Tech giants Google and Oracle are clashing at the Supreme Court in a copyright dispute that’s worth billions and important to the future of software development.
The case before the justices Wednesday has to do with Google’s creation of the Android operating system now used on the vast majority of smartphones worldwide. Google says that to create Android, which was released in 2007, it wrote millions of lines of new computer code. But it also used 11,330 lines of code and an organization that’s part of Oracle’s Java platform.
Google has defended its actions, saying what it did is long-settled, common practice in the industry, a practice that has been good for technical progress. But Oracle says Google “committed an egregious act of plagiarism” and sued, seeking more than $8 billion.
The case has been going on for a decade. Google won the first round when a trial court rejected Oracle’s copyright claim, but that ruling was overturned on appeal. A jury then sided with Google, calling its copying “fair use,” but an appeals court disagreed.
Because of the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, only eight justices are hearing the case, and they’re doing so by phone because of the coronavirus pandemic. The questions for the court are whether the 1976 Copyright Act protects what Google copied, and, even if it does, whether what Google did is still permitted.
Oracle, for its part, says the case is simple.
“This case is about theft,” Oracle’s chief Washington lobbyist, Ken Glueck, said in a telephone interview ahead of argument. He compared what Google did to plagiarizing from someone else’s speech. When you plagiarize one line from a speech, he said: “That’s a plagiarized speech. Nobody says, ‘Oh, well, it was just one line.'”
But Google’s Kent Walker, the company’s chief legal officer, said in an interview that Google wrote “every line of code we possibly could ourselves.”
“No one’s ever claimed copyright over software interfaces, but that’s what Oracle is claiming now,” Walker said.
Microsoft, IBM and major internet and tech industry lobbying groups have weighed in — in favor of Google.
The Trump administration, the Motion Picture Association and the Recording Industry Association of America are among those supporting Oracle.
…
ukrlines skype чат
популярні новини
Facebook said it will ban groups that “represent” QAnon, the baseless conspiracy theory that paints President Donald Trump as a secret warrior against a supposed child-trafficking ring run by celebrities and “deep state” government officials. The company said Tuesday that it will remove Facebook pages, groups and Instagram accounts for “representing QAnon,” even if they don’t promote violence. The social network said it will consider a variety of factors to decide if a group meets its criteria for a ban, including its name, the biography or “about” section of the page, and discussions within the page, group or Instagram account. Mentions of QAnon in a group focused on a different subject won’t necessarily lead to a ban, Facebook said. Less than two months ago, Facebook said it would stop promoting the group and its adherents, although it faltered with spotty enforcement. It said it would only remove QAnon groups if they promote violence. That is no longer the case. The company said it started to enforce the policy Tuesday but cautioned that it “will take time and will continue in the coming days and weeks.” The QAnon phenomenon has sprawled across a patchwork of secret Facebook groups, Twitter accounts and YouTube videos in recent years. QAnon has been linked to real-world violence such as criminal reports of kidnapping and dangerous claims that the coronavirus is a hoax. But the conspiracy theory has also seeped into mainstream politics. Several Republicans running for Congress this year are QAnon-friendly. By the time Facebook and other social media companies began enforcing — however limited — policies against QAnon, critics said it was largely too late. Reddit, which began banning QAnon groups in 2018, was well ahead, and to date it has largely avoided having a notable QAnon presence on its platform. Twitter did not immediately respond to a message for comment on Tuesday. Also on Tuesday, Citigroup Inc. reportedly fired a manager in its technology department after an investigation found that he operated a prominent website dedicated to QAnon. According to Bloomberg, Jason Gelinas had been placed on paid leave after he was identified on Sept. 10 by a fact-checking site as the operator of the website QMap.pub and its associated mobile apps. Citi did not immediately respond to a message for comment on Tuesday.
…
A U.S. House of Representatives panel looking into abuses of market power by four of the biggest technology companies found they used “killer acquisitions” to smite rivals, charge exorbitant fees and force small businesses into “oppressive” contracts in the name of profit. The panel, an antitrust subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, recommended that Alphabet Inc.’s Google, Apple Inc., Amazon.com and Facebook should not both control and compete in related business activities but stopped short of saying they should be broken up. The scathing 449-page report describes dozens of instances where the companies misused their power, revealing corporate cultures apparently bent on doing what they could to maintain dominance over large portions of the internet. “To put it simply, companies that once were scrappy, underdog startups that challenged the status quo have become the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons,” the report said. Facebook, Apple and Google did not have an immediate comment. In anticipation of the report, Amazon warned in a blog post Tuesday against “fringe notions of antitrust” and market interventions that “would kill off independent retailers and punish consumers by forcing small businesses out of popular online stores, raising prices and reducing consumer choice.” After more than a year of investigation involving 1.3 million documents and more than 300 interviews, the committee led by Democratic Congressman David Cicilline found companies were running marketplaces where they also competed, creating “a position that enables them to write one set of rules for others, while they play by another.” Coming just weeks before the Nov. 3 presidential election, the content of the report became increasingly political, an opportunity for Republicans and Democrats to boost their credibility in the fight against market domination by big tech companies. That said, Congress is unlikely to act on the findings this year. Ultimately, the report reflects the views of the Democratic majority in the House, and two other reports were expected to be authored by Republican members on the panel, two sources told Reuters earlier in the day. Recommendations The panel recommended companies be prohibited from operating in closely aligned businesses. While they did not name any one company, this recommendation would suggest that Google, which runs the auctions for online ad space and participates in those auctions, should potentially be required to separate clearly, or not even operate, the two businesses. The report urged Congress to allow antitrust enforcers more leeway in stopping companies from purchasing potential rivals, something that is now difficult. Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram in 2012 is an example of this. Instagram at the time was small and insignificant, but Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg saw its potential and noted that it was “building networks that are competitive with our own” and “could be very disruptive to us,” the report said. As part of the report, the committee staff drew up a menu of potential changes in antitrust law. The suggestions ranged from the aggressive, such as potentially barring companies like Amazon.com from operating the markets in which it also competes, to the less controversial, like increasing the budgets of the agencies that enforce antitrust law: the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission.
