After nearly a decade of peddling baseless conspiracy theories and outright lies about the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a Connecticut jury has awarded nearly a billion dollars in damages to families of the victims and an FBI agent whose lives were further upended by Jones’ claims the shooting was a hoax. Jones, who was deplatformed from most major social media and podcast platforms years ago, said on his show he would appeal the ruling.

Jurors in the weeks-long trial were tasked with deciding how much the Inforwars host should pay in damages to 15 plaintiffs after previously being found guilty of defamation. According to CNN, prosecutors had sought at least $500 million in damages to represent “the more than 550 million online impressions Jones’ Sandy Hook lie allegedly received online.” Jurors ultimately awarded $965 million, an amount that doesn't include punitive damages.

Though Jone and several accounts and pages associated with him have been banned from Facebook, YouTube and other platforms for years, his reach on social media prior to those bans was raised in court. At one point during the trial, prosecutors displayed Jones’ Facebook engagement in 2016, indicating he had more than 4.1 billion impressions on the platform at the time.

Jones and InfoWars were kicked off Facebook and Instagram for good in 2019, following earlier bans from Spotify and Apple’s podcast platforms. Though his deplatforming made him less relevant on mainstream social media, Infowars actually made more money after the ban, according to evidence raised in the trial. A forensic accountant testified Jones’ net worth could be as high as $270 million.

Just how much money Jones’ victims will actually receive is another matter. In addition to an expected appeal, Jones has also been accused of using shell companies and other techniques to shield his wealth from lawsuits.

A lawsuit accusing Meta of conspiring with OnlyFans is now known to include some serious allegations against top executives. Thanks to an accidentally unredacted court document, Gizmodo has learned that adult entertainers accused Meta global affairs President Nick Clegg, VP Nicola Mendelsohn and European safety director Cristian Perrella of taking bribes to give OnlyFans an unfair advantage over rivals. To support the allegations, the plaintiffs shared anonymously supplied wire transfers that were supposedly sent to execs through an OnlyFans subsidiary. The authenticity of the transfers hasn't been verified.

The adult stars maintain that OnlyFans sought to hinder competitors by placing content on a terrorist database, leading to a major drop in traffic. A lawsuit from FanCentro, an alternative to OnlyFans, made similar claims.

In a statement, a spokesperson told Engadget the bribery accusations were "baseless." You can read the full response below. The Facebook and Instagram owner already filed a motion to dismiss the suit over a lack of plausibility, and argued that it can't be held liable even if the plaintiffs succeed. Content decisions like these are protected by both First Amendment free speech rights and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, Meta said in its motion.

OnlyFans noted in a follow-up filing that it "inadvertently" left the Meta leaders' names unredacted. It asked the court to delete the relevant document. This comes more than a little late, of course. While the lawsuit certainly isn't guaranteed to survive close scrutiny, it's now clear just how serious the allegations really are.

"As we make clear in our motion to dismiss, we deny these allegations as they lack facts, merit, or anything that would make them plausible. The allegations are baseless."

Epic Games and Match Group are attempting to expand their lawsuits against Google to include additional allegations against the search giant. In a motion filed on Friday with the District Court of California, the two companies accused Google of paying off developers that had the means and ability to create competing Android app stores.

Specifically, Epic and Match point to agreements like Project Hug. The initiative, later called the “Apps and Games Velocity Program,” saw Google spend millions of dollars to keep some of Android’s most popular developers on the Play Store, according to a complaint filed by Epic last year.

“Some of these agreements were intended to, and did, stop developers from launching competing app stores,” the motion states, adding Google committed a “per se” violation of the Sherman Act, the primary US antitrust law. Under the Sherman Act, per se violations don’t require a plaintiff to show how a certain behavior negatively affected the market since it’s generally accepted such actions reduce competition (price fixing, for instance, falls under that category).

Google told Engadget it would oppose the motion. “Epic and Match are adding more inaccurate claims to their failing lawsuits and we’re looking forward to setting the record straight in court,” a company spokesperson said.

