Tesla said on Wednesday that California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) intends to file lawsuit against the company for alleged recial discrimination and harassment at its factory in Fremont, California. The alleged misconduct took place between 2015 and 2019.

The electric-car maker said it will ask the court to pause the case once the state's civil rights regulator files its lawsuit.

Tesla said that despite several requests, the regulator declined to provide it specific allegations or the factual bases for its lawsuit.

In the past, the department has investigated claims by employees who believe they were discriminated against or harassed, but did not find any misconduct, Tesla said.

The department did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

The company has been fighting a series of lawsuits over allegations of racial discrimination and sexual harassment.

It was sued by two female employees last year, with both their lawsuits alleging a "hostile work environment" against women at the carmaker's factory in Fremont.

In October, a Black contract worker won a jury award worth $137 million over workplace racism against the company.

Subsequently, a proposal was approved by Tesla shareholders asking the company to publish a report on its diversity and inclusion effort.

(With inputs from agencies)

Tesla said on Wednesday that California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) intends to file lawsuit against the company for alleged recial discrimination and harassment at its factory in Fremont, California.

Tesla said on Wednesday that California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) intends to file lawsuit against the company for alleged recial discrimination and harassment at its factory in Fremont, California. The alleged misconduct took place between 2015 and 2019. The electric-car maker said it will ask the court to pause the case once the state's civil rights regulator files its lawsuit. Tesla said that despite several requests, the regulator declined to provide it specific allegations or the factual bases for its lawsuit. In the past, the department has investigated claims by employees who believe they were discriminated against or harassed, but did not find any misconduct, Tesla said. The department did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. The company has been fighting a series of lawsuits over allegations of racial discrimination and sexual harassment. It was sued by two female employees last year, with both their lawsuits alleging a "hostile work environment" against women at the carmaker's factory in Fremont. In October, a Black contract worker won a jury award worth $137 million over workplace racism against the company. Subsequently, a proposal was approved by Tesla shareholders asking the company to publish a report on its diversity and inclusion effort. (With inputs from agencies)

Tesla says it faces lawsuit for discrimination, harassment in California factory

In the sex abuse lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre, Britain's Prince Andrew will give evidence next month, a report said on Saturday citing a source close to the prince. &nbsp;

The Duke of York will speak under oath in London, another report by the Daily Telegraph newspaper said. &nbsp;

Andrew has denied all accusations levelled by Giuffre. She claims that he sexually abused her two decades ago when she was 17. &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/britains-queen-elizabeth-ii-wants-prince-charles-wife-camilla-to-be-known-as-queen-consort-450812">Britain's Queen Elizabeth II wants Charles' wife to be known as Queen Consort</a>

"We agreed to voluntarily produce the Duke for a deposition on March 10. Despite repeated requests, Giuffre still hasn't committed to a date or location for her deposition," the source told Reuters. &nbsp;

Meanwhile, Britain's Prince Andrew can no longer be known as 'His Royal Highness' now as his royal patronages and military links have been were removed by the royal family. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Andrew, 61, is Queen Elizabeth's third child. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-pm-johnsons-photo-holding-beer-can-at-lockdown-breaching-party-handed-over-to-police-reports-450810" hreflang="en">UK PM's photo holding beer can at lockdown-breaching party handed over to cops</a>

In 2019, he was forced to step down from public duties because of his connections to convicted US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and after a disastrous BBC TV interview, which the prince had hoped would clear his name. &nbsp;

This move by the royal family means he will now lose all his royal connections. &nbsp;

"With the queen's approval and agreement, The Duke of York’s military affiliations and royal patronages have been returned to the queen," Buckingham Palace said in a statement. &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

In the sex abuse lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre, Britain's Prince Andrew will give evidence next month, a report said on Saturday citing a source close to the prince.

In the sex abuse lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre, Britain's Prince Andrew will give evidence next month, a report said on Saturday citing a source close to the prince. The Duke of York will speak under oath in London, another report by the Daily Telegraph newspaper said. Andrew has denied all accusations levelled by Giuffre. She claims that he sexually abused her two decades ago when she was 17. Also Read: Britain's Queen Elizabeth II wants Charles' wife to be known as Queen Consort "We agreed to voluntarily produce the Duke for a deposition on March 10. Despite repeated requests, Giuffre still hasn't committed to a date or location for her deposition," the source told Reuters. Meanwhile, Britain's Prince Andrew can no longer be known as 'His Royal Highness' now as his royal patronages and military links have been were removed by the royal family. Andrew, 61, is Queen Elizabeth's third child. Also Read: UK PM's photo holding beer can at lockdown-breaching party handed over to cops In 2019, he was forced to step down from public duties because of his connections to convicted US sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and after a disastrous BBC TV interview, which the prince had hoped would clear his name. This move by the royal family means he will now lose all his royal connections. "With the queen's approval and agreement, The Duke of York’s military affiliations and royal patronages have been returned to the queen," Buckingham Palace said in a statement. (With inputs from agencies)

In Virginia Giuffre sex abuse lawsuit, Britain's Prince Andrew to give evidence next month, say reports

Facebook is facing a 3.2 billion dollar plus class-action suit in Britain for allegations that it has abused its market dominance by exploiting the personal data of almost about 44 million users.

Facebook is facing a 3.2 billion dollar class-action lawsuit in Britain

Social media giant Facebook is facing a $3.2 billion class-action lawsuit for allegedly exploiting user data in the United Kingdom. It has been accused of abusing its market dominance by exploiting the personal data of nearly 44 million users.

Liza Lovdahl Gormsen, who happens to be the senior adviser to the British watchdog group Financial Conduct Authority,&nbsp;is suing Meta on behalf of people who used Facebook in between 2015 to 2019.

Lovdahl Gornsen said, "In the 17 years since it was created, Facebook became the sole social network in the UK where you could be sure to connect with friends and family in one place."

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/scaling-new-milestone-chinas-trade-surplus-reaches-6764-billion-in-2021-444661">Also read |&nbsp;Scaling new milestone? China's trade surplus reaches $676.4 billion in 2021</a>

She further added, "Yet, there was a dark side to Facebook; it abused its market dominance to impose unfair terms and conditions on ordinary Britons, giving it the power to exploit their personal data."

The lawsuit will be heard by London's Competition Appeal Tribunal. As per Lovdahl Gornsen, Facebook collected data within its platform using tools like the Facebook pixel.&nbsp;

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart &amp; Sullivan is the law firm representing Lovdahl Gormsen. The firm has notified Facebook of the claim. 
Responding to the allegation, Facebook said that people used its services because they were valued as "they have meaningful control of what information they share on Meta's platforms and who with."&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/facebook-is-facing-a-32-billion-dollar-class-action-lawsuit-in-britain-444595/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">&nbsp;</div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">(With inputs from agencies)</div>

Social media giant Facebook is facing a $3.2 billion class-action lawsuit for allegedly exploiting user data in the United Kingdom. It has been accused of abusing its market dominance by exploiting the personal data of nearly 44 million users.

Social media giant Facebook is facing a $3.2 billion class-action lawsuit for allegedly exploiting user data in the United Kingdom. It has been accused of abusing its market dominance by exploiting the personal data of nearly 44 million users. Liza Lovdahl Gormsen, who happens to be the senior adviser to the British watchdog group Financial Conduct Authority, is suing Meta on behalf of people who used Facebook in between 2015 to 2019. Lovdahl Gornsen said, "In the 17 years since it was created, Facebook became the sole social network in the UK where you could be sure to connect with friends and family in one place." Also read | Scaling new milestone? China's trade surplus reaches $676.4 billion in 2021 She further added, "Yet, there was a dark side to Facebook; it abused its market dominance to impose unfair terms and conditions on ordinary Britons, giving it the power to exploit their personal data." The lawsuit will be heard by London's Competition Appeal Tribunal. As per Lovdahl Gornsen, Facebook collected data within its platform using tools like the Facebook pixel. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan is the law firm representing Lovdahl Gormsen. The firm has notified Facebook of the claim. Responding to the allegation, Facebook said that people used its services because they were valued as "they have meaningful control of what information they share on Meta's platforms and who with." (With inputs from agencies)

Here is why social media giant Facebook is facing $3.2 billion class-action lawsuit in UK

After being allegedly harassed over cross necklace for years, a Christian nurse has won a lawsuit filed in the Employment Tribunal in the United Kingdom last week. &nbsp;

The nurse, Mary Onuoha, says she was forced to resign in June 2020 from her job at a London hospital. &nbsp;

Onuoha took legal action against Croydon Health Services NHS Trust after resignation. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/just-six-months-after-opening-londons-newest-tourist-attraction-marble-arch-mound-is-closing-443423" hreflang="en">Just six months after opening, London's newest tourist attraction Marble Arch Mound is closing</a>

She claims that she was targetted for wearing a small cross necklace for years by being told that it posed "a health and safety risk." &nbsp;

After immigrating to the UK in 1988, Onuoha, who grew up in Nigeria, worked for Croydon University Hospital for around 20 years. &nbsp;&nbsp;

In a statement, Onuoha claimed that the controversy over necklace "has always been an attack on my faith." &nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uks-education-minister-nadhim-zahawi-says-reduced-covid-isolation-will-ease-workforce-pressures-443359" hreflang="en">UK's education minister Nadhim Zahawi says reduced COVID isolation will ease workforce pressures</a>

According to Onuoha, NHS management first told her to stop wearing necklace, but when she refused, it gave her an offer of compromise and said she could wear it on a longer chain and ensure the cross stays out of sight. She refused to comply again. &nbsp;

In last Wednesday’s ruling, the tribunal dismissed the claim of hospital over the health risk and mentioned other employees are allowed to wear jewellery and hijabs too. &nbsp;

At a later hearing, financial compensation for Onuoha will be decided. &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

After being allegedly harassed over cross necklace for years, a Christian nurse has won a lawsuit filed in the Employment Tribunal in the United Kingdom last week.