…
Even though businesses are reopening around the world, the pandemic is still a reality. Many commercial spaces and offices are taking people’s temperatures before allowing them inside. In some industries, handheld thermometers may not be efficient enough. Thermal imaging systems allow temperatures to be taken without anyone needing to be physically close to the person being evaluated. The demand for these types of devices is skyrocketing globally. VOA’s Elizabeth Lee has the details.Videographers: Michael Eckels, Elizabeth Lee Video editor: Elizabeth Lee
…
Even though businesses are reopening around the world, the pandemic is still a reality. Many commercial spaces and offices are taking people’s temperatures before allowing them inside. In some industries, handheld thermometers may not be efficient enough. Thermal imaging systems allow temperatures to be taken without anyone needing to be physically close to the person being evaluated. The demand for these types of devices is skyrocketing globally. VOA’s Elizabeth Lee has the details.Videographers: Michael Eckels, Elizabeth Lee Video editor: Elizabeth Lee
…
More than six months into the COVID-19 pandemic, a handful of U.S. states are starting to roll out apps that promise to tell people if they’ve been exposed to someone with the virus — without revealing personal information. Now with the White House struggling with a COVID-19 outbreak, the goal to figure out a way to quickly notify people has gained more urgency. The arrival of these apps in the U.S. comes as communities are opening in fits and starts. The hope is that by using technology to notify people they’ve been exposed to the virus, the apps will enhance the ability of local health officials to stem the spread of COVID-19.It’s an idea being tested — in real time. But will the apps make a difference?“We don’t know yet,” said Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics. “That’s part of what’s both interesting and frustrating about where we are. This is an unproven technology. It’s being rolled out in the midst of a public health emergency. There’s a lot of learning as we go as a result.”Notifying people, anonymouslyWhile state apps vary, the primary approach being used in the U.S. is based on technology from Apple and Google:A person downloads an app created by their state health department. Using the person’s mobile phone technology, the app begins collecting anonymized information about other phones it comes near — which phones, how close and for how long. That information of the “digital handshake” is stored on the person’s phone.If a person tests positive for COVID-19, health officials give that person a code to put into the app. An alert then goes out to others who have the app who have been near that person in the prior two weeks.Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 11 MB480p | 16 MB540p | 20 MB720p | 39 MB1080p | 90 MBOriginal | 285 MB Embed” />Copy Download AudioTwo approachesCovid apps for mobile phones first appeared in Asia, in China and South Korea. There, officials used a phone’s location information to track people.It’s an approach being used in other parts of the world. In Israel, the government is scouring people’s mobile phone records to locate those who’ve been near someone who has tested positive in order to possibly quarantine those people. In Turkey, a person’s mobile phone software tracks their movements and who they’ve been near.But approaches that use a phone’s location information raise privacy questions, said Megan DeBlois, a systems security graduate student who helped to create the COVID-19 App Tracker, a website that keeps track of Covid apps around the world. “There are too many apps that request far too much,” she said.Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 9 MB480p | 12 MB540p | 16 MB720p | 32 MB1080p | 68 MBOriginal | 203 MB Embed” />Copy Download AudioAnonymous usersU.S. states are creating their own apps, based on the approach offered by Apple and Google, which made it a condition of using their technology that the COVID-19 apps couldn’t use mobile phone location data.That privacy requirement helps build people’s trust in the apps, said Sarah Kreps, a government professor at Cornell University who is studying COVID-19, technology and public sentiment. Knowing someone who has been infected by the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 also makes people more willing to try a COVID-19 app, she said.“In order for these apps to be effective, you need to have enough of a critical mass of people who are willing to download and use the app,” she said. “And short of mandating that, as was done in China, then you need a kind of public trust.”So far in Virginia and other states with COVID-19 apps, people recently interviewed appeared open to using the apps.“I’m trying to be personally conscious, responsible, for what I should be doing,” said Mike, who was recently on a bike path in Northern Virginia. “This was billed as something you can trust, and I accept it.”“I read up on it and honestly I feel pretty good about it,” said Hayes, a graduate student at University of Arizona who planned to download the CovidWatch app. “They’ve done a lot of stuff to avoid privacy issues. I think it sounds pretty legit.”Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 9 MB480p | 12 MB540p | 15 MB720p | 30 MB1080p | 57 MBOriginal | 297 MB Embed” />Copy Download AudioLimits of privacyBut anonymous COVID-19 apps come with a trade-off: They limit the app’s usefulness to public health officials. If a person’s identity and location aren’t known, the app gives scarce information about an ongoing outbreak. Joyce Schroeder heads the molecular and cellular biology department at the University of Arizona and has been the lead in developing CovidWatch, an Arizona-based app that doesn’t collect individuals’ private information.That’s “a good thing,” she said. “We want to have our privacy. But it’s also a frustrating thing when you’re trying to collect data on something and find out if it’s working. There’s very little data that we can collect on the app.”Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 11 MB480p | 16 MB540p | 19 MB720p | 39 MB1080p | 74 MBOriginal | 259 MB Embed” />Copy Download AudioStates working togetherOutside the U.S., countries’ health departments have been issuing nationwide apps. In the U.S., the federal government isn’t doing its own app so states have contracted with app developers to create their own.So far, nine states have issued COVID-19 notification apps based on the Apple-Google technology with more states working on their own, according to a review by 9to5Mac. In its latest software update, Apple installed something called Exposure Notification on mobile devices so that states can more easily start notifying people if they’ve been exposed. Users can turn it on or off. Google is expected to issue the same Android update soon.Working with Microsoft, the Association of Public Health Laboratories recently launched a “national key server,” which will make it possible to use an app from one state while visiting other states.While it’s too early to say, these efforts to use technology may make a difference in the fight against Covid, said Johns Hopkins’ Kahn.“It’s an opportunity,” he said, “to help steer the positive use of a technology during what are obviously very challenging times.”Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 8 MB480p | 12 MB540p | 16 MB720p | 36 MB1080p | 65 MBOriginal | 76 MB Embed” />Copy Download Audio
…
