"Google essentially disappeared us from the internet," says the couple who created price-comparison site Foundem in 2006. Google's search results for "price comparison" and "comparison shopping" buried their site — for more than three years.

Today the BBC looks at their 15-year legal battle, which culminated with a then record €2.4 billion fine (£2 billion or $2.6 billion) for Google, which was deemed to have abused its market dominance. The case has been hailed as a landmark moment in the global regulation of Big Tech. Google spent seven years fighting that verdict, issued in June 2017, but in September this year Europe's top court — the European Court of Justice — rejected its appeals.

Speaking to Radio 4's The Bottom Line in their first interview since that final verdict, Shivaun and Adam explained that at first, they thought their website's faltering start had simply been a mistake. "We initially thought this was collateral damage, that we had been false positive detected as spam," says Shivaun, 55. "We just assumed we had to escalate to the right place and it would be overturned...." The couple sent Google numerous requests to have the restriction lifted but, more than two years later, nothing had changed and they said they received no response. Meanwhile, their website was "ranking completely normally" on other search engines, but that didn't really matter, according to Shivaun, as "everyone's using Google".

The couple would later discover that their site was not the only one to have been put at a disadvantage by Google — by the time the tech giant was found guilty and fined in 2017 there were around 20 claimants, including Kelkoo, Trivago and Yelp... In its 2017 judgement, the European Commission found that Google had illegally promoted its own comparison shopping service in search results, whilst demoting those of competitors... "I guess it was unfortunate for Google that they did it to us," Shivaun says. "We've both been brought up maybe under the delusion that we can make a difference, and we really don't like bullies."

Even Google's final defeat in the case last month did not spell the end for the couple. They believe Google's conduct remains anti-competitive and the EC is looking into it. In March this year, under its new Digital Markets Act, the commission opened an investigation into Google's parent company, Alphabet, over whether it continues to preference its own goods and services in search results... The Raffs are also pursuing a civil damages claim against Google, which is due to begin in the first half of 2026. But when, or if, a final victory comes for the couple it will likely be a Pyrrhic one — they were forced to close Foundem in 2016.
A spokesperson for Google told the BBC the 2024 judgment from the European Court of Justice only relates to "how we showed product results from 2008-2017. The changes we made in 2017 to comply with the European Commission's Shopping decision have worked successfully for more than seven years, generating billions of clicks for more than 800 comparison shopping services.

"For this reason, we continue to strongly contest the claims made by Foundem and will do so when the case is considered by the courts."

Slashdot reader samleecole writes: Privacy advocates gained access to a powerful tool bought by U.S. law enforcement agencies that can track smartphone locations around the world. Abortion clinics, places of worship, and individual people can all be monitored without a warrant.

An investigation into tracking tool Locate X shows in the starkest terms yet how it and others — based on smartphone location data sold to various U.S. government law enforcement agencies, including state entities — could be used to monitor abortion clinic patients. This comes as more states contemplate stricter or outright bans on abortion...

In 2004 Alaa Abd El Fattah answered questions from Slashdot's readers about organizing the first-ever Linux installfest in Egypt.

In 2014 he was arrested for organizing poltical protests without requesting authorization, according to Wikipedia, and then released on bail — but then sentenced to five years in prison upon retrial. He was released in late March of 2019, but then re-arrested again in September by the National Security Agency, convicted of "spreading fake news" and jailed for five years...

Wikipedia describes Abd El-Fattah as an "Egyptian-British blogger, software developer and a political activist" who has been "active in developing Arabic-language versions of software and platforms." But this week an EFF blog post noticed that his released date had recently passed — and yet he was still in prison: It's been 28 days since September 29, the day that should have seen British-Egyptian blogger, coder, and activist Alaa Abd El Fattah walk free. Egyptian authorities refused to release him at the end of his sentence, in contradiction of the country's own Criminal Procedure Code, which requires that time served in pretrial detention count toward a prison sentence. [Human Rights Watch says Egyptian authorities are refusing to count more than two years of pretrial detention toward his time served. Amnesty International has also called for his release.] In the days since, Alaa's family has been able to secure meetings with high-level British officials, including Foreign Secretary David Lammy, but as of yet, the Egyptian government still has not released Alaa...

