By Lorena Guzmán-Díaz
Edited by Elissa D. Hecker
Below, for your browsing convenience, the categories are divided into: Entertainment, Arts, Sports, Technology/Media, and General News.
Entertainment
Majors Hit Back at Cox’s Latest Attempt to Overturn Billion Dollar Copyright Ruling
Cox Communications' attempt to overturn a $1 billion copyright infringement ruling has been challenged by major record labels, who argue that Cox's claims of evidence mishandling are unfounded. Cox is using Rule 60 of the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to seek relief from the judgment, alleging that key evidence was mishandled and that data issues only emerged after the trial. The labels counter that Cox had ample opportunity to address these issues during the trial and that the data problems cited by Cox are irrelevant. They argue that Cox’s failure to examine evidence and new code discovered post-trial does not warrant a retrial and urge the appeals court to uphold the original judgment.
Three Teenagers Arrested in Planned Attack on Taylor Swift’s Vienna Shows
Authorities in Vienna arrested a third teenager in connection with a thwarted terrorist attack aimed at a Taylor Swift concert, involving an 18-year-old Iraqi citizen who had sworn allegiance to the Islamic State but was not directly involved in the plot. The concerts, set for this week, were canceled after two other teenagers were arrested, with the main suspect—a 19-year-old Austrian of North Macedonian descent—having confessed to the plan, which aimed to create mass casualties. The police found bomb-making materials during a raid on the main suspect's home, and investigations are ongoing to uncover the network surrounding him. Approximately 200,000 fans were affected by the cancellations, and a 15-year-old boy initially questioned has been released as a witness, providing corroboration for the main suspect's confession.
Sports
Feud Flares Between U.S. and Global Antidoping Agency
American officials permitted athletes who tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs to continue competing to aid undercover investigations, a move now criticized by global counterparts as a rule violation. This controversy intensified following scrutiny of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) for its handling of positive tests among Chinese swimmers, leading to threats of funding cuts and criminal investigations by the U.S. Justice Department and FBI. In response, WADA accused the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) of similarly flouting the global anti-doping code by allowing doping athletes to compete, though USADA contends that their actions were within the rules and aimed at supporting law enforcement investigations. This dispute underscores the deepening rift in the global anti-doping community, highlighted by the International Olympic Committee's conditional award of the 2034 Winter Olympics to Salt Lake City, which included terms limiting U.S. influence over global doping regulations.
Jordan Chiles Lost a Bronze Medal Because an Appeal Was Four Seconds Late
The International Olympic Committee confirmed that it would strip Chiles of her bronze medal and give it to Romania’s Ana Barbosu. The decision came after the Court of Arbitration for Sport that Chiles’s coach had filed a scoring inquiry four seconds too late, according to gymnastics rules. The United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee said that it would appeal the reallocation of Chiles’s medal, and by Sunday afternoon, U.S.A. Gymnastics, the sport’s governing body in America, had begun that fight.
Technology/Media
‘Google Is a Monopolist,’ Judge Rules in Landmark Antitrust Case
A federal judge ruled that Google acted illegally to maintain a monopoly in online searches, which may fundamentally change the way tech giants operate. The ruling found that Google abused its dominance by paying billions to companies, like Apple and Samsung, to prioritize its search services. This landmark decision highlights the potential limit of Big Tech's power and may impact other antitrust lawsuits against major tech companies. The ruling did not include remedies yet, but it could force Google to change its practices or divest parts of its business. Google plans to appeal the decision, emphasizing its focus on providing useful products and services.
How the Google Antitrust Ruling May Influence Tech Competition
A recent ruling by Judge Amit P. Mehta found that Google violated antitrust laws by using its monopoly power in internet search to stifle competition through exclusive agreements with device makers and browser companies. This decision, echoing the influential 2000 antitrust case against Microsoft, is poised to have significant impacts on current and future tech industry regulations. Like Microsoft's case, Google's ruling could lead to major changes in how big tech operates, potentially affecting ongoing antitrust investigations into Apple, Amazon, and Meta. The ruling highlights concerns about Google's dominance in search and its extensive financial agreements to maintain that position, prompting discussions about potential remedies, including restrictions on exclusive deals and sharing search data with competitors.
After Google Antitrust Ruling, Here’s Where Other Big Tech Cases Stand
The federal government is intensifying its antitrust actions against major tech companies, with ongoing and upcoming cases targeting Amazon, Apple, Google, and Meta. Following a recent ruling that Google illegally maintained a monopoly in search, the Justice Department is preparing for a trial next month over Google's advertising practices. Amazon faces a 2026 trial over accusations of monopolistic practices and harming consumers, while Apple is contending with a March lawsuit alleging it used its smartphone monopoly to stifle competition. Additionally, Meta is defending against claims that its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp were anticompetitive, with the F.T.C. pushing to unwind these deals. These cases reflect a broader government effort to challenge Big Tech's market dominance and promote competition.