More than six months into the COVID-19 pandemic, a handful of U.S. states are starting to roll out apps that promise to tell people if they’ve been exposed to someone with the virus — without revealing personal information. Now with the White House struggling with a COVID-19 outbreak, the goal to figure out a way to quickly notify people has gained more urgency. The arrival of these apps in the U.S. comes as communities are opening in fits and starts. The hope is that by using technology to notify people they’ve been exposed to the virus, the apps will enhance the ability of local health officials to stem the spread of COVID-19.It’s an idea being tested — in real time. But will the apps make a difference?“We don’t know yet,” said Jeffrey Kahn, director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics. “That’s part of what’s both interesting and frustrating about where we are. This is an unproven technology. It’s being rolled out in the midst of a public health emergency. There’s a lot of learning as we go as a result.”Notifying people, anonymouslyWhile state apps vary, the primary approach being used in the U.S. is based on technology from Apple and Google:A person downloads an app created by their state health department. Using the person’s mobile phone technology, the app begins collecting anonymized information about other phones it comes near — which phones, how close and for how long. That information of the “digital handshake” is stored on the person’s phone.If a person tests positive for COVID-19, health officials give that person a code to put into the app. An alert then goes out to others who have the app who have been near that person in the prior two weeks.Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 11 MB480p | 16 MB540p | 20 MB720p | 39 MB1080p | 90 MBOriginal | 285 MB Embed” />Copy Download AudioTwo approachesCovid apps for mobile phones first appeared in Asia, in China and South Korea. There, officials used a phone’s location information to track people.It’s an approach being used in other parts of the world. In Israel, the government is scouring people’s mobile phone records to locate those who’ve been near someone who has tested positive in order to possibly quarantine those people. In Turkey, a person’s mobile phone software tracks their movements and who they’ve been near.But approaches that use a phone’s location information raise privacy questions, said Megan DeBlois, a systems security graduate student who helped to create the COVID-19 App Tracker, a website that keeps track of Covid apps around the world. “There are too many apps that request far too much,” she said.Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 9 MB480p | 12 MB540p | 16 MB720p | 32 MB1080p | 68 MBOriginal | 203 MB Embed” />Copy Download AudioAnonymous usersU.S. states are creating their own apps, based on the approach offered by Apple and Google, which made it a condition of using their technology that the COVID-19 apps couldn’t use mobile phone location data.That privacy requirement helps build people’s trust in the apps, said Sarah Kreps, a government professor at Cornell University who is studying COVID-19, technology and public sentiment. Knowing someone who has been infected by the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 also makes people more willing to try a COVID-19 app, she said.“In order for these apps to be effective, you need to have enough of a critical mass of people who are willing to download and use the app,” she said. “And short of mandating that, as was done in China, then you need a kind of public trust.”So far in Virginia and other states with COVID-19 apps, people recently interviewed appeared open to using the apps.“I’m trying to be personally conscious, responsible, for what I should be doing,” said Mike, who was recently on a bike path in Northern Virginia. “This was billed as something you can trust, and I accept it.”“I read up on it and honestly I feel pretty good about it,” said Hayes, a graduate student at University of Arizona who planned to download the CovidWatch app. “They’ve done a lot of stuff to avoid privacy issues. I think it sounds pretty legit.”Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 9 MB480p | 12 MB540p | 15 MB720p | 30 MB1080p | 57 MBOriginal | 297 MB Embed” />Copy Download AudioLimits of privacyBut anonymous COVID-19 apps come with a trade-off: They limit the app’s usefulness to public health officials. If a person’s identity and location aren’t known, the app gives scarce information about an ongoing outbreak. Joyce Schroeder heads the molecular and cellular biology department at the University of Arizona and has been the lead in developing CovidWatch, an Arizona-based app that doesn’t collect individuals’ private information.That’s “a good thing,” she said. “We want to have our privacy. But it’s also a frustrating thing when you’re trying to collect data on something and find out if it’s working. There’s very little data that we can collect on the app.”States working togetherOutside the U.S., countries’ health departments have been issuing nationwide apps. In the U.S., the federal government isn’t doing its own app so states have contracted with app developers to create their own.So far, nine states have issued COVID-19 notification apps based on the Apple-Google technology with more states working on their own, according to a review by 9to5Mac. In its latest software update, Apple installed something called Exposure Notification on mobile devices so that states can more easily start notifying people if they’ve been exposed. Users can turn it on or off. Google is expected to issue the same Android update soon.Working with Microsoft, the Association of Public Health Laboratories recently launched a “national key server,” which will make it possible to use an app from one state while visiting other states.While it’s too early to say, these efforts to use technology may make a difference in the fight against Covid, said Johns Hopkins’ Kahn.“It’s an opportunity,” he said, “to help steer the positive use of a technology during what are obviously very challenging times.”Sorry, but your browser cannot support embedded video of this type, you can
download this video to view it offline.Download File360p | 8 MB480p | 12 MB540p | 16 MB720p | 36 MB1080p | 65 MBOriginal | 76 MB Embed” />Copy Download Audio
…
With tens of thousands of new coronavirus cases daily in the U.S., states are launching digital apps that alert people if they have been exposed to someone who tested positive for the virus. Virginia recently rolled out a COVID exposure app that became instantly popular with residents. Health officials are trying to determine whether such apps will work to help slow virus transmission. VOA’s Julie Taboh has more.Producers: Julie Taboh, Adam Greenbaum. Videographers: Adam Greenbaum, VPM, Skype, VDH.
…
Need to pay for some groceries? No problem, just wave your palm. That could be the new mode of payment at Amazon Go stores if current trials of its new technology in Seattle, Washington, are successful. The technology, known as Amazon One, is a “free, contactless service that lets you use your palm to pay, enter or identify yourself,” according to its website. The product, which is undergoing trials at two Go stores in Seattle, will allow customers to enter their credit card details and cell phone number and scan their palm or palms for distinct details such as “surface area, lines and ridges as well as subcutaneous features such as vein patterns” on a biometric device. The individual palm details are then used to create a customer’s unique palm signature, and Amazon is counting on that to protect customer information. The e-commerce company assures customers that the Amazon One device does not store information. “We treat your palm signature just like other highly sensitive personal data and keep it safe using best-in-class technical and physical security controls,” according to the website. Once sign-up is complete, customers can purchase goods and services with their palm prints by hovering over the payment device. It will also allow customers to use their palms as a form of ID, which allows them to enter Go stores without a code. If customers change their minds about using the service, Amazon says it will completely delete their information. “Amazon will permanently delete your palm signature from Amazon’s systems after completion of any remaining transactions,” the website says. “Your Amazon One ID will also be automatically deleted if you do not interact with an Amazon One device for two years.” Amazon says it hopes to replicate the technology in all of its Go stores after its pilot use in Seattle and that it looks forward to other retailers signing up for the service.
…
Chinese-owned video sharing platform TikTok says it is creating a guide “to protect against misinformation” during the 2020 U.S. elections. In a blog post Tuesday, the company said its guide would connect “100 million Americans with trusted information about the elections from the National Association of Secretaries of State, BallotReady, SignVote, and more.” “Our The U.S. head office of TikTok is seen in Culver City, California, Sept. 15, 2020.TikTok, which is especially popular with younger people, is owned by ByteDance, a Chinese company. TikTok has sought to alleviate U.S. concerns over privacy issues by forming a partnership with two U.S. companies, Oracle and WalMart. The deal has not been finalized, and there have been conflicting statements among the parties about how much of the new venture each company would own. The Trump administration was moving forward to ban TikTok from app stores, but on Sunday, a judge blocked an order to prevent app stores from distributing it. The judge gave lawyers for TikTok and the administration until Wednesday to meet and propose a schedule for further proceedings in the case.