Alaa deserves to finally return to his family, now in the UK, and to be reunited with his son, Khaled, who is now a teenager. We urge EFF supporters in the UK to write to their MP to place pressure on the UK's Labour government to use their power to push for Alaa's release.
Last month the EFF wrote:: Over 20 years ago Alaa began using his technical skills to connect coders and technologists in the Middle East to build online communities where people could share opinions and speak freely and privately. The role he played in using technology to amplify the messages of his fellow Egyptians — as well as his own participation in the uprising in Tahrir Square — made him a prominent global voice during the Arab Spring, and a target for the country's successive repressive regimes, which have used antiterrorism laws to silence critics by throwing them in jail and depriving them of due process and other basic human rights.

Alaa is a symbol for the principle of free speech in a region of the world where speaking out for justice and human rights is dangerous and using the power of technology to build community is criminalized...

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Delta Air Lines on Friday sued cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike in a Georgia state court after a global outage in July caused mass flight cancellations, disrupted travel plans of 1.3 million customers and cost the carrier more than $500 million. Delta's lawsuit filed in Fulton County Superior Court called the faulty software update from CrowdStrike "catastrophic" and said the firm "forced untested and faulty updates to its customers, causing more than 8.5 million Microsoft Windows-based computers around the world to crash." [...]

Delta, which has purchased CrowdStrike products since 2022, said the outage forced it to cancel 7,000 flights, impacting 1.3 million passengers over five days. "If CrowdStrike had tested the faulty update on even one computer before deployment, the computer would have crashed," Delta's lawsuit says. "Because the faulty update could not be removed remotely, CrowdStrike crippled Delta's business and created immense delays for Delta customers." Delta said that as part of its IT-planning and infrastructure, it has invested billions of dollars "in licensing and building some of the best technology solutions in the airline industry."

Apple was handed a victory today by a jury in Delware, which ruled that two of Masimo's smartwatches and chargers "willfully violated Apple's patent rights in smartwatch designs," according to Reuters. The reward? $250 in damages. 9to5Mac reports: Apple previously accused Masimo of using litigation to boost the launch of its own smartwatch product. In October 2022, Apple filed two patent infringement lawsuits against Masimo. The first lawsuit accused Masimo of copying the Apple Watch design. The second said that Masimo's technical features infringed on Apple patents covering technology used in the Apple Watch.

Reuters reports: "Apple convinced a federal jury on Friday that health monitoring tech company Masimo's smartwatches infringe two of its design patents. The jury, in Delaware, agreed with Apple that Masimo's W1 and Freedom watches and chargers willfully violated Apple's patent rights in smartwatch designs, awarding the tech giant $250 in damages. Apple's attorneys told the court the 'ultimate purpose' of its lawsuit was to win an injunction against sales of Masimo's smartwatches after an infringement ruling." The jury, however, also determined that Masimo's smartwatches "did not infringe on Apple patents covering smartwatch inventions that the tech giant had accused Masimo of copying." The two companies continue to battle it out over patent infringements regarding the Apple Watch's blood oxygen sensor.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Earlier this year, we reported on the video game archivists asking for a legal DMCA exemption to share Internet-accessible emulated versions of their physical game collections with researchers. Today, the US Copyright Office announced once again that it was denying that request, forcing researchers to travel to far-flung collections for access to the often-rare physical copies of the games they're seeking.

In announcing its decision, the Register of Copyrights for the Library of Congress sided with the Entertainment Software Association and others who argued that the proposed remote access could serve as a legal loophole for a free-to-access "online arcade" that could harm the market for classic gaming re-releases. This argument resonated with the Copyright Office despite a VGHF study that found 87 percent of those older game titles are currently out of print. "While proponents are correct that some older games will not have a reissue market, they concede there is a 'healthy' market for other reissued games and that the industry has been making 'greater concerted efforts' to reissue games," the Register writes in her decision. "Further, while the Register appreciates that proponents have suggested broad safeguards that could deter recreational uses of video games in some cases, she believes that such requirements are not specific enough to conclude that they would prevent market harms."