When It Rains, It Pours: DOJ and FTC File Children’s Privacy Lawsuit Against TikTok As Forced-Sale Deadline Nears
TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance, are facing new legal troubles as the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission have filed a lawsuit alleging violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). This lawsuit comes amid ongoing scrutiny and potential restrictions from U.S. regulations, including the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which could force ByteDance to divest from TikTok by January 19th. The complaint accuses TikTok of unlawfully collecting data from under-13 users without proper parental consent and failing to honor requests for data deletion. This adds to TikTok’s recent legal woes, including significant fines in the UK and EU, and a broader investigation by the EU into its impact on minors. TikTok has disputed the allegations, claiming that many concerns are outdated or have already been addressed.
U.S. TikTok Ban Addresses “Grave National-Security Threats” and is a “Triumph for Human Rights” Say New Court Filings
The deadline for submitting amicus briefs regarding the legal challenges to the U.S. sell-or-be-banned law targeting TikTok and its parent company ByteDance has passed, with various supporters backing the law, including former national security officials, Congress members, state attorneys general, human rights groups, and free speech experts. The law, which mandates ByteDance to sell TikTok or face a ban by January, is defended by former U.S. security officials who cite national security threats from Chinese control of TikTok and alleged obligations under Chinese law to assist with intelligence gathering. Supporters argue that the law is a necessary measure for national security and human rights protection, while TikTok disputes these claims, contending the law breaches free speech rights and is impractical. Additionally, the Department of Justice has recently filed a lawsuit accusing TikTok of violating children's privacy laws, adding to the company's legal challenges. The legal battle over the sell-or-be-banned law is set to proceed to trial next month.
Federal Task Force Makes New Social Media Recommendations To Address Youth Mental Health Crisis
The new federal recommendations from the Kids Online Health and Safety Task Force aim to provide guidance on protecting children online amid the youth mental health crisis, addressing issues like online harassment and abuse. Parents are advised to communicate openly with their children about social media, set ground rules, and promote balanced screen time. The report also includes recommendations for internet service providers to enhance privacy protections and prevent cyberbullying. Emphasizing the need for federal legislation to safeguard young people online, the task force highlights immediate actions to improve the current online environment for children.
The EFF Campaign Against DMCA Section 1201 Perishes in the DC Circuit
The First Amendment protects the right to read books but does not permit illegal activities, such as breaking into a bookstore to access them, even if the intent is to use the book's content in a manner that would be considered fair use under copyright law. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has long contested this distinction, arguing that Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which prohibits circumvention of digital locks protecting copyrighted works, is unconstitutional as it impedes free speech. However, recent court rulings have upheld the constitutionality of §1201, emphasizing that it targets a broad range of activities beyond expressive conduct and that exemptions are granted through a triennial rulemaking process, which is less restrictive than individual litigation for fair use claims. The court concluded that the law's restrictions on digital circumvention are permissible and that the rulemaking process itself is constitutionally sound, leaving the EFF's arguments largely unpersuasive and suggesting that the issue may now be settled.
Advertising Coalition Shuts Down After X Sues
The Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) will dissolve following a lawsuit filed by the social media company X, which accused the coalition of orchestrating an antitrust boycott against the platform. GARM, led by the World Federation of Advertisers, decided to cease operations due to limited financial resources amid the legal battle. The lawsuit claims that GARM and major brands, like CVS and Unilever, conspired to withhold advertising revenue from X, impacting its earnings significantly. Musk and supporters view GARM's closure as a victory for free speech, while critics argue that it could further alienate advertisers and hinder efforts to address online extremism and misinformation.
Elon Musk Revives Lawsuit Against OpenAI and Sam Altman
Elon Musk has revived his lawsuit against OpenAI, accusing the company and its founders, Sam Altman and Greg Brockman, of prioritizing commercial interests over their original mission to benefit humanity. Musk claims that OpenAI breached its founding agreement by forming a lucrative partnership with Microsoft, which he views as a betrayal of the commitment to open-source AI development. OpenAI has countered that Musk's claims are baseless and that he sought to commercialize the organization himself before leaving in 2018. The renewed federal lawsuit, which follows a previous state court case, alleges that OpenAI’s actions constitute federal racketeering and seeks to void its contract with Microsoft, questioning whether OpenAI’s technologies have achieved the promised level of artificial general intelligence.
CrowdStrike Faces a Potential Tsunami of Lawsuits. Only the Fine Print Can Save It, Experts Say
After a faulty software update from cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike caused a global IT outage, disrupting millions of computers and resulting in over $5 billion in financial losses, legal action is underway. Delta Airlines is suing CrowdStrike for $500 million in damages, while a class action lawsuit has been filed by shareholders claiming misrepresentation regarding the company's software testing. Despite CrowdStrike's acknowledgment of responsibility, it is protected by contractual liability limitations, potentially capping its financial exposure. This situation underscores the challenges of pursuing compensation, particularly for businesses without direct contracts with CrowdStrike, and highlights calls for regulatory reform in software liability.
