Elon Musk's X Corp is facing what could be the first of several lawsuits related to its name. A Florida-based company called X Social Media has accused X Corp. of trademark and service mark infringement, obviously for the use of the letter "X." Musk rebranded Twitter in July, renamed the social network as "X" and replaced its iconic bird logo with the letter. The executive is known for having an affinity for the letter X, so it didn't really come as a surprise, but as trademark attorney Josh Gerben told Reuters back then, there's "about a 100 percent probability that Twitter/X will be sued by both opportunistic and legitimate plaintiffs over the new name." Today, Gerben's firm represents the plaintiff in this case. 

X Social Media described itself in the lawsuit (PDF) as a company that has "offered its advertising and social media services connecting law firms and those in need of advocates since 2016." While its logo looks vastly different from the logo used by the social network formerly known as Twitter, it argued in its complaint that it "frequently emphasizes the 'X' portion of its mark throughout its advertising, blogs, and newsletters highlighting its work." 

The Florida-based company also said that the media coverage Elon Musk's X got when it rebranded caused confusion and had led consumers to believe that its advertising services are being offered by or are associated with X Corp. "As 'X' is a social media platform, consumers naturally conflate 'X SocialMedia' as an X Corp.'s social media platform," it explained. The plaintiff told the court that it has already suffered losses in revenue due to Twitter's rebranding, and that it's highly probable that the confusion will continue to its "financial detriment." Especially since X Corp appears at the top of search results when you look for "x social media" — or at least it used to before news about the lawsuit came out. 

Further, it accused Musk's company for filing multiple trademark applications for business data analysis, promotional services, business consulting and information services, as well as business, consumer and market research, which are comparable to its offerings, even though it allegedly knew about X Social Media. Apparently, X Social Media sent Musk's company a cease-and-desist letter in August 2023, but X Corp. refused to stop using the letter. It's now asking the court for an injunction, prohibiting Musk's company from marketing, offering, selling or distributing services bearing the mark "X." The plaintiff is also asking for damages equivalent to three times of its losses or the defendant's profits. 

Tesla has been tolerating racial harassment at its factory in Fremont, California since at least 2015 until today, according to the lawsuit filed by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The automaker has violated federal law by tolerating the "widespread and ongoing racial harassment of its Black employees," the agency said. Further, affected workers who raised concerns about the abuse they were getting were apparently subjected to various forms of retaliation: They were transferred, their duties were changed, or they were terminated. 

The EEOC's lawsuit says Black employees were regularly called variations of the N-word, "monkey," "boy" and "black b*tch" throughout the factory, even in hubs were workers gathered. These employees also encountered drawings of racial graffiti, including swastikas and nooses, on desks, as well as on the walls of bathroom stalls and elevators throughout the factory. If these allegations sound familiar, it's because they're identical to the complaints filed by plaintiffs who previously sued Tesla for racial harassment. 

One of those plaintiffs was Melvin Berry, who accused Tesla supervisors of using racial slurs against him. And there was Owen Diaz, who said he was subjected to racial slurs and was made to feel unsafe at work with racist graffiti on his workspace, such as drawings of Inki the Caveman. Diaz was originally granted $137 million in damages, which was one of the highest amounts awarded to an individual suing on the basis of discrimination. However, it was significantly lowered following several appeals, until it was reduced to $3.2 million earlier this year. 

The EEOC filed its lawsuit after doing an investigation on the automaker and trying to reach pre-litigation settlement through conciliation. Now, it's seeking both compensatory and punitive damages, as well as backpay for all affected workers. It's also asking the court for an injunction "designed to reform Tesla's employment practices to prevent such discrimination in the future."

Epic Games has asked the US Supreme Court to review a ruling from 2021 that cleared Apple of violating antitrust laws, according to a Bloomberg report. The Fortnite maker previously claimed that Apple violated California's Unfair Competition law, stating that the App Store prohibits developers from directing users to other third-party payment systems. The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the 2021 court’s decision back in April, finding that Apple’s practices had “a substantial anticompetitive effect that harms consumers,” but didn’t meet the bar for an antitrust case.

