Nintendo Palworld lawsuit seeks $65,700 in damages

Nintendo and the Pokémon Company are seeking approximately $65,700 in compensation from their lawsuit against Palworld developer Pocketpair. In a press release the studio issued on Friday, it said Nintendo and the Pokémon Company want ¥5 million each (plus late fees), for a total of ¥10 million or $65,700 in damages.

At first glance, that's a paltry amount of money to demand for copying one of the most successful gaming properties ever, particularly when you consider Tropic Haze, the creator of the now defunct Yuzu Switch emulator, agreed to pay $2.4 million to settle its recent case with Nintendo. While Nintendo and the Pokémon Company may have well wanted to sue for more, their legal approach may have limited their options somewhat.

As you might recall, when the two sued Pocketpair in September, they didn’t accuse it of copyright infringement. Instead, they went for patent infringement. On Friday, Pocketpair listed the three patents Nintendo and the Pokémon Company are accusing the studio of infringing. Per Bloomberg, they relate to gameplay elements found in most Pokémon games. For example, one covers the franchise’s signature battling mechanics, while another relates to how players can ride monsters.

Pokémon games have featured those mechanics since the start, but here’s the thing: all three patents were filed and granted to Nintendo and the Pokémon Company after Pocketpair released Palworld to early access on January 19, 2024. The earliest patent, for instance, was granted to Nintendo and the Pokémon Company on May 22, 2024, or nearly four months after Palworld first hit Steam and Xbox Game Pass.

According to Pocketpair, the two companies seek “compensation for a portion of the damages incurred between the date of registration of the patents and the date of filing of this lawsuit.” Put another way, it's a small window of time the suit targets. 

I’m not a lawyer, so I won’t comment on Nintendo’s strategy of attempting to enforce patents that were issued after Palworld was already on the market. However, I think it’s worth mentioning that Pocketpair CEO Takuro Mizobe had said before the game's release that Palworld had “cleared legal reviews,” suggesting the studio had looked at Nintendo's patent portfolio for possible points of conflict. In any case, the Tokyo District Court is scheduled to hear opening remarks from each side next week.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/nintendo/nintendo-palworld-lawsuit-seeks-65700-in-damages-163051523.html?src=rss

TSMC will reportedly stop making advanced AI chips for Chinese companies

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has suspended the production of advanced AI chips for Chinese companies, according to the Financial Times. The Taiwanese semiconductor chip manufacturer has reportedly notified its clients from China that it will stop producing AI chips for them, particularly models 7 nanometers and smaller, starting this Monday. If a Chinese company orders products that fall within that category, they'll have to go through an approval process that'll likely involve the US government. 

The manufacturer's new policy could be a direct result of its discovery that Huawei had used its chips in AI accelerators without its knowledge. A Canadian research firm called TechInsights was the one that notified the company that it discovered the presence of TSMC-manufactured products in Huawei's hardware. It was a violation of the trade sanctions the US Commerce Department had imposed against Huawei way back in 2020 that prevented it from acquiring chips made by foreign firms. More recently, it revoked its licenses that allowed Intel and Qualcomm to manufacture chips for its devices.

TSMC reported TechInsights' findings to the US Commerce Department, which is now investigating how it had happened. The company denied any working relationship with Huawei and also stopped selling its chips to the client it believes had been illegally forwarding them to the Chinese brand. The Times' sources said that TSMC made the decision to suspend the production of AI chips for Chinese clients altogether, because it wants to show the US government that it's "not acting against US interests." Its new policy could have a big impact on the AI efforts of its Chinese clients. Baidu, for instance, had plans to build hardware for its AI business powered by a series of chips made by TSMC.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/tsmc-will-reportedly-stop-making-advanced-ai-chips-for-chinese-companies-143029506.html?src=rss

TSMC will reportedly stop making advanced AI chips for Chinese companies

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has suspended the production of advanced AI chips for Chinese companies, according to the Financial Times. The Taiwanese semiconductor chip manufacturer has reportedly notified its clients from China that it will stop producing AI chips for them, particularly models 7 nanometers and smaller, starting this Monday. If a Chinese company orders products that fall within that category, they'll have to go through an approval process that'll likely involve the US government. 

