UnknowingFool writes: The civil trial of Ira Kleiman vs. Craig Wright started on Monday in Miami. The estate of David Kleiman is suing Craig Wright, the self declared inventor of bitcoin, for 50% ownership of 1.1 million bitcoins. The estate claims Kleiman was in a partnership with Wright to mine the coins but after Kleiman died in April 2013, Wright denied any partnership. At over $60,000 each per bitcoin, this case is currently worth $65 billion.

Craig Wright has previously claimed he is the inventor of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, which has been met with skepticism based on his inability to show any proof. In this case, Wright has made numerous dubious claims. After the case was filed in 2018, Wright claimed he did not have the keys to the coins but that they would be arriving in January 2020 through a "bonded courier." After January 2020, Wright provided keys to the estate for verification which the estate claims the bitcoins were fake. Expressing skepticism that the courier even existed, the estate asked for more information about the courier. Wright then claimed the identity of the courier and all communications were protected under attorney-client privilege as the courier was an attorney.

Facebook plans to shut down its decade-old facial recognition system this month, deleting the face scan data of more than one billion users and effectively eliminating a feature that has fueled privacy concerns, government investigations, a class-action lawsuit and regulatory woes. From a report: Jerome Pesenti, vice president of artificial intelligence at Meta, Facebook's newly named parent company, said in a blog post on Tuesday that the social network was making the change because of "many concerns about the place of facial recognition technology in society." He added that the company still saw the software as a powerful tool, but "every new technology brings with it potential for both benefit and concern, and we want to find the right balance." The decision shutters a feature that was introduced in December 2010 so that Facebook users could save time.

The facial-recognition software automatically identified people who appeared in users' digital photo albums and suggested users "tag" them all with a click, linking their accounts to the images. Facebook now has built one of the largest repositories of digital photos in the world, partly thanks to this software. Facial-recognition technology, which has advanced in accuracy and power in recent years, has increasingly been the focus of debate because of how it can be misused by governments, law enforcement and companies. In China, authorities use the capabilities to track and control the Uighurs, a largely Muslim minority. In the United States, law enforcement has turned to the software to aid policing, leading to fears of overreach and mistaken arrests. Some cities and states have banned or limited the technology to prevent potential abuse.

A U.S. Treasury Department-led regulatory body called on Monday for Congress to regulate issuers of "stablecoins" like banks and urged financial agencies to assess whether the role of these fast-growing digital assets in the country's payments system posed a systemic risk. Reuters reports: The hotly awaited report by the President's Working Group on Financial Markets will likely boost policymakers' efforts to put guardrails around stablecoins, a type of digital asset pegged to traditional currencies which the body said could pose threats to the broader financial system. Stablecoins, which include the likes of Tether, USD Coin and Binance USD, have ballooned 500% to reach a market cap of $127 billion over the past 12 months, according to the report. "The rapid growth of stablecoins increases the urgency of this work," the report stated. "Failure to act risks growth of payment stablecoins without adequate protection for users, the financial system, and the broader economy."

While stablecoins are primarily used to facilitate trading in other cryptocurrencies, they could become widely used by households and businesses to make payments, the report said. Currently, though, stablecoins have a wide range of policies governing disclosures, what assets are held in reserve to back the coins, and around redemption rights, all of which could make them susceptible to runs if users lose confidence in the asset. "Runs could spread contagiously from one stablecoin to another, or to other types of financial institutions that are believed to have a similar risk profile. Risks to the broader financial system could rapidly increase as well, especially in the absence of prudential standards," the report warned. Chief among the report's recommendations is for Congress to "urgently" pass a law that would regulate stablecoin issuers akin to insured depository institutions, subjecting them to strict supervision by banking regulators while also providing some form of government backstop in the event of crises.

The U.S. Copyright Office "is expanding a legal shield for fixing digital devices," reports the Verge, "including cars and medical devices."

Earlier this week the office "submitted new exemptions to Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which bars breaking software copy protection. The resulting rules include a revamped section on device repair, reflecting renewed government pressure around 'right to repair' issues." [T]his latest rulemaking adopts repair-related proposals from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, iFixit, and other organizations. The Librarian of Congress adopted the recommendations in a final rule that will take effect [Thursday].