After being allegedly harassed over cross necklace for years, a Christian nurse has won a lawsuit filed in the Employment Tribunal in the United Kingdom last week. The nurse, Mary Onuoha, says she was forced to resign in June 2020 from her job at a London hospital. Onuoha took legal action against Croydon Health Services NHS Trust after resignation. Also Read: Just six months after opening, London's newest tourist attraction Marble Arch Mound is closing She claims that she was targetted for wearing a small cross necklace for years by being told that it posed "a health and safety risk." After immigrating to the UK in 1988, Onuoha, who grew up in Nigeria, worked for Croydon University Hospital for around 20 years. In a statement, Onuoha claimed that the controversy over necklace "has always been an attack on my faith." Also Read: UK's education minister Nadhim Zahawi says reduced COVID isolation will ease workforce pressures According to Onuoha, NHS management first told her to stop wearing necklace, but when she refused, it gave her an offer of compromise and said she could wear it on a longer chain and ensure the cross stays out of sight. She refused to comply again. In last Wednesday’s ruling, the tribunal dismissed the claim of hospital over the health risk and mentioned other employees are allowed to wear jewellery and hijabs too. At a later hearing, financial compensation for Onuoha will be decided. (With inputs from agencies)

Harassed by hospital over cross necklace for years, Christian nurse wins lawsuit in UK

A US judge has rejected BlackBerry Ltd's bid to dismiss a long-running lawsuit claiming it defrauded shareholders by inflating the success and profitability of its BlackBerry 10 smartphones, and said the class-action case could go to trial this fall.

BlackBerry loses bid to dismiss lawsuit in US, fall trial possible

American multinational Morgan Stanley has agreed to pay $60 million in order to settle a lawsuit by customers who have claimed that the Wall Street bank exposed their personal data. This was done when the bank failed twice to properly retire its old information technology.

Nearly 15 million customers filed a preliminary settlement of the proposed class action in Manhattan federal court. However, it still requires approval by US District Judge Analisa Torres.&nbsp;

The customers have accused Morgan Stanley of failing to decommission two wealth management data centres before the unencrypted equipment was resold to unauthorised third parties. The customers also claim that few old servers containing customer data went missing after Morgan Stanley transferred them in 2019 to an outside vendor.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/technology-giants-spy-on-staff-to-prevent-unionising-report-says-441951">Also read |&nbsp;Technology giants spy on staff to prevent unionising, report says</a>

However, as per court papers, the servers were later recovered.&nbsp;

The customers will be receiving at least two years of fraud insurance coverage. Also, each person can apply for reimbursement of up to $10,000 in out-of-pocket losses.

As per the settlement papers, Morgan Stanley has denied wrongdoing and has made "substantial" upgrades to its data security practices.

(With inputs from agencies)

American multinational Morgan Stanley has agreed to pay $60 million in order to settle a lawsuit by customers who have claimed that the Wall Street bank exposed their personal data.

American multinational Morgan Stanley has agreed to pay $60 million in order to settle a lawsuit by customers who have claimed that the Wall Street bank exposed their personal data. This was done when the bank failed twice to properly retire its old information technology. Nearly 15 million customers filed a preliminary settlement of the proposed class action in Manhattan federal court. However, it still requires approval by US District Judge Analisa Torres. The customers have accused Morgan Stanley of failing to decommission two wealth management data centres before the unencrypted equipment was resold to unauthorised third parties. The customers also claim that few old servers containing customer data went missing after Morgan Stanley transferred them in 2019 to an outside vendor. Also read | Technology giants spy on staff to prevent unionising, report says However, as per court papers, the servers were later recovered. The customers will be receiving at least two years of fraud insurance coverage. Also, each person can apply for reimbursement of up to $10,000 in out-of-pocket losses. As per the settlement papers, Morgan Stanley has denied wrongdoing and has made "substantial" upgrades to its data security practices. (With inputs from agencies)

In a data security lawsuit, Morgan Stanley agrees to pay $60 million

A woman in Lincolnshire, England was awarded millions in compensation after suing her Mom's doctor for allowing her birth. What was the doctor's crime? Was the lawsuit justified? Palki Sharma gets you a report.

Gravitas: Woman sues doctor for allowing her birth

Is Donald Trump being harassed? At a recent legal hearing, Trump labelled a lawsuit against him as 'pure harassment'. The former U.S. President is fighting multiple legal battles after leaving the White House. Palki Shama gets you a report.

Gravitas: 'Pure Harassment', Trump slams Lawsuit against him

The turmoil over allegations of sexual abuse at Liberty University seems to have worsened as around 10 people have joined an existing lawsuit by saying they were drugged, raped, sexually assaulted or abused at the varsity, according to a new filing. It also said the people in power are refusing to act. &nbsp;

Alleging the university created an unsafe environment, Jane Does 13-22 joined the first 12 anonymous plaintiffs in suing the private school for the amount to be determined during the trial, revealed a status report from the US District Court for the eastern district of New York on Thursday. &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/with-new-hypersonic-missile-test-in-august-china-surprised-us-officials-421414" hreflang="en">With new hypersonic missile test in August, China surprised US officials</a>

"Since the complaint was filed, additional plaintiffs and witnesses have come forward. It is likely that, if the case does not resolve amicably, a First Amended Complaint will be filed on behalf of Jane Does 1-through-22, including certain current students at Liberty University," the status report of plaintiffs said. &nbsp;

It also asked the court to grant counsel's motion for leave to appear pro hac vice and place the matter on standby for three months in accordance with the university's request for "an opportunity to discuss an amicable resolution prior to the filing of a First Amended Complaint." &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/key-to-bidens-climate-agenda-likely-to-be-cut-because-of-manchin-opposition-421381" hreflang="en">Key to Biden’s climate agenda likely to be cut because of Manchin opposition</a>

In July 20 filing, the original 12 plaintiffs alleged that the university "intentionally created a campus environment where sexual assault and rapes are foreseeably more likely to occur than they would in the absence of Liberty's policies." &nbsp;&nbsp;

"In short, Liberty University weaponised its sexual violence reporting policies by (a) offering the victims of sexual violence a confusingly worded amnesty that (b) was often ignored altogether in practice," said the complaint. &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

The turmoil over allegations of sexual abuse at Liberty University seems to have worsened as around 10 people have joined an existing lawsuit by saying they were drugged, raped, sexually assaulted or abused at the varsity, according to a new filing.

The turmoil over allegations of sexual abuse at Liberty University seems to have worsened as around 10 people have joined an existing lawsuit by saying they were drugged, raped, sexually assaulted or abused at the varsity, according to a new filing. It also said the people in power are refusing to act. Alleging the university created an unsafe environment, Jane Does 13-22 joined the first 12 anonymous plaintiffs in suing the private school for the amount to be determined during the trial, revealed a status report from the US District Court for the eastern district of New York on Thursday. Also Read: With new hypersonic missile test in August, China surprised US officials "Since the complaint was filed, additional plaintiffs and witnesses have come forward. It is likely that, if the case does not resolve amicably, a First Amended Complaint will be filed on behalf of Jane Does 1-through-22, including certain current students at Liberty University," the status report of plaintiffs said. It also asked the court to grant counsel's motion for leave to appear pro hac vice and place the matter on standby for three months in accordance with the university's request for "an opportunity to discuss an amicable resolution prior to the filing of a First Amended Complaint." Also Read: Key to Biden’s climate agenda likely to be cut because of Manchin opposition In July 20 filing, the original 12 plaintiffs alleged that the university "intentionally created a campus environment where sexual assault and rapes are foreseeably more likely to occur than they would in the absence of Liberty's policies." "In short, Liberty University weaponised its sexual violence reporting policies by (a) offering the victims of sexual violence a confusingly worded amnesty that (b) was often ignored altogether in practice," said the complaint. (With inputs from agencies)

10 more plaintiffs join lawsuit against Liberty University over sexual abuse

A jury ordered Tesla to pay $137 million to Owen Diaz, a Black former employee who accused the carmaker of ignoring racial abuse he faced while working there, his lawyer, Lawrence Organ, said late Monday.

"It’s a great thing when one of the richest corporations in America has to have a reckoning of the abhorrent conditions at its factory for Black people," Organ, of the California Civil Rights Law Group, said in an interview.

The decision by the jury, in federal court in San Francisco, was reported earlier by Bloomberg News. Tesla’s lawyers did not immediately provide comment.

In an interview, Diaz said he was relieved by the jury’s decision.

"It took four long years to get to this point," he said Monday evening. "It’s like a big weight has been pulled off my shoulders."

Diaz said he worked as an elevator operator at Tesla’s factory in Fremont, California, for about a year in 2015 and 2016. There, he said, a supervisor and other colleagues repeatedly referred to him using racial slurs. He also said employees had drawn swastikas and scratched a racial epithet in a bathroom stall and left drawings of derogatory caricatures of Black children around the factory. Despite repeated complaints, the company did little to address the behavior, he said.

"It’s not like they were removing the offensive behavior, they would just let people keep adding and adding," he said.

After deliberating for about four hours, the jury agreed with Diaz’s assertion that Tesla had created a hostile work environment by failing to address the racism he faced, Organ said. The vast majority of the award — $130 million — was punitive damages for the company. The rest was for emotional distress Diaz suffered, Organ said.

Despite the abuse he himself faced, Diaz said, he reached a breaking point when he witnessed similar racist epithets directed at his son, Demetric, who secured a job — his first — at the company with Diaz’s help.

"My son watched his father being broken in front of him," Owen Diaz said.

In an internal email to Tesla staff obtained by Organ and shared with the Times, Valerie Capers Workman, a human resources executive, downplayed the allegations in the lawsuit.

"In addition to Mr. Diaz, three other witnesses (all non-Tesla contract employees) testified at trial that they regularly heard racial slurs (including the N-word) on the Fremont factory floor," she wrote. "While they all agreed that the use of the N-word was not appropriate in the workplace, they also agreed that most of the time they thought the language was used in a ‘friendly’ manner and usually by African-American colleagues."

The company, she wrote in the email, was responsive to Diaz’s complaints, firing two contractors and suspending another. Tesla does not believe the facts justify the verdict, she wrote, but acknowledges that the company was "not perfect" in 2015 and 2016. "We’re still not perfect," she added. "But we have come a long way."

Owen Diaz said in the suit that he was left feeling "demeaned, disrespected and devalued." He sued Tesla alongside his son and another Black former employee, but only the elder Diaz’s claims made it to trial.

It was not immediately clear whether Tesla planned to appeal the decision.