The manufacturer's new policy could be a direct result of its discovery that Huawei had used its chips in AI accelerators without its knowledge. A Canadian research firm called TechInsights was the one that notified the company that it discovered the presence of TSMC-manufactured products in Huawei's hardware. It was a violation of the trade sanctions the US Commerce Department had imposed against Huawei way back in 2020 that prevented it from acquiring chips made by foreign firms. More recently, it revoked its licenses that allowed Intel and Qualcomm to manufacture chips for its devices.

TSMC reported TechInsights' findings to the US Commerce Department, which is now investigating how it had happened. The company denied any working relationship with Huawei and also stopped selling its chips to the client it believes had been illegally forwarding them to the Chinese brand. The Times' sources said that TSMC made the decision to suspend the production of AI chips for Chinese clients altogether, because it wants to show the US government that it's "not acting against US interests." Its new policy could have a big impact on the AI efforts of its Chinese clients. Baidu, for instance, had plans to build hardware for its AI business powered by a series of chips made by TSMC.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/general/tsmc-will-reportedly-stop-making-advanced-ai-chips-for-chinese-companies-143029506.html?src=rss

OpenAI wins first round against Raw Story and AlterNet copyright case

OpenAI is facing multiple lawsuits over its use of several publications' and books' content to train its large language models without explicit permission or proper compensation. A judge has just dismissed one of them. New York federal judge Colleen McMahon has dismissed the lawsuit filed by Raw Story and AlterNet, which accused the company of using their materials for AI training without consent. As VentureBeat notes, though, their complaint didn't argue that OpenAI infringed on their copyright like other publications' lawsuits do. Instead, it focused on the DMCA provision that protects "copyright management information."

The publications argued that OpenAI removed the author names, titles and other metadata identifying their copyright from the articles it used to train its LLMs. McMahon explained that the plaintiffs failed to show that they suffered "a cognizable injury" from those actions and that the harm they had cited was "not the type of harm that has been elevated" to warrant a lawsuit. The judge also said that "the likelihood that ChatGPT would output plagiarized content from one of [their] articles seems remote." She added that the plaintiffs are truly seeking redress for the use of their articles "to develop ChatGPT without compensation" and not for the removal of their copyright management information. 

Raw Story and AlterNet don't intend to back down, based on what their lawyer told Reuters. Matt Topic, their attorney, said they're "certain [they] can address the concerns the court identified through an amended complaint."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/openai-wins-first-round-against-raw-story-and-alternet-copyright-case-130027681.html?src=rss

OpenAI wins first round against Raw Story and AlterNet copyright case

OpenAI is facing multiple lawsuits over its use of several publications' and books' content to train its large language models without explicit permission or proper compensation. A judge has just dismissed one of them. New York federal judge Colleen McMahon has dismissed the lawsuit filed by Raw Story and AlterNet, which accused the company of using their materials for AI training without consent. As VentureBeat notes, though, their complaint didn't argue that OpenAI infringed on their copyright like other publications' lawsuits do. Instead, it focused on the DMCA provision that protects "copyright management information."

The publications argued that OpenAI removed the author names, titles and other metadata identifying their copyright from the articles it used to train its LLMs. McMahon explained that the plaintiffs failed to show that they suffered "a cognizable injury" from those actions and that the harm they had cited was "not the type of harm that has been elevated" to warrant a lawsuit. The judge also said that "the likelihood that ChatGPT would output plagiarized content from one of [their] articles seems remote." She added that the plaintiffs are truly seeking redress for the use of their articles "to develop ChatGPT without compensation" and not for the removal of their copyright management information. 

