A New York federal judge has ruled that that multi-state antitrust lawsuit against Google spearheaded by the Attorney General of Texas can move forward. That said, Judge P. Kevin Castel has also dismissed the plaintiffs' claim that Google's online ad deal with Meta, codenamed Jedi Blue, was an unlawful restraint of trade. The judge said that "there is nothing inexplicable or suspicious" about the two companies entering the agreement. 

If you'll recall, the states that filed the lawsuit accused Google of entering a deal with Meta that gave the latter certain advantages on the ad exchange the tech giant runs. As Bloomberg notes, Meta allegedly had to abandon its plans to adopt a new technology that would've hurt Google's monopoly and to back the tech giant's Open Bidding approach when it comes to selling ads in exchange.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that he was filing a "multi-state lawsuit against Google for anti-competitive conduct, exclusionary practices and deceptive misrepresentations" back in 2020. The lawsuit focused on Google's advertising tech practices and how, Paxton said, the company uses its "monopolistic power to control pricing" of ads and "engage in market collusions."

Google sought to dismiss the lawsuit earlier this year. While it failed to convince Judge Castel to fully toss the lawsuit out, the company still posted a celebratory note about the decision. "Importantly, the Court dismissed the allegations about our Open Bidding agreement with Meta — the centerpiece of AG Paxton’s case," the company wrote in a blog post. The tech giant added that the agreement had never been a secret and that it was pro-competitive. It also called Paxton's case "deeply flawed."

Although the judge for this case dismissed the claim that Jedi Blue was unlawful, the deal and Google's ad tech practices as a whole are still under scrutiny by authorities. The European Commission and UK's Competition and Markets Authority launched an antitrust investigation into the companies' agreement back in March. And just last month, Bloomberg had reported that the US Department of Justice was preparing to sue Google over its dominance in the ad market sometime this September.

A judge recently ruled that Elon Musk can use the allegations made by Twitter whistleblower Peiter Zatko as part of the arguments in his countersuit against the company. As it turns out, Musk intends to use not just Zatko's claims to win his case, but also the fact that the former Twitter executive received a settlement to get out of the $44 billion acquisition deal he made with the social network. As The Washington Post reports, Musk's lawyers sent a letter to Twitter, telling the company that the severance payment worth $7.75 million that it made to Zatko in June violated a provision in their sales agreement. 

In the letter uploaded to the SEC website, Musk's lawyers cited Section 6.1(e) of the merger agreement, which says Twitter promised not to "grant or provide any severance or termination payments or benefits to any Company Service Provider other than the payment of severance amounts or benefits in the ordinary course of business consistent with past practice and subject to the execution and non-revocation of a release of claims in favor of the Company and its Subsidiaries." Former employees are considered Company Service Providers.

Musk and Twitter entered the purchase agreement in April, and it wasn't until June when Zatko received his severance pay. The company didn't seek Musk's consent before making the payment or notify him of the transaction, the lawyers said in the letter. Musk apparently only found out about the settlement when Twitter included the information in its court filing on September 3rd. As such, Musk's camp argues that the settlement serves as an additional basis to terminate the parties' purchase agreement. As The Post notes, it's now up to Twitter to prove that such a big payout to a former employee wasn't out of the ordinary. We've reached out to Twitter for a statement, and we'll update this post when we hear back.

Also known as "Mudge," Zatko accused the the social network of having "extreme, egregious deficiencies" in security. He said in a complaint filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that Twitter violated the terms it had agreed to when it settled a privacy dispute with the FTC back in 2011. The whistleblower also claimed that he couldn't get a direct response from Twitter regarding the actual number of bots on the website. If you'll recall Musk previously accused Twitter of fraud for hiding the real number of bots on its platform and told the court in a legal filing that 10 percent — not just 5 percent as the social network maintains — of its daily active users who see ads are inauthentic accounts.

Twitter and Musk are set to face off in court in a five-day trial scheduled to start on October 17th.