“The program on which Epic and Match base their claims simply provides incentives for developers to give benefits and early access to Google Play users when they release new or updated content; it does not prevent developers from creating competing app stores, as they allege,” they added. “In fact, the program is proof that Google Play competes fairly with numerous rivals for developers, who have a number of choices for operating systems and app stores.”

The motion comes after both Epic and Match reached temporary agreements with Google earlier this year to ensure their apps remain on the Play Store while they resolve their litigation. In a countersuit Google filed in June, the company accused Match of attempting to pay “nothing at all” for access to the Play Store. Google’s store fees have also drawn scrutiny from the Department of Justice and a group of more than three dozen states.

In 2020, Apple was hit with a record €1.1 billion fine ($1.2 billion at the time) in France over antitrust practices with two wholesalers. Now, the Paris court of appeals has reduced the penalty by two thirds to just €371.6 million ($364.6 million today), Reuters has reported. The court ruled that the original fine was "disproportionate," and reduced it to an amount "sufficient to guarantee that the penalties are repressive and dissuasive."

According to the original complaint, Apple and its distribution partners Ingram Micro and Tech Data agreed not to compete with one another, "thereby sterilizing the wholesale market for Apple products." This forced other premium distributors to keep prices high to match those of integrated distributors. Apple immediately announced plans to appeal the decision, calling it "disheartening" and saying it discarded 30 years of legal precedent in France.

Apple still isn't satisfied, telling Bloomberg it plans to file another appeal at France's top court to eliminate the fine altogether. France's antitrust agency (l'Autorité de la concurrence) is also considering an appeal. "We would like to reaffirm our desire to guarantee the dissuasive nature of our penalties, especially when it concerns market players of the caliber of [big tech companies]," said l'Autorité communications director Virginie Guin.

The reduction is part of an ongoing battle between France and the EU and Silicon Valley tech firms. Last year, Google was fined €500 million over its news dominance in France, and recently lost an appeal in a €4.34 billion EU antitrust case over its Android system dominance, though the fine was reduced to €4.12 billion ($4.04 billion). 

The Twitter v. Elon Musk trial is now on hold as the two sides work to hammer out a deal for Musk to complete his buyout of the social media company. On Thursday, Judge Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, Chancellor of Delaware’s Chancery Court, stayed the trial until October 28th, following a motion from Musk's lawyers to call off the trial.

However, if the two sides aren’t able to close by the end of the month, a trial could be back on. “If the transaction does not close by 5 p.m. on October 28, 2022, the parties are instructed to contact me by email that evening to obtain November 2022 trial dates,” McCormick wrote.

The stay comes less than two weeks before the five-day trial was scheduled to begin, and on the same day that Musk was scheduled to be deposed in the case. It’s the latest sign that Musk and Twitter are moving closer to a deal. Earlier in the week, Musk said he would agree to a deal at the original price of $54.20 a share, provided he finalized his financing and that the trial was adjourned. Twitter also confirmed it wanted to close the deal on its original terms.

But since then the two sides have still been arguing over the particulars of the arrangement. Bloombergreported Musk wanted a provision that would still allow him to sue Twitter over the number of bots on the platform, while The New York Times reported Twitter didn’t want to call off the trial until its shareholders had been paid.

Musk’s lawyers alluded to the disagreements in their filing, writing that “Twitter will not take yes for an answer,” claiming the company was endangering the deal. McCormick didn’t weigh in on the disagreement, though she noted that Twitter has opposed Musk’s motion to stay the trial.

Lawyers for Elon Musk have officially asked to cancel the upcoming trial with Twitter, as the two sides attempt to negotiate a deal. In a new court filing, Musk’s lawyers asked the judge to call off the trial, which is currently scheduled to begin October 17th.

Earlier this week, Musk’s camp had proposed proceeding with the original deal, to buy Twitter at $54.20 a share, contingent on Musk’s financing going through and the adjournment of the trial. Twitter responded that it was also intent on closing the deal.

While that certainly seemed to put the two sides a lot closer to an agreement, it wasn’t an immediate end to the litigation. The New York Times has since reported that Twitter does not want to call off the trial until a deal is finalized and the company’s shareholders have been paid. There are likely other sticking points, too. Bloomberg reported Tuesday that “Musk is also seeking to reserve his rights to file a fraud suit over his claims the platform’s executives misled him and other investors about the number of spam and robot accounts.”