…
Facebook’s deletion of accounts targeting the Philippines from bases in China shows that the U.S. internet giant wants a better reputation in Southeast Asia after letting things slide in the past, say analysts who follow the case. On September 22, Facebook said it had removed 155 of its own accounts and six Instagram accounts for violating an internal policy against “foreign or government interference which is coordinated inauthentic behavior on behalf of a foreign or government entity.” The accounts originated in China and focused “primarily on the Philippines and Southeast Asia more broadly” as well as on the United States, Facebook says. Facebook’s move will endear it to Filipinos, who use the service so fervently that it has become a de facto official homepage for businesses and government agencies but who also worry that it has become too permissive, scholars say. For Facebook, “it’s more from a kind of a PR point of view – I do this at a particular time, somehow, it’s seen as positive and I can say, ‘look, I have done this,’” said James Gomez, regional director at the Bangkok-based think tank Asia Center. Operators of the deleted accounts had posted in Chinese, English and Tagalog about naval activity in the South China Sea as well as Philippine politics and tried to cover up their identities, Facebook said. China and the Philippines dispute sovereignty over a tract of the sea that’s rich in fisheries as well as undersea energy reserves. China has the upper hand militarily, frustrating officials in Manila and fanning debate there over whether the Philippines should ask Washington for more help. The connection to Facebook goes back to 2015, when the California-based service joined domestic mobile service provider Smart Communications to offer an app that allowed free access to 24 heavily used mobile sites.The thumbs-up Like logo is shown on a sign at Facebook headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif., April 14, 2020. Facebook’s long-awaited oversight board is set to launch in October 2020.But Facebook has made eyes roll in the Philippines and other Southeast Asian countries by allowing relatively unfettered access by politicians, hate-speech spreaders and purveyors of fake news, Gomez said. “We would welcome that there is self-governance on the part of Facebook,” said Ramon Casiple, executive director of the Metro Manila-based advocacy group Institute for Political and Electoral Reform. “There was a lot of that [problematic material] in the past up till now.”’ Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte maintains an “online army” that was reportedly paid to pack Facebook with supportive material in the name of “grassroots activists”, Southeast Asian news outlet New Mandala reported in 2017, a year after Duterte took office. Filipinos are starting now to eye the 2022 presidential election, motivating Facebook to clean up so it can avoid criticism, said Eduardo Araral, a Filipino and associate professor at the National University of Singapore’s public policy school. Some of the shuttered accounts carried “content supportive of President Rodrigo Duterte and Sara Duterte’s potential run in the 2022 Presidential election,” Facebook said, referring to the current leader’s daughter. Presidents can serve just one term in the Philippines. “They have to be active in showing Facebook is no longer used or can no longer be used as a platform for inauthentic behavior,” Araral said. Duterte has pursued friendship with China despite the maritime dispute, but common Filipinos remain leery of Beijing’s designs for the surrounding seas. About 74 million people use Facebook in the Philippines, where the total population stands near 109 million. Facebook’s statement says 276,000 accounts followed one or more or 11 deleted Facebook Pages belonging to businesses. The service took down those pages along with the 155 non-business accounts. Facebook said that about 5,500 people followed one of more of the closed-down Instagram accounts. Facebook has removed accounts in Singapore and Myanmar as well, as both countries approached political milestones, Gomez said. In 2018, for example, a U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights mission found that Facebook had helped spread “hate” speech against the Rohingya, a Muslim minority in Myanmar that has struggled to get along with the country’s government. Facebook took down a page authored by senior Myanmar military officials — a long-time nemesis of the Rohingya — after the U.N. findings appeared.
…
A U.S. federal judge has temporarily halted a Trump administration order to ban the popular video app TikTok from U.S. app stores. The ban was due to go into effect at the end of the day Sunday by order of the U.S. Commerce Department, the latest move targeting what administration officials have said are security concerns with Chinese companies. The judge gave lawyers for TikTok and the administration until Wednesday to meet and propose a schedule for further proceedings in the case. TikTok lawyers argued at a Sunday hearing that banning the app would infringe on the free speech rights of its users, while also bringing irreparable harm to the company’s business. “We will continue defending our rights for the benefit of our community and employees,” the company said in a statement welcoming the judge’s decision. The U.S. head office of TikTok is seen in Culver City, California, Sept. 15, 2020.The Commerce Department said after the ruling that an executive order President Donald Trump issued in August outlining concerns that TikTok collects a wide range of data that could end up in the hands of the Chinese government “is fully consistent with the law and promotes legitimate national security interests.” The statement said the government is complying with the injunction but intends to “vigorously defend” the executive order and its implementation from legal challenges. The Trump administration also sought to shut another popular app, WeChat, out of U.S. app stores, before a judge issued an injunction a week ago stopping that ban as well. China has rejected the U.S. allegations that the apps present security concerns, while accusing the United States of bullying Chinese companies. The Justice Department asked Friday for the WeChat ban to be allowed to go into effect while that legal case plays out, arguing that allowing the app to continue to be available to U.S. users will cause the country harm. TikTok has sought to alleviate U.S. concerns by forming a partnership with two U.S. companies, Oracle and WalMart. The deal has not been finalized, and there have been conflicting statements among the parties about how much of the new venture each would own. Trump initially said he gave his blessing to the arrangement, before stating it would not go forward if TikTok’s parent company had any ownership stake in the new company. TikTok said after Sunday’s ruling that it will “maintain our ongoing dialogue with the government to turn our proposal, which the President gave his preliminary approval to last weekend, into an agreement.”