Elon Musk can use whistleblower claims from Twitter’s former head of security, Pieter Zatko, as he attempts to get out of the $44 billion acquisition, a judge has ruled. The ruling comes one day after lawyers for Musk and twitter faced off in Delaware’s Court of Chancery over Zatko’s allegations.

Twitter had argued that Zatko was a disgruntled employee, and that Musk was looking for reasons to get out of the deal long before he learned about the whistleblower complaint. The decision could complicate Twitter’s ongoing legal battle. The company has so far declined to address Zatko’s allegations in detail, though it’s not clear how long it can continue to do so. Zatko is also scheduled to testify at the Senate Judiciary Committee next week.

Musk’s attempt to delay the October trial that will decide whether he can get out of the Twitter deal, however, was rebuffed. In the same decision, the judge wrote that “even four weeks’ delay would risk further harm to Twitter too great to justify.” The trial is scheduled for October 17th and expected to last 5 days.

Brazil's Ministry of Justice has issued an order banning Apple from selling iPhones that don't come with chargers in the country. It has also slapped the tech giant with a fine of 12.275 million Brazilian reals ($2.38 million) and has ordered the cancelation of the iPhone 12's registration with the country's national telecoms agency Anatel. Apple stopped bundling chargers with its mobile devices back in 2020 with the release of the iPhone 12, citing environmental concerns.

The company said that it was shipping devices without power adapters to reduce the manufacturing processes needed for each unit. In its 2021 Environmental Progress Report, Apple claimed the decision to stop bundling chargers will save 861,000 tons of copper, zinc and tin. Plus, the ability to ship devices more efficiently — shipping pallets were able to carry up to 70 percent more iPhone 12 boxes — would help reduce the company's carbon dioxide emissions. 

Brazilian authorities didn't buy Apple's explanations and argued that the tech giant could have taken other measures to help the environment, such as adding USB-C charging support to its iPhones. Selling devices without a power adapter is a "deliberate discriminatory practice against consumers," authorities have decided. 

This decision comes after the ministry wrapped up its investigation that started in December. The Brazilian state of São Paulo also previously fined Apple 10.55 million reals ($1.92 million at the time) for selling iPhones without a charger. 

Apple has yet to pull its newer iPhones from its Brazilian online store, but it told Reuters that it would continue to work with authorities to "resolve their concerns." A spokesperson also told the news organization that Apple will appeal the ministry's decision. "We have already won several court rulings in Brazil on this matter and we are confident that our customers are aware of the various options for charging and connecting their devices," they said. It's worth noting that Samsung worked with São Paulo authorities to bundle Samsung Galaxy S21 pre-orders with a gift charger. Whether the tech giant will do the same for its next iPhone, which is expected to be unveiled later today, remains to be seen.

AT&T is suing T-Mobile. On Tuesday, the carrier filed a complaint with a federal court in the Eastern District of Texas, accusing its rival of false advertising. T-Mobile’s recently launched “Verizon and AT&T Ban Senior Discounts” campaign is at the center of the lawsuit. The activation includes a website that claims “92 percent of seniors in the US can’t get a wireless discount from Verizon and AT&T because they don’t live in Florida.”

The campaign aims to draw attention to a promotion that dates back to John Legere’s tenure as CEO of T-Mobile. Since 2017, the carrier has offered Unlimited 55+ plans that give people 55 and older discounted access to its network. For instance, the current base level package starts at $40 per month with autopay and includes “unlimited” talk, text and smartphone data.

In early 2020, AT&T began piloting its own Unlimited 55+ plan. At the moment, however, it’s only available in Florida. “Until Verizon and AT&T offer senior discounts outside of Florida, we’re helping their customers get access to the wireless discounts they deserve as part of our Carrier Callout,” T-Mobile says.

