on developers before they are allowed to offer alternative app stores or distribute apps from the web on iPhones.

The probe includes Apple’s requirement that developers have “membership of good standing” in the Apple Developer Program in order to benefit from the alternative distribution methods required by the DMA. The commission said it is also probing the “checks and reviews put in place by Apple to validate apps and alternative app stores to be sideloaded.”

EU says Apple violated app developers’ rights, could be fined 10% of revenue Read More »

internet-archive-forced-to-remove-500,000-books-after-publishers’-court-win

Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win

Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win

As a result of book publishers successfully suing the Internet Archive (IA) last year, the free online library that strives to keep growing online access to books recently shrank by about 500,000 titles.

IA reported in a blog post this month that publishers abruptly forcing these takedowns triggered a “devastating loss” for readers who depend on IA to access books that are otherwise impossible or difficult to access.

To restore access, IA is now appealing, hoping to reverse the prior court’s decision by convincing the US Court of Appeals in the Second Circuit that IA’s controlled digital lending of its physical books should be considered fair use under copyright law. An April court filing shows that IA intends to argue that the publishers have no evidence that the e-book market has been harmed by the open library’s lending, and copyright law is better served by allowing IA’s lending than by preventing it.

“We use industry-standard technology to prevent our books from being downloaded and redistributed—the same technology used by corporate publishers,” Chris Freeland, IA’s director of library services, wrote in the blog. “But the publishers suing our library say we shouldn’t be allowed to lend the books we own. They have forced us to remove more than half a million books from our library, and that’s why we are appealing.”

IA will have an opportunity to defend its practices when oral arguments start in its appeal on June 28.

“Our position is straightforward; we just want to let our library patrons borrow and read the books we own, like any other library,” Freeland wrote, while arguing that the “potential repercussions of this lawsuit extend far beyond the Internet Archive” and publishers should just “let readers read.”

“This is a fight for the preservation of all libraries and the fundamental right to access information, a cornerstone of any democratic society,” Freeland wrote. “We believe in the right of authors to benefit from their work; and we believe that libraries must be permitted to fulfill their mission of providing access to knowledge, regardless of whether it takes physical or digital form. Doing so upholds the principle that knowledge should be equally and equitably accessible to everyone, regardless of where they live or where they learn.”

Internet Archive fans beg publishers to end takedowns

After publishers won an injunction stopping IA’s digital lending, which “limits what we can do with our digitized books,” IA’s help page said, the open library started shrinking. While “removed books are still available to patrons with print disabilities,” everyone else has been cut off, causing many books in IA’s collection to show up as “Borrow Unavailable.”

Ever since, IA has been “inundated” with inquiries from readers all over the world searching for the removed books, Freeland said. And “we get tagged in social media every day where people are like, ‘why are there so many books gone from our library’?” Freeland told Ars.

In an open letter to publishers signed by nearly 19,000 supporters, IA fans begged publishers to reconsider forcing takedowns and quickly restore access to the lost books.

Among the “far-reaching implications” of the takedowns, IA fans counted the negative educational impact of academics, students, and educators—”particularly in underserved communities where access is limited—who were suddenly cut off from “research materials and literature that support their learning and academic growth.”

They also argued that the takedowns dealt “a serious blow to lower-income families, people with disabilities, rural communities, and LGBTQ+ people, among many others,” who may not have access to a local library or feel “safe accessing the information they need in public.”

“Your removal of these books impedes academic progress and innovation, as well as imperiling the preservation of our cultural and historical knowledge,” the letter said.

“This isn’t happening in the abstract,” Freeland told Ars. “This is real. People no longer have access to a half a million books.”

Internet Archive forced to remove 500,000 books after publishers’ court win Read More »

pornhub-prepares-to-block-five-more-states-rather-than-check-ids

Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

“Uphill battle” —

The number of states blocked by Pornhub will soon nearly double.

Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

Aurich Lawson | Getty Images

Pornhub will soon be blocked in five more states as the adult site continues to fight what it considers privacy-infringing age-verification laws that require Internet users to provide an ID to access pornography.

On July 1, according to a blog post on the adult site announcing the impending block, Pornhub visitors in Indiana, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, and Nebraska will be “greeted by a video featuring” adult entertainer Cherie Deville, “who explains why we had to make the difficult decision to block them from accessing Pornhub.”