…
A federal judge on Sunday postponed a Trump administration order that would have banned the popular video sharing app TikTok from U.S. smartphone app stores around midnight. A more comprehensive ban remains scheduled for November, about a week after the presidential election. The judge, Carl Nichols of the U.S District Court for the District of Columbia, did not agree to postpone the later ban. The ruling followed an emergency hearing Sunday morning in which lawyers for TikTok argued that the administration’s app-store ban would infringe on First Amendment rights and do irreparable harm to the business. Earlier this year, President Donald Trump declared that TikTok was a threat to national security and that it must either sell its U.S. operations to American companies or be barred from the country. TikTok, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, is scrambling to firm up a deal tentatively struck a week ago in which it would partner with Oracle, a huge database-software company, and Walmart in an effort to win the blessing of both the Chinese and American governments. In the meantime, it is fighting to keep the app available in the U.S. Judge Nichols did not explain his reasoning publicly, instead filing his judicial opinion under seal. Initially, both the U.S. government’s brief in the case and the entire Sunday morning hearing were also to be sealed, although the court later relented.The U.S. head office of TikTok is seen in Culver City, California, Sept. 15, 2020.In arguments to Judge Nichols, TikTok lawyer John Hall said that TikTok is more than an app, saying it functions as a “modern day version of a town square.” “If that prohibition goes into effect at midnight, the consequences immediately are grave,'” Hall said. “It would be no different than the government locking the doors to a public forum, roping off that town square” at a time when a free exchange of ideas is necessary heading into a polarized election. TikTok lawyers also argued that a ban on the app would affect the ability of tens of thousands of potential viewers and content creators to express themselves every month and would also hurt its ability to hire new talent. In addition, Hall argued that a ban would prevent existing users from automatically receiving security updates, eroding national security. Justice Department lawyer Daniel Schwei said that Chinese companies are not purely private and are subject to intrusive laws compelling their cooperation with intelligence agencies. The Justice Department has also argued that economic regulations of this nature generally are not subject to First Amendment scrutiny. “This is the most immediate national security threat,” Schwei argued. “It is a threat today. It is a risk today and therefore it deserves to be addressed today even while other things are ongoing and playing out.” Schwei also argued that TikTok lawyers failed to prove the company would suffer irreparable business harm. The Justice Department laid out its objections to TikTok’s motion for a temporary injunction in a brief under seal, but it was unsealed in redacted form to protect confidential business information. Trump set the process in motion with executive orders in August that declared TikTok and another Chinese app, WeChat, threats to national security. The White House says the video service is a security risk because the personal information of its millions of U.S. users could be handed over to Chinese authorities. Trump has given tentative approval to a proposed deal in which Oracle and Walmart could initially own a combined 20% of a new U.S. entity, TikTok Global. But Trump also said he could retract his approval if Oracle doesn’t have “total control” of the company; the president did not explain what he meant by that. The deal remains unfinalized, and the two sides have also appeared at odds over the corporate structure of TikTok Global. ByteDance said last week that it will still own 80% of the U.S. entity after a financing round. Oracle, meanwhile, put out a statement saying that Americans “will be the majority and ByteDance will have no ownership in TikTok Global.” Government-owned media in China have criticized the deal as bullying and extortion. ByteDance said Thursday it has applied for a Chinese technology export license after Beijing tightened control over exports last month in an effort to gain leverage over Washington’s attempt to force an outright sale of TikTok to U.S. owners. China’s foreign ministry has said the government will “take necessary measures” to safeguard its companies but gave no indication what steps it can take to affect TikTok’s fate in the United States. TikTok is also asking a federal court to declare Trump’s Aug. 6 executive order unlawful. The Chinese firm said the president doesn’t have the authority to take these actions under the national-security law he cited; that the ban violates TikTok’s First Amendment speech rights and Fifth Amendment due-process rights; and that there’s no authority for the restrictions because they are not based on a national emergency.
…
Lawyers for TikTok pleaded with a U.S. federal judge on Sunday to delay the Trump administration’s ban of the popular video sharing program from app stores set to take effect at the end of the day, arguing the move would infringe on First Amendment rights and do irreparable harm to the business.The 90-minute hearing came after President Donald Trump declared this summer that TikTok was a threat to national security and that it either sold its U.S. operations to U.S. companies or the app would be barred from the country.TikTok, owned by Chinese company ByteDance, is scrambling to firm up a deal tentatively struck a week ago in which it would partner with tech company Oracle and retailer Walmart and that would get the blessing of the Chinese and American governments. In the meantime, it is fighting to keep the app available in the United States.The ban on new downloads of TikTok, which has about 100 million users in the U.S, was delayed once by the government. A more comprehensive ban is scheduled for November, about a week after the presidential election. Judge Carl Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said he would make a decision by late Sunday, leaving TikTok’s fate hanging.In arguments to Nichols, TikTok lawyer John Hall said that TikTok is more than an app but rather is a “modern day version of a town square.””If that prohibition goes into effect at midnight, the consequences immediately are grave,'” Hall said. “It would be no different than the government locking the doors to a public forum, roping off that town square” at a time when a free exchange of ideas is necessary heading into a polarized election. TikTok lawyers also argued that a ban on the app would stop tens of thousands of potential viewers and content creators every month and hurt its ability to hire new talent. In addition, Hall argued that a ban would prevent existing users from automatically receiving security updates, eroding national security. Justice Department lawyer Daniel Schwei sought to undercut TikTok lawyers’ argument, saying that Chinese companies are not purely private and are subject to intrusive laws compelling their cooperation with intelligence agencies. The Justice Department has also argued that economic regulations of this nature generally are not subject to First Amendment scrutiny. Plaintiffs can’t claim a First Amendment right in hosting TikTok itself as a platform for others’ speech because merely hosting a platform is not an exercise of the First Amendment, the Justice Department contends. “This is the most immediate national security threat,” Schwei argued. “It is a threat today. It is a risk today and therefore it deserves to be addressed today even while other things are ongoing and playing out.”Schwei also argued that TikTok lawyers failed to prove it would suffer irreparable business harm.The Justice Department laid out its objections to TikTok’s motion for a temporary injunction in a brief under seal, but it was unsealed in redacted form to protect confidential business information.Trump set the process in motion with executive orders in August that declared TikTok and another Chinese app, WeChat, as threats to national security. The White House says the video service is a security risk because the personal information of its millions of U.S. users could be handed over to Chinese authorities.Trump has said he would approve a proposed deal in which Oracle and Walmart could initially own a combined 20% of a new U.S. entity, TikTok Global. Trump also said he could retract his approval if Oracle doesn’t have “total control.”The two sides of the TikTok deal have also appeared at odds over the corporate structure of TikTok Global. ByteDance said last week that it will still own 80% of the U.S. entity after a financing round. Oracle, meanwhile, put out a statement saying that Americans “will be the majority and ByteDance will have no ownership in TikTok Global.”Chinese media have criticized the deal as bullying and extortion, suggesting that the Chinese government is not happy with the arrangement. ByteDance said Thursday it has applied for a Chinese technology export license after Beijing tightened control over exports last month in an effort to gain leverage over Washington’s attempt to force an outright sale of TikTok to U.S. owners. China’s foreign ministry has said the government will “take necessary measures” to safeguard its companies but gave no indication what steps it can take to affect TikTok’s fate in the United States.TikTok is suing the U.S. government over Trump’s Aug. 6 executive order, saying it is unlawful. So are resulting Commerce Department prohibitions that aim to kick TikTok out of U.S. app stores and, in November, essentially shut it down in the U.S., it claimed.The Chinese firm said the president doesn’t have the authority to take these actions under the national security law he cited, that the ban violates TikTok’s First Amendment speech rights and Fifth Amendment due-process rights, and that there’s no authority for the restrictions because they are not based on a national emergency.