In their latest filing, Musk’s lawyers confirm the disagreement over the trial, writing that Twitter is now endangering the deal. “Twitter will not take yes for an answer,” Musk’s lawyers write. “Astonishingly, they have insisted on proceeding with this litigation, recklessly putting the deal at risk and gambling with their stockholders’ interests. Instead of allowing the parties to turn their focus to securing the Debt Financing necessary to consummate the transaction and preparing for a transition of the business, the parties will instead remain distracted by completing discovery and an unnecessary trial.”

Notably, the filing comes on the same day Musk was scheduled to be deposed in the case. The deposition was delayed — for the second time. Musk's lawyers say they expect the deal could close "on or around October 28."

Google will pay Arizona $85 million to settle a 2020 lawsuit, which claimed that the search giant was illegally tracking Android users, Bloomberg reports. At the time, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich argued that Google continued to track users for targeted advertising, even after they turned off location data settings. If this sounds familiar, it's because Google is also being sued by attorneys general in Texas, Washington, D.C., and Indiana over similar data tracking complaints. Brnovich's office also notes that the $85 million settlement is the largest amount Google has paid per user in a privacy lawsuit like this. 

But given that Google is currently seeing quarterly revenue over $69 billion, the punishment may seem like a drop in the bucket. It's nothing compared to the $1.7 billion Google was fined by the EU over abusive advertising practices. In a statement, Google spokesman José Castañeda said the suit was related to older product policies that have been changed. “We provide straightforward controls and auto delete options for location data, and are always working to minimize the data we collect,” he said. “We are pleased to have this matter resolved and will continue to focus our attention on providing useful products for our users.”

Brnovich, meanwhile, says he's “proud of this historic settlement that proves no entity, not even big tech companies, is above the law."

Apple's alleged union busting has prompted federal action. As The New York Timesreports, the National Labor Relations Board has issued a complaint against Apple following accusations it broke multiple laws trying to thwart union organizers at the World Trade Center store in New York City. The Communications Workers of America (CWA) union claims Apple surveilled and questioned staff, limited access to pro-union fliers and made employees listen to anti-union speeches.

The NLRB found enough merit in two of the claims. A judge will hold a hearing on December 13th if there's no settlement.

We've asked Apple for comment. In a statement to The Times, a spokesperson said the iPhone maker disputed CWA's allegations and was anticipating "presenting the facts." In the past, Apple has maintained that unionization would hinder labor improvements and prevent "direct engagement" between the company and store workers. Apple told staff it would increase pay, but also that unionization could lead to fewer promotions and fixed hours.

There's no certainty the NLRB complaint will lead to change in Apple's labor practices. However, it comes as teams at multiple US stores have made unionization bids. While people at an Atlanta location gave up their efforts, Towson, Maryland workers voted to unionize this spring. Oklahoma City employees vote next week. There's mounting pressure on Apple to act, if just to minimize similar complaints.

Twitter has agreed – once again – to Elon Musk’s proposal to buy the company for $54.20 a share. In a statement, Twitter confirmed it had received Musk’s letter that “the intention of the Company is to close the transaction at $54.20 per share.” The agreement follows months of legal drama after Musk tried to back out of his original agreement this spring to buy the company for $44 billion.

The two sides were set to go to trial later this month. But Musk abruptly reversed course on Tuesday, telling Twitter he would proceed with the original terms of the deal. In the letter filed with the SEC, Musk's lawyers say they will go ahead with the agreement struck in April if Delaware Chancery Court will "adjourn the trial and all other proceedings related" to the ongoing lawsuit.

It’s not yet clear when the acquisition could actually close. Twitter’s shareholders have already voted to approve the deal, but both sides now need to wait for Delaware’s Chancery Court’s response. The next question: What will Musk do with Twitter?

