Another social media company is paying up due to Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act. Snap Inc. (the parent company of Snapchat) has reached a $35 million settlement in an Illinois class action lawsuit over its use of facial recognition technology. The lawsuit alleges that Snapchat violated the BIPA law by collecting and storing the biometric data of users who used its lenses and filters — without their consent. Illinois residents who resided in the state after November 17th, 2015 and used Snapchat’s popular AR features may be eligible for a cut of the settlement.

Snap Inc. is only the latest company to get penalized under BIPA — which requires companies to ask for consent before it can collect biometric data from users. The law is unique in that it allows private citizens to sue companies that may have violated the law. Earlier this year, Facebook reached a $650 settlement over its old photo-tagging system and Google agreed on a $100 million settlement over a feature that used facial recognition in Google Photos.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Illinois residents who qualify could be eligible for payouts between $58 and $117. The settlement is still awaiting approval from a district court, which will happen in November. Illinois residents have until November 5th of this year to file a claim.

Snap Inc. has not admitted any wrongdoing, despite agreeing to the settlement. In a statement to the Tribune, a company spokesperson wrote that Snapchat issued an in-app consent notice to Illinois residents earlier this year out of caution. It also denied that the biometric data collected through its app can be used to identify specific people. “Lenses do not collect biometric data that can be used to identify a specific person, or engage in facial identification,” Snap said. “For example, Lenses can be used to identify an eye or a nose as being part of a face, but cannot identify an eye or a nose as belonging to any specific person.”

Back in 2018, former Apple employee Xiaolang Zhang was arrested at San Jose International Airport where he was going to board a last-minute flight to China. Zhang was accused of transferring a 25-page document that includes the engineering schematics of a circuit board for the company's self-driving vehicle, along with technical manuals describing Apple's prototype, to his wife's laptop. He was also accused of stealing circuit boards and a Linux server from the company's development labs. Now, Zhang has pleaded guilty to a felony charge of theft of trade secrets in San Jose federal court, according to CNBC.

The news organization has obtained a court document (PDF) summarizing the proceedings in which Zhang changed his plea — he originally pleaded not guilty when he was indicted in 2018. In it, the court has noted that his plea agreement is under seal and that his sentencing is scheduled on November 14th. Zhang faces up to ten years in prison and could pay up to $250,000 in fine.

Before his arrest, Zhang worked as a hardware engineer in Apple's autonomous vehicle division and was part of the team that designs and tests circuit boards for sensors. As CNBC notes, circuit designs are typically considered some of the most valuable trade secrets in electronics. Apple reportedly first suspected Zhang of stealing from the company when he turned in his resignation following a paternity leave and a trip to China. He told the company that he was resigning so he could move back to China and take care of his mother. 

Zhang also told Apple that he was planning to work with XPeng Motors, an electric vehicle manufacturer that's also developing its own autonomous driving technology. His access to Apple's resources was cut off after he resigned, and an investigation followed soon after. It was through that investigation that Apple discovered that he transferred gigabytes' worth of top secret files via AirDrop and saw him physically taking hardware from the company's labs via CCTV footage.

Meanwhile, the tech giant remains as secretive about its autonomous vehicle development progress as ever. Last year, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reported that Apple decided to focus on developing full self-driving capabilities and that the company is aiming to launch its autonomous electric vehicle in 2025. 

Nintendo may respond quickly to allegations of sexual discrimination and harassment at its American division. A Kotakusource has reportedly shared a company-wide message from Nintendo of America President Doug Bowser revealing that the Switch creator is "actively investigating" the misconduct claims. The firm "will always" look into assertions like these and encourages workers to report violations, Bowser reportedly said.

We've asked Nintendo for comment. The company has previously reacted to incidents elsewhere in the industry, however. In November, Bowser said the accusations behind the Activision Blizzard scandal were "distressing and disturbing." Days later, Nintendo pledged to increase the number of female managers.