A DMCA exemption for remote sharing already exists for non-video-game computer software that is merely "functional," as the Register notes. But the same fair use arguments that allow for that sharing don't apply to video games because they are "often highly expressive in nature," the Register writes. In an odd footnote, the Register also notes that emulation of classic game consoles, while not infringing in its own right, has been "historically associated with piracy," thus "rais[ing] a potential concern" for any emulated remote access to library game catalogs. That footnote paradoxically cites Video Game History Foundation (VGHF) founder and director Frank Cifaldi's 2016 Game Developers Conference talk on the demonization of emulation and its importance to video game preservation. "The moment I became the Joker is when someone in charge of copyright law watched my GDC talk about how it's wrong to associate emulation with piracy and their takeaway was 'emulation is associated with piracy,'" Cifaldi quipped in a social media post.

The top U.S. consumer finance watchdog warned businesses about potential legal problems they could face from using new technology such as artificial intelligence or algorithmic scores to snoop on and evaluate their employees. From a report: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday said "invasive" new tools to monitor workers are governed by a law designed to ensure fairness in credit reporting, giving employees specific rights. Employees have the right to consent to the collection of personal information, to receive detailed information and to dispute inaccurate information, the CFPB said in the newly released guidance.

"Workers shouldn't be subject to unchecked surveillance or have their careers determined by opaque third-party reports without basic protections," CFPB Director Rohit Chopra said. More companies are leaning on AI and other powerful tools throughout the employment process, using software that can, for example, interview candidates and surveillance tools that can look for unsafe behavior. Americans have expressed concerns about Big Brother-style surveillance while they are on the job.

A government-controlled wallet that had been drained of $20 million on Thursday received most of its funds back Friday, adding another layer of mystery to transactions flagged by blockchain analysts as likely being connected to a high-profile theft. From a report: The pseudonymous blockchain sleuth ZachXBT had said in a tweet Thursday that the transfers resembled the playbook of a bad actor. Engaging with several decentralized finance protocols, the wallet had also tapped so-called instant exchanges after funds were moved across a series of transfers that "looked nefarious." About $19.3 million worth of funds had been returned to the wallet early Friday, per on-chain data collected by Arkham Intelligence, including Ethereum and the stablecoin USDC. Still, ZachXBT said in his Telegram community that funds transferred to exchanges had not yet been returned.

UnitedHealth Group said a ransomware attack in February resulted in more than 100 million individuals having their private health information stolen. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services first reported the figure on Thursday. TechCrunch reports: The ransomware attack and data breach at Change Healthcare stands as the largest known digital theft of U.S. medical records, and one of the biggest data breaches in living history. The ramifications for the millions of Americans whose private medical information was irretrievably stolen are likely to be life lasting. UHG began notifying affected individuals in late July, which continued through October. The stolen data varies by individual, but Change previously confirmed that it includes personal information, such as names and addresses, dates of birth, phone numbers and email addresses, and government identity documents, including Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, and passport numbers. The stolen health data includes diagnoses, medications, test results, imaging and care and treatment plans, and health insurance information -- as well as financial and banking information found in claims and payment data taken by the criminals.

The cyberattack became public on February 21 when Change Healthcare pulled much of its network offline to contain the intruders, causing immediate outages across the U.S. healthcare sector that relied on Change for handling patient insurance and billing. UHG attributed the cyberattack to ALPHV/BlackCat, a Russian-speaking ransomware and extortion gang, which later took credit for the cyberattack. The ransomware gang's leaders later vanished after absconding with a $22 million ransom paid by the health insurance giant, stiffing the group's contractors who carried out the hacking of Change Healthcare out of their new financial windfall. The contractors took the data they stole from Change Healthcare and formed a new group, which extorted a second ransom from UHG, while publishing a portion of the stolen files online in the process to prove their threat.

