Tag: Sues

Categories
News

TikTok Sues U.S. Government Over Bill Requiring Sale

[ad_1]

TikTok parent company ByteDance today filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government in an effort to put a stop to the bill requiring TikTok to be sold off to a non-Chinese company in a matter of months, or face a U.S. ban.

tiktok logo
The Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act that passed in April requires ByteDance to divest its TikTok ownership within nine months, with the possibility of a three-month extension if a deal is in progress. If TikTok is not sold off, the bill will prevent app stores and companies in the U.S. from providing the TikTok app to users. As of now, TikTok will be forced to shut down on January 19, 2025.

ByteDance calls the act “obviously unconstitutional,” and says that there is no path for TikTok to continue operating in the United States. The 270-day timeline is “not possible,” and even if it were, the company claims that the act is still an “extraordinary and unconstitutional assertion of power.”

If upheld, it would allow the government to decide that a company may no longer own and publish the innovative and unique speech platform it created. If Congress can do this, it can circumvent the First Amendment by invoking national security and ordering the publisher of any individual newspaper or website to sell to avoid being shut down. And for TikTok, any such divestiture would disconnect Americans from the rest of the global community on a platform devoted to shared content — an outcome fundamentally at odds with the Constitution’s commitment to both free speech and individual liberty.

The lawsuit argues that the act violates the First Amendment, and it claims that “speculative and analytically flawed” concern over security and content manipulation is an insufficient reason for limiting the free speech of TikTok’s 170 million U.S. users.

ByteDance says that a U.S. TikTok platform would not be commercially viable because it would limit the pool of content, undermining “the value and viability of the U.S. TikTok business.” ByteDance also claims that it would be technologically impossible to give the TikTok source code to a new owner because it would take years for new engineers to become familiar enough with the code to perform routine maintenance, plus the code would need to be rearchitected not to use ByteDance’s software tools, which cannot be done in 270 days.

The Chinese government has said that it will “firmly oppose” any effort to sell TikTok to a U.S. company, and China would need to approve a sale. China has no intention of allowing the TikTok recommendation engine to be divested. ByteDance has already moved U.S. data to servers owned by Oracle, but U.S. lawmakers do not feel that is enough to protect users.

There are few U.S. companies that could afford to purchase TikTok, and the tech giants that could buy it would likely be restricted from doing so due to antitrust concerns.

ByteDance is asking the court to issue a declaratory judgment that the act violates the U.S. Constitution, preventing the U.S. Attorney General from enforcing it.

Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.



[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
News

Apple Sues Former Employee for Leaking iPhone’s Journal App and More

[ad_1]

Apple this month sued its former employee Andrew Aude in California state court, alleging that he breached the company’s confidentiality agreement and violated labor laws by leaking sensitive information to the media and employees at other tech companies. Apple has demanded a jury trial, and it is seeking damages in excess of $25,000.

apple leak feature blue
Aude joined Apple as an iOS software engineer in 2016, shortly after graduating college. He worked on optimizing battery performance, making him “privy to information regarding dozens of Apple’s most sensitive projects,” according to the complaint.

Leaks

The lawsuit alleges that over a five-year period, Aude used his Apple-issued work iPhone to leak information about more than a half-dozen Apple products and policies, including its then-unannounced Journal app and Vision Pro headset, product development policies, strategies for regulatory compliance, employee headcounts, and more.

In April 2023, for example, Apple alleges that Aude leaked a list of finalized features for the iPhone’s Journal app to a journalist at The Wall Street Journal on a phone call. That same month, The Wall Street Journal‘s Aaron Tilley published a report titled “Apple Plans iPhone Journaling App in Expansion of Health Initiatives.”

Using the encrypted messaging app Signal, Aude is said to have sent “over 1,400” messages to the same journalist, who Aude referred to as “Homeboy.” He is also accused of sending “over 10,000 text messages” to another journalist at the website The Information, and he allegedly traveled “across the continent” to meet with her.

HomeboyHomeboyA screenshot included in the lawsuit

Other leaks relate to the Vision Pro and other hardware:

As another example, an October 2020 screenshot on Mr. Aude’s Apple-issued work iPhone shows that he disclosed Apple’s development of products within the spatial computing space to a non-Apple employee. Mr. Aude made this disclosure even though Apple’s development efforts were confidential and not known to the public. Over the following months, Mr. Aude disclosed additional Apple confidential information—including information concerning unannounced products, and hardware information.

