Login
Google to Pay $68 Million Over Allegations Its Voice Assistant Eavesdropped on Users
Google has agreed to pay $68 million to settle a class-action lawsuit that alleged the technology giant’s voice assistant had illegally recorded users and then shared their private conversations with advertisers. The preliminary settlement, filed January 23 in federal court in San Jose, California, requires approval by U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman.
The settlement stems from a lawsuit filed by several Google device owners who claimed their conversations had been recorded without their knowledge. While Google stated that its voice assistant would only register people’s speech when consumers uttered an activation phrase, such as “Hey Google,” the consumers claimed that their devices recorded them even without using such language.
Some claimants alleged the Google devices recorded private conversations about financial issues, personal decisions and employment. If the settlement is approved, Google will place $68 million in a fund that will pay all consumer claims, as well as court-approved attorneys’ fees and other costs.
TikTok Settles Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Ahead of a Landmark Trial
The settlement means TikTok will avoid a trial where plaintiffs had planned to argue that social media platforms are inherently defective and subject to personal injury liability.
TikTok reached an agreement late Monday to settle a lawsuit over claims that social media companies had engineered their products to hook young users, avoiding the first in a series of landmark trials.
The trial, which is scheduled to begin in the California Superior Court of Los Angeles County with jury selection on Tuesday, is the first in a series of lawsuits expected to be heard this year against Meta, YouTube, Snap and TikTok. The cases stem from lawsuits filed by thousands of individuals, school districts and state attorneys general, accusing the companies of making their products addictive, like cigarettes, and causing personal injury.
The plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages and changes to the design of social media platforms to curb excessive use. If they succeed in arguing that the tech titans created defective products that injured millions of young American users, the cases — which are regarded as bellwethers — could open new lanes of liability against the tech titans.
TikTok and Snap have both now settled the first case, leaving Meta and YouTube as the remaining defendants. The case involves a 20-year-old California woman identified in a 2023 lawsuit as K.G.M. The woman said she had become addicted to the social media sites as a child and experienced anxiety, depression and body-image issues as a result. Meta’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, and YouTube’s chief, Neal Mohan, are expected to testify.
Meta CEO Zuckerberg Blocked Curbs on Sex-Talking Chatbots for Minors, Court Filing Alleges
Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg approved allowing minors to access AI chatbot companions that safety staffers warned were capable of sexual interactions, according to internal Meta documents filed in a New Mexico state court case and made public Monday.
The lawsuit — brought by the state’s attorney general, Raul Torrez, and scheduled for trial next month — alleges that Meta “failed to stem the tide of damaging sexual material and sexual propositions delivered to children” on Facebook and Instagram.
The filing on Monday included internal Meta employee emails and messages obtained by the New Mexico Attorney General’s Office through legal discovery. The state alleges they show that “Meta, driven by Zuckerberg, rejected the recommendations of its integrity staff and declined to impose reasonable guardrails to prevent children from being subject to sexually exploitative conversations with its AI chatbots,” the attorney general said in the filing.
Regulations, but Not for Us: US Age Check Debate Bounces Around the Tech Stack
The so-called tech temperance movement is upon us. Biometric age assurance tools are the new seatbelts, and legislation to make them mandatory for social media platforms and other age-sensitive spaces is flying. Bills beget injunctions from lobby groups representing tech giants. Smaller tech enterprises feel lost in the shuffle.
A recent article in Tech Policy states the situation in admirably frank terms: “Everyone wants the benefits of a safer internet for kids, but nobody wants the liability, reputational risk, or the user friction that comes with hard checks.” Should app stores be safety regulators? The question is currently roiling in U.S. courts, as competing interests continue to argue over who has to bear the cross of age assurance.
Depending on the age rating of a given app, underage users would need a parent or guardian’s digital permission to download apps or make in-app purchases. The bill has advocates and critics. Stephanie Smith, president and CEO of the Alabama Policy Institute, points out that “nowhere in the brick and mortar or real world do children sign contracts, nor should they. They can’t even sign their own field trip form.”
‘Impossible’ to Travel in London in Future Without Being Scanned by Facial Recognition, Court Told
It will be “impossible” for Londoners to travel without being scanned by facial recognition unless police use of the technology is properly restricted, the High Court has been told.
The Metropolitan Police is facing legal action over its use of live facial recognition (LFR), brought by a youth worker who was misidentified by the technology and the director of a civil liberties campaign group.
Shaun Thompson, who volunteers with young people affected by violence, and Silkie Carlo, from Big Brother Watch, are concerned that facial recognition could be used arbitrarily or in a discriminatory way. Mr Squires described facial recognition as “similar to a DNA profile,” turning people’s facial characteristics into coded data which is then compared with people on a “watch list.”