There is no evidence that the cybercriminals subsequently deleted the data. Other extortion gangs, including LockBit, have been shown to hoard stolen data, even after the victim pays and the criminals claim to have deleted the data. In paying the ransom, Change obtained a copy of the stolen dataset, allowing the company to identify and notify the affected individuals whose information was found in the data. Efforts by the U.S. government to catch the hackers behind ALPHV/BlackCat, one of the most prolific ransomware gangs today, have so far failed. The gang bounced back following a takedown operation in 2023 to seize the gang's dark web leak site. Months after the Change Healthcare breach, the U.S. State Department upped its reward for information on the whereabouts of the ALPHV/BlackCat cybercriminals to $10 million.

The EU Court of Justice ruled in favor of Intel, dismissing the European Commission's appeal and ending a nearly two-decade-long case over allegations that Intel's rebates to computer makers were anticompetitive. Reuters reports: The European Commission had fined Intel for giving rebates to computer makers Dell, Hewlett-Packard and Lenovo for buying most of their chips from Intel, which regulators said was an attempt to block Advanced Micro Devices. Regulators generally oppose rebates offered by dominant companies because they fear they may be anticompetitive, while companies say enforcers must prove discounts have anticompetitive effects before companies are sanctioned.

EU regulators had initially fined Intel 1.06 billion euros ($1.14 billion) but a lower tribunal scrapped that. Intel's case was boosted earlier this year when an adviser to the court said regulators had not properly performed an economic analysis.

Norway plans to enforce a strict minimum social media age of 15 to protect children from harmful content and the influence of algorithms. The Guardian reports: The Scandinavian country already has a minimum age limit of 13 in place. Despite this, more than half of nine-year-olds, 58% of 10-year-olds and 72% of 11-year-olds are on social media, according to research by the Norwegian media authority. The government has pledged to introduce more safeguards to prevent children from getting around the age restrictions -- including amending the Personal Data Act so that social media users must be 15 years old to agree that the platform can handle their personal data, and developing an age verification barrier for social media.

"It sends quite a strong signal," the prime minister told the newspaper VG on Wednesday. "Children must be protected from harmful content on social media. These are big tech giants pitted against small children's brains. We know that this is an uphill battle, because there are strong forces here, but it is also where politics is needed." While he said he understood that social media could offer lonely children a community, self-expression must not be in the power of algorithms. "On the contrary, it can cause you to become single-minded and pacified, because everything happens so fast on this screen," he added. "It is also about giving parents the security to say no," said Kjersti Toppe, the minister for children and families. "We know that many people really want to say no, but don't feel they can."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from SecurityWeek.com: White hat hackers taking part in the Pwn2Own Ireland 2024 contest organized by Trend Micro's Zero Day Initiative (ZDI) have earned half a million dollars on the first day of the event, for exploits targeting NAS devices, cameras, printers and smart speakers. The highest single reward, $100,000, was earned by Sina Kheirkhah of Summoning Team, who chained a total of nine vulnerabilities for an attack that went from a QNAP QHora-322 router to a TrueNAS Mini X storage device. Another exploit chain involving the QNAP QHora-322 and TrueNAS Mini X products was demonstrated by Viettel Cyber Security, but this team earned only $50,000.

A significant reward was also earned by Jack Dates of RET2 Systems, who received $60,000 for hacking a Sonos Era 300 smart speaker. QNAP TS-464 and Synology DiskStation DS1823XS+ NAS device exploits earned $40,000 each for two different teams. Participants also successfully demonstrated exploits against the Lorex 2K WiFi, Ubiquity AI Bullet, and Synology TC500 cameras, and HP Color LaserJet Pro MFP 3301fdw and Canon imageCLASS MF656Cdw printers. These attempts earned the hackers between $11,000 and $30,000. According to ZDI, a total of $516,250 was paid out on the first day of Pwn2Own Ireland for over 50 unique vulnerabilities.