A jury ordered Tesla to pay $137 million to Owen Diaz, a Black former employee who accused the carmaker of ignoring racial abuse he faced while working there, his lawyer, Lawrence Organ, said late Monday.

A jury ordered Tesla to pay $137 million to Owen Diaz, a Black former employee who accused the carmaker of ignoring racial abuse he faced while working there, his lawyer, Lawrence Organ, said late Monday. "It’s a great thing when one of the richest corporations in America has to have a reckoning of the abhorrent conditions at its factory for Black people," Organ, of the California Civil Rights Law Group, said in an interview. The decision by the jury, in federal court in San Francisco, was reported earlier by Bloomberg News. Tesla’s lawyers did not immediately provide comment. In an interview, Diaz said he was relieved by the jury’s decision. "It took four long years to get to this point," he said Monday evening. "It’s like a big weight has been pulled off my shoulders." Diaz said he worked as an elevator operator at Tesla’s factory in Fremont, California, for about a year in 2015 and 2016. There, he said, a supervisor and other colleagues repeatedly referred to him using racial slurs. He also said employees had drawn swastikas and scratched a racial epithet in a bathroom stall and left drawings of derogatory caricatures of Black children around the factory. Despite repeated complaints, the company did little to address the behavior, he said. "It’s not like they were removing the offensive behavior, they would just let people keep adding and adding," he said. After deliberating for about four hours, the jury agreed with Diaz’s assertion that Tesla had created a hostile work environment by failing to address the racism he faced, Organ said. The vast majority of the award — $130 million — was punitive damages for the company. The rest was for emotional distress Diaz suffered, Organ said. Despite the abuse he himself faced, Diaz said, he reached a breaking point when he witnessed similar racist epithets directed at his son, Demetric, who secured a job — his first — at the company with Diaz’s help. "My son watched his father being broken in front of him," Owen Diaz said. In an internal email to Tesla staff obtained by Organ and shared with the Times, Valerie Capers Workman, a human resources executive, downplayed the allegations in the lawsuit. "In addition to Mr. Diaz, three other witnesses (all non-Tesla contract employees) testified at trial that they regularly heard racial slurs (including the N-word) on the Fremont factory floor," she wrote. "While they all agreed that the use of the N-word was not appropriate in the workplace, they also agreed that most of the time they thought the language was used in a ‘friendly’ manner and usually by African-American colleagues." The company, she wrote in the email, was responsive to Diaz’s complaints, firing two contractors and suspending another. Tesla does not believe the facts justify the verdict, she wrote, but acknowledges that the company was "not perfect" in 2015 and 2016. "We’re still not perfect," she added. "But we have come a long way." Owen Diaz said in the suit that he was left feeling "demeaned, disrespected and devalued." He sued Tesla alongside his son and another Black former employee, but only the elder Diaz’s claims made it to trial. It was not immediately clear whether Tesla planned to appeal the decision.

Jury orders Tesla to pay $137 million over racist treatment

Twitter announced Monday it will pay $809 million to settle a 2016 lawsuit alleging members of the social network's leadership, including founder Jack Dorsey, provided misleading information to investors about slowing user growth.

The suit claimed the defendants, such as former CEO Dick Costolo, did not disclose the full picture of the company's state while they sold their personal shares in Twitter.

"The proposed settlement resolves all claims asserted against Twitter and the other named defendants without any admission, concession or finding of any fault, liability or wrongdoing," the company said in a statement.

Twitter said the final settlement agreement will be subject to court approval, and the company intends to pay in cash later this year.

In July, Twitter posted better-than-expected results with gains in revenue, profit, and its user base, sparking a rally in shares for the messaging platform.

Net profit was $66 million on revenue that surged to $1.19 billion, beating Wall Street expectations.

Twitter announced Monday it will pay $809 million to settle a 2016 lawsuit alleging members of the social network's leadership, including founder Jack Dorsey, provided misleading information to investors about slowing user growth.

Twitter announced Monday it will pay $809 million to settle a 2016 lawsuit alleging members of the social network's leadership, including founder Jack Dorsey, provided misleading information to investors about slowing user growth. The suit claimed the defendants, such as former CEO Dick Costolo, did not disclose the full picture of the company's state while they sold their personal shares in Twitter. "The proposed settlement resolves all claims asserted against Twitter and the other named defendants without any admission, concession or finding of any fault, liability or wrongdoing," the company said in a statement. Twitter said the final settlement agreement will be subject to court approval, and the company intends to pay in cash later this year. In July, Twitter posted better-than-expected results with gains in revenue, profit, and its user base, sparking a rally in shares for the messaging platform. Net profit was $66 million on revenue that surged to $1.19 billion, beating Wall Street expectations.

Twitter to pay $809 million to settle a suit claiming investors were misled

Boeing's management is under threat. A US judge ruled that Boeing's board of directors must face a lawuit from shareholdres.

Boeing's management under threat after ruling that Boeing must face lawsuit from shareholders

Seven US Capitol Police officers have filed lawsuits against their former President Donald Trump. The officers were assaulted during the January 6 Capitol riots.

Seven Capitol Police officers sue Donald Trump over riots

Owing to the ongoing Covid-19 situation, Walt Disney had to release some of its films—including ‘Black Widow’—both in theatres as well as OTT platforms, Disney Chief Bob Chapek said on Thursday.&nbsp;

“These films were conceived during a time when … we certainly didn’t know about COVID. Just like what we’ve done many times before, we’ve found ways to fairly compensate our talent so that, no matter what, everyone feels satisfied,” Chapek reportedly told trade analysts.&nbsp;

 
“Both Bob Iger (Chairman, Disney) and I determined this was the right strategy. And, just to reiterate, distribution decisions are made on a film by film basis. We will continue to utilize all options going forward,” the CEO added.&nbsp;

 
Disney’s other hybrid releases include ‘Cruella’, ‘Raya and the Last Dragon’ and the recently released ‘Jungle Cruise’, starring Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt. Right before the release of his film, Johnson had openly supported the company’s decision to release it in theatres as well as on Disney +.

 
Scarlett Johansson, one of Hollywood's biggest and top-paid stars, was entitled to a percentage of box office receipts from the much-anticipated Marvel film, ‘Black Widow’, according to a lawsuit filed at Los Angeles Superior Court in July.

 
"It's no secret that Disney is releasing films like Black Widow directly onto Disney+ to increase subscribers and thereby boost the company's stock price -- and that it's hiding behind Covid-19 as a pretext to do so," said Johansson's attorney John Berlinski in a statement to a global news agency.

 
"This will surely not be the last case where Hollywood talent stands up to Disney and makes it clear that, whatever the company may pretend, it has a legal obligation to honor its contracts," he added.

 
A spokesperson for Disney—which owns superhero movie powerhouse Marvel Studios—dismissed the lawsuit, telling the agency in a statement that Disney had not breached any contract and that "there is no merit whatsoever to this filing."

 
"The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the Covid-19 pandemic," it had said.

Owing to the ongoing Covid-19 situation, Walt Disney had to release some of its films—including ‘Black Widow’—both in theatres as well as OTT platforms, Disney Chief Bob Chapek said on Thursday.

Owing to the ongoing Covid-19 situation, Walt Disney had to release some of its films—including ‘Black Widow’—both in theatres as well as OTT platforms, Disney Chief Bob Chapek said on Thursday. “These films were conceived during a time when … we certainly didn’t know about COVID. Just like what we’ve done many times before, we’ve found ways to fairly compensate our talent so that, no matter what, everyone feels satisfied,” Chapek reportedly told trade analysts. “Both Bob Iger (Chairman, Disney) and I determined this was the right strategy. And, just to reiterate, distribution decisions are made on a film by film basis. We will continue to utilize all options going forward,” the CEO added. Disney’s other hybrid releases include ‘Cruella’, ‘Raya and the Last Dragon’ and the recently released ‘Jungle Cruise’, starring Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt. Right before the release of his film, Johnson had openly supported the company’s decision to release it in theatres as well as on Disney +. Scarlett Johansson, one of Hollywood's biggest and top-paid stars, was entitled to a percentage of box office receipts from the much-anticipated Marvel film, ‘Black Widow’, according to a lawsuit filed at Los Angeles Superior Court in July. "It's no secret that Disney is releasing films like Black Widow directly onto Disney+ to increase subscribers and thereby boost the company's stock price -- and that it's hiding behind Covid-19 as a pretext to do so," said Johansson's attorney John Berlinski in a statement to a global news agency. "This will surely not be the last case where Hollywood talent stands up to Disney and makes it clear that, whatever the company may pretend, it has a legal obligation to honor its contracts," he added. A spokesperson for Disney—which owns superhero movie powerhouse Marvel Studios—dismissed the lawsuit, telling the agency in a statement that Disney had not breached any contract and that "there is no merit whatsoever to this filing." "The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the Covid-19 pandemic," it had said.

Disney CEO Bob Chapek defends ‘Black Widow’ release format amid Scarlett Johansson lawsuit

New York and other US states filed a notice on Wednesday saying they will fight the dismissal of an antitrust lawsuit that they launched against Facebook Inc in an appeals court.

In June, a US&nbsp;judge dismissed federal and state antitrust complaints against the social media company that had sought to force it to sell Instagram and WhatsApp.

Judge James Boasberg of the US&nbsp;District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the states' lawsuit but said the Federal Trade Commission could refile its complaint.

New York Attorney General Letitia James said the states would press on.

"We filed this notice of appeal because we disagree with the court's decision and must hold Facebook accountable for stifling competition, reducing innovation and cutting privacy protections," she said.

In dismissing the states' lawsuit, Boasberg said they had waited too long to challenge the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, in 2012 and 2014 respectively.

"We believe the District Court's decision dismissing the states' complaint is correct and look forward to defending the District Court's decision before the Court of Appeals, a Facebook spokesperson said.

New York and other US states filed a notice on Wednesday saying they will fight the dismissal of an antitrust lawsuit that they launched against Facebook Inc in an appeals court.