…
The U.S. government has placed new export restrictions on China’s most advanced maker of computer chips, citing an “unacceptable risk” that equipment sold to the country’s Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. (SMIC) could be used for military purposes.According to a letter Friday by the Commerce Department, American suppliers of certain technology products to SMIC will need to apply for individual licenses before they can export to the Chinese company.The U.S. has cut off China’s telecom giant Huawei from essential supplies of semiconductors since September 15. As the requirement takes effect, SMIC becomes the second leading Chinese technology company to face U.S. trade sanctions.When asked for comment, the Chinese chipmaker told Reuters it had not received any official notice of the restrictions from Washington and said it had no ties with the Chinese military.’No relationship’ with militaryLast month, after the Trump administration reportedly was considering adding SMIC to a trade blacklist, the company denied its technology was for military use. “The company manufactures semiconductors and provides services solely for civilian and commercial end-users and end-uses. We have no relationship with the Chinese military,” SMIC said in a statement.The Chinese company indicated last month that in order to avoid U.S. sanctions, it was willing to abide by the American rules and stop selling chips to Huawei.For all of China’s efforts to become a global leader in high technology, the factory of the world is yet not able to manufacture top-level contenders in one crucial area — the microchip, the nervous system that runs just about every electronic device. Last year, China imported more than $304 billion in computer chips, more than it spent on crude oil.SMIC’s best manufacturing process is believed to be able to make 14-nanometer microchips, which are several generations behind Samsung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., which already makes 5-nanometer chips. Even for those less advanced chips, SMIC still heavily relies on American technology and equipment.
…
The U.S. Justice Department asked a federal judge in San Francisco on Friday to allow the government to bar Apple Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google from offering WeChat for download in U.S. app stores pending an appeal.The filing asked U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler to put on hold her preliminary injunction issued Saturday. That injunction blocked the U.S. Commerce Department order that was set to take effect late September 20 and that would also bar other U.S. transactions with Tencent Holding’s WeChat, potentially making the app unusable in the United States.Beeler responded late Friday by setting a hearing for October 15 on the motion but said she could potentially hold it on “a tighter time period.”The Justice Department filing said Beeler’s order was in error and “permits the continued, unfettered use of WeChat, a mobile application that the Executive Branch has determined constitutes a threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”Tencent had put forward a “mitigation proposal” that sought to create a new U.S. version of the app, deploy specific security measures to protect the new apps source code, partner with a U.S. cloud provider for user data storage, and manage the new app through a U.S.-based entity, the filing said.However, its proposal still allowed Tencent to retain ownership of WeChat and did not address U.S. concerns over the company, it added.Tencent declined to comment.Lawyers for U.S. WeChat Users Alliance, the group behind the legal challenge to the WeChat ban, questioned the urgency of the government’s request, noting the time it took for the government to seek a stay.”The government’s decision to sit tight for five days shows that there is no emergency,” they wrote.In support of its argument, the Justice Department made public portions of a September 17 Commerce Department memo outlining the WeChat transactions to be banned.”The WeChat mobile application collects and transmits sensitive personal information on U.S. persons, which is accessible to Tencent and stored in data centers in China and Canada,” the memo said. Beeler said WeChat users who filed a lawsuit “have shown serious questions going to the merits of the First Amendment claim.”The Justice Department filing said, “The First Amendment does not bar regulation of WeChat simply because it has achieved the popularity and dependency sought by (China), precisely so it can surveil users, promote its propaganda, and otherwise place U.S. national security at risk.”WeChat has had an average of 19 million daily active users in the United States, analytics firms Apptopia said in early August. It is popular among Chinese students, Americans living in China and some Americans who have personal or business relationships in China.Beeler wrote “certainly the government’s over-arching national-security interest is significant. But on this record — while the government has established that China’s activities raise significant national security concerns — it has put in scant little evidence that its effective ban of WeChat for all U.S. users addresses those concerns.”WeChat is an all-in-one mobile app that combines services similar to Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram and Venmo. The app is an essential part of daily life for many in China and boasts more than 1 billion users.TikTok on Wednesday sought a similar preliminary injunction from a U.S. judge in Washington. A judge on Friday said he would hold a hearing Sunday morning about whether to halt the U.S. app store ban on new TikTok downloads set to take effect Sunday night.
…
Facebook’s highly anticipated independent oversight board, a group that will be empowered to overrule the company’s leadership on issues pertaining to the platform’s content moderation decisions, plans to launch in October, just in time for the November U.S. presidential election.The board was created by Facebook after the platform was criticized for its handling of problematic content, most recently a backlash over its decision to take no action in response to posts from U.S. President Donald Trump containing misinformation about mail-in voting and inflammatory language directed toward the Black Lives Matter anti-racism protests that erupted over the summer.Other platforms that contain user-generated content, such as Twitter, have taken measures to combat misinformation online, including attaching fact-checking warning labels to posts.Facebook has not yet announced whether the board will hear cases related to the election. Representatives from the company said that the board did not consider cases involving Trump’s posts in its preliminary hearings. Reviewing removed postsMembers of the oversight board will review appeals only over posts that Facebook has taken down initially, instead of taking into consideration content that the company leaves up. It will also deal only with individual posts that fall under the areas where Facebook exercises editorial control.Content that is regulated by Facebook includes algorithms that shape how much distribution a post receives, taking down or leaving up Facebook groups, pages, and events, and whether to leave specific pieces of content up on the site.The board has been harshly criticized for starting by reviewing appeals concerning posts that were taken down, which experts say will have little impact on addressing problems like misinformation and hate speech that are rampant on the platform. Critics say that the long-awaited board has not moved fast enough to curb these issues before the election. Prioritizing casesAccording to the board’s website, the criteria for the prioritization of cases has not been decided and is being debated by the board’s 20 members. While tens of thousands of cases are expected to be presented to the board, leaders say that the board will take only a small number of cases each year, most likely in the “tens or hundreds.”Board members include lawyers, academics, journalists and policy experts from around the world, who collectively speak 27 different languages and represent having lived in 29 different countries.Preparation leading up to the board’s launch includes educating members on Facebook’s community standards, international human rights law and receiving technical training on case management rolls that will allow members to receive and consider appeals.