Several female game testers told Kotaku that they'd faced multiple forms of harassment and discrimination at Nintendo. Senior-ranking testers allegedly made unwanted advances and comments. Anti-LGBT remarks, pay gaps and attempts to suppress criticism were also part of the workplace culture, according to the allegations. Female workers are believed to be underrepresented at Nintendo as a whole (37 percent), and particularly among contract-based game testers (10 percent).

It's too soon to know if any investigation will lead to firings or reforms. If accurate, however, the scoop is a reminder that misconduct complaints haven't been limited to one developer. Activision Blizzard, Ubisoft and others have had to address concerns as well — it may reflect cultural issues across the industry.

Google has prevailed in its long-running battle over potentially defamatory web links. Australia's High Court has ruled Google wasn't the publisher of a link to a 2004 story in The Age that allegedly tarnished state lawyer George Defteros, who represented people implicated in the Melbourne gangland killings and briefly faced charges himself. As The Guardianreports, five of seven court justices found that the search result link "merely facilitated access" to the story — Google didn't play a part in writing or distributing the content.

The High Court also rebuffed Defteros' claim that search results encouraged users to visit a story. Someone who found that link was already searching for relevant content, the justices said. Some of the justices said the case might have been different if it had been a sponsored link, but that Google's appeal didn't require an answer on the subject.

Defteros sued Google in 2016, accusing the company of defaming him. Google pulled the link in December that year, and lost its initial court fight, but tried to overturn the ruling by arguing that it could have been held liable for the content of any page it linked to — it was worried it would have to "act as censor" for the internet at large. The company didn't succeed with that first appeal, and in 2020 a Victorian supreme court ordered that Defteros receive $40,000 in damages. Google asked the High Court to intervene in January.

The decision could a wide-ranging impact on internet firms operating in Australia. They might not have to worry that search queries or other automatically-generated links could get them into legal trouble. A complainant would have to show there was a deliberate attempt to promote an unflattering piece.

Qualcomm was apparently the victim of a sophisticated fraud. The Los Angeles Timesreports the federal government revealed charges against former Qualcomm research VP Karim Arabi and three others for allegedly tricking the chip maker into spending $150 million in 2015 to acquire technology that it already had. After Arabi developed a quicker method of testing processors, the four launched a scheme to falsely claim that a Canadian graduate student (Arabi's sister) had invented the technique and was commercializing it through a startup. Arabi purportedly hid his involvement through the entire process (his sister even changed her name), leading Qualcomm to buy the startup even though it legally owned the executive's inventions.

Arabi left Qualcomm in June 2016. Prosecutors further alleged that the quartet laundered money through methods that included interest-free loans and purchasing foreign real estate. The penalties could be steep if the court convicts Arabi's group. Each could face up to 20 years in prison and fines of either $250,000 or double whatever they gained through the fraud scheme. 

Qualcomm sued Arabi, his sister and the startup's CEO in 2017. That case was dismissed without prejudice in 2018, opening the door to another lawsuit, but the company didn't discuss the possibility of another suit in a statement to The Times.

At least one former Twitter employee is facing prison time for allegedly helping Saudi Arabia spy on critics. Bloombergreports a jury in San Francisco has convicted US resident Ahmad Abouammo of serving as an agent for Saudi Arabia, as well as falsifying records, money laundering and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. According to prosecutors, Abouammo took bribes in 2015 from a key aide to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Bader Al Asaker, in return for sensitive account info that could be used to track and silence dissidents.

The one-time media partnership manager said that he was only doing his job. However, the prosecution showed evidence that Abouammo received $300,000 and a $20,000 Hublot watch from the aide.

Abouammo will be sentenced to between 10 and 20 years in prison. He and his legal team have declined to comment. However, defense attorney Angela Chuang argued in court that the conviction is a consolation prize meant to "save face" for government officials and Twitter. The US supposedly let its main target, former Twitter engineer Ali Alzabarah, flee to Saudi Arabia. A third suspect outside of Twitter, Ahmed Almutairi, is believed to have acted as a go-between before he left for Saudi Arabia.

The case highlights concerns about the potential for staff at social media companies to abuse account information. Twitter previously said it limited data access to vetted employees and had "tools in place" to protect privacy, but those safeguards clearly failed. There are still concerns internet firms may need to further tighten security to prevent similar misuses.