New York and other US states filed a notice on Wednesday saying they will fight the dismissal of an antitrust lawsuit that they launched against Facebook Inc in an appeals court. In June, a US judge dismissed federal and state antitrust complaints against the social media company that had sought to force it to sell Instagram and WhatsApp. Judge James Boasberg of the US District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the states' lawsuit but said the Federal Trade Commission could refile its complaint. New York Attorney General Letitia James said the states would press on. "We filed this notice of appeal because we disagree with the court's decision and must hold Facebook accountable for stifling competition, reducing innovation and cutting privacy protections," she said. In dismissing the states' lawsuit, Boasberg said they had waited too long to challenge the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, in 2012 and 2014 respectively. "We believe the District Court's decision dismissing the states' complaint is correct and look forward to defending the District Court's decision before the Court of Appeals, a Facebook spokesperson said.

New York, other states to fight dismissal of antitrust lawsuit against Facebook

Gucci&nbsp;and&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;have&nbsp;filed a&nbsp;joint&nbsp;lawsuit&nbsp;in California&nbsp;against&nbsp;an individual, who&nbsp;allegedly used the US&nbsp;group's social media platforms to sell fake&nbsp;Gucci&nbsp;products, the two companies said on Tuesday.

The initiative, a first of its kind for both&nbsp;Gucci&nbsp;and&nbsp;Facebook, is the latest example of an Internet giant joining forces with a luxury label to fight the proliferation of counterfeit goods being sold via social media.

Amazon has&nbsp;filed similar&nbsp;lawsuits over the past year with Valentino and Ferragamo.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="Apple to roll out new privacy update; Facebook, Google protest">Apple to roll out new privacy update; Facebook, Google protest</a>

In a statement,&nbsp;Gucci&nbsp;- the profit engine of French group Kering - and&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;alleged&nbsp;the unidentified defendant used multiple&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;and Instagram accounts to promote her international online counterfeit business.

Online sales of luxury handbags, shoes and garments have boomed over the past year as the coronavirus pandemic forced retailers to temporarily close their stores.

Groups like&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;are keen to make a bigger push into the luxury market and "social commerce", but to do so they need to show that their platforms are not a conduit for counterfeiting and are safe for brands, some of which are reluctant to sell their products through third-party players.

"More than one million pieces of content were removed from&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;and Instagram in the first half of 2020, based on thousands of reports of counterfeit content from brand owners, including&nbsp;Gucci," the statement said.

It added that in 2020 alone the actions of&nbsp;Gucci's in-house intellectual property team had resulted in four million on-line counterfeit product listings being taken down, the seizure of 4,100,000 counterfeit products, and 45,000 websites, including social media accounts, being disabled.

Gucci and Facebook have filed a joint lawsuit in California against an individual, who allegedly used the US group's social media platforms to sell fake Gucci products, the two companies said on Tuesday.

Gucci and Facebook have filed a joint lawsuit in California against an individual, who allegedly used the US group's social media platforms to sell fake Gucci products, the two companies said on Tuesday. The initiative, a first of its kind for both Gucci and Facebook, is the latest example of an Internet giant joining forces with a luxury label to fight the proliferation of counterfeit goods being sold via social media. Amazon has filed similar lawsuits over the past year with Valentino and Ferragamo. Also read: Apple to roll out new privacy update; Facebook, Google protest In a statement, Gucci - the profit engine of French group Kering - and Facebook alleged the unidentified defendant used multiple Facebook and Instagram accounts to promote her international online counterfeit business. Online sales of luxury handbags, shoes and garments have boomed over the past year as the coronavirus pandemic forced retailers to temporarily close their stores. Groups like Facebook are keen to make a bigger push into the luxury market and "social commerce", but to do so they need to show that their platforms are not a conduit for counterfeiting and are safe for brands, some of which are reluctant to sell their products through third-party players. "More than one million pieces of content were removed from Facebook and Instagram in the first half of 2020, based on thousands of reports of counterfeit content from brand owners, including Gucci," the statement said. It added that in 2020 alone the actions of Gucci's in-house intellectual property team had resulted in four million on-line counterfeit product listings being taken down, the seizure of 4,100,000 counterfeit products, and 45,000 websites, including social media accounts, being disabled.

Gucci, Facebook file joint lawsuit against alleged counterfeiter

A US Army lieutenant filed a lawsuit against two Virginia policemen in federal court over a violent traffic stop, where police officers pointed their guns, knocked him to the ground, pepper-sprayed him, and "threatened to murder him."

US army officer files lawsuit against two Virginia policemen

Four more states have joined a lawsuit filed by Texas and others against Alphabet Inc's Google that accuses it of breaking antitrust laws to boost its already dominant advertising business.

The lawsuit accuses Google of violating the law in how it dominates the steps in the process of placing ads online. It alleges Google quietly teams with its closest online advertising competitor, Facebook, and that it uses the excuse of protecting users' privacy to act unfairly. Publishers complain that one result has been lower revenues.

Joining the lawsuit filed in December are Alaska, Florida, Montana, Nevada and Puerto Rico, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said. This brings the number of plaintiffs in the lawsuit to 15 states and territories.

The lawsuit was one of three filed last year by the federal government or states against the tech giant.

Google is fighting the allegations, and a hearing scheduled for Thursday is expected to include discussion of the company's petition for a Texas federal court to move the case to California.

"Our coalition looks forward to holding Google accountable for its illegal conduct and reforming Google’s practices in the future," Paxton said in a statement. "We are confident Google will be forced to pay for its misconduct through significant financial penalties."

The amended complaint states that Facebook and Google "work together to identify users using Apple products," without elaborating. Apple Inc in recent years on its Safari browser and iPhones has increased ways to block what it views as privacy-intrusive user tracking by ad tech companies, some of which have tried to devise circumvention measures.

The revised complaint also adds that beginning in 2015, Google could view messages from Facebook's WhatsApp service that users backed up to Google's Drive cloud storage system. Google knew users were uninformed about its access, but "did nothing to correct this misunderstanding," the lawsuit states.

Google Drive gained almost 250 million new users by June 2016 because of the WhatsApp partnership, according to the lawsuit.

Four more states have joined a lawsuit filed by Texas and others against Alphabet Inc's Google that accuses it of breaking antitrust laws to boost its already dominant advertising business.

Four more states have joined a lawsuit filed by Texas and others against Alphabet Inc's Google that accuses it of breaking antitrust laws to boost its already dominant advertising business. The lawsuit accuses Google of violating the law in how it dominates the steps in the process of placing ads online. It alleges Google quietly teams with its closest online advertising competitor, Facebook, and that it uses the excuse of protecting users' privacy to act unfairly. Publishers complain that one result has been lower revenues. Joining the lawsuit filed in December are Alaska, Florida, Montana, Nevada and Puerto Rico, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said. This brings the number of plaintiffs in the lawsuit to 15 states and territories. The lawsuit was one of three filed last year by the federal government or states against the tech giant. Google is fighting the allegations, and a hearing scheduled for Thursday is expected to include discussion of the company's petition for a Texas federal court to move the case to California. "Our coalition looks forward to holding Google accountable for its illegal conduct and reforming Google’s practices in the future," Paxton said in a statement. "We are confident Google will be forced to pay for its misconduct through significant financial penalties." The amended complaint states that Facebook and Google "work together to identify users using Apple products," without elaborating. Apple Inc in recent years on its Safari browser and iPhones has increased ways to block what it views as privacy-intrusive user tracking by ad tech companies, some of which have tried to devise circumvention measures. The revised complaint also adds that beginning in 2015, Google could view messages from Facebook's WhatsApp service that users backed up to Google's Drive cloud storage system. Google knew users were uninformed about its access, but "did nothing to correct this misunderstanding," the lawsuit states. Google Drive gained almost 250 million new users by June 2016 because of the WhatsApp partnership, according to the lawsuit.

Four more US states join Texas-led antitrust lawsuit against Google

Kanye West was recently hit with class-action lawsuits stemming from Sunday Services. 
 
West's seemingly imminent divorce from Kim Kardashian West isn't the only legal trouble the rapper and designer is&nbsp;facing. According to toThe Sun and the Daily Mail Kanye is facing class-action suits related to his Sunday Services and other performances. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/kim-kardashian-kanye-wests-marriage-issues-to-be-featured-in-the-final-season-of-keeping-up-with-the-kardashians-357979" hreflang="en">Kim Kardashian, Kanye West's marriage issues to be featured in the final season of 'Keeping Up With The Kardashians'</a> 
 
The suits were reportedly filed in Los Angeles last year and revolve around hundreds of performers and production staff who detail long delays in payment, unexpected cuts in those payments, and mistreatment on the job. The first of the two lawsuits was filed on behalf of 500 performers who, according to the Daily Mail US, claim that they were forced to work for two days with no meals or breaks. Michael Pearson, one of the performers representing the group in the lawsuit, said that for their time, they were reportedly told they would be paid $500 no matter how much time they worked. 
 
Performer Michael Pearson&nbsp;alleges he was not allowed to take food or bathroom breaks and, like other performers, was made to stand for his entire, all-day shift before walking home "when a shuttle wasn't provided." There's also a complaint from people involved in Kanye's staging of the 2019 opera "Nebuchadnezzar," over similar grievances including late payments and the denial of meal and bathroom breaks as well as overtime, according to The Sun's sources. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/this-is-how-kanye-west-feels-about-donald-trump-leaving-the-white-house-report-358270" hreflang="en">This is how Kanye West feels about Donald Trump leaving the White House: Report</a>

He also recounts how they were forced to sit on the floor because there was not enough seating provided, as well as walk back from the venue because they were not made aware that their transportation to the location was one-way. Pearson, et al. are suing for lost wages, overtime compensation, meal and rest breaks, damages, and the cost of the legal action.&nbsp; 
 
The Daily Mail reports another lawsuit related to Kanye's Sunday Services was filed by the tech company MyChannel Inc. In that suit, workers have alleged they were never paid for six months of work. According to the Daily Mail, Kanye could end up paying some $30 million in damages as the lawsuit progress. 
&nbsp;

Kanye West was recently hit with class-action lawsuits stemming from Sunday Services. West's seemingly imminent divorce from Kim Kardashian West isn't the only legal trouble the rapper and designer is facing.