A judge has allowed Saudi dissident Yahya Assiri to sue the kingdom for allegedly targeting his devices with Pegasus spyware and other Israeli-made surveillance tools. Reuters reports: Yahya Assiri, a founder of the opposition National Assembly Party (NAAS) who lives in exile in Britain, alleges his electronic devices were targeted with surveillance software between 2018 and 2020. He is suing Saudi Arabia at London's High Court, saying the country used Pegasus - made by Israeli company NSO Group and sold only to nation states - and other spyware made by lesser-known Israeli firm QuaDream because of his work with dissidents.

Earlier this month, Roger Eastman, a judge in the High Court, gave Assiri permission to serve his lawsuit on the Saudi government, a step that required the court to find Assiri has an arguable case. The decision announced on Monday to allow the case to be served on Saudi Arabia in Riyadh was made on Oct. 11. Assiri said in a statement: "I am fully aware that the authorities will want to target me. However, it is outrageous for them also to target individuals such as the victims of rights abuses and their families in Saudi Arabia simply because these people have been in contact with me."

A civil liberties group has filed a lawsuit in Virginia arguing that the widespread use of Flock's automated license plate readers violates the Fourth Amendment's protections against warrantless searches. 404 Media reports: "The City of Norfolk, Virginia, has installed a network of cameras that make it functionally impossible for people to drive anywhere without having their movements tracked, photographed, and stored in an AI-assisted database that enables the warrantless surveillance of their every move. This civil rights lawsuit seeks to end this dragnet surveillance program," the lawsuit notes (PDF). "In Norfolk, no one can escape the government's 172 unblinking eyes," it continues, referring to the 172 Flock cameras currently operational in Norfolk. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures and has been ruled in many cases to protect against warrantless government surveillance, and the lawsuit specifically says Norfolk's installation violates that. [...]

The lawsuit in Norfolk is being filed by the Institute for Justice, a civil liberties organization that has filed a series of privacy and government overreach lawsuits over the last few years. Two Virginia residents, Lee Schmidt and Crystal Arrington, are listed as plaintiffs in the case. Schmidt is a Navy veteran who alleges in the lawsuit that the cops can easily infer where he is going based on Flock data. "Just outside his neighborhood, there are four Flock Cameras. Lee drives by these cameras (and others he sees around town) nearly every day, and the Norfolk Police Department [NPD] can use the information they record to build a picture of his daily habits and routines," the lawsuit reads. "If the Flock Cameras record Lee going straight through the intersection outside his neighborhood, for example, the NPD can infer that he is going to his daughter's school. If the cameras capture him turning right, the NPD can infer that he is going to the shooting range. If the cameras capture him turning left, the NPD can infer that he is going to the grocery store. The Flock Cameras capture the start of nearly every trip Lee makes in his car, so he effectively cannot leave his neighborhood without the NPD knowing about it." Arrington is a healthcare worker who makes home visits to clients in Norfolk. The lawsuit alleges that it would be trivial for the government to identify her clients. "Fourth Amendment case law overwhelmingly shows that license plate readers do not constitute a warrantless search because they take photos of cars in public and cannot continuously track the movements of any individual," a Flock spokesperson said. "Appellate and federal district courts in at least fourteen states have upheld the use of evidence from license plate readers as Constitutional without requiring a warrant, as well as the 9th and 11th circuits. Since the Bell case, four judges in Virginia have ruled the opposite way -- that ALPR evidence is admissible in court without a warrant."

Democratic senators Elizabeth Warren, Ron Wyden, Richard Blumenthal and Representative Katie Porter are demanding the Justice Department prosecute tax preparation companies for allegedly sharing sensitive taxpayer data with Meta and Google through tracking pixels. The lawmakers' call follows a Treasury Inspector General audit confirming their earlier investigation into TaxSlayer, H&R Block, and Tax Act. The audit found multiple companies failed to properly obtain consent before sharing tax return information via advertising tools. Violations could result in one-year prison terms and $1,000 fines per incident, potentially reaching billions in penalties given the scale of affected users.