…
A group of Apple Inc.’s critics, including Spotify Technology SA, Match Group Inc. and “Fortnite” creator Epic Games, have joined a nonprofit group that plans to advocate for legal and regulatory action to challenge the iPhone maker’s App Store practices. Apple charges a commission of between 15% and 30% for apps that use its in-app payment system and sets out extensive rules for apps in its App Store, which is the only way Apple allows consumers to download native apps to devices such as the iPhone. Those practices have drawn criticism and formal legal complaints from some developers. FILE – Apple CEO Tim Cook speaks during an announcement of new products at the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference in San Jose, Calif., June 4, 2018.The Coalition for App Fairness, structured as a nonprofit based in Washington and Brussels, said it plans to advocate legal changes that would force Apple to change. Beyond Epic, Match and Spotify, other members include smaller firms such as Basecamp, Blix, Blockchain.com, Deezer, and Tile, along with developers from Europe, including the European Publishers Council, News Media Europe and Protonmail. Epic is suing Apple over antitrust claims in a U.S. federal court in California, while Spotify has filed an antitrust complaint against Apple in the European Union. Sarah Maxwell, a representative for the group, declined to comment on how much funding the Coalition for App Fairness has raised and from whom. Apple declined to comment but on Thursday unveiled a new section of its website explaining the benefits of its approach, saying it had blocked 150,000 apps last year for privacy violations. It says App Store fees fund the creation of developer resources such as 160,000 technical documents and sample code to help developers build apps. Mike Sax, founder of The App Association, a group sponsored by Apple, said in a statement that the new coalition’s “big brands do not speak for the thousands of app makers that are the foundation of the app economy.”
…
President Donald Trump met with nine Republican state attorneys general on Wednesday to discuss the fate of a legal immunity for internet companies after the Justice Department unveiled a legislative proposal aimed at reforming the same law. Trump met with attorneys general from Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and West Virginia. Also Wednesday, the Justice Department, which is probing Google for potential breaches of antitrust law, held a call with state attorneys general’s offices to preview a complaint to be filed against the search and advertising giant, perhaps as soon as next week, according to two sources familiar with the matter. It is normal for the department to seek support from state attorneys general when it files big lawsuits. Critics have accused Google, owned by Alphabet Inc., of breaking antitrust law by abusing its dominance of online advertising and its Android smartphone operating system as well as favoring its own businesses in search. The White House said the legal immunity discussion involved how the attorneys general can utilize existing legal recourses at the state level—in an effort to weaken the law known as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects internet companies from liability over content posted by users. After the meeting, Trump told reporters he expects to come to a conclusion on the issue of technology platforms within a short period. It was not immediately clear what conclusion he was referring to. He said his administration is watching the performance of tech platforms in the run-up to the Nov. 3 presidential election. “In recent years, a small group of powerful technology platforms have tightened their grip over commerce and communications in America,” Trump said. “Every year countless Americans are banned, blacklisted and silenced through arbitrary or malicious enforcement of ever-shifting rules,” he added. Trump, who himself frequently posts on Twitter, said Twitter routinely restricts expressions of conservative views. Earlier on Wednesday, the Justice Department unveiled a legislative proposal to reform Section 230. It followed through on Trump’s bid earlier this year to crack down on tech giants after Twitter Inc. placed warning labels on some of Trump’s tweets, saying they have included potentially misleading information about mail-in voting. The Justice Department’s proposal would need congressional approval and is not likely to see action until next year at the earliest. Unless the Republicans win control of the House of Representatives and maintain control of the Senate in the November elections, any bill would need Democratic support. The Justice Department proposal primarily states that when internet companies “willfully distribute illegal material or moderate content in bad faith, Section 230 should not shield them from the consequences of their actions.” It proposes a series of reforms to ensure internet companies are transparent about their decisions when removing content and when they should be held responsible for speech they modify. It also revises existing definitions of Section 230 with more concrete language that offers more guidance to users and courts. It also incentivizes online platforms to address illicit content and pushes for more clarity on federal civil enforcement actions. The Internet Association, which represents major internet companies including Facebook Inc., Amazon.com Inc. and Google, said the Justice Department’s proposal would severely limit people’s ability to express themselves and have a safe experience online. The group’s deputy general counsel, Elizabeth Banker, said moderation efforts that remove misinformation, platform manipulation and cyberbullying would all result in lawsuits under the proposal.
…
TikTok asked a U.S. judge on Wednesday to block a Trump administration order that would require Apple Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google to remove the short video-sharing app for new downloads starting Sunday. A federal judge in San Francisco on Saturday issued a preliminary injunction blocking a similar Commerce Department order from taking effect Sunday on Tencent Holdings’ WeChat app. U.S. officials have expressed serious concerns that the personal data of as many as 100 million Americans that use the app was being passed on to China’s Communist Party government. FILE – People walk past a WeChat Pay sign at the Tencent company headquarters, in Shenzhen, Guangdong province, China, Aug. 7, 2020.On Saturday, the Commerce Department announced a one-week delay in the TikTok order, citing “recent positive developments” in talks over the fate of its U.S. operations. TikTok said the restrictions “were not motivated by a genuine national security concern, but rather by political considerations relating to the upcoming general election.” TikTok said if the order is not blocked, “hundreds of millions of Americans who have not yet downloaded TikTok will be shut out of this large and diverse online community — six weeks before a national election.” TikTok’s Chinese owner, ByteDance, said on Monday it will own 80% of TikTok Global, a newly created U.S. company that will own most of the app’s operations worldwide. ByteDance added that TikTok Global will become its subsidiary. Oracle Corp and Walmart Inc have agreed to take stakes in TikTok Global of 12.5% and 7.5%, respectively. On Monday, Oracle said ByteDance’s ownership of TikTok would be distributed to ByteDance’s investors, and that the Beijing-based firm would have no stake in TikTok Global. On Saturday, ByteDance, Walmart and Oracle said they reached an agreement that would to allow TikTok to continue to operate in the United States after President Donald Trump said he had blessed the deal. Trump signed an executive order on Aug. 14 giving ByteDance 90 days to relinquish ownership of TikTok.