Kanye West was recently hit with class-action lawsuits stemming from Sunday Services. West's seemingly imminent divorce from Kim Kardashian West isn't the only legal trouble the rapper and designer is facing. According to toThe Sun and the Daily Mail Kanye is facing class-action suits related to his Sunday Services and other performances. Kim Kardashian, Kanye West's marriage issues to be featured in the final season of 'Keeping Up With The Kardashians' The suits were reportedly filed in Los Angeles last year and revolve around hundreds of performers and production staff who detail long delays in payment, unexpected cuts in those payments, and mistreatment on the job. The first of the two lawsuits was filed on behalf of 500 performers who, according to the Daily Mail US, claim that they were forced to work for two days with no meals or breaks. Michael Pearson, one of the performers representing the group in the lawsuit, said that for their time, they were reportedly told they would be paid $500 no matter how much time they worked. Performer Michael Pearson alleges he was not allowed to take food or bathroom breaks and, like other performers, was made to stand for his entire, all-day shift before walking home "when a shuttle wasn't provided." There's also a complaint from people involved in Kanye's staging of the 2019 opera "Nebuchadnezzar," over similar grievances including late payments and the denial of meal and bathroom breaks as well as overtime, according to The Sun's sources. This is how Kanye West feels about Donald Trump leaving the White House: Report He also recounts how they were forced to sit on the floor because there was not enough seating provided, as well as walk back from the venue because they were not made aware that their transportation to the location was one-way. Pearson, et al. are suing for lost wages, overtime compensation, meal and rest breaks, damages, and the cost of the legal action. The Daily Mail reports another lawsuit related to Kanye's Sunday Services was filed by the tech company MyChannel Inc. In that suit, workers have alleged they were never paid for six months of work. According to the Daily Mail, Kanye could end up paying some $30 million in damages as the lawsuit progress.

Kanye West sued for $30 million in damages over Sunday Service Labor Practices

An&nbsp;English teacher and author from the US has filed a lawsuit against Netflix and the creators of their hit show 'Outer Banks,” claiming copyright infringement. The North Carolina resident, Kevin Wooten, filed an official complaint on December 21.&nbsp; 
 
The author of the 2016 novel 'Pennywise: The Hunt for Blackbeard’s Treasure' claims that Netflix and the creators of 'Outer Banks'&nbsp;— Josh Pate, Jonas Pate, and Shannon Burke — got the plot for the show from his book.

According to Variety, The suit alleges that both the show and the book share striking similarities, including that they take place in the Outer Banks, have the same amount of main characters that share similar storylines, feature antagonists “consisting of a rich benefactor and a corrupt member of law enforcement” and discover similar clues leading them to buried treasure, which is then stolen by said antagonists. 
 
&nbsp;

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GC68w9tvv6I" width="560"></iframe>

The Amazon description of Wooten’s book reads: “Benjamin and Nathaniel Pennywise, along with their uncle, Ottaway Burns, discover a clue while diving off the coast of Ocracoke that takes them on an adventure spanning two continents. They must outwit a sinister group of treasure hunters who will stop at nothing to lay hold to the chest so they can use its contents to further their agenda.”

Wooten is seeking to prove that the creators had access to his book before making the show. According to the complaint, Wooten claims this is possible because he sold and promoted the book in Wilmington, N.C., a place that the show’s creators have previously said was a source of inspiration.

Wooten is seeking payment for damages as well as ongoing royalties and has requested a trial by jury. 
&nbsp;

An English teacher and author from the US has filed a lawsuit against Netflix and the creators of their hit show 'Outer Banks,” claiming copyright infringement. The North Carolina resident, Kevin Wooten, filed an official complaint on December 21.

An English teacher and author from the US has filed a lawsuit against Netflix and the creators of their hit show 'Outer Banks,” claiming copyright infringement. The North Carolina resident, Kevin Wooten, filed an official complaint on December 21. The author of the 2016 novel 'Pennywise: The Hunt for Blackbeard’s Treasure' claims that Netflix and the creators of 'Outer Banks' — Josh Pate, Jonas Pate, and Shannon Burke — got the plot for the show from his book. According to Variety, The suit alleges that both the show and the book share striking similarities, including that they take place in the Outer Banks, have the same amount of main characters that share similar storylines, feature antagonists “consisting of a rich benefactor and a corrupt member of law enforcement” and discover similar clues leading them to buried treasure, which is then stolen by said antagonists. The Amazon description of Wooten’s book reads: “Benjamin and Nathaniel Pennywise, along with their uncle, Ottaway Burns, discover a clue while diving off the coast of Ocracoke that takes them on an adventure spanning two continents. They must outwit a sinister group of treasure hunters who will stop at nothing to lay hold to the chest so they can use its contents to further their agenda.” Wooten is seeking to prove that the creators had access to his book before making the show. According to the complaint, Wooten claims this is possible because he sold and promoted the book in Wilmington, N.C., a place that the show’s creators have previously said was a source of inspiration. Wooten is seeking payment for damages as well as ongoing royalties and has requested a trial by jury.

Netflix's 'Outer Banks' accused of copyright infringement by US author

A group of US states is planning to take aim at Google with an antitrust lawsuit, saying the internet giant abused its power when ranking its own offerings in search results.

Politico reported Tuesday that a complaint led by attorneys general from Colorado and Nebraska could be filed as early as Thursday.

Amazon, TripAdvisor, Yelp and other internet firms that involve recommending products or services have complained that Google favours its own offerings in general search results.

The suit being prepared by states will argue that Google's search engine disadvantages rivals by design.

Google called the US lawsuit "deeply flawed."

Google's long-running business model based on free services and advertising is already being put to the test in a landmark antitrust lawsuit filed by the US Justice Department.

The US government filed a blockbuster lawsuit in October accusing Google of maintaining an "illegal monopoly" in online search and advertising. The country's biggest antitrust case in decades, it opens the door to a potential breakup of the Silicon Valley titan.

The politically charged case, which could take years to play out, draws new battle lines between the US government and Big Tech, with potentially major implications for the sector.

But the government is likely to face challenges proving monopoly allegations against the tech firm, which grew into one of the world's most successful companies by leveraging its powerful search engine for a network of services such as maps, email, shopping and travel that feed its data-driven digital advertising.

Legal experts point to the fact that it may be difficult to show Google's conduct was illegal under the longstanding "consumer welfare" standard in monopoly cases because its services are largely free.

The case -- joined by 11 states, all of which have Republican attorneys general -- comes against a backdrop of fierce political backlash against Big Tech giants that have extended their dominance in recent years.

The Justice Department argues that Google has cemented its monopoly position using deals with device makers to ensure its apps and services are prominently displayed, and sometimes can't be deleted.

(with inputs from agencies)

A group of US states is planning to take aim at Google with an antitrust lawsuit, saying the internet giant abused its power when ranking its own offerings in search results.

A group of US states is planning to take aim at Google with an antitrust lawsuit, saying the internet giant abused its power when ranking its own offerings in search results. Politico reported Tuesday that a complaint led by attorneys general from Colorado and Nebraska could be filed as early as Thursday. Amazon, TripAdvisor, Yelp and other internet firms that involve recommending products or services have complained that Google favours its own offerings in general search results. The suit being prepared by states will argue that Google's search engine disadvantages rivals by design. Google called the US lawsuit "deeply flawed." Google's long-running business model based on free services and advertising is already being put to the test in a landmark antitrust lawsuit filed by the US Justice Department. The US government filed a blockbuster lawsuit in October accusing Google of maintaining an "illegal monopoly" in online search and advertising. The country's biggest antitrust case in decades, it opens the door to a potential breakup of the Silicon Valley titan. The politically charged case, which could take years to play out, draws new battle lines between the US government and Big Tech, with potentially major implications for the sector. But the government is likely to face challenges proving monopoly allegations against the tech firm, which grew into one of the world's most successful companies by leveraging its powerful search engine for a network of services such as maps, email, shopping and travel that feed its data-driven digital advertising. Legal experts point to the fact that it may be difficult to show Google's conduct was illegal under the longstanding "consumer welfare" standard in monopoly cases because its services are largely free. The case -- joined by 11 states, all of which have Republican attorneys general -- comes against a backdrop of fierce political backlash against Big Tech giants that have extended their dominance in recent years. The Justice Department argues that Google has cemented its monopoly position using deals with device makers to ensure its apps and services are prominently displayed, and sometimes can't be deleted. (with inputs from agencies)

US states aiming an antitrust suit against Google

California will join the US government and 11 other states in bringing lawsuits against Google for abusing its market dominance.

Google, founded in 1998 and headquartered in California, has often been accused of abusing its power to exclude competitors. It is the default search engine on many devices, and its Chrome web browser and mobile operating system Android dominate the market.

The US Justice Department and 11 states in October brought a civil case against Google for pursuing an illegal monopoly in its search functions and in its advertising research services.

"Google's market dominance leaves consumers and small businesses with little choice when it comes to internet search engines," Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement.&nbsp;

"By using exclusionary agreements to dominate the market, Google has stifled competition and rigged the advertising market."

The US Justice Department also accuses it of forcing consumers and advertisers to use its services on Android devices on apps that cannot be deleted, such as Google Maps.

On Wednesday, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and prosecutors representing 48 states and territories also announced they had filed a complaint against Facebook for abusing its market dominance.

California will join the US government and 11 other states in bringing lawsuits against Google for abusing its market dominance. Google, founded in 1998 and headquartered in California, has often been accused of abusing its power to exclude competitors.

California will join the US government and 11 other states in bringing lawsuits against Google for abusing its market dominance. Google, founded in 1998 and headquartered in California, has often been accused of abusing its power to exclude competitors. It is the default search engine on many devices, and its Chrome web browser and mobile operating system Android dominate the market. The US Justice Department and 11 states in October brought a civil case against Google for pursuing an illegal monopoly in its search functions and in its advertising research services. "Google's market dominance leaves consumers and small businesses with little choice when it comes to internet search engines," Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement. "By using exclusionary agreements to dominate the market, Google has stifled competition and rigged the advertising market." The US Justice Department also accuses it of forcing consumers and advertisers to use its services on Android devices on apps that cannot be deleted, such as Google Maps. On Wednesday, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and prosecutors representing 48 states and territories also announced they had filed a complaint against Facebook for abusing its market dominance.

California joins US govt to bring antitrust lawsuit against Google

Chance the Rapper has been sued by his longtime manager Pat Corcoran. Pat has accused the rapper of refusing to pay out over $3 million in unpaid commissions after his firing in April.