Should Epic win its appeal, Apple could stand to lose a substantial source of revenue. The company takes a cut of all purchases made through its App Store, which can run as high as 30 percent. Epic Games has been the loudest voice protesting this cut, though other companies like Spotify and Tile are also part of the Coalition for App Fairness, which has been pressuring Apple to change its policies. Outside of the US, Epic and its peers have had more success in changing the status quo: Authorities in both South Korea and the Netherlands have ruled that Apple must allow third-party payments, though Apple is still taking a considerable cut as a “transaction fee.” Apple is also rumored to be preparing support for third-party app stores in response to the European Union’s Digital Markets Act.

Bloomberg says the Supreme Court could decide if it will take up the case before the end of the year. In the meantime, Fortnite is still not available on the App Store. It’s been absent since August 2020, when Apple banned the game after Epic added alternative payment methods to bypass the App Store cut.

Epic is also in a legal battle with Google for similar practices. Both Epic and the Match Group, which operates dating apps like Hinge and Tinder, are alleging that Google abuses its control of Android app distribution through the Play Store by establishing unfair fees and requirements for in-app purchases. That trial is supposed to kick off in the next few weeks.

Ford said on Monday that it was suspending construction of a Michigan battery factory for electric vehicles. The automaker didn’t specify its exact reasons for the shutdown as United Auto Workers (UAW) strikes continue. However, it stated (viaThe New York Times) that it was “pausing work and limiting spending on construction on the Marshall project until we’re confident about our ability to competitively operate the plant.”

The factory was established earlier this year to produce battery tech licensed from China’s Contemporary Amperex Technology Co (CATL). It isn’t yet clear if the suspension is temporary or permanent.

The news came ahead of President Biden’s trip to Michigan on Tuesday to protest alongside picketing workers. Ford didn’t state whether its decision was related to the strikes. The UAW’s walkout against the Big Three automakers expanded to 38 locations in 20 states last week.

The $3.5 billion factory, scheduled to open in 2026, is slated to produce lithium-iron-phosphate batteries for EVs — supplying jobs for at least 2,500 autoworkers and spurring domestic EV battery production. However, the project has been flanked by uncertainty as the Biden Administration weighs regulations that could prevent US companies from working with select Chinese businesses.

The UAW has previously given Ford credit for bringing more concessions to the negotiating table during the strike than GM or Stellantis, going as far as sparing Ford from the recent walkout expansions. The union is asking for pay raises, a shorter workweek, protection against inflation and other worker concessions. In an interview this month, Ford CEO Jim Farley claimed meeting the union’s demands “would force Ford to scrap its investments in electric vehicles.”

UAW President Shawn Fain described Ford’s closure as “a shameful, barely-veiled threat by Ford to cut jobs.” He posted on X (formerly Twitter) on Monday, “Closing 65 plants over the last 20 years wasn’t enough for the Big Three, now they want to threaten us with closing plants that aren’t even open yet. We are simply asking for a just transition to electric vehicles and Ford is instead doubling down on their race to the bottom.”

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon today, with 17 states joining the federal agency. The case isn’t a surprise (the FTC was reported to be nearly ready to file in late August), but its specifics weren’t yet known. The FTC accuses the online retailer of monopolistic practices, including preventing merchants from offering lower prices on other platforms while forcing them to use Amazon’s logistics service if they wanted to be listed as part of Prime shipping perks for customers. “Today’s lawsuit seeks to hold Amazon to account for these monopolistic practices and restore the lost promise of free and fair competition,” said FTC chair Lina Khan, according toThe New York Times.

The FTC has had its eye on Amazon for several years. This is the fourth action the agency has taken against the company this year. Amazon settled a previous lawsuit (for $30.8 million) over Alexa children’s privacy concerns and snooping with Ring cameras. In June, the FTC sued the retailer again, claiming the company tricked customers into signing up for Prime subscriptions and then made it hard to cancel them. Those factors allegedly led to higher prices and an inferior shopping experience.

“Today’s suit makes clear the FTC’s focus has radically departed from its mission of protecting consumers and competition,” said David Zapolsky, Amazon Senior Vice President of Global Public Policy and General Counsel. “The practices the FTC is challenging have helped to spur competition and innovation across the retail industry, and have produced greater selection, lower prices, and faster delivery speeds for Amazon customers and greater opportunity for the many businesses that sell in Amazon’s store. If the FTC gets its way, the result would be fewer products to choose from, higher prices, slower deliveries for consumers, and reduced options for small businesses—the opposite of what antitrust law is designed to do. The lawsuit filed by the FTC today is wrong on the facts and the law, and we look forward to making that case in court.”