– Mat Smith

The biggest stories you might have missed

• Apple's second-generation AirPods fall to a new low of $79

• The EU will require USB-C charging for all mobile devices by the end of 2024

• The Matter smart home standard is finally available

• Google's Nest WiFi Pro arrives with faster speeds and new high-gloss design

• Xiaomi's new 2-in-1 robot vacuum can wash and dry its own mops

• US to impose more trade restrictions on Chinese AI and supercomputer companies

'Overwatch 2' server attack prevented fans from playing the game on launch day

We were stuck in a queue behind tens of thousands of other people.

Overwatch 2's early access launch has been marred by a massive DDoS attack preventing players from getting into the game. Many gamers, including me, were stuck on the connection screen, put in a queue behind tens of thousands of other players also trying to get in. When the countdown finished, I was booted from the server. I was apparently not the only one. Blizzard president Mike Ybarra tweeted that the game was "experiencing a mass DDoS attack" on its servers, causing drop and connection issues.

Continue reading.

Xiaomi's 12T Pro packs a 200-megapixel camera

But without Leica branding.

Engadget

Xiaomi's 12T Pro uses Samsung's ISOCELL HP1 sensor to capture epic 200-megapixel stills. The HP1 includes 2x in-sensor zoom, 4-in-1 pixel binning to mimic larger pixel sites for better sensitivity and 16-in-1 super pixel binning to simulate even bigger pixel sites for dark environments. If you shoot 200-megapixel images, you can let the AI-powered Xiaomi ProCut tool analyze those shots and suggest ideal compositions. Oddly, there's no Leica branding here. Engadget reached out to Xiaomi on this matter, and a rep replied: "While Leica is a partner in our strategic imagery upgrade, it won't necessarily contribute to every device."

Continue reading.

'The Onion' filed a real brief with the Supreme Court supporting man jailed for making fun of cops

A man was arrested for a Facebook page that parodied his local police department.

Satire and comedy news site The Onion filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of Anthony Novak, who was arrested and jailed for four days after briefly running a Facebook page parodying the police department of Parma, Ohio, back in 2016. Parma's police department claimed back then that people were confusing his posts with real information from law enforcement. Novak filed a civil suit against the city of Parma and the officers that arrested him , arguing his constitutional rights were violated. After federal appeals, he eventually took the battle to the Supreme Court.

Continue reading.

CDPR is working on a 'Cyberpunk 2077' sequel

And several new Witcher games.

CDPR

The game developer has shared a long-term roadmap that elaborates on its plans for its big gaming franchises. A project codenamed Orion is effectively a sequel to Cyberpunk 2077 to "further develop the potential" of the sci-fi franchise. We’ve already heard of a new Unreal Engine 5-based The Witcher game in the works, but it’s just the start of a new trilogy. We might not have to wait long to see the story reach its conclusion, either. CDPR hopes to release all three games within a six-year span, with the first (codenamed Polaris) serving as a technology foundation for the remaining two.

Continue reading.

One person’s quest for the perfect productivity mouse

Is it time for an upgrade?

James Trew’s mission for a mouse had several requirements. Top of the list: ergonomics. The Magic Mouse is… fine, but a little low profile for his palming style. Given that some rough repetitive strain injury (RSI) was exclusively in his mousing arm, that was crucial. As was a reasonable degree of configurability. So, of course, he tested 11 mice.

Continue reading.

Twitter has agreed — once again — to Elon Musk’s proposal to buy the company for $54.20 a share. In a statement, Twitter confirmed it had received Musk’s letter that “the intention of the Company is to close the transaction at $54.20 per share.”

The agreement follows months of legal drama after Musk tried to back out of his original agreement to buy the company for $44 billion this spring. The two sides were set to go to trial later this month as Twitter attempted to force Musk to keep up his end of the agreement. Musk had claimed Twitter had misled him about the number of bots on the platform, and had raised concerns about issues disclosed by the company’s former head of security who filed a whistleblower complaint against the company.

But Musk, once again, abruptly reversed course on Tuesday, telling Twitter that he would be willing to proceed with the original terms of the deal. In the letter filed with the SEC, Musk's lawyers say they will go ahead with the original agreement struck in April if Delaware Chancery Court will "adjourn the trial and all other proceedings related" to the ongoing lawsuit.

Developing...