Raw Story and AlterNet don't intend to back down, based on what their lawyer told Reuters. Matt Topic, their attorney, said they're "certain [they] can address the concerns the court identified through an amended complaint."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/openai-wins-first-round-against-raw-story-and-alternet-copyright-case-130027681.html?src=rss

A fired Disney employee allegedly altered menus to change allergy markers

As someone allergic to a big sect of food (hey gluten free eaters!), I know how important accurate allergy markers are on a menu. Yet, a new criminal complaint alleges that a former Disney World employee intentionally altered a menu's allergy information to state foods didn't contain peanuts that, in fact, did, 404 Media and Court Watch reported in collaboration. 

The complaint alleges that Michael Scheuer was fired by Disney and then used still viable passwords to access a third-party created proprietary menu creation and inventory system. Over the course of his misdoings, he allegedly changed the allergy information along with adding profanity, altering prices and changing the font to Wingdings. Those wingdings were what initially tipped off employees. All menus in the database were deemed unusable and the application went offline for one to two weeks to fix the issues.

Disney changed the passwords, but then Scheuer allegedly broke into multiple of the third-party company's FTPs, to change the allergy markers and altered QR codes from directing to a menu to a boycott Israel website. He also tried to break into Disney employees' accounts nearly 8,000 times. Disney claims that the altered menus were identified before being shipped out to restaurants. 

This case is unrelated to a doctor who died of an allergic reaction after eating at a Disney Springs restaurant last year. Notably, Disney tried to get a lawsuit filed by the doctor's husband thrown out in August, alleging that he had agreed to settle lawsuits out of court through arbitration. The reason? He had signed a terms of service for a one-month Disney+ trial in 2019 and again when making an account to buy park tickets. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/a-fired-disney-employee-allegedly-altered-menus-to-change-allergy-markers-161549481.html?src=rss

Brazil sues Meta and TikTok for over $500 million for not protecting minors

Meta and TikTok are once again in hot water for allegedly failing to protect minors or limit their use on the platforms. The Collective Defense Institute, a consumer rights group in Brazil, has issued two lawsuits against Meta, TikTok and Kwai, another short video platform from China, to the sound of three billion reais ($525.8 million), Reuters reports

The lawsuits pull from some of the (many) studies demonstrating the risk of social media use. It orders Meta and co. to clearly issue warnings about how platform addiction can negatively impact minors' mental health. It also calls for the companies to lay out detailed data protection mechanisms. 

"It is urgent that measures be adopted in order to change the way the algorithm works, the processing of data from users under 18, and the way in which teenagers aged 13 and over are supervised and their accounts created, in order to ensure a safer, healthier experience...as is already the case in developed countries," said Lillian Salgado, a lawyer and one of the plaintiffs.

This is far from the first lawsuit for Meta or TikTok regarding the safety of minors. In late 2023, New Mexico sued Meta for not protecting children in a claim that both Facebook and Instagram suggested sexual content to minors. One month later it was revealed that, in a 2021 internal memo, Meta had found over 100,000 child users faced daily harassment. Yet, Meta executives rejected recommended algorithm redesigns. Earlier this month, 14 attorneys general sued TikTok for "falsely claiming its platform is safe for young people." These are just two of the many suits filed against social media platforms for not protecting young users.

Meta recently created teen accounts on Instagram that are mandatory for all users under 16. They have stricter privacy settings and require parent approval for any changes. However, these accounts are not yet available in Brazil — though Meta claims they will be soon. 

A statement from Meta said it wants "young people to have safe and age-appropriate experiences on our apps, and we have been working on these issues for over a decade, developing more than 50 tools, resources, and features to support teens and their guardians." 

Notably, Brazil has recently squared off with Elon Musk's X (formerly Twitter) for refusing to block profiles that the government claimed promoted election misinformation. The company eventually paid a 28 million reais ($4.9 million fine).