The exemptions replace an itemized list of repairable devices with broad protections for any consumer devices that rely on software to function, as well as land and sea vehicles and medical devices that aren't consumer-focused. The rulemaking doesn't rewrite the exemption to cover all non-consumer devices, and it doesn't cover all "modification," only "diagnosis, maintenance, and repair." For video game consoles specifically, repair only covers repairing the device's optical drives and requires reenabling any technological protection measures that were circumvented afterward.
The Verge notes that Acting General Counsel Kevin Amer told reporters the exemption should prove useful, adding that their decision had been influenced by an earlier executive order from the Biden administration supporting third-party and consumer repair work. The article also notes other U.S. agencies are also moving on the issue. "The Federal Trade Commission, for instance, has pledged to fight business practices that lock out independent repair shops.

"This copyright rulemaking doesn't address those practices, but it helps lift a legal threat hanging over technicians and consumers."

From the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: In 1947, more than 4 million Americans owned $3.4 billion in saving deposits held not by a bank or credit union, but by the United States Postal Service. It's a largely forgotten part of American banking (and postal) history that the USPS ran the Postal Savings System for 56 years, from 1911 to 1967... [T]o this day postal services around the world provide small-scale financial services, from check cashing to savings accounts to e-commerce solutions, such as allowing refunds for returned goods to be deposited directly into a consumer's postal account. In September, the U.S. Postal Service took the first steps toward restoring its place in Americans' financial lives: At four East Coast post offices, customers can now get paychecks or business checks worth up to $500 cashed for a flat fee of $5.95....

Postal banking has the potential to reorient the American financial landscape for the benefit the most vulnerable. A fifth of Americans are considered "unbanked" or "underbanked," often relying on unscrupulous payday lenders because they lack the week-to-week security to set even a little aside in a traditional account. According to a 2014 USPS report, in 2012 alone these "alternative financial services" wrung $89 billion in interest and fees out of the poorest Americans... Postal banking also has a bipartisan pedigree. While it has most recently been a centerpiece of the progressive platforms of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., it has also been promoted by reformist conservatives as a way to get and keep capital in local communities, rather than having it held in the coffers of multinational conglomerates.

And finally, an expansion into basic financial services may be essential to the very survival of the U.S. Postal Service. As Amazon and private shipping companies continue to press their advantage, the Postal Service can press its own: thousands of locations in every nook and cranny of the country, along with broad community trust.
This modest pilot "is the foundation for more expansive contemplated postal banking services that could include bill-paying services, ATM access and money-order and wire-transfer capabilities," argues a follow-up piece in the same newspaper: Local bank branches are shuttering in communities all across our country, and mainstream banks are failing to offer financial services that meet the needs of many communities... Robust postal banking, which should ultimately include checking and savings accounts as well as loan options, could step into the breach and provide equitable, accessible and affordable financial services to people who lack access to traditional bank services and would otherwise have to turn to high-cost and low-value fringe financial institutions... Underbanked households have an average annual income of $25,000 and typically spend approximately 10% of their income on fees and interest to fringe financial institutions simply to access their money — an amount equal to what the average household spends on food annually...

Postal banking provides an economic lifeline to countless Americans living in banking deserts. The Postal Service's 34,000 facilities service every ZIP code in the country. More than two-thirds of the census tracts that have a post office do not have a bank branch. Postal banking also provides transparent and equitable services and costs. Traditional bank fees and requirements — such as minimum balance requirements, activity fees and overdraft charges — exclude low-income and small-balance customers... Postal banking is a key pathway from poverty to economic mobility for millions of Americans and also produces significant revenue and opportunities for the Postal Service to flourish and expand its business model.

"The third time my 1999 Honda Civic was stolen, I had a plan," writes Washington Post technology reporter Heather Kelly. Specifically, it was a tile tracker hidden in the car, "quietly transmitting its approximate location over Bluetooth." Later that day, I was across town hiding down the block from my own car as police detained the surprised driver. When the Tile app pinged me with a last known location, I showed up expecting the car to be abandoned. I quickly realized it was still in use, with one person looking through the trunk and another napping in the passenger seat, so I called the police...

In April of this year, one month after my car was stolen, Apple released the $29 AirTag, bringing an even more effective Bluetooth tracking technology to a much wider audience. Similar products from Samsung and smaller brands such as Chipolo are testing the limits of how far people will go to get back their stolen property and what they consider justice. "The technology has unintended consequences. It basically gives the owner the ability to become a mini surveillance operation," said Andrew Guthrie Ferguson, a law professor at the American University Washington College of Law...