Google may soon be facing its second antitrust lawsuit filed by the US Department of Justice. According to Bloomberg, the DOJ is gearing up to sue the tech giant as soon as September after a year of looking into whether it's been using its dominant position to illegally control the digital ad market. The Justice Department's lawyers have reportedly been conducting another round of interviews to glean additional information that could help make their case stronger. These new interviews are expected to build on previous ones conducted much earlier on in the investigation. 

The Justice Department first filed an antitrust lawsuit against the company back in 2020, accusing it of having an unfair monopoly over search and search-related advertising. For that particular case, the agency argued that forcing Android phone manufacturers to set Google as the default search engine prevents rivals from gaining traction and ensures that the company will earn an enormous amount of money from search-related advertising. 

In the same year, Texas filed a multi-state lawsuit against Google, with the state's Attorney General accusing the company of using its "monopolistic power to control" ad pricing. The company's ad practices are under scrutiny not just in the US but in other parts of the world: The European Commission also opened a probe to look into whether Google limits rival services' access to user data for ad purposes last year. As a concession to the EU's concerns, Reuters reported in June that Google may let rival ad platforms run ads on YouTube.

While the DOJ has yet to officially file its case, Google spokesperson Peter Schottenfels defended the company's ad business in a statement to Bloomberg, which says: "Our advertising technologies help websites and apps fund their content, and enable small businesses to reach customers around the world. The enormous competition in online advertising has made online ads more relevant, reduced ad tech fees, and expanded options for publishers and advertisers."

Apple and Google are already facing scrutiny in the wake of a South Korean law requiring that they allow third-party payments. Reutersreports the Korea Communications Commission (KCC) will investigate Apple, Google and SK Group's One Store over potential violations of the in-app payment law. Regulators said they started inspecting the digital shops on May 17th, and found enough to be concerned all three might have broken the rules.

It's not certain just how the firms might have violated the law. MacRumorsnoted that a delay in communicating changes might have played a role in Apple's case. While the law (a revision of the Telecommunications Business Act) took effect in March, Apple didn't notify developers until late June. Google alerted Android developers in November of last year.

Both companies still take cuts from purchases made using alternative billing systems — they just take smaller portions. When Google announced its policy change, it maintained that it needed fees to "continue to invest" in Android and the Play Store. It's not clear if these policies play any role in the investigation, however.

We've asked Apple and Google for comment. In a statement to Reuters, Google said it would continue cooperating with the KCC and that it had "worked closely" with both the government and developers to comply with the law.

The law allows for fines as high as two percent of the average yearly revenue for related business. Officials didn't set expectations for possible fines, but the stores are major money generators. Apple, for example, paid developers $60 billion worldwide in 2021 and made a tidy profit for itself through fees on those sales. Even if South Korea only considered revenue earned within its borders to be actionable for fines, this could still lead to steep penalties if the KCC finds any violations.

Google has sued Sonos, alleging that its new voice assistant violates seven patents related to its own Google Assistant technology, CNET has reported. It's the latest salvo in a long-running smart speaker battle between the companies, with each suing and countersuing the other following a period when they worked together. 

"[Sonos has] started an aggressive and misleading campaign against our products, at the expense of our shared customers," a Google spokesperson said in a statement. 

Sonos' Voice Control assistant arrived in June, letting users give commands with the phrase "Hey Sonos," much like Amazon's Alexa or Google Assistant. In the complaint, Google said it "worked for years with Sonos engineers on the implementation of voice recognition and voice-activated devices control in Sonos products... even providing its Google Assistant software to Sonos for many years." 

The fight erupted in early 2020 when Sonos sued Google for alleged patent infringement after the companies had collaborated for several years. Sonos claimed that Google gained knowledge of its technology when they worked together and used that information to develop its own smart speaker line. The company filed another suit in September 2020, claiming that Google infringed on five more patents. 