The European Commission has imposed a €376.36 million ($400 million) fine on Intel for blocking the sales of devices powered by its competitors' x86 CPUs. This brings one part of the company's long-running antitrust court battle with the European authority to a close. If you'll recall, the Commission slapped the chipmaker with a record-breaking €1.06 billion ($1.13 billion) fine in 2009 after it had determined that Intel abused its dominant position in the market. ye

It found back then that the company gave hidden rebates and incentives to manufacturers like HP, Dell and Lenovo for buying all or almost all their processors from Intel. The Commission also found that Intel paid manufacturers to delay or to completely cease the launch of products powered by its rivals' CPUs "naked restrictions." Other times, Intel apparently paid companies to limit those products' sales channels. The Commission calls these actions "naked restrictions."

The case has gone through several European courts since then, with either side lodging an appeal, depending on what the decision was. In 2017, the highest court in the European Union ordered the fine to be re-examined on the basis that the Commission didn't conduct an economic assessment on how Intel's activity impacted its rivals' ability to compete against it. 

Europe's second highest court, the General Court, then decided last year that the Commission indeed failed to perform analysis of the company's rebate scheme. As a result, it came to the conclusion that it couldn't determine how the incentives Intel offered affected its competitors. It also scrapped Intel's €1.06 billion fine, explaining that it's not in a position to determine how much it actually has to pay, but it upheld previous courts' decision that the company's naked restrictions violated EU laws.

In its announcement, the European Commission gave a few examples of how Intel hindered the sales of competing products. It apparently paid HP between November 2002 and May 2005 to sell AMD-powered business desktops only to small- and medium-sized enterprises and via direct distribution channels. It also paid Acer to delay the launch of an AMD-based notebook from September 2003 to January 2004. Intel paid Lenovo to push back the launch of AMD-based notebooks for half a year, as well.

The Commission has since appealed the General Court's decision to dismiss the part of the case related to the rebates Intel offered its clients. Intel, however, did not lodge an appeal for the court's ruling on naked restrictions, setting it in stone. "With today's decision, the Commission has re-imposed a fine on Intel only for its naked restrictions practice," the European authority wrote. "The fine does not relate to Intel's conditional rebates practice. The fine amount, which is based on the same parameters as the 2009 Commission's decision, reflects the narrower scope of the infringement compared to that decision." Seeing as the rebates part of the case is under appeal, Intel could still pay the rest of the fine in the future.

Google will pay $93 million in a settlement it reached with California Attorney General Rob Bonta, resolving allegations that the company’s location-privacy practices violated the state’s consumer protection laws. The California Department of Justice claimed that Google was “collecting, storing, and using their location data” for consumer advertising purposes without informed consent.

The complaint alleges that Google continued to collect consumer data related to a user’s location even when a user turned the “location history” feature off. The company settled similar lawsuits in Arizona and Washington last year for illegally tracking consumers.

In addition to paying $93 million, Google agreed to “deter future misconduct.” This settlement, which won’t really hurt Google’s deep pockets, is important because the tech giant generates the majority of its revenue from advertising and location-based advertising is a critical feature of its advertising platform.

Moving forward, the California AG is asking Google to provide additional transparency about location tracking by providing users with detailed information about location data it collects. The company must also provide disclaimers to users that their location information may be used for ad personalization.

Engadget reached out to Google for comment but didn't receive a response.

The ALPHV/BlackCat ransomware group claimed responsibility for the MGM Resorts cyber outage on Tuesday, according to a post by malware archive vx-underground. The group claims to have used common social engineering tactics, or gaining trust from employees to get inside information, to try and get a ransom out of MGM Resorts, but the company reportedly refuses to pay. The conversation that granted initial access took just 10 minutes, according to the group. 

"All ALPHV ransomware group did to compromise MGM Resorts was hop on LinkedIn, find an employee, then call the Help Desk," the organization wrote in a post on X. Those details came from ALPHV, but have not been independently confirmed by security researchers.

The international resort chain started experiencing outages earlier this week, as customers noticed slot machines at casinos owned by MGM Resorts shut down on the Las Vegas strip. As of Wednesday morning, MGM Resorts still shows signs that it's experiencing downtime, like continued website disruptions. MGM Resorts has not responded to a request for comment, but said in a statement on Tuesday that "Our resorts, including dining, entertainment and gaming are currently operational."