Pornhub explained that—similar to blocks in Texas, Utah, Arkansas, Virginia, Montana, North Carolina, and Mississippi—the site refuses to comply with soon-to-be-enforceable age-verification laws in this new batch of states that allegedly put users at “substantial risk” of identity theft, phishing, and other harms.

Age-verification laws requiring adult site visitors to submit “private information many times to adult sites all over the Internet” normalizes the unnecessary disclosure of personally identifiable information (PII), Pornhub argued, warning, “this is not a privacy-by-design approach.”

Pornhub does not outright oppose age verification but advocates for laws that require device-based age verification, which allows users to access adult sites after authenticating their identity on their devices. That’s “the best and most effective solution for protecting minors and adults alike,” Pornhub argued, because the age-verification technology is proven and less PII would be shared.

“Users would only get verified once, through their operating system, not on each age-restricted site,” Pornhub’s blog said, claiming that “this dramatically reduces privacy risks and creates a very simple process for regulators to enforce.”

A spokesperson for Pornhub-owner Aylo told Ars that “unfortunately, the way many jurisdictions worldwide have chosen to implement age verification is ineffective, haphazard, and dangerous.”

“Any regulations that require hundreds of thousands of adult sites to collect significant amounts of highly sensitive personal information is putting user safety in jeopardy,” Aylo’s spokesperson told Ars. “Moreover, as experience has demonstrated, unless properly enforced, users will simply access non-compliant sites or find other methods of evading these laws.

Age-verification laws are harmful, Pornhub says

Pornhub’s big complaint with current age-verification laws is that these laws are hard to enforce and seem to make it riskier than ever to visit an adult site.

“Since age verification software requires users to hand over extremely sensitive information, it opens the door for the risk of data breaches,” Pornhub’s blog said. “Whether or not your intentions are good, governments have historically struggled to secure this data. It also creates an opportunity for criminals to exploit and extort people through phishing attempts or fake [age verification] processes, an unfortunate and all too common practice.”

Over the past few years, the risk of identity theft or stolen PII on both widely used and smaller niche adult sites has been well-documented.

Hundreds of millions of people were impacted by major leaks exposing PII shared with popular adult sites like Adult Friend Finder and Brazzers in 2016, while likely tens of thousands of users were targeted on eight poorly secured adult sites in 2018. Niche and free sites have also been vulnerable to attacks, including millions collectively exposed through breaches of fetish porn site Luscious in 2019 and MyFreeCams in 2021.

And those are just the big breaches that make headlines. In 2019, Kaspersky Lab reported that malware targeting online porn account credentials more than doubled in 2018, and researchers analyzing 22,484 pornography websites estimated that 93 percent were leaking user data to a third party.

That’s why Pornhub argues that, as states have passed age-verification laws requiring ID, they’ve “introduced harm” by redirecting visitors to adult sites that have fewer privacy protections and worse security, allegedly exposing users to more threats.

As an example, Pornhub reported, traffic to Pornhub in Louisiana “dropped by approximately 80 percent” after their age-verification law passed. That allegedly showed not just how few users were willing to show an ID to access their popular platform, but also how “very easily” users could simply move to “pirate, illegal, or other non-compliant sites that don’t ask visitors to verify their age.”

Pornhub has continued to argue that states passing laws like Louisiana’s cannot effectively enforce the laws and are simply shifting users to make riskier choices when accessing porn.

“The Louisiana law and other copycat state-level laws have no regulator, only civil liability, which results in a flawed enforcement regime, effectively making it an option for platform operators to comply,” Pornhub’s blog said. As one of the world’s most popular adult platforms, Pornhub would surely be targeted for enforcement if found to be non-compliant, while smaller adult sites perhaps plagued by security risks and disincentivized to check IDs would go unregulated, the thinking goes.

Aylo’s spokesperson shared 2023 Similarweb data with Ars, showing that sites complying with age-verification laws in Virginia, including Pornhub and xHamster, lost substantial traffic while seven non-compliant sites saw a sharp uptick in traffic. Similar trends were observed in Google trends data in Utah and Mississippi, while market shares were seemingly largely maintained in California, a state not yet checking IDs to access adult sites.

Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs Read More »

at&t-can’t-hang-up-on-landline-phone-customers,-california-agency-rules

AT&T can’t hang up on landline phone customers, California agency rules

Landline phones —

State dismisses AT&T application to end Carrier of Last Resort obligation.

AT&T can’t hang up on landline phone customers, California agency rules

Getty Images | Joe Raedle

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) yesterday rejected AT&T’s request to end its landline phone obligations. The state agency also urged AT&T to upgrade copper facilities to fiber instead of trying to shut down the outdated portions of its network.

AT&T asked the state to eliminate its Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) obligation, which requires it to provide landline telephone service to any potential customer in its service territory. A CPUC administrative law judge recommended rejection of the application last month, and the commission voted to dismiss AT&T’s application with prejudice on Thursday.

“Our vote to dismiss AT&T’s application made clear that we will protect customer access to basic telephone service… Our rules were designed to provide that assurance, and AT&T’s application did not follow our rules,” Commissioner John Reynolds said in a CPUC announcement.

State rules require a replacement COLR in order to relieve AT&T of its duties, and AT&T argued that VoIP and mobile services could fill that gap. But residents “highlighted the unreliability of voice alternatives” at public hearings, the CPUC said.

“Despite AT&T’s contention that providers of voice alternatives to landline service—such as VoIP or mobile wireless services—can fill the gap, the CPUC found AT&T did not meet the requirements for COLR withdrawal,” the agency said. “Specifically, AT&T failed to demonstrate the availability of replacement providers willing and able to serve as COLR, nor did AT&T prove that alternative providers met the COLR definition.”

The administrative law judge’s proposed decision said AT&T falsely claimed that commission rules require it “to retain outdated copper-based landline facilities that are expensive to maintain.” The agency stressed that its rules do not prevent AT&T from upgrading to fiber.

“COLR rules are technology-neutral and do not distinguish between voice services offered… and do not prevent AT&T from retiring copper facilities or from investing in fiber or other facilities/technologies to improve its network,” the agency said yesterday.

AT&T seeks change to state law

In a statement provided to Ars, AT&T California President Marc Blakeman said the carrier is turning its focus to lobbying for changes to state law.

“No customer will be left without voice and 911 services. We are focused on the legislation introduced in California, which includes important protections, safeguards, and outreach for consumers and does not impact our customers in rural locations. We are fully committed to keeping our customers connected while we work with state leaders on policies that create a thoughtful transition that brings modern communications to all Californians,” Blakeman said.

AT&T said the legislation is “based on feedback we and legislators received over the last year” and “addresses concerns raised during the community outreach process and sets a clear path forward.”

The legislation pushed by AT&T “would create a way for AT&T to remain as COLR in rural regions, which the company estimates as being about 100,000 customers, while being released from COLR obligations everywhere else,” a Bay City News article said.

The Marin County Board of Supervisors opposed the bill, saying it “would simply accomplish the same aims as AT&T’s application to the CPUC for relief of its Carrier of Last Resort Obligations,” which would have “significant negative effects… [on] more than 580,000 customers in California that rely on Plain Old Telephone Service (POTS) under AT&T’s COLR obligations.”

The CPUC is separately moving ahead with a new rulemaking process that could result in changes to the COLR rules. The rulemaking says the commission believes “that the COLR construct remains necessary, at least for certain individuals or communities in California,” but it is seeking public comment on possible changes.

The rulemaking asks whether the commission should relax COLR requirements, for example by declaring that certain regions may no longer require a carrier of last resort. It also seeks comment on whether VoIP and wireless providers should be designated as carriers of last resort.

AT&T can’t hang up on landline phone customers, California agency rules Read More »

citing-national-security,-us-will-ban-kaspersky-anti-virus-software-in-july

Citing national security, US will ban Kaspersky anti-virus software in July

banhammer —

US cites Russian government’s “capacity to influence Kaspersky’s operations.”

Citing national security, US will ban Kaspersky anti-virus software in July

The Biden administration will ban all sales of Kaspersky antivirus software in the US starting in July, according to reporting from Reuters and a filing from the US Department of Commerce (PDF).