Apple has been careful to never say AirTags can be used to recover stolen property. The marketing for the device is light and wholesome, focusing on situations like lost keys between sofa cushions. The official tagline is "Lose your knack for losing things" and there's no mention of crime, theft or stealing in any of the ads, webpages or support documents. But in reality, the company has built a network that is ideal for that exact use case. Every compatible iPhone, iPad and Mac is being silently put to work as a location device without their owners knowing when it happens. An AirTag uses Bluetooth to send out a ping with its encrypted location to the closest Apple devices, which pass that information on to the Apple cloud. That spot is visible on a map in the Find My app. The AirTag owner can also turn on Lost Mode to get a notification the next time it's detected, as well as leave contact information in case it's found. Apple calls this the Find My network, and it also works for lost or stolen Apple devices and a handful of third-party products. The proliferation of compatible Apple devices — there are nearly a billion in the network around the world — makes Find My incredibly effective, especially in cities. (Apple device owners are part of the Find My network by default, but can opt out in settings, and the location information is all encrypted...)

All the tracker companies recommend contacting law enforcement first, which may sound logical until you find yourself waiting hours in a parking lot for officers to address a relatively low-priority crime, or having to explain to them what Bluetooth trackers are.
The Times shares stories of two people who tried using AirTags to track down their stolen property. One Seattle man tracked down his stolen electric bike — and ended up pedalling away furiously on the (now out of power) bicycle as the suspected thief chased after him.

And an Ohio man waited for hours in an unfamiliar drugstore parking lot for a response from the police, eventually travelling with them to the suspect's house — where his stolen laptop was returned to the police officer by a man holding two babies in his arms.

Some parents have even hidden them in their childrens' backpacks, and pet owners have hidden them in their pet's collars, the Times reports — adding that the EFF's director of cybersecurity sees another possibility. "The problem is it's impossible to build a tool that is designed to track down stolen items without also building the perfect tool for stalking."

To fund the Truth social network, former U.S. president Trump merged it with a special purpose acquisition company (or "SPAC"), reports the New York Times. "The result is that Mr. Trump — largely shut out of the mainstream financial industry because of his history of bankruptcies and loan defaults — secured nearly $300 million in funding for his new business."

But there may be a hitch: To get his deal done, Mr. Trump ventured into an unregulated and sometimes shadowy corner of Wall Street, working with an unlikely cast of characters: the former "Apprentice" contestants, a small Chinese investment firm and a little-known Miami banker named Patrick Orlando. Mr. Orlando had been discussing a deal with Mr. Trump since at least March, according to people familiar with the talks and a confidential investor presentation reviewed by The New York Times.

That was well before his SPAC, Digital World Acquisition, made its debut on the Nasdaq stock exchange last month. In doing so, Mr. Orlando's SPAC may have skirted securities laws and stock exchange rules, lawyers said... SPACs aren't supposed to have a merger planned at the time of their I.P.O. Lawyers and industry officials said that talks between Mr. Orlando and Mr. Trump or their associates consequently could draw scrutiny from the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Another issue is that Digital World's securities filings repeatedly stated that the company and its executives had not engaged in any "substantive discussions, directly or indirectly," with a target company — even though Mr. Orlando had been in discussions with Mr. Trump. Given the politically fraught nature of a deal with Mr. Trump, securities lawyers said that Digital World's lack of disclosure about those conversations could be considered an omission of "material information."
The Times adds that Trump had previously even discussed merging Trump Media with a smaller SPAC created with help from the same Shanghai-based investment bank — which "specialized in helping Chinese companies list on U.S. stock exchanges."

"U.S. tech giant Google has paid Russia more than 32 million roubles ($455,079) in fines," reports Reuters, "for failing to delete content Moscow deems illegal, the company and a Russian lawmaker said after talks on Monday." Russia last week said it would seek to fine the U.S. tech giant a percentage of its annual Russian turnover later this month for repeatedly failing to delete banned content on its search engine and YouTube, in Moscow's strongest move yet to rein in foreign tech firms... Russia's state communications regulator, Roskomnadzor, on Monday said it has the technical capability to slow down the speed of YouTube, Interfax reported, but that administrative measures are currently sufficient.