Katie Malone for Engadget

ALPHV has a reputation in the cybersecurity community as being "remarkably gifted at social engineering for initial access," according to vx-underground. From there, it usually uses ransomware ploys to extort a target into paying up, and it's been going after huge corporate targets. In July, ALPHV and another threat actor Clop listed beauty giant Estée Lauder on their data leak sites. 

AI chatbots are coming to your Salesforce applications and it looks like it'll all of them. Company executives had a lot to show off during Tuesday's Dreamforce 2023 keynote address, including major updates to both its Einstein AI and Data Cloud services. 

Einstein AI has received a slew of updates and upgrades since we saw it integrated with Slack back in May. The new Copilot service will take the existing AI chatbot and tune it to a client company's specific datasets using their Salesforce Data Cloud data. This enables the Einstein AI to provide better, more relevant and more actionable answers to employees' natural language questions and requests. 

"Copilot is a conversational AI assistant for both companies and employees to securely and safely access generative AI to do their jobs better, faster and more easily," Salesforce CEO of AI, Clara Chi, said during a press call monday. "It's going to be available to every Salesforce user across every cloud."

The new Copilot Studio takes that tuning process a step further, allowing customers to "customize Einstein Copilot with specific prompts, skills, and AI models," per a Monday release. This more tightly structures Einstein's behaviors without constricting its generative capabilities. What's more, Salesforce executives announced that Copilot will be available across a variety of mobile platforms, including "real-time chat, Slack, WhatsApp or SMS." 

"We think that there is an incredible opportunity in AI," Patrick Stokes, Salesforce EVP and GM of Platform, said during the press call. "We think that it is creating jobs, we think that it is driving productivity across organizations... we also think that as customers and businesses are driving towards these AI strategies, they may not have the platform that they really want or that they really need."

He notes that much of their customers' data is fractured and split among different applications, data lakes, APIs and vendors. "This is all leading to low productivity, and what they really want, is one connected platform or one that will connect their data," Stokes continued. To address that need, Salesforce also announced that it is integrating the chatbot with its Data Cloud service to create a one-stop platform for building low-code AI-powered CRM applications. Salesforce calls it the Einstein 1 Platform.

"All of these fields coming together from different systems that speak different languages... now speak one language on the platform," Chi said. "Any data from any system can now be used like any other object or field in Salesforce."

One of Salesforce's first big innovations was its metadata framework a system that describes the relationship between, and behaviors of, individual pieces of a company's data. That metadata framework is also an ideal medium for training machine learning models to better understand customer interactions and business operations, thereby improving and refining their performance.

"Much of Salesforce is built on this metadata framework — from our platform to analytics, commerce, sales service and marketing," Stokes said. "Now our Data Cloud and Einstein are really giving you one platform where you can build all of your customer experience in one place with all of the data and AI that you need."

To minimize the rate of hallucination and false responses by the AI, Salesforce has developed the "Einstein trust layer" which we first saw roll out to the company's CRM applications in March. The trust layer both secures data retrieval from the cloud and masks any sensitive or proprietary information before passing it on to the language model with another round of toxicity checks after that. 

The company does not deny that this new generation of generative AI can and likely will lead to job losses, such as coders whose services will be replaced by Einstein 1, but remains confident that there is reason for optimism. "I think it is a it's a big moment in time and there will certainly be impact a certain jobs," Chi admitted. "There's also certainly going to be a new jobs that are being created such as prompt engineer." Oh boy, a prompt engineer, the career every kid dreams of.

MGM Resorts confirmed on Monday that it was hit by a cybersecurity issue, shutting down systems across its suite of casinos. The hotel giant owns a notable swath of casinos along the Las Vegas Strip, where some gamblers reported slot machines being taken offline because of the incident. At MGM Resorts' international properties, hotels are currently taking reservations via phone because of website shutdowns. 

"MGM Resorts recently identified a cybersecurity issue affecting some of the company's systems," the company wrote in a statement. It said the company "took prompt action to protect our systems and data, including shutting down certain systems" in response to the attack. MGM Resorts has not confirmed how widespread the shut down is, what systems have been affected or other details about the incident. 

Customer anecdotes report issues making reservations, using ATM machines, playing certain games and mobile key entry into hotel rooms, but Engadget has not independently confirmed these reports. While MGM Resorts informed the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department about the incident, the department said in a statement that these types of incidents are typically passed along to federal agencies.