In a letter shared with The Verge, the lawmakers said: "Accountability for these tax preparation companies -- who disclosed millions of taxpayers' tax return data, meaning they could potentially face billions of dollars in criminal liability -- is essential for protecting the rule of law and the privacy of taxpayers," the letter reads. "We urge you to follow the facts and the conclusions of TIGTA and the IRS and to take appropriate action against any companies or individuals that have violated the law."

Session, a small but increasingly popular encrypted messaging app, is moving its operations outside of Australia after the country's federal law enforcement agency visited an employee's residence and asked them questions about the app and a particular user. 404 Media reports: Now Session will be maintained by an entity in Switzerland. The move signals the increasing pressure on maintainers of encrypted messaging apps, both when it comes to governments seeking more data on app users, as well as targeting messaging app companies themselves, like the arrest of Telegram's CEO in August. "Ultimately, we were given the choice between remaining in Australia or relocating to a more privacy-friendly jurisdiction, such as Switzerland. For the project to continue, it could not be centred in Australia," Alex Linton, president of the newly formed Session Technology Foundation (STF) which will publish the Session app, told 404 Media in a statement. The app will still function in Australia, Linton added. Linton said that last year the Australian Federal Police (AFP) visited a Session employee at their home in the country. "There was no warrant used or meeting organised, they just went into their apartment complex and knocked on their front door," Linton said.

The AFP asked about the Session app and company, and the employee's history on the project, Linton added. The officers also asked about an ongoing investigation related to a specific Session user, he added. Linton showed 404 Media an email sent by Session's legal representatives to the AFP which reflected that series of events. Part of Session's frustration around the incident came from the AFP deciding to "visit an employee at home rather than arranging a meeting through our proper (publicly available) channels," Linton said.

WordPress sites are being compromised through malicious plugins that display fake software updates and error messages, leading to the installation of information-stealing malware. BleepingComputer reports: Since 2023, a malicious campaign called ClearFake has been used to display fake web browser update banners on compromised websites that distribute information-stealing malware. In 2024, a new campaign called ClickFix was introduced that shares many similarities with ClearFake but instead pretends to be software error messages with included fixes. However, these "fixes" are PowerShell scripts that, when executed, will download and install information-stealing malware.

Last week, GoDaddy reported that the ClearFake/ClickFix threat actors have breached over 6,000 WordPress sites to install malicious plugins that display the fake alerts associated with these campaigns. "The GoDaddy Security team is tracking a new variant of ClickFix (also known as ClearFake) fake browser update malware that is distributed via bogus WordPress plugins," explains GoDaddy security researcher Denis Sinegubko. "These seemingly legitimate plugins are designed to appear harmless to website administrators but contain embedded malicious scripts that deliver fake browser update prompts to end-users."

The malicious plugins utilize names similar to legitimate plugins, such as Wordfense Security and LiteSpeed Cache, while others use generic, made-up names. Website security firm Sucuri also noted that a fake plugin named "Universal Popup Plugin" is also part of this campaign. When installed, the malicious plugin will hook various WordPress actions depending on the variant to inject a malicious JavaScript script into the HTML of the site. When loaded, this script will attempt to load a further malicious JavaScript file stored in a Binance Smart Chain (BSC) smart contract, which then loads the ClearFake or ClickFix script to display the fake banners. From web server access logs analyzed by Sinegubko, the threat actors appear to be utilizing stolen admin credentials to log into the WordPress site and install the plugin in an automated manner.

According to an internal Border Patrol memo, nearly one-third of the surveillance cameras along the U.S.-Mexico border don't work. "The nationwide issue is having significant impacts on [Border Patrol] operations," reads the memo. NBC News reports: The large-scale outage affects roughly 150 of the 500 cameras perched on surveillance towers along the U.S.-Mexico border. It was due to "several technical problems," according to the memo. The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue, blamed outdated equipment and outstanding repair issues.

