Login
Classic Internet Censorship
I want us to consider the implications of this new reality: In three of the four most populous countries in the world, governments have now given themselves the power to order that the internet be wiped of citizens’ posts that the authorities don’t like.
In free societies, there has long been a tug of war over free speech and its limits. But one of the enduring questions of the online era is what governments, digital companies and citizens should do now that the internet and social media make it both easier for people to share their truth (or their lies) with the world and more appealing for national leaders to shut it all down.
What is happening in three of the world’s four largest countries — China, India and Indonesia; the U.S. is the 3rd largest — is simpler than that. It fits the classic definition of censorship. Governments are seeking to silence their external critics.
CDC Expected to Ease COVID Recommendations, Including for Schools, as Soon as This Week
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is expected to update its guidance for COVID-19 control in the community, including in schools, in the coming days, according to sources familiar with the plan.
A preview of the plans obtained by CNN shows that the updated recommendations are expected to ease quarantine recommendations for people exposed to the virus and de-emphasize 6 feet of social distancing.
The agency is also expected to de-emphasize regular screening testing for COVID-19 in schools as a way to monitor the spread of the virus, according to sources who were briefed on the agency’s plans but were not authorized to speak to a reporter. Instead, it says it may be more useful to base testing on COVID-19 community levels and whether settings are higher-risk, such as nursing homes or prisons.
The changes, which may be publicly released as early as this week, were previewed to educators and public health officials. They are still being deliberated and are not final.
Elon Musk’s Answer to Twitter Lawsuit to Be Made Public by Friday
Elon Musk’s response to Twitter’s lawsuit over the billionaire’s attempt to call off his $44 billion takeover of the social media company is coming before the end of the week.
It is expected to be made public by Friday evening at the latest, according to a judge’s ruling.
That’s a couple days later than Musk’s team wanted. Attorneys wanted to file a public version of their answer and counterclaims in Delaware court Wednesday.
Twitter attorneys complained that they needed more time to review and potentially redact Musk’s sealed filing, saying it refers “extensively” to internal Twitter information and data given to Musk.
Antitrust Law Should Continue to Prioritize Consumers Over Corporations | Opinion
For decades, American antitrust law has prioritized people over corporations. If consumers are getting more innovative products at cheaper prices, then the government shouldn’t intervene to protect competitor companies that are struggling to keep up.
But now, policymakers in Washington want to change that core principle of American law. According to a new study written by leading antitrust expert Koren W. Wong-Ervin, proposals in Congress “would protect inefficient companies from market forces — a development that could lead to higher prices for consumers.” There are numerous problems with this approach, with high risks of unintended consequences.
First, these bills would permit less efficient competitors to bring lawsuits against America’s most innovative companies, even if there’s scant evidence that consumers are being harmed. If these laws are passed, rival corporations and the government will have more power to dictate the tech products that end up in the hands of American consumers.
Not only will these bills make it harder for American tech companies to keep up the pace of innovation, but they’ll also put serious roadblocks in the way of our country gaining leadership on the strategic technologies of the future. Instead, foreign companies, particularly companies in China, could easily gain the upper hand. The impact on our national security could be devastating.
U.S. Attorneys General Will Take Legal Action Against Telecom Providers Enabling Robocalls
The Attorneys General (AG) of all 50 states have joined forces in hopes of giving teeth to the seemingly never-ending fight against robocalls. North Carolina AG Josh Stein, Indiana AG Todd Rokita and Ohio AG Dave Yost are leading the formation of the new Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force. In Stein’s announcement, he said the group will focus on taking legal action against telecoms, particularly gateway providers, allowing or turning a blind eye to foreign robocalls made to U.S. numbers.
He explained that gateway providers routing foreign phone calls into the U.S. telephone network have the responsibility under the law to ensure the traffic they’re bringing in is legal. Stein said that they mostly aren’t taking any action to keep robocalls out of the U.S. phone network, though, and they’re even intentionally allowing robocall traffic through in return for steady revenue in many cases.
The Attorney General referenced data from the National Consumer Law Center, which previously reported that American phone numbers get more than 33 million scam robocalls a day. Those include Social Security scams targeting seniors and gift card scams, wherein bad actors pretend they’re from the IRS. In that report, the center warned that consumers will keep on getting robocalls as long as phone providers are earning from them.
What Twitter’s Subpoenas to Elon Musk’s Inner Circle Could Yield
The Wall Street Journal reported:
Twitter is seeking records from several of Elon Musk’s circle of Silicon Valley investors, friends and financial backers as the company looks to build its case against the Tesla chief executive over his stalled $44 billion takeover.
Twitter wants any communication from those people related to the deal. The goal is likely to be to determine whether Mr. Musk had other concerns about completing his agreement to buy the company, beyond what he has said publicly, according to lawyers and academics not involved in the case.
It is standard in such merger disputes to seek information from financial institutions backing the stalled deal. But lawyers and academics say that because Mr. Musk was acquiring the company as an individual, those close to him, including friends and advisers, are fair game as potential sources of information about his intentions.
“A single email could be decisive, increasing the chances of winning,” said Stephen Gillers, a professor at New York University School of Law.
The subpoenas requested information and documents, including face-to-face conversations, physical mail, emails, text messages, instant messages, social-media contacts, facsimiles and phone conversations, according to court documents.