The US believes that security software made by Moscow-based Kaspersky Lab represents a national security risk and that the Russian government could use Kaspersky’s software to install malware, block other security updates, and “collect and weaponize the personal information of Americans,” said US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo.

“When you think about national security, you may think about guns and tanks and missiles,” said Raimondo during a press briefing, as reported by Wired. “But the truth is, increasingly, it’s about technology, and it’s about dual-use technology, and it’s about data.”

US businesses and consumers will be blocked from buying new software from Kaspersky starting on or around July 24, 2024, 30 days after the restrictions are scheduled to be published in the federal register. Current users will still be able to download the software, resell it, and download new updates for 100 days, which Reuters says will give affected users and businesses time to find replacement software. Rebranded products that use Kaspersky’s software will also be affected.

Companies that continue to sell Kaspersky’s software in the US after the ban goes into effect could be subject to fines.

The ban follows a two-year national security probe of Kaspersky’s antivirus software by the Department of Commerce. It’s being implemented using authority that the government says it was given under a national defense authorization act signed during the Trump administration in 2018.

The ban is the culmination of long-running concern across multiple presidential administrations. Kaspersky’s software was banned from systems at US government agencies following allegations of the company’s links to Russian intelligence operations. A month after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, the US Federal Communications Commission went one step further, adding Kaspersky to a security threat list that included Chinese hardware makers Huawei and ZTE. Adding Kaspersky to that list didn’t ban consumer sales, but it did prevent Kaspersky from receiving funding from the FCC.

For its part, Kaspersky and its representatives have always denied the US government’s allegations. CEO Eugene Kaspersky called the 2017 reports “BS brewed on [a] political agenda,” and the company similarly accused the FCC in 2022 of making decisions “on political grounds” and “not based on any technical assessment of Kaspersky products.”

Citing national security, US will ban Kaspersky anti-virus software in July Read More »

statewide-911-outage-was-caused-by-911-vendor’s-malfunctioning-firewall

Statewide 911 outage was caused by 911 vendor’s malfunctioning firewall

911 outage —

911 vendor Comtech still investigating why firewall blocked emergency calls.

Emergency number 911 inputted on a cell phone dialing screen.

Getty Images | artas

A 911 vendor’s malfunctioning firewall caused a statewide outage in the emergency calling system in Massachusetts on Tuesday afternoon, the state government said. A Massachusetts government press release issued yesterday said the state’s 911 vendor, Comtech, “has advised State 911 that they have applied a technical solution to ensure that this does not happen again.”

“A preliminary investigation conducted by the State 911 Department and Comtech determined that the outage was the result of a firewall, a safety feature that provides protection against cyberattacks and hacking,” the announcement said. “The firewall prevented calls from getting to the 911 dispatch centers, also known as Public Safety Answer Points (PSAPs).”

Comtech’s initial review “confirmed that the interruption was not the result of a cyberattack or hack,” but “the exact reason the firewall stopped calls from reaching dispatch centers remains under review,” the state said. A full review is continuing.

The 911 outage lasted two hours. Shortly after it began, the State 911 Department alerted local law enforcement and issued a statewide emergency alert to residents advising them to call their local public safety business line directly if they had an emergency.

“Although some calls may not have gone through, the system allows dispatch centers to identify the phone number of callers and return those calls. The Department has not received any reports of emergencies impacted during the interruption,” the Massachusetts announcement said.

State 911 Department Executive Director Frank Pozniak promised that the department “will take all necessary steps to prevent a future occurrence.” Massachusetts has 204 Public Safety Answering Points that received an average of 8,800 calls, combined, per day in 2023.

Comtech announced a five-year contract extension with Massachusetts in May 2024. “Since 2014, Comtech has been developing, implementing and operating a secure, IP-based NG911 [Next Generation 911] system for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,” the vendor announcement said. Comtech says it has provided public safety and security technology for over 25 years and that “service providers, states, and local jurisdictions nationwide rely on our portfolio of mission‑critical products and services.”

911 disruptions happen occasionally and are sometimes caused by broader outages in phone networks. A 37-hour CenturyLink outage in December 2018 that disrupted 911 service for millions of Americans was caused by “malformed packets.” In February 2024, a major AT&T wireless outage caused by a botched network update led to warnings that 911 access could be disrupted.