Apple believes that Aude’s actions were “extensive and purposeful,” with Aude allegedly admitting that he leaked information so he could “kill” products and features with which he took issue. The company alleges that his wrongful disclosures resulted in at least five news articles discussing the company’s confidential and proprietary information. Apple says these public revelations impeded its ability to “surprise and delight” with its latest products.

Apple Finds Out

Apple said it learned of Aude’s wrongful disclosures in late 2023, and the company fired him for his alleged misconduct in December of that year.

In a November 2023 interview, Apple alleges that Aude denied leaking confidential information to anyone. However, during that interview, Apple alleges that Aude went to the bathroom and deleted “significant amounts of evidence” from his work iPhone, including the Signal app that he used to communicate with “Homeboy.”

During a follow-up interview in December 2023, Apple alleges that Aude admitted to some of his wrongful disclosures, but claims he only provided “narrow admissions limited to the information he had not been able to destroy.”

Apple attempted to resolve this matter out of court, but it said Aude was uncooperative:

Apple does not bring suit against its former employees lightly. As a result of Mr. Aude’s willful destruction of evidence, however, Apple cannot know the universe of what he disclosed to whom and when. Before filing this lawsuit, Apple reached out to Mr. Aude to potentially resolve this matter. Over a month ago, Apple contacted Mr. Aude to understand the full scope of his leaks and ask for his full cooperation in resolving this matter without litigation. Mr. Aude, however, did not commit to cooperating.

Aude has also allegedly refused to divest of the restricted Apple stock units that he received as part of his compensation package.

Apple said that Aude poses an “ongoing threat” to the company due to his “long and extensive history of disclosing it to third parties intentionally and without authorization, his continued relationships with individuals at other technology companies, and journalists, and his attempts to conceal his misconduct.”

Apple is seeking both compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial, and it is also seeking other legal remedies.

The full complaint can be viewed in this PDF file.

[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
Bisnis Industri

Apple sues Microsoft for ripping off Mac OS: Today in Apple history

[ad_1]

March 17: Today in Apple history: Apple sues Microsoft for ripping off Mac OS March 17, 1988: Apple sues Microsoft for allegedly stealing 189 different elements of its Macintosh operating system to create Windows 2.0.

The incident, which causes a deep rift between Apple and one of its top developers, paves the way for an epic battle between the two companies that will rage for years.

Apple sues Microsoft after developer goes from friend to foe

As a valued developer, Microsoft got a behind-the-scenes look at the development of the Macintosh project prior to its 1984 release. Shortly after the very first Mac 128K went on sale, Microsoft founder Bill Gates wrote then-Apple CEO John Sculley. Gates suggested Apple should license the Macintosh operating system to outside manufacturers to help establish it as the standard interface for personal computing.

Sculley was tentatively open to the idea. But on June 25, 1985, Apple exec Jean-Louis Gassée shot down the proposal. (Gassée took over running the Mac division from Steve Jobs.)

Gates decided to capitalize on what he saw as a great business opportunity to create a mass-market operating system. He debuted Windows on November 15, 1985.

Windows debut stirs anger at Apple

Sculley reacted furiously when he saw Windows, although version 1.0 did not compare well to Mac OS. For example, although the new Microsoft OS featured onscreen windows, they could not overlap one another.

However, in some ways, Windows seemed eerily close to Mac. For one thing, Microsoft packaged it with built-in apps Write and Paint, which were reminiscent of MacWrite and MacPaint.

Since Microsoft made up two-thirds of software sales for Mac at the time, it was in nobody’s interest to break up the partnership. Mac sales were underperforming as it was, and Microsoft’s first version of Windows was no more threatening than any of the other Apple knockoffs floating around.

A disastrous agreement between Microsoft and Apple

Windows wasn’t a straight-up Mac OS ripoff. In fact, Microsoft began developing Windows before Gates ever saw the Macintosh. Plus, both operating systems licensed technology from Xerox PARC, which did a lot of the creative legwork on inventing the graphical user interface.

As a result, Microsoft and Apple came to an agreement. Sculley and Gates signed a deal on Nov. 21, 1985, that licensed the Mac’s “visual displays” to Microsoft. Gates agreed that Microsoft would continue writing software for Mac. Microsoft also gave Apple a two-year exclusivity window on its popular spreadsheet program Excel.