According to the complaint filed in Cook County Circuit Court of Illinois on Monday, Corcoran alleges that Chance the Rapper (real name Chancelor Bennett) ignored his professional advice in the lead-up to the release of his debut studio album, The Big Day, on July 26, 2019, and subsequently blamed Corcoran for the album’s mixed response, as well as poor ticket sales for the accompanying tour. After Bennett fired Corcoran, Corcoran alleges his requests for more than $3 million in unpaid commissions were denied, with Bennett’s father, Ken Bennett, instead offering a flat sum of $350,000.

Corcoran is suing for breach of contract, violation of the Illinois Sales Representative Act and unjust enrichment, among other counts. He is additionally asking the court to order an accounting of all amounts earned by the Bennetts beginning in Feb. 2013 — the date Corcoran says that Bennett agreed to pay him 15% commission on all touring, merch and album sales, among other income streams — as well as to enforce a sunset clause that will entitle him to future commissions for a three-year post-termination period ending Apr. 25, 2023.

The complaint names as defendants Chance the Rapper, LLC as well as the rapper’s merchandise and touring companies Cool Pop Merch and CTR Touring.

According to a report in Billboard, the 20-page suit narrates Corcoran’s years-long relationship with Bennett and his instrumental role in building the rapper’s career beginning in 2012 — a journey that culminated in Bennett’s rise to superstardom and Grammy win for best rap album in 2017 for his mixtape Coloring Book. Throughout, Corcoran asserts his influence in steering Bennett towards eventual fame and fortune, including encouraging the rapper to continue building his brand independently despite overtures from record labels — most notably Sylvia Rhone at Epic Records/Vested in Culture — after Bennett sold out his first headlining show at Lincoln Hall in June 2012. Ultimately, the suit paints a portrait of a dedicated manager frustrated by his superstar client’s alleged self-sabotaging behaviour, as well as the eventual implosion of his first proper album release and national tour. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/listen-to-justin-biebers-new-song-featuring-chance-the-rapper-here-328372">Listen to Justin Bieber's new song featuring Chance the Rapper here</a>

Among the many deals highlighted in the complaint, Corcoran emphasizes his key role in negotiating Coloring Book’s exclusive release on Apple Music for a two-week period in 2016 — all while allowing Bennett to retain control of his masters. Not only characterized as a savvy deal where “Corcoran and Bennett were able to secure the funds necessary to clear the album,” which included features from Kanye West, Justin Bieber, Young Thug and others, and they were not required to pay any royalties to Apple, the suit also signals it as a “paradigm shift for the music industry” that led to a flood of independent artists carving out successful careers free of label influence.

The complaint additionally draws out Corcoran’s role in building out&nbsp;independent merchandising operation for Bennett. Included is the deal Corcoran struck with New Era Cap Company for a Chance the Rapper-branded hat that went on to become one of the best-selling non-sports caps in New Era’s history, resulting in “massive profits” for Bennett and his associates.

The relationship between Bennett and Corcoran began to show cracks in Feb. 2019, when Corcoran alleges the rapper failed to consult him before publicly announcing he would be releasing The Big Day that July. He claims Bennett subsequently ignored his reservations about producing an album in such a short amount of time (particularly in light of Bennett’s upcoming wedding scheduled for that March) and instead forged ahead with recording sessions that Corcoran describes as “unproductive and undisciplined.”

“Procrastination and lackadaisical effort, perpetuated by various hangers-on uninterested in the hard work of writing and recording, resulted in a freestyle-driven product of sub-par quality, a complete deviation from the meticulous writing process the brought Bennett fame for his wordplay and wit,” the complaint reads.

Though The Big Day ultimately debuted at No. 2 on the Billboard 200 and received mixed-to-positive reviews from critics, the complaint characterizes the album as a disappointment overall, citing it as “Chance’s least popular project to date” that “deliver[ed] a blow” to Corcoran and Bennett’s reputations.

It is that cool reception from fans, the suit claims, which ultimately led to the cancellation of a 30-city tour Corcoran had planned behind the much-anticipated album. Estimated to gross between $25 and $35 million early on, low ticket sales and poor attendance projections eventually led Corcoran to recommend that Bennett cancel the tour and “use the time to regroup and refocus.” Bennett postponed the tour just days before it was set to kick off in Sept. 2019 before canceling it altogether that December.

The relationship only grew more strained from there, with Corcoran claiming that Ken and Taylor (“despite having little or no experience in the music industry”) began steering Bennett’s career in a direction that conflicted with the manager’s vision. Instead of following Corcoran’s advice to keep a lower profile and focus on songwriting and recording, under the direction of the Bennetts, the rapper instead made “monetizing every available promotional opportunity” a priority, including appearances on talk shows such as Ellen, Good Morning America and The Late Show With Stephen Colbert. “These appearances only served to exacerbate the failure of The Big Day,” Corcoran concludes.

Following the tour’s cancellation — and after Ken and Taylor allegedly “eroded” Bennett’s confidence in Corcoran — the manager says Bennett blamed him for the relative failure of the Big Day album and tour “rather than accept that his own lack of dedication had doomed the project.” Corcoran was ultimately fired on April&nbsp;27, 2020 after eight years.

After “months of contentious interactions” with the Bennetts over unpaid commissions, Corcoran says he eventually presented them with a list of all commissions owed from streaming and sales of album releases and singles as well as proceeds from touring and merchandise. He claims that in response, Ken Bennett offered a lump sum of $350,000, in violation of Corcoran and Bennett’s longstanding agreement giving Corcoran a 15% commission on net profits.

“Despite months of outreach and efforts at reconciliation,” the complaint concludes, “Bennett has refused to pay Corcoran the amounts Corcoran is fairly owed under the parties’ long-standing agreement and well-settled course of conduct.”

&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

Chance the Rapper has been sued by his longtime manager Pat Corcoran. Pat has accused the rapper of refusing to pay out over $3 million in unpaid commissions after his firing in April.

Chance the Rapper has been sued by his longtime manager Pat Corcoran. Pat has accused the rapper of refusing to pay out over $3 million in unpaid commissions after his firing in April. According to the complaint filed in Cook County Circuit Court of Illinois on Monday, Corcoran alleges that Chance the Rapper (real name Chancelor Bennett) ignored his professional advice in the lead-up to the release of his debut studio album, The Big Day, on July 26, 2019, and subsequently blamed Corcoran for the album’s mixed response, as well as poor ticket sales for the accompanying tour. After Bennett fired Corcoran, Corcoran alleges his requests for more than $3 million in unpaid commissions were denied, with Bennett’s father, Ken Bennett, instead offering a flat sum of $350,000. Corcoran is suing for breach of contract, violation of the Illinois Sales Representative Act and unjust enrichment, among other counts. He is additionally asking the court to order an accounting of all amounts earned by the Bennetts beginning in Feb. 2013 — the date Corcoran says that Bennett agreed to pay him 15% commission on all touring, merch and album sales, among other income streams — as well as to enforce a sunset clause that will entitle him to future commissions for a three-year post-termination period ending Apr. 25, 2023. The complaint names as defendants Chance the Rapper, LLC as well as the rapper’s merchandise and touring companies Cool Pop Merch and CTR Touring. According to a report in Billboard, the 20-page suit narrates Corcoran’s years-long relationship with Bennett and his instrumental role in building the rapper’s career beginning in 2012 — a journey that culminated in Bennett’s rise to superstardom and Grammy win for best rap album in 2017 for his mixtape Coloring Book. Throughout, Corcoran asserts his influence in steering Bennett towards eventual fame and fortune, including encouraging the rapper to continue building his brand independently despite overtures from record labels — most notably Sylvia Rhone at Epic Records/Vested in Culture — after Bennett sold out his first headlining show at Lincoln Hall in June 2012. Ultimately, the suit paints a portrait of a dedicated manager frustrated by his superstar client’s alleged self-sabotaging behaviour, as well as the eventual implosion of his first proper album release and national tour. Listen to Justin Bieber's new song featuring Chance the Rapper here Among the many deals highlighted in the complaint, Corcoran emphasizes his key role in negotiating Coloring Book’s exclusive release on Apple Music for a two-week period in 2016 — all while allowing Bennett to retain control of his masters. Not only characterized as a savvy deal where “Corcoran and Bennett were able to secure the funds necessary to clear the album,” which included features from Kanye West, Justin Bieber, Young Thug and others, and they were not required to pay any royalties to Apple, the suit also signals it as a “paradigm shift for the music industry” that led to a flood of independent artists carving out successful careers free of label influence. The complaint additionally draws out Corcoran’s role in building out independent merchandising operation for Bennett. Included is the deal Corcoran struck with New Era Cap Company for a Chance the Rapper-branded hat that went on to become one of the best-selling non-sports caps in New Era’s history, resulting in “massive profits” for Bennett and his associates. The relationship between Bennett and Corcoran began to show cracks in Feb. 2019, when Corcoran alleges the rapper failed to consult him before publicly announcing he would be releasing The Big Day that July. He claims Bennett subsequently ignored his reservations about producing an album in such a short amount of time (particularly in light of Bennett’s upcoming wedding scheduled for that March) and instead forged ahead with recording sessions that Corcoran describes as “unproductive and undisciplined.” “Procrastination and lackadaisical effort, perpetuated by various hangers-on uninterested in the hard work of writing and recording, resulted in a freestyle-driven product of sub-par quality, a complete deviation from the meticulous writing process the brought Bennett fame for his wordplay and wit,” the complaint reads. Though The Big Day ultimately debuted at No. 2 on the Billboard 200 and received mixed-to-positive reviews from critics, the complaint characterizes the album as a disappointment overall, citing it as “Chance’s least popular project to date” that “deliver[ed] a blow” to Corcoran and Bennett’s reputations. It is that cool reception from fans, the suit claims, which ultimately led to the cancellation of a 30-city tour Corcoran had planned behind the much-anticipated album. Estimated to gross between $25 and $35 million early on, low ticket sales and poor attendance projections eventually led Corcoran to recommend that Bennett cancel the tour and “use the time to regroup and refocus.” Bennett postponed the tour just days before it was set to kick off in Sept. 2019 before canceling it altogether that December. The relationship only grew more strained from there, with Corcoran claiming that Ken and Taylor (“despite having little or no experience in the music industry”) began steering Bennett’s career in a direction that conflicted with the manager’s vision. Instead of following Corcoran’s advice to keep a lower profile and focus on songwriting and recording, under the direction of the Bennetts, the rapper instead made “monetizing every available promotional opportunity” a priority, including appearances on talk shows such as Ellen, Good Morning America and The Late Show With Stephen Colbert. “These appearances only served to exacerbate the failure of The Big Day,” Corcoran concludes. Following the tour’s cancellation — and after Ken and Taylor allegedly “eroded” Bennett’s confidence in Corcoran — the manager says Bennett blamed him for the relative failure of the Big Day album and tour “rather than accept that his own lack of dedication had doomed the project.” Corcoran was ultimately fired on April 27, 2020 after eight years. After “months of contentious interactions” with the Bennetts over unpaid commissions, Corcoran says he eventually presented them with a list of all commissions owed from streaming and sales of album releases and singles as well as proceeds from touring and merchandise. He claims that in response, Ken Bennett offered a lump sum of $350,000, in violation of Corcoran and Bennett’s longstanding agreement giving Corcoran a 15% commission on net profits. “Despite months of outreach and efforts at reconciliation,” the complaint concludes, “Bennett has refused to pay Corcoran the amounts Corcoran is fairly owed under the parties’ long-standing agreement and well-settled course of conduct.”