T-Mobile

AT&T contends T-Mobile’s campaign is “intentionally designed to deceive senior citizens.” The carrier says T-Mobile’s website includes claims that are “literally false.” Moreover, it notes that “AT&T has not ‘banned’ seniors from getting discounted services outside the state of Florida.” The company points to a program it has had in place since March 2015. AT&T offers members of AARP, a nonprofit organization that represents more than 38 million seniors in the US, a $10 discount off its Unlimited Premium plan, among other perks. That promotion is available in all 50 US states. 

“T-Mobile’s claims are outright dishonest and completely false. It is not the first time they have spread misleading information,” an AT&T spokesperson said. “AT&T offers wireless discounts to people of all ages, including seniors in all 50 states. The only way to stop the un-truthful carrier is apparently in a court of law, and that’s where we are.”

T-Mobile did not immediately respond to Engadget’s request for comment. AT&T is seeking damages and an injunction against the campaign. The Unlimited 55 promotion isn’t the first time T-Mobile has gotten in trouble for its advertising. In 2020, the carrier said it would stop claiming its 5G network was more reliable than that of its competitors after Verizon filed a complaint with National Advertising Review Board.

Amazon lockers are already supposed to fend off package thieves, but some now perhaps have an extra layer of security. Washington DC is the first city in the US to test Amazon lockers at police stations. This week, Metropolitan Police Department installed the lockers at two sites in the city. The department and Amazon plan to position lockers at more stations if the pilot goes well, according to Washingtonian.

On the surface, it's a logical move to vex porch pirates. It's unlikely that anyone would try pinching a package from a police station. It's a little odd to imagine someone being released from custody only to pick up a package before they leave a police station.

Amazon already has several ties to law enforcement agencies. Earlier this summer, it emerged that the company has given police footage from Ring cameras on at least 11 occasions without a court order or user consent. Law enforcement was also able to use Amazon's facial recognition tech for a time. The company enacted a one-year ban on police use of Rekognition in 2020, and it extended that measure indefinitely last year.

Elon Musk's lawyers today filed a motion to delay his trial against Twitter by a month, arguing they need more time to process recent claims by whistleblower Peiter Zatko, the former head of security at Twitter. With the motion, Musk's legal team is attempting to amend its counterclaims against Twitter, using details from Zatko's legal complaints against the company. The trial between Musk and Twitter is currently scheduled to begin in October, and the motion filed today would delay it into November.

This is the same tactic that Musk is using to try to end his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter altogether. Twitter originally sued Musk in July in an attempt to force him to follow through on their multibillion-dollar acquisition agreement, and Musk counter-sued, attempting to get out of the sale. Musk's legal team this morning filed a notice with the Securities and Exchange Commission asking to kill the acquisition agreement, citing Zatko's recent allegations of security deficiencies at Twitter. Zatko's claims build on Musk's original argument to end his Twitter takeover, which accused the company of dramatically underestimating the number of bot accounts on the network.

Zatko filed complaints last week with the SEC, Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission accusing Twitter of gross negligence when it comes to information security. Zatko accused the company of encouraging the propagation of spam accounts in the name of increasing user numbers, downplaying the amount of bot profiles on the platform, and running the whole enterprise on outdated software. There is already movement in Congress to investigate these claims.

Twitter said in court filings that Zatko's accusations are riddled with inconsistencies and lack context. The company has long argued that spam accounts make up less than 5 percent of Twitter's total user numbers. Musk, and now Zatko, argue the true figure is much higher.

Amid Elon Musk's legal battle with Twitter, his attorneys have now subpoenaed the company's former security chief, Peiter “Mudge” Zatko, to appear for a deposition on September 9th. Zatko last week submitted a lengthy whistleblower complaint against Twitter to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. He accused the company of (among other things) having "egregious" security issues. Zatko suggested the problems may pose a national security risk.

