AOL members sue over search data release
Plaintiffs seek monetary relief as well as changes to AOL's privacy practices
By Juan Carlos Perez, IDG News Service September 25, 2006
Three people have sued AOL LLC over the company's controversial release of member search-engine records, in what their lawyers are billing as the first such lawsuit seeking national class action status.
The three AOL members charge the Time Warner Inc. subsidiary with, among other things, privacy violation, false advertising and unjust enrichment.
Two unnamed AOL members residing in California, and Kasadore Ramkissoon, who lives in New York, filed their lawsuit on Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
The lawsuit seeks monetary relief for all affected AOL members in the U.S. whose search data was disclosed without consent from January 1, 2004 until the present.
The plaintiffs also ask the court to instruct AOL not to store or maintain users' Web search records, and to destroy the Web search records it currently has.
The lawsuit stems from AOL's decision to post on its research Web site about 20 million search records from about 658,000 of its members, covering the three-month period between March and May.
AOL didn't disclose the names of the members, but it grouped each member's records with a unique number. This made it possible to see what each individual searched for. The data included search queries, as well as Web sites the members clicked on to.
When the issue became a privacy scandal in August, AOL apologized and pulled the data [when outsiders pointed out what the CEO had missed... Bob] from the Web site, but by then the data set had been downloaded multiple times and the records remain available online.
The records contain sensitive information like credit card, telephone and Social Security numbers, birth dates, full names and addresses. The New York Times tracked down one of the affected members and, with her permission, interviewed and identified her.
The law firm Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo represents the plaintiffs. A copy of the complaint is posted on the law firm's Web site.
The scandal has had significant repercussions within AOL. Its Chief Technology Officer Maureen Govern resigned and two other employees were fired. [The CEO will get the regular year-end bonus... Bob]
Last week, in an e-mail sent to all employees and obtained by IDG News Service, AOL's Chief Executive Officer Jonathan Miller referred to the incident as "the search data debacle" and announced AOL plans to hire, for the first time ever, a chief privacy officer. [“We never considered privacy before...” Bob]
In the e-mail, Miller outlined a reorganization of AOL's business structure, which will include a unit solely dedicated to what he termed the "protection" of AOL consumers.
Last week, in its latest search engine usage study, Nielsen/NetRatings reported that in August, people in the U.S. ran 18.2 percent fewer queries on AOL's search engine, compared with August 2005.
Nielsen/NetRatings didn't venture any explanations for the drop, but industry observers have pointed directly at the search data scandal as the culprit. Among the top five search engine providers, AOL was the only one whose usage share shrunk last month. [Perhaps stockholders would like to sue as well? Bob]
The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a complaint with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission against AOL in August over the search data release.
AOL declined to provide comment for this story.
House panel on HP scandal adds second day of hearings
Major wireless phone carriers have been invited to testify
By Robert Mullins, IDG News Service September 25, 2006
The U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee looking into the Hewlett-Packard Co. boardroom spying scandal has added a second day of hearings and issued subpoenas for some witnesses.
The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee is holding hearings on Thursday, Sept. 28, and now Friday the 29th on pretexting, the practice of obtaining private phone records under false pretenses from phone companies.
On the second day of hearings, the subcommittee has invited executives of the major wireless phone carriers to testify as well as the chairmen of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), according to a subcommittee news release Monday.
Several people connected with the HP scandal have already accepted invitations to testify before the subcommittee on Thursday. HP has admitted that outside investigators it hired earlier this year to find the source of news leaks from the HP board engaged in pretexting to access their phone records.
... The subcommittee said in a news release that the hearings are part of a seven-month inquiry it's been conducting into data brokers and the questionable practice of pretexting.
They're okay to use, BUT...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/22/AR2006092201839.html?nav=rss_nation
Colo. Judge Grudgingly Approves Machine Vote
By Colleen Slevin Associated Press Saturday, September 23, 2006; A05
DENVER, Sept. 22 -- A judge on Friday chastised state officials for botching efforts to ensure that electronic voting machines are tamper-proof, but he cleared them for use in the November election, saying it is too late now to change course.
Denver County District Judge Lawrence A. Manzanares said the secretary of state's office had violated state law by failing to come up with minimum security standards for the machines. He added that the office had done an "abysmal" job documenting which tests were performed on the machines and should not have allowed computer manufacturers to vouch for the security of their own products.
The judge said, however, that he would not bar the machines with the election just six weeks away and county clerks warning that they might not have time to print enough paper ballots.
Many of the machines will be used in Colorado's most populous counties during the general election Nov. 7. A lawsuit filed by 13 voters claimed the machines were not secure, suggesting the accuracy of election results could be in jeopardy.
Manzanares said the secretary of state's office must issue new security guidelines after the election. [Might be fun to be involded in this discussion... Bob]
For November, he ordered the state to work with counties to make sure the machines are kept under close watch.
I wonder what the wholesale cost is?