Statewide 911 outage was caused by 911 vendor’s malfunctioning firewall Read More »

lawsuit:-meta-engineer-told-to-resign-after-calling-out-sexist-hiring-practices

Lawsuit: Meta engineer told to resign after calling out sexist hiring practices

“Driving women away” —

Meta managers are accused of retaliation and covering up mistreatment of women.

Lawsuit: Meta engineer told to resign after calling out sexist hiring practices

Meta got hit Tuesday with a lawsuit alleging that the company knowingly overlooks sexist treatment of female employees. That includes an apparent practice of hiring and promoting less qualified men to roles over more qualified female applicants.

The complaint was filed in a US district court in New York by Jeffrey Smith, an engineer who joined Meta in 2018. Smith alleged that Meta was on the brink of promoting him when suddenly his “upward trajectory stopped” after he started speaking up about allegedly misogynistic management practices at Meta.

Smith claimed that instead of a promotion, his Meta manager, Sacha Arnaud, suggested that he resign shortly after delivering Smith’s first-ever negative performance review, which reduced his bonus payout and impacted his company stock. Smith has alleged he suffered emotional distress and economic injury due to this alleged retaliation.

“Punished almost immediately”

The engineer—whose direct reports consider him to be “pro-active” and “the most thoughtful manager” ever, the complaint noted—started protesting Meta’s treatment of women in the summer of 2023.

For Smith, the tipping point toward advocating for women at Meta came when an “exceedingly capable female Meta employee” had her role downsized during a company reorganization. Some of her former responsibilities were allocated to two male employees, one of which Smith considered “a particularly poor fit,” because the male employee had significantly less experience than the female employee and no experience managing other managers.

After that, Smith learned about a Meta research scientist, Ran Rubin, who allegedly evaluated “a high-performing” female employee’s work “more critically than men’s work.”

Smith said that he repeatedly raised concerns about the perceived sexist management with Meta’s human resources and leadership, but nothing came of it.

Instead of prompting Meta to intervene, Smith was overwhelmed as more women came forward, revealing what he considered “a pattern of neglectful management” at Meta, routinely providing “overly critical feedback” and exhibiting “bias against the women.”  Three women specifically complained about Rubin, who allegedly provided poor management and “advocated for white men to have supervision” over the women whose competence he “denigrated.”

“Rubin’s comments about each of these women was not based on any evidence, and all had significant experience and no complaints against them,” Smith’s complaint said.

As Smith tells it, he couldn’t help but speak up after noticing “a qualified female employee was inexplicably stripped of responsibilities, a male supervisor was hyper-critical of a female direct report, certain male managers exhibited bias towards women they oversaw and that Meta exhibited systematic preferential treatment towards men in promotions and ratings, while failing to provide career development support to women,” his complaint said.

Smith alleged that Meta “punished” him “almost immediately” after he spoke up for these women. Rather than incorporate employee feedback into his performance review, his manager took the “highly unusual” step of skipping a formal review and instead delivering an informal critical review.

Meta accused of “driving women away”

“Smith felt intimidated,” the complaint said, and he stopped reporting alleged mistreatment of women for a short period. But in October 2023, “Smith decided that he could not stay silent any longer,” resuming his criticism of Meta’s allegedly sexist male managers with gusto. Some women had left Meta over the alleged treatment, and once again, he felt he ought to be “voicing his concerns that the actions of Rubin and other managers were driving women away from Meta by treating them unequally.”

Weeks later, Smith received a negative annual performance review, but that didn’t stop him from raising a red flag when he learned that a manager intended to fill a research science manager role “with a junior white man.”

Smith told his manager that “the two most qualified people for the role” were “both women and were not being considered,” Smith’s complaint said. But allegedly, his manager “responded by lashing out” and “questioning whether Smith’s response was ‘productive.'” After that, another employee accused of acting “disrespectfully” toward women “yelled at and insulted Smith,” while everyday workplace activity like taking previously approved time off suddenly seemed to negatively impact his performance review.

Ultimately, “no action was ever taken regarding his complaints about Mr. Rubin or the culture at Meta,” Smith’s complaint said, but his manager suggested that he “search for a new job internally” before later “stating that Smith should consider resigning his role.”