Chance the Rapper's former manager files $3million lawsuit against the artist

Apple has been ordered to face lawsuit by shareholders who accused CEO Tim Cook of concealing falling demand for iPhones in China, resulting in billions of dollars of investor losses.

World Business Watch: Apple to face lawsuit over CEO Tim Cook's 2018 China sales comments

Tech giant Facebook has won preliminary approval from a federal court on Wednesday for settlement of a lawsuit that claimed it illegally collected and stored biometric data of millions of users without their consent.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-removes-hundreds-of-qanon-groups-citing-public-safety-risks-321797">Facebook removes hundreds of QAnon groups, citing public safety risks</a>

In July, Facebook Inc raised its settlement offer by $100 million to $650 million concerning their lawsuit that involved Illinois users accusing them of violating the US state's Biometric Information Privacy Act.&nbsp;

According to Judge James Donato's order filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, the revised settlement agreement resolved the court's concerns, leading to the preliminary approval of the class action settlement.

"Preliminary approval of the amended stipulation of class action settlement, Dkt. No. 468, is granted, and a final approval hearing is set for January 7, 2021," the judge said in the eight-page order.

The social media giant allegedly violated the state's law through its "Tag Suggestions" feature, which began in 2015. This feature allowed users to recognize their Facebook friends from previously uploaded photos, according to the lawsuit.

(Inputs from Agencies)

Tech giant Facebook has won preliminary approval from a federal court on Wednesday for settlement of a lawsuit that claimed it illegally collected and stored biometric data of millions of users without their consent.

Tech giant Facebook has won preliminary approval from a federal court on Wednesday for settlement of a lawsuit that claimed it illegally collected and stored biometric data of millions of users without their consent. Also read: Facebook removes hundreds of QAnon groups, citing public safety risks In July, Facebook Inc raised its settlement offer by $100 million to $650 million concerning their lawsuit that involved Illinois users accusing them of violating the US state's Biometric Information Privacy Act. According to Judge James Donato's order filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, the revised settlement agreement resolved the court's concerns, leading to the preliminary approval of the class action settlement. "Preliminary approval of the amended stipulation of class action settlement, Dkt. No. 468, is granted, and a final approval hearing is set for January 7, 2021," the judge said in the eight-page order. The social media giant allegedly violated the state's law through its "Tag Suggestions" feature, which began in 2015. This feature allowed users to recognize their Facebook friends from previously uploaded photos, according to the lawsuit. (Inputs from Agencies)

Facebook wins preliminary approval to settle facial recognition lawsuit

Facebook Inc raised its settlement offer by $100 million to $650 million related to a lawsuit that claimed it illegally collected and stored biometric data for millions of users without their consent.

The social media giant reached a $550 million settlement in January regarding the same lawsuit, which started in 2015, when Illinois users accused the company of violating the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act in collecting biometric data.

This comes after a federal judge balked at the original proposal on the grounds it did not adequately punish Facebook.

The settlement covers any Facebook user in Illinois whose picture appeared on the site after 2011.

The lawsuit came about as a result of a state law in Illinois, which obliges companies to get permission before using facial recognition technology on their customers.

The final Facebook settlement is likely to be approved later this year, meaning Illinois residents will be poised to collect a payout in 2021.

According to the new document, those users can each expect to receive between $200 and $400 depending on how many people file a claim.

Facebook Inc raised its settlement offer by $100 million to $650 million related to a lawsuit that claimed it illegally collected and stored biometric data for millions of users without their consent.

Facebook Inc raised its settlement offer by $100 million to $650 million related to a lawsuit that claimed it illegally collected and stored biometric data for millions of users without their consent. The social media giant reached a $550 million settlement in January regarding the same lawsuit, which started in 2015, when Illinois users accused the company of violating the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act in collecting biometric data. This comes after a federal judge balked at the original proposal on the grounds it did not adequately punish Facebook. The settlement covers any Facebook user in Illinois whose picture appeared on the site after 2011. The lawsuit came about as a result of a state law in Illinois, which obliges companies to get permission before using facial recognition technology on their customers. The final Facebook settlement is likely to be approved later this year, meaning Illinois residents will be poised to collect a payout in 2021. According to the new document, those users can each expect to receive between $200 and $400 depending on how many people file a claim.

Facebook agrees to pay $650M to settle facial recognition lawsuit

Apple's clash with EU competition regulators comes to a head on Wednesday as Europe's second-highest court rules on whether it has to pay 13 billion euros ($15 billion) in Irish back taxes, a key part of the EU's crackdown against sweetheart tax deals.

In its order four years ago, the European Commission said Apple benefited from illegal state aid via two Irish tax rulings that artificially reduced its tax burden for over two decades - to as low as 0.005% in 2014.

Defeat for European Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager could weaken or delay pending cases against Ikea's and Nike's deals with the Netherlands, as well as Huhtamaki's agreement with Luxembourg.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="/technology/apple-reportedly-paid-almost-1-billion-to-samsung-for-faltering-on-order-for-screens-313197" hreflang="en">Apple reportedly paid almost $1 billion to Samsung for faltering on order for screens</a>

Vestager, who has made the tax crackdown a centrepiece of her time in office, saw the same court last year overturn her demand for Starbucks to pay up to 30 million euros in Dutch back taxes. In another case, the court also threw out her ruling against a Belgian tax scheme for 39 multinationals.&nbsp;

The Apple dispute is seen by some analysts as a lose-lose situation for Ireland, which has appealed against the Commission's order alongside the iPhone maker.&nbsp;

While 14 billion euros - including interest - would go a long way to plugging the coronavirus-shaped hole in the state's finances, Dublin is seeking to protect a low tax regime that has attracted 250,000 multinational employers.

If Ireland's appeal succeeds, the government will be ridiculed by opposition parties for not taking the cash, which could cover at least half of a budget deficit forecast to balloon to as much as 10% of GDP this year.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="/technology/apple-supplier-foxconn-to-invest-1-billion-in-india-sources-312563" hreflang="en">Apple supplier Foxconn to invest $1 billion in India: Sources</a>

Should Ireland lose, the government will be castigated by the same politicians for launching the appeal. A ruling in favour of the Commission could also raise questions about the application of Ireland's tax code at a sensitive time, when new global rules for taxing digital giants are being debated.

Defeat could also hurt Ireland's ability to attract investment, although the promotional blitz undertaken after the Commission's 2016 decision appears to have worked. The numbers employed by multinationals like Apple, Facebook and Google have grown by 25%, accounting for one in ten Irish workers.

For Apple, defeat would be a blow, but manageable given its cash holdings topped $190 billion at the end of its fiscal second quarter.&nbsp;

The cases are T-778/16 Ireland v Commission and T-892/16 Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe v Commission. The defeated side can appeal on points of law to the EU Court of Justice, Europe's highest court.

Apple's clash with EU competition regulators comes to a head on Wednesday as Europe's second-highest court rules on whether it has to pay 13 billion euros ($15 billion) in Irish back taxes, a key part of the EU's crackdown against sweetheart tax deals.

Apple's clash with EU competition regulators comes to a head on Wednesday as Europe's second-highest court rules on whether it has to pay 13 billion euros ($15 billion) in Irish back taxes, a key part of the EU's crackdown against sweetheart tax deals. In its order four years ago, the European Commission said Apple benefited from illegal state aid via two Irish tax rulings that artificially reduced its tax burden for over two decades - to as low as 0.005% in 2014. Defeat for European Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager could weaken or delay pending cases against Ikea's and Nike's deals with the Netherlands, as well as Huhtamaki's agreement with Luxembourg. Also read: Apple reportedly paid almost $1 billion to Samsung for faltering on order for screens Vestager, who has made the tax crackdown a centrepiece of her time in office, saw the same court last year overturn her demand for Starbucks to pay up to 30 million euros in Dutch back taxes. In another case, the court also threw out her ruling against a Belgian tax scheme for 39 multinationals. The Apple dispute is seen by some analysts as a lose-lose situation for Ireland, which has appealed against the Commission's order alongside the iPhone maker. While 14 billion euros - including interest - would go a long way to plugging the coronavirus-shaped hole in the state's finances, Dublin is seeking to protect a low tax regime that has attracted 250,000 multinational employers. If Ireland's appeal succeeds, the government will be ridiculed by opposition parties for not taking the cash, which could cover at least half of a budget deficit forecast to balloon to as much as 10% of GDP this year. Also read: Apple supplier Foxconn to invest $1 billion in India: Sources Should Ireland lose, the government will be castigated by the same politicians for launching the appeal. A ruling in favour of the Commission could also raise questions about the application of Ireland's tax code at a sensitive time, when new global rules for taxing digital giants are being debated. Defeat could also hurt Ireland's ability to attract investment, although the promotional blitz undertaken after the Commission's 2016 decision appears to have worked. The numbers employed by multinationals like Apple, Facebook and Google have grown by 25%, accounting for one in ten Irish workers. For Apple, defeat would be a blow, but manageable given its cash holdings topped $190 billion at the end of its fiscal second quarter. The cases are T-778/16 Ireland v Commission and T-892/16 Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe v Commission. The defeated side can appeal on points of law to the EU Court of Justice, Europe's highest court.