Google countersued, alleging that Sonos was using Google’s search, software, networking, audio processing and other technology without paying a license fee and made "false claims" about their work together

In 2021, the US International Trade Commission ruled that Google infringed on five Sonos patents. That forced Google to change the way its speakers were set up to avoid an import ban. Most of those were related to the way speaker groups are controlled — for instance, users can no longer change the volume of a group of speakers and must adjust them individually instead. 

"Google previously sued us all over the world and Sonos has prevailed in every decided case," Sonos' chief legal officer Eddie Lazarus told CNET. "[The latest lawsuits] are an intimidation tactic designed to retaliate against Sonos for speaking out against Google's monopolistic practices." 

The Financial Times has published a lengthy report saying that Apple has fostered a culture of apathy toward reports of employee misconduct, and has actively retaliated against staff members who complained about colleagues, including those who reported incidents of sexual assault. If accurate, the allegations are at odds with the image of inclusiveness that Apple projects, and cast a pall on the real progress it has made in boosting its workforce diversity. 

Multiple women described filing complaints with Apple's human resources department over sexual abuse, bullying and other incidents. Former employee Megan Mohr complained that a colleague removed her bra and clothes while she was asleep and took photos of her after a platonic night out. However, the HR representative called the experience "a minor traffic accident."

"Although what he did was reprehensible as a person and potentially criminal, as an Apple employee he hasn't violated any policy in the context of his Apple work," Apple's HR department said in an email seen by FT. "And because he hasn't violated any policy we will not prevent him seeking employment opportunities that are aligned with his goals and interests." 

An Apple Store Genius employee complained about two instances of serious sexual assault including being raped, and said HR treated her not as a victim, but as the problem. "I was told [the alleged rapist] went on a ‘career experience’ for six months and they said: ‘maybe you’ll be better by the time he’s back?" She requested a transfer but it was declined, and she still works at the same store. 

IP attorney Margaret Anderson complained of a "toxic work environment" and "gaslighting," and said a male vice-president wanted to fire her, citing false allegations that predated her arrival at Apple. HR reportedly ignored a document she created refuting the allegations.

Employees have also complained about Apple suppressing worker organizing and blocking Slack channels used by employees to complain about bad managers and pay inequity. Software engineer Cher Scarlett said Apple retaliated after she filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The company offered her a $213,000 severance package, but she refused to sign it because Apple demanded she hand over a letter sent to the NLRB that included the names of other employees. 

That's their playbook. Offer me enough money to pay off my lawyers and debt, and they wanted a list of people to retaliate against. How do I talk about how egregious that truly is?

She accepted the deal when Apple withdrew the demand, but was forced to pull the NLRB complaint. However, she intentionally broke the agreement when Apple sent a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) saying it "supports the rights of its employees and contractors to speak freely." Scarlett then showed her exit arrangement to the media, which led to eight US state treasurers asking the SEC to investigate "whether or not Apple misled the Commission and investors." 

The highest profile complaint was from Jayne Whitt, a director in Apple's legal department. She told HR that a colleague hacked her devices and threatened her life, with the expectation that the complaint would be handled seriously. Instead, the employee investigative division said Whitt "failed to act in a professional and work appropriate manner" during their meeting, at a time when Whitt "said she was begging for help and reliving trauma," the FT wrote. 

She subsequently posted a 2,800 word essay on the whistleblower platform The Lioness describing the situation, prompting an outpouring of support from Apple employees. However, Apple proceeded to fire her based on what she called an "irrelevant" six-year-old indiscretion. 

Whitt is now challenging Apple legally, and said the Slack channels on gender-pay disparity helped open her eyes. "I was disadvantaged — this is how women struggle," she said. "Had these stories [on Slack] not been coming out, I would not have been compelled to do the right thing, to blow up my career."

Apple told The Financial Times in a statement that it works hard to thoroughly investigate misconduct allegations and strives to create "an environment where employees feel comfortable reporting any issues." However, it acknowledged not having always met those ideals. "There are some accounts raised that do not reflect our intentions or our policies and we should have handled them differently, including certain exchanges reported in this story. As a result, we will make changes to our training and processes." It wouldn't comment on specific cases "out of respect for the privacy of the individuals involved."