Smith hopes a jury will agree that Meta violated anti-retaliation and anti-interference laws in New York. A victory could result in civil and punitive damages compensating Smith for harm to his “professional and personal reputations and loss of career fulfillment.” It could also block Meta from any further mistreatment of women in the workplace, as alleged in the complaint.

An attorney for Smith, Valdi Licul, provided Ars with a statement, characterizing Smith’s case as “yet another example of how major corporations are failing to address sexist cultures and how they try to silence those who speak out against their practices. We look forward to holding Meta accountable and making it clear that sexism has no place in the workforce.”

Meta did not immediately respond to Ars’ request to comment.

Lawsuit: Meta engineer told to resign after calling out sexist hiring practices Read More »

at&t-imposes-$10-price-hike-on-most-of-its-older-unlimited-plans

AT&T imposes $10 price hike on most of its older unlimited plans

Raising the price limit —

Price hike paired with data boosts to make “unlimited” plans a bit less limited.

A man with an umbrella walking past a building with an AT&T logo.

AT&T is imposing $10 and $20 monthly price hikes on users of older unlimited wireless plans starting in August 2024, the company announced. The single-line price of these 10 “retired” plans will increase by $10 per month, while customers with multiple lines on a plan will be hit with a total monthly increase of $20.

“If you have a single line of service on your plan, your monthly plan charge will increase by $10. If you have multiple lines on your plan, your monthly plan charge will increase by a total of $20. This is the total monthly increase, not per line increase,” AT&T said.

AT&T has offered a dizzying array of “unlimited” data plans over the years, all with different limits and perks. While unlimited plans let customers avoid overage fees, speeds can be slowed once customers hit their high-speed data limit. There are also limits on the usage of hotspot data.

The $10 and $20 price increases “affect most of our older unlimited plans,” AT&T said. The list of affected plans is as follows:

    • AT&T Unlimited & More Premium
    • AT&T Unlimited Choice Enhanced
    • AT&T Unlimited & More
    • AT&T Unlimited Choice II
    • AT&T Unlimited Plus
    • AT&T Unlimited Choice
    • AT&T Unlimited Plan
    • AT&T Unlimited Plus Enhanced
    • AT&T Unlimited Value Plan
    • AT&T Unlimited Plan (with TV)

AT&T softens blow with more high-speed data

To soften the blow of the price increase, AT&T said it would let customers who keep their older plans have more high-speed data and hotspot data:

AT&T Unlimited Choice, Choice II, Choice Enhanced, Unlimited & More, and Unlimited Value plans will now include 75GB of high-speed data and 30GB of hotspot data. AT&T Unlimited Plus, Plus Enhanced, Unlimited &More Premium, and AT&T Unlimited (with TV) plans will now include 100GB of high-speed data and 60GB of hotspot data.

Customers may get a better price by switching to one of AT&T’s current unlimited plans, which range from $66 to $86 for a single line before taxes and fees. In 2019, as we wrote at the time, Unlimited & More cost $70 per month for one line while Unlimited & More Premium cost $80 per month for a single line.

The Unlimited & More plans replaced Unlimited Plus and Unlimited Choice in 2018. The 2018 change resulted in AT&T’s entry-level unlimited plan starting at $70 instead of the previous $65. All those plans are affected by the price increase slated for August 2024.

Unlimited & More originally didn’t have any set amount of high-speed data. Instead, that plan was subject to reduced speeds during times of network congestion regardless of how much data the customer used. The more expensive Unlimited & More Premium was given 22GB of high-speed data before possible slowdowns.

Unlimited & More originally did not allow mobile hotspot usage, while Unlimited & More Premium allowed 15GB of high-speed mobile hotspot use. The new increases to high-speed data and hotspot allotments make these older plans behave a bit more like AT&T’s current mid-range and high-end plans.

Limits on current “unlimited” plans

Before deciding whether to switch to a current plan, AT&T customers should examine their limits. For the current entry-level plan titled “AT&T Unlimited Starter SL,” which costs $66 for a single line, AT&T says it “may temporarily slow data speeds if the network is busy” regardless of how much data you’ve used.