The New A.I. Deal: Buy Everything but the Company
In 2022, Noam Shazeer and Daniel De Freitas left Google to launch Character.AI, a chatbot start-up that quickly raised nearly $200 million. Last week, they announced their return to Google, not through an acquisition, but via a $3 billion licensing deal for Character.AI's technology. This agreement, which involves Google paying $2.5 billion to buy out shareholders, including Shazeer, and $500 million to license the technology, is part of a trend where big tech firms seek to acquire technology and talent without outright buying start-ups. This approach allows tech giants like Google, Microsoft, and Amazon to bypass regulatory scrutiny while enhancing their A.I. capabilities. The deal reflects a broader pattern where tech companies use complex transactions to secure advanced A.I. technology and talent, leaving behind former start-ups with reduced resources and a potential disruption in their operational continuity.
Elon Musk Clashes With Keir Starmer Over Riots in Britain
Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Elon Musk are clashing over incendiary comments Musk has made about violent protests in Britain on X. Musk's posts, which include suggestions of an impending civil war and criticisms of the UK's handling of the riots, have drawn ire from Starmer, who has condemned the comments and emphasized the need to protect all communities, not just specific ones. The violence, which erupted after a stabbing incident and was fueled by misinformation, has led to significant unrest, including attacks on immigrant businesses and asylum seeker accommodations. Starmer is considering holding a parliamentary inquiry into X's role in the violence, as British authorities struggle to address misinformation and enforce online safety laws.
General News
Supreme Court Rejects Long-Shot Challenge to Trump Hush Money Case
The Supreme Court rejected Missouri's attempt to use its "original jurisdiction" to intervene in former President Donald Trump’s New York hush money case, which involves his conviction for falsifying business records. Missouri, led by Attorney General Andrew Bailey, sought to delay Trump’s sentencing and lift a gag order, arguing that the case's outcome could affect the 2024 election. The Court's brief order did not explain its reasoning, but Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. expressed a willingness to allow the suit, though they did not comment on its merits. New York Attorney General Letitia James countered that Missouri lacked standing and that the issues raised could be addressed through other legal avenues. The Court, while required to hear some state disputes under its original jurisdiction, often exercises discretion in rejecting such cases, as demonstrated by its past rejections of suits over state election laws and marijuana legalization.
Sept. 11 Judge to Decide Whether Guantánamo Plea Deals Are Valid
Judge Matthew N. McCall has authorized an investigation into whether Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III lawfully rescinded a plea deal with Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and two other accused 9/11 plotters. This decision follows confusion after a senior Pentagon official signed a plea agreement for lifetime sentences, which Austin later overturned, opting instead for a death-penalty trial. McCall has ordered briefings on potential unlawful influence by Austin and directed the government to provide information about the decision's context. The judge is also reviewing whether the plea agreement, signed by a Pentagon appointee, was binding, and has rejected requests to expedite a narrow ruling, emphasizing the complexity of the case and its broader implications.
Justice Thomas Failed to Reveal More Private Flights, Senator Says
Senator Ron Wyden has pressed wealthy conservative donor Harlan Crow’s lawyer for details on Crow’s undisclosed flights with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, including a 2010 trip between Hawaii and New Zealand, which was not listed on Thomas’s financial disclosure forms. Wyden, citing Customs and Border Protection records and previous revelations of undisclosed travel on Crow's private jet and yacht, expressed concern that Thomas might have received substantial gifts from Crow, potentially affecting his judicial impartiality. Crow’s lawyer has dismissed Wyden’s inquiries as politically motivated harassment, asserting that all relevant tax laws were followed. This development comes amid broader Democratic calls for stricter Supreme Court ethics rules and further scrutiny of justices' financial disclosures.
Arizona Grand Jury Wanted to Indict Trump in Fake Electors Case
Court papers reveal that a grand jury in Arizona, which charged 18 people in a scheme to overturn the 2020 election, had considered indicting Trump, but was advised against it by state prosecutors. The prosecutors cited a Justice Department policy that discourages state charges overlapping with federal cases. The grand jurors expressed disappointment when prosecutors recommended not charging Trump, despite his involvement as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Arizona case. Trump is also facing federal charges in Washington and has been formally indicted only in Georgia, with other states, including Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, naming him as an unindicted co-conspirator. The Arizona case is not expected to go to trial until next year, and recent developments include cooperation agreements from key figures involved in the scheme.
Election Highlights: Trump and Harris Agree to September Debate on ABC, Network Says
Trump and Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris will debate on September 10th, hosted by ABC News.
Fears of Slowing U.S. Growth Jolt Markets Around the World
Anxiety over a potential U.S. economic slowdown triggered a global market rout, following a retreat that began the previous week. The sell-off was fueled by concerns that the Federal Reserve had delayed too long in cutting interest rates and was exacerbated by a disappointing U.S. employment report, which showed slower hiring and a rising unemployment rate. This sparked fears of a broader economic downturn and led to a significant decline in stock prices, with the S&P 500 falling 3 percent and the Nikkei 225 plummeting 12.4 percent. The turmoil was intensified by a strengthening yen, which disrupted global capital flows and led to widespread selling across markets. While some analysts view the market reaction as an overreaction, with the underlying economy still showing signs of expansion, others warn of a potential feedback loop where forced selling exacerbates the downturn.
Comments