Controversially, this deal gave Microsoft a “non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, nontransferable license to use [parts of the Mac technology] in present and future software programs, and to license them to and through third parties for use in their software programs.”

Windows 2.0: Apple sues Microsoft

A couple of years later, Windows 2.0 arrived. It resembled the Macintosh interface much more closely than the first version of Microsoft’s operating system. As a result, on March 17, 1988 — the date we’re commemorating today — Apple sued Microsoft for stealing its work.

Unfortunately, things didn’t go well for Apple. Judge William Schwarzer ruled that the existing license between Apple and Microsoft covered certain interface elements for the new Windows. Those that weren’t covered were not copyrightable.

It was the start of a decade of dominance for Microsoft, and a decade of disaster and near-ruin for Apple.



[ad_2]

Source Article Link

Categories
News

Woman Sues McDonalds for ‘Severe Burns’ Following Coffee Spill.

A woman in her 80s is suing a San Francisco McDonald’s for allegedly failing to assist her after she received “severe burns” from a hot cup of coffee.

According to court papers obtained by NBC News, Mable Childress filed a case in San Francisco Superior Court on September 14. The complaint claims that the workers at the San Francisco branch owed the plaintiff a “duty of care” and failed to uphold it by failing to secure the lip of the coffee cup she purchased via the drive-thru, among other things.

As a result of the incident, Childress alleges she suffered major burns, disfigurement, emotional suffering, and medical expenditures.

Peter Ou, the franchise’s owner and operator in San Francisco, shared his concerns with TODAY.com.

“My restaurants have strong food safety standards in place, including educating employees to ensure lids on hot beverages are secure,” he says in an official statement. When Ms. Childress notified us about her experience later that day, our staff and management team reached back to her within minutes, as we do with every customer complaint. We are actively investigating this new legal allegation.

According to Childress’ complaint, an incident occurred on June 13 at 1100 Fillmore Street in San Francisco. According to the lawsuit, when Childress attempted to take a drink, the lid sprung apart and “scalding coffee poured out of the cup,” leaving her with major burns and scars in her crotch.

In her case, Childress alleges she told three McDonald’s employees, including managers, what transpired. According to the lawsuit, the three defendants “ignored” her and “refused to help her” until she left to seek medical care for her injuries.

When TODAY.com contacted Childress’ lawyer for comment, they did not respond right away. Dylan Hackett, her attorney, told the San Francisco publication SFGate that the coffee was boiling hot because the cup wasn’t “properly” covered.

“She’s an elderly lady, and she was waiting for over an hour to speak to a manager, and a manager never spoke to her,” Hackett told SFGate. “They treated her as if she didn’t exist. No one moved forward to assist her. She needed to go to the emergency department.

According to Childress’ court records, this is a civil case with possible damages in excess of $25,000.

Which McDonald’s coffee lawsuit has received the most attention?

This is not the first time McDonald’s has been sued over its coffee. Stella Liebeck is one of the most well-known McDonald’s lawsuits.

In 1992, a McDonald’s coffee spilled on Stella Liebeck’s lap, inflicting third-degree burns, according to NBC News. She was hospitalized for more than a week after suffering severe burns to her crotch and legs. Liebeck first requested $20,000 from McDonald’s. This amount was intended to support her medical expenses. When McDonald’s refused to settle, she brought the case to court, where a jury awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages.

A jury once ruled that McDonald’s coffee was served at a temperature nearly 40 degrees higher than that of rival restaurants, according to the American Museum of Tort Law.

The parties struck a confidential settlement after the court reduced Liebeck’s initial $2.7 million award to $480,000.

Was McDonald’s ever sued over a sizzling chicken nugget?

The family of a 4-year-old girl who allegedly received major burns from a Chicken McNugget at a McDonald’s restaurant in Florida was awarded $800,000 in July.

The parents of 4-year-old Olivia Caraballo, Philana Holmes and Humberto Caraballo Estevez, have launched a lawsuit against McDonald’s and its franchise owner, Upchurch Food. Olivia’s leg was allegedly burnt to a second degree after a “unreasonably and dangerously” wedged nugget in her car seat caught fire.

Both McDonald’s and Upchurch blamed the sufferer for the burns.