Crunch time for Apple in fight against $15 billion EU tax order

Google has been sued in a proposed class action accusing the internet search company of illegally invading the privacy of millions of users by pervasively tracking their internet use through browsers set in "private" mode.

The complaint said the proposed class likely includes "millions" of Google users who since June 1, 2016 browsed the internet in "private" mode.

The lawsuit seeks at least $5 billion, accusing Google of surreptitiously collecting information about what people view online and where they browse, despite the Incognito mode.

According to the complaint filed in the federal court in San Jose, California, Google gathers data through Google Analytics, Google Ad Manager and other applications and website plug-ins, including smartphone apps, regardless of whether users click on Google-supported ads.

This helps Google learn about users' friends, hobbies, favorite foods, shopping habits, and even the "most intimate and potentially embarrassing things" they search for online, the complaint said.

"Google cannot continue to engage in the covert and unauthorized data collection from virtually every American with a computer or phone," the complaint added.

The Mountain View, California-based company will defend itself against the claims.

While users may view private browsing as a safe haven from watchful eyes, computer security researchers have long raised concern that Google and rivals might augment user profiles by tracking people's identities across different browsing modes, combining data from private and ordinary internet surfing.

(with inputs from Reuters)

Google has been sued in a proposed class action accusing the internet search company of illegally invading the privacy of millions of users by pervasively tracking their internet use through browsers set in "private" mode.

Google has been sued in a proposed class action accusing the internet search company of illegally invading the privacy of millions of users by pervasively tracking their internet use through browsers set in "private" mode. The complaint said the proposed class likely includes "millions" of Google users who since June 1, 2016 browsed the internet in "private" mode. The lawsuit seeks at least $5 billion, accusing Google of surreptitiously collecting information about what people view online and where they browse, despite the Incognito mode. According to the complaint filed in the federal court in San Jose, California, Google gathers data through Google Analytics, Google Ad Manager and other applications and website plug-ins, including smartphone apps, regardless of whether users click on Google-supported ads. This helps Google learn about users' friends, hobbies, favorite foods, shopping habits, and even the "most intimate and potentially embarrassing things" they search for online, the complaint said. "Google cannot continue to engage in the covert and unauthorized data collection from virtually every American with a computer or phone," the complaint added. The Mountain View, California-based company will defend itself against the claims. While users may view private browsing as a safe haven from watchful eyes, computer security researchers have long raised concern that Google and rivals might augment user profiles by tracking people's identities across different browsing modes, combining data from private and ordinary internet surfing. (with inputs from Reuters)

Google accused of illegally invading privacy, faces $5 billion lawsuit in US

The drug kingpin Pablo Escobar's brother,&nbsp;Roberto Escobar, is apparently&nbsp;suing the tech giant for $2.6bn (£2.1bn)

Roberto has claimed that someone hacked into his iPhoneX and found out his address, which he is blaming on Apple.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/apple-secures-deal-for-martin-scorseses-next-film-starring-leonardo-dicaprio-robert-de-niro-301445">Also read: Apple secures deal for Martin Scorsese's next film starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Robert De Niro</a>

According to reports, he has claimed that someone found his address through FaceTime and found out his address.&nbsp;

He also said that the hackers sent him life-threatening messages.

Escobar has decided to sue Apple for this alleged hacking activity, as he claims that while buying the phone, an Apple employee had assured Escobar that iPhoneX is the most secure phone in the market. He has demanded damages for&nbsp;breach of contract, misrepresentation and emotional distress, as the hacking has forced him into hiding.

This is not the first time Escobar has talked about suing Apple.&nbsp;Earlier this year, when he had launched a foldable gold unbreakable smartphone, he had talked about how he had&nbsp;hopes of "beating Apple" and revealed his lawyers were building a "$30bn class-action lawsuit" against the company for "cheating the people and selling worthless phones".

There has been no comment from Apple yet.

The drug kingpin Pablo Escobar's brother, Roberto Escobar, is apparently suing the tech giant for $2.6bn (£2.1bn) Roberto has claimed that someone hacked into his iPhoneX and found out his address, which he is blaming on Apple.

The drug kingpin Pablo Escobar's brother, Roberto Escobar, is apparently suing the tech giant for $2.6bn (£2.1bn) Roberto has claimed that someone hacked into his iPhoneX and found out his address, which he is blaming on Apple. Also read: Apple secures deal for Martin Scorsese's next film starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Robert De Niro According to reports, he has claimed that someone found his address through FaceTime and found out his address. He also said that the hackers sent him life-threatening messages. Escobar has decided to sue Apple for this alleged hacking activity, as he claims that while buying the phone, an Apple employee had assured Escobar that iPhoneX is the most secure phone in the market. He has demanded damages for breach of contract, misrepresentation and emotional distress, as the hacking has forced him into hiding. This is not the first time Escobar has talked about suing Apple. Earlier this year, when he had launched a foldable gold unbreakable smartphone, he had talked about how he had hopes of "beating Apple" and revealed his lawyers were building a "$30bn class-action lawsuit" against the company for "cheating the people and selling worthless phones". There has been no comment from Apple yet.

Pablo Escobar's brother sues Apple over hacking concerns

Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Pakistan's Dawn newspaper Hameed Haroon on Monday sent a defamation notice to film director <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/film-maker-stirs-pakistan-metoo-debate-with-rape-allegation-257954">Jamshed 'Jami' Mahmood</a> seeking an "unconditional public apology" and the retraction of rape accusations that the former had alleged against him.

The two have been involved in a public dispute since Jami last year in October came forward with the accusation that he was raped by a "media tycoon" 13 years ago and on December 28, named Haroon as his alleged rapist, sources reported.

In response, Haroon had issued a statement categorically rejecting the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistani-media-mogul-rejects-rape-accusations-by-filmmaker-271209">rape accusations</a> and saying he would initiate legal action.

"Almost two months after circulating your first tweet on being allegedly raped, and strangely and abruptly travelling outside Pakistan, on December 28, 2019, on the social media platform Twitter, you falsely and maliciously labelled our client as an alleged rapist," said the four-page-long legal notice sent today.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Why im so strongly supporting <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/metoo?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#metoo</a> ? cuz i know exactly how it happens now, inside a room then outside courts inside courts and how a survivor hides confides cuz i was brutally raped by a very powerful person in our media world. A Giant actually. and yes im taller than him but
— jami (@jamiazaad) <a href="https://twitter.com/jamiazaad/status/1185980753584316418?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 20, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"Since then, you have been continuing to circulate this false allegation all over <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/imran-chishti-the-man-who-incited-nankana-sahib-gurdwara-violence-arrested-272549">Pakistan</a>, including Karachi and abroad. Our client categorically denies that he has ever perpetrated the sexual assault on anyone and categorically denies that he has raped you," it added.

The notice also said that unless Jami circulates an unconditional public apology and issues a public statement retracting his allegation of rape from all social media posts and other media outlets within 14 days of the receipt of this notice, Haroon reserves the right to initiate civil and criminal legal proceedings against the director under Section 499 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, and the Defamation Ordinance, 2002, and other applicable laws.

Jami, who is currently in the United States, told sources that he has received the notice and is in the process of perusing it. 
"He added, however, that an apology was 'not even a distant possibility'," said reports. "There is a lot that needs to be done for victims of sexual harassment and for future victims," Jami was quoted as saying.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-will-not-become-part-of-this-us-iran-conflict-shah-mehmood-qureshi-pak-foreign-minister-272573">'Pakistan will not become part of US-Iran conflict': Pakistan Foreign Minister Qureshi</a>

Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Pakistan's Dawn newspaper Hameed Haroon on Monday sent a defamation notice to film director Jamshed 'Jami' Mahmood seeking an "unconditional public apology" and the retraction of rape accusations that the former had alleged against him.

Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Pakistan's Dawn newspaper Hameed Haroon on Monday sent a defamation notice to film director Jamshed 'Jami' Mahmood seeking an "unconditional public apology" and the retraction of rape accusations that the former had alleged against him. The two have been involved in a public dispute since Jami last year in October came forward with the accusation that he was raped by a "media tycoon" 13 years ago and on December 28, named Haroon as his alleged rapist, sources reported. In response, Haroon had issued a statement categorically rejecting the rape accusations and saying he would initiate legal action. "Almost two months after circulating your first tweet on being allegedly raped, and strangely and abruptly travelling outside Pakistan, on December 28, 2019, on the social media platform Twitter, you falsely and maliciously labelled our client as an alleged rapist," said the four-page-long legal notice sent today. Why im so strongly supporting #metoo ? cuz i know exactly how it happens now, inside a room then outside courts inside courts and how a survivor hides confides cuz i was brutally raped by a very powerful person in our media world. A Giant actually. and yes im taller than him but — jami (@jamiazaad) October 20, 2019 × "Since then, you have been continuing to circulate this false allegation all over Pakistan, including Karachi and abroad. Our client categorically denies that he has ever perpetrated the sexual assault on anyone and categorically denies that he has raped you," it added. The notice also said that unless Jami circulates an unconditional public apology and issues a public statement retracting his allegation of rape from all social media posts and other media outlets within 14 days of the receipt of this notice, Haroon reserves the right to initiate civil and criminal legal proceedings against the director under Section 499 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, and the Defamation Ordinance, 2002, and other applicable laws. Jami, who is currently in the United States, told sources that he has received the notice and is in the process of perusing it. "He added, however, that an apology was 'not even a distant possibility'," said reports. "There is a lot that needs to be done for victims of sexual harassment and for future victims," Jami was quoted as saying. Also Read: 'Pakistan will not become part of US-Iran conflict': Pakistan Foreign Minister Qureshi

Rape accused Dawn media CEO Haroon sends defamation notice to Jami

lawsuit

Lawsuit, News on Lawsuit, stories on Lawsuit, articles on Lawsuit, Lawsuit stories at Wion, Lawsuit news, Lawsuit latest news