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/25/2110213&from=rss
Free PC With French Broadband Connection
Posted by timothy on Monday September 25, @05:14PM from the someone-mention-this-to-aol-please dept. The Internet Linux Business IT Hardware
robson writes "Neuf Cegetel announced the purchase of AOL France, an ISP that counts 500.000 broadband subscribers and the arrival of 'the box,' an Internet access terminal. Code-name: Easy Gate. It's a computer, working under the Linux OS. It's a router. It's a DSL modem. It's also a telephone. All in one. Easy Gate will be available from November, the actual 'box' consists of: an Intel 852 GM, 6 ports USB 2.0, 512 Mb of RAM and 512 Mb of Flash memory."
Not the best thought out business plan I can imagine...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14995196/
Targeted in online check scam, FTC sues
Agency targets Qchex.com after crooks write bogus checks on its accounts
By Bob Sullivan Technology correspondent MSNBC Updated: 3:43 p.m. MT Sept 25, 2006
A federal court in California has ordered a Web site to stop e-mailing personal checks without verifying the identity of the check-writers in response to a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit alleging that the practice has resulted in widespread fraud. The action came after brazen crooks used the Qchex Web site to try to steal from federal agencies, including the FTC itself.
U.S. District Judge William Q. Hayes last week issued a temporary restraining order barring Qchex from e-mailing the checks while the FTC pursues a lawsuit against the San Diego-based company.
In seeking the order, the FTC said it had received over 600 complaints from consumers who say the practice was used to fraudulently withdraw money from their accounts.
The agency said criminals also wrote 20 checks drawn against FTC and Federal Communications Commission bank accounts. Neither the 16 fake checks worth a total of $100,000 written on the FCC accounts nor those drawn on FTC accounts was cashed, so no money was lost, it said.
The company did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the lawsuit.
Site popular with fraud artists
MSNBC.com first warned consumers about Qchex.com more than a year ago. The site offers consumers the ability to register their checking accounts, then send checks via e-mail. But the service quickly became popular with fraud artists who discovered that Qchex didn't verify that its users were the legitimate account holders before giving them the ability to draft checks drawn on an account.
The FTC said most of the complaints it received about Qchex came from businesses defrauded by criminals who paid by a Qchex check that eventually was returned as worthless. Generally, criminals used the fake checks to purchase merchandise online.
While personal checks generally must be signed in order to be valid, federal and state banking regulations contain an exception to the rule that the criminals are exploiting. Known as "demand drafts" or "remotely created checks," the documents look like personal checks but are stamped with a message such as "signature not required."
This enables Qchex users to easily write a fraudulent check if they have the bank routing number and account number that appear on every paper check and deposit slip. A criminal can create a fraudulent check even if the account holder's name and address are incorrect, as long as the bank routing number and account number are accurate, the FTC said.
Qchex victims told the FTC that the company was virtually unreachable, or could only be contacted only through "Herculean persistence." One Utah company complained that 20 Qchex checks were drawn on its business account over several months despite numerous attempts to reach the company by phone and e-mail.
CEO says site not to blame
When MSNBC.com first wrote about Qchex, James Danforth, CEO of the site's parent company, Neovi Data Corp., conceded that some fraud occurs from criminals using the site. But he said the overwhelming number of customers are legitimate and argued that the site is no different from hardware and software that allows consumers to print their own checks at home.
"Anybody could take any check in America and commit fraud," Danforth said. "A check is a very simple document to reproduce."
The site itself acknowledged the threat of illegal use, urging consumers to register their checking account numbers before they are claimed by a criminal. [Ah! It's a marketing tool! Bob]
“Registering your bank accounts with Qchex ensures no one else can set up or access your account numbers on the Qchex system,” it advised in its instructions.
In its motion in support of a temporary restraining order request, the FTC said Qchex still does not adequately verify its users.
"Defendants did not and still do not require a customer requesting those services to demonstrate that he or she has authority to write checks on an identified bank account," it said. "As a result of defendants’ failure to verify their customers’ authority to write checks drawn on identified accounts, defendants have created and delivered numerous bogus checks for fraud operators. ... Anyone could open a Qchex account with any bank account number and Qchex would create and deliver checks for them."
Lack of verification blamed for ‘substantial injury’
The motion says Qchex has refused to add verification procedures to its site, indicating the company has "persisted in their course of conduct, even after being notified repeatedly and from numerous quarters of the substantial injury it causes."
Federal regulators have been eyeing Qchex for some time. In July 2005, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation issued a warning to member banks about fraudulent Qchex checks. At the time, Danforth told the FDIC that the site was processing several thousand transactions every week, the FTC complaint says.
In response, Danforth told regulators that Qchex would add a number of systems to improve the site's security. But in its motion, the FTC alleges that those systems had loopholes that were easily abused by criminals.
The federal government also has taken action to tighten rules on demand drafts.
The Federal Reserve last year adopted an amendment to its checks regulations that makes the bank that cashes a demand draft liable for losses if it is fraudulent. Previously the bank that had the account the check was drawn from was liable.
The new regulations went into effect in July and it is not yet clear if the change is stemming fraud using demand drafts.
http://news.com.com/2100-1025_3-6119043.html
British Library calls for digital copyright action
By Tom Espiner Story last modified Mon Sep 25 08:39:15 PDT 2006
The British Library has called for a "serious updating" of current copyright law to "unambiguously" include digital content and take technological advances into account.