…
Germany’s health ministry Wednesday said its coronavirus smartphone app has been downloaded more than 18 million times and transmitted 1.2 million test results from labs to users during the first 100 days of use.Health Minister Jens Spahn told reporters in Berlin that while the “Corona Warn App” is far from perfect, it should be considered a success. He said almost 5,000 users have activated the app to warn their contacts and called it a key tool in the country’s effort to contain the spread of the virus, which causes the COVID-19 disease.He said, “This shows that the corona tracing app works, it is in demand…it helps to prevent infections and it is one of the most successful apps worldwide.”Spahn noted in particular the fact that most users can get their test results sent directly to their smartphones, without having to wait for their doctor to inform them.German Health Minister Jens Spahn attends a news conference to give an update on a smartphone app that allows users to evaluate their risk of being exposed to the coronavirus in Berlin, Germany, Sept. 23, 2020.Germany’s strict privacy rules mean that the app stores all data on phones and not on a central server. Observers, however, say there is no precise data on the number of people alerted about possible exposure.Should an app user get a positive test result, the app has a button the person can press to warn his or her contacts. Spahn says one problem is not everyone is doing that. “Only about half of the app users who get a positive result inform their contacts afterwards.”Spahn says the app is not a cure-all, but one of a number of important tools the government is using to control the spread of the virus.German tech company Deutsche Telekom, working with software company SAP, developed the app. Deutsche Telekom Chief Executive Tim Hoettges said more than 90% of labs in Germany are now connected to it.Hoettges said efforts are under way to establish a European “gateway” that will allow the German app to communicate with those in 10 other European countries, including Italy, Poland and Spain, that use the same decentralized, Bluetooth-based system.
…
The U.S. Commerce Department said Monday it is challenging a federal judge’s injunction against its order that Apple and Google remove WeChat from their U.S. app stores due to data privacy and national security concerns.The department’s original order, issued Friday, also included another Chinese-owned app, TikTok, and expressed the Trump administration’s concerns about the way the apps collect user data and the potential for that information to be shared with Chinese government agencies.China has rejected the U.S. allegations of a security threat, and on Saturday condemned what it called “bullying” that violated international trade standards.U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler responded Sunday to a request for an injunction from WeChat users by putting the Commerce Department’s order on hold, ruling that the Trump administration’s actions would restrict users’ free speech rights under the First Amendment.WeChat has about 19 million active daily users in the United States. The service, owned by Chinese tech company Tencent, is popular with Americans who use it to communicate with family and friends in China.Video-sharing service TikTok earned a short reprieve from its part of the Commerce Department order after announcing an agreement to form a new company with U.S. tech giant Oracle and retailer WalMart together holding up to a 20% share.The U.S. head office of TikTok is seen in Culver City, California, Sept. 15, 2020.Speaking to Fox News on Monday, Trump said his administration would not approve the agreement if ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese owner, has any control.“If we find that they don’t have total control, then we’re not going to approve the deal,” Trump said of Oracle and WalMart. “We will be watching it very closely.”Those comments are in contrast to those Trump gave Saturday when he said he approved of the agreement “in concept” and had “given the deal my blessing.” The Commerce Department has delayed the app store ban for TikTok until September 27, and given the company until November 12 to resolve national security concerns before facing a wider range of restrictions.
…
A U.S. judge early Sunday blocked the Commerce Department from requiring Apple Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google to remove Chinese-owned messaging app WeChat for downloads by late Sunday. U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler in San Francisco said in an order that WeChat users who filed a lawsuit “have shown serious questions going to the merits of the First Amendment claim [and] the balance of hardships tips in the plaintiffs’ favor.” On Friday, the Commerce Department had issued an order citing national security grounds to block the app from U.S. app stores owned by Tencent Holdings, and the Justice Department had urged Beeler not to block the order. Beeler’s preliminary injunction also blocked the Commerce order that would have barred other transactions with WeChat in the United States that could have degraded the site’s usability for current U.S. users. The U.S. Commerce Department did not immediately comment. WeChat has had an average of 19 million daily active users in the United States, analytics firms Apptopia said in early August. It is popular among Chinese students, Americans living in China and some Americans who have personal or business relationships in China. The Justice Department said blocking the order would “frustrate and displace the president’s determination of how best to address threats to national security.” But Beeler said, “while the general evidence about the threat to national security related to China [regarding technology and mobile technology] is considerable, the specific evidence about WeChat is modest.” She added, “The regulation — which eliminates a channel of communication without any apparent substitutes — burdens substantially more speech than is necessary to further the government’s significant interest.” WeChat is an all-in-one mobile app that combines services similar to Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram and Venmo. The app is an essential part of daily life for many in China and boasts more than 1 billion users. The WeChat Users Alliance that had sued praised the ruling “as an important and hard-fought victory” for “millions of WeChat users in the U.S.” Michael Bien, a lawyer for the users, said “the United States has never shut down a major platform for communications, not even during war times. There are serious First Amendment problems with the WeChat ban, which targets the Chinese American community.” He added the order “trampled on their First Amendment guaranteed freedoms to speak, to worship, to read and react to the press, and to organize and associate for numerous purposes.”
…
Facebook has told Ireland’s High Court it cannot see how its services could operate in the European Union if regulators freeze its data transfer mechanism, the Sunday Business Post reported, citing court documents seen by the paper.The U.S. social media giant last week said that the Irish Data Protection Commission, its lead EU regulator, had made a preliminary decision that the mechanism it uses to transfer data from the EU to the United States “cannot in practice be used.”Facebook requested and secured a temporary freeze on the order and a court review in the Irish High Court, which is due to consider the issue in November. In an affidavit submitted to the court to request that the order be frozen, Yvonne Cunnane, Facebook Ireland’s head of data protection and associate general counsel, said it was not clear how the company could continue providing services in the EU if the Irish order is enforced, the Sunday Business Post reported.”It is not clear to (Facebook) how, in those circumstances, it could continue to provide the Facebook and Instagram services in the EU,” the newspaper quoted the affidavit as saying.The affidavit has not been made public, a High Court spokesman said, and a Facebook spokeswoman did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.In a Sept. 9 blog post that first confirmed the investigation by the Irish regulator, Facebook said it “relied on the mechanism in question – under what are known as standard contractual clauses (SCCs) – to transfer data to countries outside the EU and that a ban would have “a far reaching effect on businesses that rely on SCCs.”The Irish investigation follows a ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union in July on when SCCs can be used legally.The ruling was in response to EU concerns that the surveillance regime in the United States might not respect the privacy rights of EU citizens when their personal data is sent to the United States for commercial use.
…