In 2020, Google's compliance with requests to delete content was 96.2%, Pancini said, and in the first half of this year, it removed over 489,000 videos, but Russia said too much banned content still remained available.

According to a post on the Signal blog, a federal grand jury in the Central District of California has subpoena'd Signal for a whole pile of user data, like subscriber information, financial information, transaction histories, communications, and more. HotHardware reports: The thing is, the subpoena is moot: Signal simply doesn't have the data to provide. The company can't provide any of the data that the grand jury is asking for because, as the company itself notes, "Signal doesn't have access to your messages, your chat list, your groups, your contacts, your stickers, [or] your profile name or avatar." The only things that Signal can offer up to the court are Unix timestamps for when the accounts in question were created and last accessed the service.

The announcement (and, we suppose, this news post) essentially amounts to an advertisement for Signal, but it's an amusing -- or possibly distressing -- anecdote nonetheless. While Signal is secure, keep in mind that the messages still originate from your device, which means that other apps on your device (like, say, your keyboard) could still be leaking your data. Lest you doubt Signal's story, the app creators have published the subpoena, suitably redacted, on their blog.

The head of America's Intelligence Community reports that the U.S. intelligence community "was able to reach broad agreement" on several key issues about the origins of COVID-19.

"We judge the virus was not developed as a biological weapon," they announced today.

In addition, the U.S. intelligence community report includes a second new assessment: that China's officials "did not have foreknowledge of the virus before the initial outbreak of COVID-19 emerged."

Beyond that, they note that most of the intelligence community's agencies also specifically assess that SARS-CoV-2 "probably was not genetically engineered" (albeit with "low confidence"). Of the 19 member agencies in the U.S. intelligence community, just two believed that there just wasn't enough evidence to actually issue an assessment of either possibility, the report adds.

The [U.S.] intelligence community judges they will be unable to provide a more definitive explanation for the origin of COVID-19 unless new information allows them to determine the specific pathway for initial natural contact with an animal or to determine that a laboratory in Wuhan was handling SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor virus before COVID-19 emerged. The intelligence community — and the global scientific community — lacks clinical samples or a complete understanding of epidemiological data from the earliest COVID-19 cases. If we obtain information on the earliest cases that identified a location of interest or occupational exposure, it may alter our evaluation of hypotheses.

China's cooperation most likely would be needed to reach a conclusive assessment of the origins of COVID-19. Beijing, however, continues to hinder the global investigation, resist sharing information, and blame other countries, including the United States. These actions reflect, in part, China's government's own uncertainty about where an investigation could lead as well as its frustration the international community is using the issue to exert political pressure on China.
In assessing whether a lab incident or a "natural" exposure to an infected animal caused the outbreak, they cited assessments from eight different U.S. intelligence community elements. Half of them agreed with the National Intelligence Council assessment (with low confidence) "that the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection was most likely caused by natural exposure to an animal infected with it or a close progenitor virus — a virus that probably would be more than 99 percent similar to SARS-CoV-2. These analysts give weight to China's officials' lack of foreknowledge, the numerous vectors for natural exposure, and other factors."

Three of the remaining four "remain unable to coalesce around either explanation without additional information, with some analysts favoring natural origin, others a laboratory origin, and some seeing the hypotheses as equally likely." One element did assess "with moderate confidence that the first human infection with SARS-CoV-2 most likely was the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably involving experimentation, animal handling, or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of Virology... Variations in analytic views largely stem from differences in how agencies weigh intelligence reporting and scientific publications and intelligence and scientific gaps."

The 18-page assessment includes an appendix addressing details of specific theories, but ultimately concludes that "Our growing understanding of the similarities of SARS-CoV-2 to other coronaviruses in nature and the ability of betacoronaviruses — the genus to which SARS-CoV-2 belongs — to naturally recombine suggests SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically engineered." It even notes that the much-discussed furin cleavage sites "have been identified in naturally occurring coronaviruses in the same genetic location [as in SARS-CoV-2]. This suggests that SARS-CoV-2 or a progenitor virus could have acquired its furin cleavage sites through natural recombination with another virus."