In the subpoena, which was filed on Monday and obtained by The Verge, Musk's attorneys request materials related to how Zatko’s tenure at Twitter ended and what stock, if any, he owns in the company. There are also demands for documents that might indicate any illegal activity by Twitter or foreign intelligence agents it employs. Perhaps most pertinently to Musk's attempt to back out of his agreement to buy Twitter, the subpoena asks for information connected to the monetizable daily active users (mDAUs) metric Twitter uses, as well as documents Zatko has on Twitter's alleged spam problem.

Zatko claimed in the complaint that Twitter lied to Musk about the prevalence of bots and spam accounts, as The Washington Post notes. Musk has accused Twitter of fraudulently masking the true number of bots. In his bid to abandon the acquisition, Musk said Twitter made “false and misleading representations” about how many phony accounts are on the platform.

In July, Twitter sued Musk over his attempt to wash his hands of the deal. Musk filed a countersuit later that month. His team has also subpoenaed former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey. The case will go to trial in October. 

Meanwhile, Senate and Congressional committee leaders are investigating Zatko's claims. The whistleblower is set to appear at a Judiciary Committee hearing five days after he's scheduled to be deposed in Musk's case against Twitter. Zatko's assertions have been disputed by Twitter and its CEO Parag Agrawal.

Apple may again be looking to nail down "Reality" trademarks ahead of the launch of its much-anticipated AR/VR headset, Bloomberg has reported. Applications were filed for the names "Reality One," "Reality Pro" and "Reality Processor" in the US, EU, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Costa Rica and Uruguay. While Apple didn't directly request the trademarks, they were filed by law firms that it has previously used to claim brand names. 

Clues emerged in February that Apple may be using "Reality" branding for its headsets, when the term was spotted in GitHub open source code and App Store upload logs. Then in May, trademark applications were spotted for "realityOS" at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Those were filed by a company called Realityo Systems, but evidence suggests that's a shell company created by Apple to cover its tracks.

With realityOS as a potential name for the operating system, Reality One and Reality Pro could be naming options for the actual headsets. "Reality Processor” could be an M2-based chip designed for the headset that reportedly includes 16 gigabytes of memory, along with graphics technology designed for high-resolution VR and AR images.

There are similar clues with the new filings. The three "Reality" trademarks were filed by a shell company called Immersive Health Solutions LLC incorporate in February, according to Bloomberg. That was registered by another shell corporation (Corporation Trust Co.) often used for filings by firms who want to avoid publicity. Trademarks filed in other countries like New Zealand, meanwhile, were made by law firms that Apple has used in the past. 

Apple's development of AR/VR headsets has been rumored for years, after it purchased VR company VRvana in 2017. The most recent rumor from Bloomberg suggests that the headset will be delayed until 2023 . It may include VR versions of apps like Maps and FaceTime along with collaboration features that will help it compete with Meta. It may also let users watch movies and other content, while offering health-related functions. 

Apple may be facing a potential US Department of Justice antitrust lawsuit — but this time focused on AirTags and its other hardware. Sources toldPolitico that DOJ lawyers are in the nascent stages of drafting an antitrust complaint against the tech giant. While these sources indicated the DOJ has taken an interest in Apple's hardware, there's no guarantee the agency will follow through with a lawsuit at this time. 

The DOJ began investigating the iPhone maker in 2019, as part of a larger government antitrust probe into Big Tech. So far, the agency has primarily focused on Apple’s tight hold of its App Store and payment system for developers. The new potential suit reportedly may go further and hone in on years of public complaints by tracking device maker Tile over Apple’s AirTags. 

AirTags use ultra-wideband technology and Apple's Find My network to locate devices, often much more precisely than Tile's early-model Bluetooth-enabled trackers. In testimony before Congress, Tile has alleged that Apple purposely disadvantaged Tile on iOS devices by walling off its Find My network. The tech giant eventually opened its Find My network to third-party devices last year for location tracking, albeit with severe terms and restrictions which would likely result in companies like Tile having to give up their software ecosystems in favor of Apple's. Incidentally, this was a bargain Tile opted not to take. Engadget has reached out to Apple and the DOJ for comment and will update if we hear back.