The current mid-range offering, AT&T Unlimited Extra EL, is $76 for a single line and comes with 75GB of smartphone data before possible slowdowns. The high-end Unlimited Premium PL, which is $86 for a single line, does not have slowdowns based on the amount of smartphone data you’ve used.

The above limits don’t apply to hotspot data, which is handled separately. Unlimited Premium PL comes with 60GB of high-speed hotspot data, the mid-range plan has 30GB of high-speed hotspot data, and the entry-level plan has 5GB of high-speed hotspot data. On all three plans, hotspot speeds are slowed to a maximum of 128 kbps once customers use the allotment.

AT&T’s price hike on older plans follows a similar move by T-Mobile. But unlike T-Mobile, AT&T didn’t promise that it would never raise prices on these plans.

AT&T imposes $10 price hike on most of its older unlimited plans Read More »

elon-musk-rushes-to-debut-x-payments-as-tech-issues-hamper-creator-payouts

Elon Musk rushes to debut X payments as tech issues hamper creator payouts

Elon Musk rushes to debut X payments as tech issues hamper creator payouts

Elon Musk is still frantically pushing to launch X payment services in the US by the end of 2024, Bloomberg reported Tuesday.

Launching payment services is arguably one of the reasons why Musk paid so much to acquire Twitter in 2022. His rebranding of the social platform into X revives a former dream he had as a PayPal co-founder who fought and failed to name the now-ubiquitous payments app X. Musk has told X staff that transforming the company into a payments provider would be critical to achieving his goal of turning X into a so-called everything app “within three to five years.”

Late last year, Musk said it would “blow” his “mind” if X didn’t roll out payments by the end of 2024, so Bloomberg’s report likely comes as no big surprise to Musk’s biggest fans who believe in his vision. At that time, Musk said he wanted X users’ “entire financial lives” on the platform before 2024 ended, and a Bloomberg review of “more than 350 pages of documents and emails related to money transmitter licenses that X Payments submitted in 11 states” shows approximately how close he is to making that dream a reality on his platform.

X Payments, a subsidiary of X, reports that X already has money transmitter licenses in 28 states, but X wants to secure licenses in all states before 2024 winds down, Bloomberg reported.

Bloomberg’s review found that X has a multiyear plan to gradually introduce payment features across the US—including “Venmo-like” features to send and receive money, as well as make purchases online—but hopes to begin that process this year. Payment providers like Stripe and Adyen have already partnered with X to process its transactions, Bloomberg reported, and X has told regulators that it “anticipated” that its payments system would also rely on those partnerships.

Musk initially had hoped to launch payments globally in 2024, but regulatory pressures forced him to tamp down those ambitions, Bloomberg reported. States like Massachusetts, for example, required X to resubmit its application only after more than half of US states had issued licenses, Bloomberg found.

Ultimately, Musk wants X to become the largest financial institution in the world. Bloomberg reported that he plans to do this by giving users a convenient “digital dashboard” through X “that will serve as a centralized hub for all payments activity” online. To make sure that users keep their money stashed on the platform, Musk plans to offer “extremely high yield” savings accounts that X Payments’ chief information security officer, Chris Stanley, teased in April would basically guarantee that funds are rarely withdrawn from X.

“The end goal is if you ever have any incentive to take money out of our system, then we have failed,” Stanley posted on X.

Stanley compared X payments to Venmo and Apple Pay and said X’s plan for its payment feature was to “evolve” so that X users “can gain interest, buy products,” and “eventually use it to buy things in stores.”

Bloomberg confirmed that X does not plan to charge users any fees to send or receive payments, although Musk has told regulators that offering payments will “boost” X’s business by increasing X users’ “participation and engagement.” Analysts told Bloomberg that X could also profit off payments by charging merchants fees or by “offering banking services, such as checking accounts and debit cards.”

Musk has told X staff that he plans to offer checking accounts, debit cards, and even loans through X, saying that “if you address all things that you want from a finance standpoint, then we will be the people’s financial institution.”

X CEO Linda Yaccarino has been among the biggest cheerleaders for Musk’s plan to turn X into a bank, writing in a blog last year, “We want money on X to flow as freely as information and conversation.”

Elon Musk rushes to debut X payments as tech issues hamper creator payouts Read More »