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/brazil-sues-meta-and-tiktok-for-over-500-million-for-not-protecting-minors-154518826.html?src=rss

Microsoft accuses Google of secretly funding regulatory astroturf campaign

Microsoft is accusing Google of funding a proxy campaign designed to discredit it in the eyes of regulatory authorities and policymakers in the European Union and beyond. In a blog post penned by Rima Alaily, the company’s deputy general counsel, Microsoft claims the search giant has gone to “great lengths to obfuscate its involvement, funding and control” of the Open Cloud Coalition, a group of “cloud service providers, industry leaders and stakeholders” that says it’s committed to advocating for a “fair, competitive, and open cloud services industry across the UK and EU.”

According to Microsoft, Google hired a lobbying agency in Europe to create and operate the organization, and recruited “a handful of” European cloud providers to appear as the public face of the soon-to-launch campaign. The company says that Google plans to “present itself as a backseat member” of the Open Cloud Coalition, rather than its leader and primary funder. As one example, Microsoft points to a recruitment document (PDF link) that makes no mention of the group’s claimed affiliation to Google. It also notes the involvement of Nicky Steward, who co-wrote a complaint against Microsoft and Amazon Web Services as part of the UK’s ongoing antitrust investigation into the cloud services market.

“It remains to be seen what Google offered smaller companies to join, either in terms of cash or discounts,” Microsoft says. It adds that one of the cloud providers Google approached about joining the Open Cloud Coalition claims that the company will direct the group to attack “Microsoft’s cloud computing business in the European Union and the United Kingdom.”

Engadget was unable to independently verify Microsoft’s claims.

"We’ve been very public about our concerns with Microsoft’s cloud licensing. We and many others believe that Microsoft’s anticompetitive practices lock-in customers and create negative downstream effects that impact cybersecurity, innovation, and choice,” a Google spokesperson told Engadget, and pointed us to four separate blog posts on the matter.

As for why Google would potentially go to the extraordinary lengths of funding an astroturf campaign, Microsoft points to the recent uptick in regulatory scrutiny of the company’s search, advertising and mobile app store businesses. By Microsoft’s count, Google faces at least 24 antitrust investigations globally, including a Department of Justice probe that could see the potential break up of the company.

“Never in the past two decades have Google’s search, digital advertising, and mobile app store monopolies faced such a concerted and determined threat as they do today.” Alaily writes. “At a time when Google should be focused on addressing legitimate questions about its business, it is instead turning its vast resources towards tearing down others. It is disappointing that, with the foundation of their business facing jeopardy, they have sought to bolster their cloud computing service – Google Cloud Platform – by attacking ours.”

The accusations come after Google had reportedly attempted to derail an antitrust settlement Microsoft had negotiated with the Cloud Infrastructure Services Providers in Europe (CISPE). In July, Bloomberg wrote that Google had offered the group €470 million to go forward with litigation against its rival, an overture CISPE ultimately rejected.

As revenue growth from digital ads has slowed for Google in recent years, the company has increasingly turned to the cloud market to pick up the slack. In 2023, Google’s cloud business broke even for the first time. More recently, the unit generated a $900 million profit in the first quarter of this year.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/microsoft-accuses-google-of-secretly-funding-regulatory-astroturf-campaign-203804594.html?src=rss

Microsoft accuses Google of secretly funding regulatory astroturf campaign

Microsoft is accusing Google of funding a proxy campaign designed to discredit it in the eyes of regulatory authorities and policymakers in the European Union and beyond. In a blog post penned by Rima Alaily, the company’s deputy general counsel, Microsoft claims the search giant has gone to “great lengths to obfuscate its involvement, funding and control” of the Open Cloud Coalition, a group of “cloud service providers, industry leaders and stakeholders” that says it’s committed to advocating for a “fair, competitive, and open cloud services industry across the UK and EU.”