The U.S. government owes a patent holding company at least $103 million because of the Transportation Security Administration's misuse of its technology for handling trays at airport security checkpoints, a Washington, D.C.-based federal court said. Reuters reports: In an opinion (PDF) made public Friday, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims said the TSA used SecurityPoint Holdings Inc's patented methods for most of its security screenings at the largest U.S. airports since 2008 without compensating it. St. Petersburg, Florida-based SecurityPoint's founder Joseph Ambrefe offered the TSA a license to his patent in 2005 in exchange for the exclusive right to advertise on the trays at U.S. airports. The TSA had success testing SecurityPoint's technology and equipment, but refused SecurityPoint's offer.

The court said the TSA began using the same method with its own equipment later that year at most or all of the airports under its control, and SecurityPoint sued the U.S. government for patent infringement in 2011. The government conceded that it had used the technology since 2008 in 10 airports including Dallas/Fort Worth, Boston Logan, Phoenix Sky Harbor and all three major Washington, D.C.-area airports. The court rejected the government's arguments that SecurityPoint's patent was invalid in 2015, leaving questions about the extent of the government's infringement and how much it owed in damages.

After a trial last year, Senior U.S. Judge Eric Bruggink of the Court of Federal Claims said in an August opinion unsealed Friday that the government owes SecurityPoint $103.6 million in royalties from 2008 through the date of the opinion. Bruggink said the TSA's checkpoint design guides, employee testimony and expert testimony showed that with a few exceptions, SecurityPoint's tray-recycling method was "universally used as the default method for all lanes" at the largest U.S. airports.

Google is now making it easier for minors or their parents to have photos of them deleted from search results. CNN reports: In a blog post published Wednesday, the company said it is rolling out a tool that lets parents and kids under the age of 18 request photos be removed from its images tab or no longer appear as thumbnails in a search inquiry. The new form allows users to flag URLs of any images or search results that contain pictures they want removed. Google said its teams will review each submission and reach out if they need additional information to verify the requirements for removal. However, the company emphasized this won't remove the image from the internet entirely; people will need to contact a website's webmaster to ask for that content to be removed. "We know that kids and teens have to navigate some unique challenges online, especially when a picture of them is unexpectedly available on the internet," the company said in the blog post. "We believe this change will help give young people more control over their digital footprint and where their images can be found on Search."

Huq, an established data vendor that obtains granular location information from ordinary apps installed on people's phones and then sells that data, has been receiving GPS coordinates even when people explicitly opted-out of such collection inside individual Android apps, researchers and Motherboard have found. From a report: The news highlights a stark problem for smartphone users: that they can't actually be sure if some apps are respecting their explicit preferences around data sharing. The data transfer also presents an issue for the location data companies themselves. Many claim to be collecting data with consent, and by extension, in line with privacy regulations. But Huq was seemingly not aware of the issue when contacted by Motherboard for comment, showing that location data firms harvesting and selling his data may not even know whether they are actually getting this data with consent or not.

"This shows an urgent need for regulatory action," Joel Reardon, assistant professor at the University of Calgary and the forensics lead and co-founder of AppCensus, a company that analyzes apps, and who first flagged some of the issues around Huq to Motherboard, said in an email. "I feel that there's plenty wrong with the idea that -- as long as you say it in your privacy policy -- then it's fine to do things like track millions of people's every moment and sell it to private companies to do what they want with it. But how do we even start fixing problems like this when it's going to happen regardless of whether you agree, regardless of any consent whatsoever."

A security bug in the health app Docket exposed the private information of residents vaccinated against COVID-19 in New Jersey and Utah, where the app received endorsements from state officials. From a report: Docket lets residents download and carry a digital copy of their immunizations by pulling their vaccination records from their state's health authority. The digital copy has the same information as the COVID-19 paper card, but is digitally signed by the state to prevent forgeries. Docket is one of several so-called vaccine passports in the U.S., allowing residents to show their vaccination records -- or a scannable QR code -- for getting into events, restaurants or crossing into countries where vaccines are required.