The camera systems, known as Remote Video Surveillance Systems, have been used since 2011 to "survey large areas without having to commit hundreds of agents in vehicles to perform the same function." But according to the internal memo, 30% were inoperable. It is not clear when the cameras stopped working.Two Customs and Border Protections officials said that some repairs have been made this month but that there are still over 150 outstanding requests for camera repairs. The officials said there are some areas that are not visible to Border Patrol because of broken cameras.

A Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said the agency has installed roughly 300 new towers that use more advanced technology. "CBP continues to install newer, more advanced technology that embrace artificial intelligence and machine learning to replace outdated systems, reducing the need to have agents working non-interdiction functions," the spokesperson said. The agency points the finger at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which is responsible for servicing the systems and repairing the cameras. "The FAA, which services the systems and repairs the cameras, has had internal problems meeting the needs of the Border Patrol, the memo says, without elaborating on what those problems are," reports NBC News. While the FAA is sending personnel to work on the cameras, Border Patrol leaders are considering replacing them with a contractor that can provide "adequate technical support for the cameras."

Further reading: U.S. Border Surveillance Towers Have Always Been Broken (EFF)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the Hollywood Reporter: A production company for Blade Runner 2049 has sued (PDF) Tesla, which allegedly fed images from the movie into an artificial intelligence image generator to create unlicensed promotional materials. Alcon Entertainment, in a lawsuit filed Monday in California federal court, accuses Elon Musk and his autonomous vehicle company of misappropriating the movie's brand to promote its robotaxi at a glitzy unveiling earlier this month. The producer says it doesn't want Blade Runner 2049 to be affiliated with Musk because of his "extreme political and social views," pointing to ongoing efforts with potential partners for an upcoming TV series.

The complaint, which brings claims for copyright infringement and false endorsement, also names Warner Bros. Discovery for allegedly facilitating the partnership. "Any prudent brand considering any Tesla partnership has to take Musk's massively amplified, highly politicized, capricious and arbitrary behavior, which sometimes veers into hate speech, into account," states the complaint. "Alcon did not want BR2049 to be affiliated with Musk." [...] The lawsuit cites an agreement, the details of which are unknown to Alcon, for Warners to lease or license studio lot space, access and other materials to Tesla for the event. Alcon alleges that the deal included promotional elements allowing Tesla to affiliate its products with WBD movies. WBD was Alcon's domestic distributor for the 2017 release of Blade Runner 2049. It has limited clip licensing rights, though not for Tesla's livestream TV event, the lawsuit claims.

Alcon says it wasn't informed about the brand deal until the day of the unveiling. According to the complaint, Musk communicated to WBD that he wanted to associate the robotaxi with the film. He asked the company for permission to use a still directly from the movie, which prompted an employee to send an emergency request for clearance to Alcon since international rights would be involved, the lawsuit says. The producer refused, spurring the creation of the AI images. [...] Alcon seeks unspecified damages, as well as a court order barring Tesla from further distributing the disputed promotional materials. Musk referenced Denis Villeneuve's Blade Runner movie during the robotaxi event. "You know, I love Blade Runner, but I don't know if we want that future," he said. "I believe we want that duster he's wearing, but not the, uh, not the bleak apocalypse."

I, Robot director Alex Proyas also took to X last week, writing: "Hey Elon, Can I have my designs back please?"

News Corp's Dow Jones & Co., publisher of the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post have sued Perplexity, a startup that calls itself an "AI-powered Swiss Army Knife for information discovery and curiosity," alleging copyright infringement. From a report: "Perplexity is a generative artificial intelligence company that claims to provide its users accurate and up-to-date news and information in a platform that, in Perplexity's own words, allows users to 'Skip the Links' to original publishers' websites," the companies said in the federal lawsuit, filed Monday. "Perplexity attempts to accomplish this by engaging in a massive amount of illegal copying of publishers' copyrighted works and diverting customers and critical revenues away from those copyright holders. This suit is brought by news publishers who seek redress for Perplexity's brazen scheme to compete for readers while simultaneously freeriding on the valuable content the publishers produce."