According to Microsoft, Google hired a lobbying agency in Europe to create and operate the organization, and recruited “a handful of” European cloud providers to appear as the public face of the soon-to-launch campaign. The company says that Google plans to “present itself as a backseat member” of the Open Cloud Coalition, rather than its leader and primary funder. As one example, Microsoft points to a recruitment document (PDF link) that makes no mention of the group’s claimed affiliation to Google. It also notes the involvement of Nicky Steward, who co-wrote a complaint against Microsoft and Amazon Web Services as part of the UK’s ongoing antitrust investigation into the cloud services market.

“It remains to be seen what Google offered smaller companies to join, either in terms of cash or discounts,” Microsoft says. It adds that one of the cloud providers Google approached about joining the Open Cloud Coalition claims that the company will direct the group to attack “Microsoft’s cloud computing business in the European Union and the United Kingdom.”

Engadget was unable to independently verify Microsoft’s claims.

"We’ve been very public about our concerns with Microsoft’s cloud licensing. We and many others believe that Microsoft’s anticompetitive practices lock-in customers and create negative downstream effects that impact cybersecurity, innovation, and choice,” a Google spokesperson told Engadget, and pointed us to four separate blog posts on the matter.

As for why Google would potentially go to the extraordinary lengths of funding an astroturf campaign, Microsoft points to the recent uptick in regulatory scrutiny of the company’s search, advertising and mobile app store businesses. By Microsoft’s count, Google faces at least 24 antitrust investigations globally, including a Department of Justice probe that could see the potential break up of the company.

“Never in the past two decades have Google’s search, digital advertising, and mobile app store monopolies faced such a concerted and determined threat as they do today.” Alaily writes. “At a time when Google should be focused on addressing legitimate questions about its business, it is instead turning its vast resources towards tearing down others. It is disappointing that, with the foundation of their business facing jeopardy, they have sought to bolster their cloud computing service – Google Cloud Platform – by attacking ours.”

The accusations come after Google had reportedly attempted to derail an antitrust settlement Microsoft had negotiated with the Cloud Infrastructure Services Providers in Europe (CISPE). In July, Bloomberg wrote that Google had offered the group €470 million to go forward with litigation against its rival, an overture CISPE ultimately rejected.

As revenue growth from digital ads has slowed for Google in recent years, the company has increasingly turned to the cloud market to pick up the slack. In 2023, Google’s cloud business broke even for the first time. More recently, the unit generated a $900 million profit in the first quarter of this year.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/microsoft-accuses-google-of-secretly-funding-regulatory-astroturf-campaign-203804594.html?src=rss

Apple wins $250 in Masimo smartwatch patent case

The legal battle between Apple and medical technology company Masimo rages on, with the bigger company — sorta, kinda — winning their latest face off. A federal jury has agreed with Apple that previous versions of Masimo's W1 and Freedom (pictured above) watches infringed on its design patents, according to Reuters. It only awarded Apple $250 in damages, which is the smallest amount that could be awarded for patent infringement, but the company's lawyers reportedly told the court that it wasn't after money anyway. 

What Apple, which is worth $3.5 trillion, wanted was an injunction on the sales of Masimo's current smartwatch models. However, the jury determined that those newer models don't violate Apple's intellectual property. That is why Masimo is also treating the jury's decision as a win, telling the news organization that it's thankful for the verdict that's "in favor of Masimo and against Apple on nearly all issues." Apparently, the ruling only affects a "discontinued module and charger." As for Apple, it told Reuters that it was "glad the jury's decision today will protect the innovations [it advances] on behalf of [its] customers."

Masimo sued Apple in 2021, accusing it of infringing on several of its light-based blood-oxygen monitoring patents, while the tech giant countersued a year later. A court sided with Masimo in 2023, forcing Apple to pause sales on its latest smartwatch models, as the US International Trade Commission blocked all Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 imports into the country. The company appealed and was ultimately able to sell its watches in the country earlier this year by removing the technology from the units offered in the US. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/apple-wins-250-in-masimo-smartwatch-patent-case-150020340.html?src=rss