But for a time, the app allowed anyone access to the QR codes of other vaccinated users -- and all the personal and vaccine information encoded within. That included names, dates of birth and information about a person's COVID-19 vaccination status, such as which type of vaccine they received and when. TechCrunch discovered the bug on Tuesday and immediately contacted the company. Docket chief executive Michael Perretta said the bug was fixed at the server level a few hours later. The bug was found in how the Docket app requests the user's QR code from its servers. The user's QR code is generated on the server in the form of a SMART Health Card, a widely accepted standard for validating a person's vaccination status across the world. That QR code is tied to a user ID, which isn't visible from the app, but can be viewed by looking at its network traffic using off-the-shelf software like Burp Suite or Charles Proxy.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: India's supreme court has ordered an independent inquiry into whether the government used the surveillance software Pegasus to spy illegally on journalists, activists and political opponents. The decision on Wednesday to create an independent committee to investigate whether and how the Indian state had used the Israeli spyware tool was a significant victory for privacy campaigners after years of stonewalling by Narendra Modi's government. The order was a response to cases lodged by several Indian journalists and activists, including some revealed by the Guardian and a consortium of reporting partners to have been victims of Pegasus -- a cyber-weapon capable of hacking a target's smartphone, extracting its contents and turning on the device's microphone and camera.

Pegasus is a cyber-weapon capable of hacking a target's smartphone, extracting its contents and turning on the device's microphone and camera. Analysis by the media outlets of infected phones, and of a wider list of more than 50,000 phone numbers believed to have been selected as persons of interest by clients of Pegasus' manufacturer, NSO Group, strongly indicated the Indian government was using the tool. Delhi has consistently declined to confirm if it has access to it. The committee will comprise three cybersecurity experts and its work will be overseen by a retired supreme court judge. It will submit its report in two months. The expert group will have powers to call witnesses and seek documents as part of its fact-finding mission, and can issue adverse findings against individuals or the government if they decline to cooperate. The court listed another hearing date for after the committee's reporting deadline, indicating it intended to continue pursuing the issue.

A "sophisticated" teenager has had $2.88m in cryptocurrency confiscated after he set up a phishing site and advertised it on Google, duping consumers into handing over gift voucher redemption codes. From a report: The schoolboy set up a website impersonating gift voucher site Love2Shop. Having done that he then bought Google ads which resulted in his fake site appearing above the real one in search results, Lincoln Crown Court was told. Crown prosecutor Sam Skinner told Her Honour Judge Catarina Sjolin Knight that the boy, whose identity is protected by a court order, harvested $8,931 worth of vouchers in the week his site was active. Love2shop began investigating in April 2020 after a customer complained, at which point the boy took down his fake site. The stolen vouchers were converted into Love2Shop vouchers on the A-level student's own account. A later police investigation discovered 12,000 credit card numbers on his computer along with details for 197 Paypal accounts. On top of that, he had 48 Bitcoins: when police arrested him in August last year these were worth $275,000 but their value has risen tenfold since. Sentencing the boy earlier this week, HHJ Knight commented in court: "If he was an adult he would be going inside."

Encrypted email provider Protonmail has hailed a recent Swiss legal ruling as a "victory for privacy," after winning a lawsuit that sees it exempted from data retention laws in the mountainous realm. From a report: Referring to a previous ruling that exempted instant messaging services from data capture and storage laws, the Protonmail team said this week: "Together, these two rulings are a victory for privacy in Switzerland as many Swiss companies are now exempted from handing over certain user information in response to Swiss legal orders." Switzerland's Federal Administrative Court ruled on October 22 that email providers in Switzerland are not considered telecommunications providers under Swiss law, thereby removing them from the scope of data retention requirements imposed on telcos. The victory comes after controversy over a previous (and not directly related) Swiss court order that forced the company to collect mobile device push notification identifiers from a specified user's account. That user was later arrested by French police, who had asked their Swiss counterparts to obtain the surveillance order. Protonmail chief exec Andy Yen told The Register his business doesn't routinely collect such data on its users.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Sophie Fornairon's independent bookshop has survived the rise of Amazon thanks to a French law that prohibits price discounting on new books, but she says the e-commerce giant's ability to undercut on shipping still skews the market against stores like hers. Fornairon, who owns the Canal Bookstore in central Paris, now hopes that new legislation that would set a minimum price for book deliveries will even the contest further in the battle of neighborhood stores against Amazon. "It's a just return towards a level playing field," Fornairon, who employs four workers, said. "We're not at risk of closing down any time soon, but Amazon is a constant battle".

French law prohibits free book deliveries but Amazon has circumvented this by charging a single centime (cent). Local book stores typically charge about 5-7 euros ($5.82-8.15) for shipping a book. Amazon's pricing strategy had resulted in the growing market share of a single operator, the Ministry of Culture said. "This law is necessary to regulate the distorted competition within online book sales and prevent the inevitable monopoly that will emerge if the status quo persists," the ministry told Reuters. Centre-right Senator Laure Darcos, who drafted the law, decided upon the minimum delivery charge when she observed how bookstores maintained 70% of their business despite being forced to shut during early COVID lockdowns, because the government reimbursed the shipping fees. "It showed what a brake on business the postage costs are for local bookstores," Darcos said. Asked when the legislation would be enacted, the Ministry of Culture declined to give a date, saying it was too early to say.

Apple's privacy rules are "negatively affecting" Facebook, and its business, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg claimed during its most recent earnings call. MacRumors reports: As a quick refresher, starting with iOS 14.5 and all newer versions of iOS and iPadOS, Apple requires that apps ask for users' permission to track them across other apps and websites. Under the App Tracking Transparency (ATT) framework, the latest change gives users a choice on whether they wish to be tracked for ads or other purposes. [...] Continuing on its anti-Apple's privacy rules campaign, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was quick to blame Apple for his company's lower than expected growth in the third quarter of the year. Kicking off the earnings call, Zuckerberg said Apple is "negatively affecting" Facebook but that he believes the company will be able to "navigate" the challenges Apple is presenting thanks to its long-term investments.

"As expected, we did experience revenue headwinds this quarter, including from Apple's changes that are not only negatively affecting our business, but millions of small businesses in what is already a difficult time for them in the economy. Sheryl and Dave will talk about this more later, but the bottom line is we expect we'll be able to navigate these headwinds over time with investments that we're already making today." While Zuckerberg and the Facebook executive team hold Apple's changes accountable for this quarter's performance, it may also be an asset. Zuckerberg has in the past stated that ATT could ultimately help Facebook, and it's a sentiment he again repeated during the earning's call. Apple's changes, according to Zuckerberg, are making "e-commerce and customer acquisition less effective on the web." Still, Facebook could benefit from the lessened effectiveness as "solutions that allow businesses to set up shop right inside our apps will become increasingly attractive," Zuckerberg added.

Facebook's chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, also criticized Apple and its privacy rules, going as far as to claim that the new rules are negatively impacting Facebook while benefiting Apple's own advertising business: "We've been open about the fact that there were headwinds coming -- and we've experienced that in Q3. The biggest is the impact of Apple's iOS14 changes, which have created headwinds for others in the industry as well, major challenges for small businesses, and advantaged Apple's own advertising business." Despite Facebook facing an avalanche of pressure amid leaked internal documents and scrutiny, Sandberg pointed the finger at Apple for Facebook's lackluster performance this quarter. "Overall, if it wasn't for Apple's iOS 14 changes, we would have seen positive quarter-over-quarter revenue growth," Sandberg said.

During the company's first appearance at a U.S. congressional hearing, TikTok executive Michael Beckerman said it does not give information to the Chinese government and has sought to safeguard U.S. data. Reuters reports: Michael Beckerman, TikTok's head of public policy for the Americas, became the company's first executive to appear before Congress, testifying to a subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee. Republicans in particular pressed Beckerman on worries regarding TikTok's stewardship of data on the app's users. Senator Marsha Blackburn, the panel's top Republican, said she is concerned about TikTok's data collection, including audio and a user's location, and the potential for the Chinese government to gain access to the information. Blackburn questioned Beckerman on whether TikTok could resist giving data to China's government if material were to be demanded. "We do not share information with the Chinese government," Beckerman responded.

Under questioning by Republican Senator Ted Cruz, Beckerman said that TikTok has "no affiliation" with Beijing ByteDance Technology, a ByteDance entity at which the Chinese government took a stake and a board seat this year. Beckerman also testified that TikTok's U.S. user data is stored in the United States, with backups in Singapore. "We have a world-renowned U.S. based security team that handles access," Beckerman said. Republican Senator John Thune said TikTok is perhaps more driven by content algorithms than even Facebook, as the app is famous for quickly learning what users find interesting and offering them those types of videos. Beckerman said TikTok would be willing to provide the app's algorithm moderation policies in order for the Senate panel to have it reviewed by independent experts.