In a manifesto released on Monday at the Labor Party Conference in Manchester, the United Kingdom's national library warned that the country's traditional copyright law needs to be extended to fully recognize digital content.
"Unless there is a serious updating of copyright law to recognize the changing technological environment, the law becomes an ass," [Don't you love the Queen's English? Bob] Lynne Brindley, chief executive of the British Library, told ZDNet UK.
Digital rights management (DRM) technologies and licensing agreements currently can impose restrictions on copying content that go beyond the requirements of copyright law. This needs legal clarification, according to the British Library.
"DRM is a technical device, but it's being used in an all-embracing sense. It can't be circumvented for disabled access or preservation, and the technology doesn't expire (as traditional copyright does). In effect, it's overriding exceptions to copyright law," Brindley said.
The British Library hopes to protect statutory exceptions and fair dealing, which enable libraries to make and preserve copies of content, and make them available for research purposes and for disabled people.
"This is a global, international issue," Brindley said. "We have to have the same balance as in traditional print. We are seeking a triage ensuring creators are rewarded but also that the public good is served."
The Open Rights Group, a digital civil-rights organization, said it "whole-heartedly supported" the British Library's call for a clarification of copyright law.
"One of the key problems is that the limitations and exceptions to copyright law are being ignored by business, which is imposing restrictive licenses on digital content," Suw Charman, executive director of the Open Rights Group, told ZDNet UK.
Charman said DRM restrictions could be particularly damaging for academic research.
"If a library carried a printed journal, academics and students could photocopy it. Digital journals have restrictions on access, which is a dangerous road to go down," Charman said. "If we allow companies to create their own licenses, we undermine copyright law. If we say contract law is more important than copyright law, it allows publishers to write whatever license they like, which is what is happening now."
The British Library said it hopes to play a leading role in moderating the debate between those who wish to make copyright law more restrictive and those who wish to radically reform it.
The British Library also called for the question of "orphan works"--content whose rights holder is hard to find--to be addressed.
"There's an enormous amount of material locked up because we can't trace the copyright holders," Brindley said.
http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/012612.html
September 25, 2006
Pew Internet Project Releases Second Report on Future of the Internet
"A survey of internet leaders, activists, and analysts shows that a majority agree with predictions that by 2020 [Link to The Future of the Internet II (115 pages, PDF)]:
A low-cost global network will be thriving and creating new opportunities in a “flattening” world.
Humans will remain in charge of technology, even as more activity is automated and “smart agents” proliferate. However, a significant 42% of survey respondents were pessimistic about humans’ ability to control the technology in the future. This significant majority agreed that dangers and dependencies will grow beyond our ability to stay in charge of technology. This was one of the major surprises in the survey.
Virtual reality will be compelling enough to enhance worker productivity and also spawn new addiction problems.
Tech “refuseniks” will emerge as a cultural group characterized by their choice to live off the network. Some will do this as a benign way to limit information overload, while others will commit acts of violence and terror against technology-inspired change.
People will wittingly and unwittingly disclose more about themselves, gaining some benefits in the process even as they lose some privacy.
English will be a universal language of global communications, but other languages will not be displaced. Indeed, many felt other languages such as Mandarin, would grow in prominence."
http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/012611.html
September 25, 2006
Previously unreleased bibliographies and indexes of National Security Agency publications
The Memory Hole: "This page contains indexes of four periodicals published by the National Security Agency, plus a listing of publications from the NSA's Center for Cryptologic History. These indexes haven't been publicly released until now, and many of the Cryptologic History publications weren't previously known to the public. Researcher Michael Ravnitzky has discovered a huge cache of information about the NSA, intelligence, and cryptography."
Push too hard and someone will push back... (Can an organization funded by an Oligopoly act as a Monopoly?)
http://techdirt.com/articles/20060925/230637.shtml
Limewire Hits Back Hard: Sues RIAA For Antitrust And Consumer Fraud
from the this-may-get-interesting dept
Last month, the RIAA sued Limewire after Limewire wouldn't agree to simply roll over and pretend the RIAA's interpretation of the Supreme Court decision in the Grokster case was actually what the Supreme Court said. The court actually said that services could be found liable, if they were shown to actively induce infringement. The RIAA and the MPAA pretended this meant that any file sharing network that had unauthorized content was flat-out illegal. Of course, that's a bit of a stretch. So, it already seemed like it would be an interesting case, but now Limewire has hit back even harder with counterclaims accusing the RIAA of antitrust violations, consumer fraud and other misconduct. Specifically, they seem to be making the case that the RIAA only wants to shut down Limewire because it is a competitive distribution mechanism that they cannot control, which helps compete with their monopolistic control on traditional distribution. It's an interesting claim that does make some sense, though the RIAA will simply try to paint Limewire as a tool for "thieves." As with many of these types of cases, there's probably a decent chance that the sides will settle before any decision is made, but in this case, it would be very interesting to see the actual outcome of any lawsuit -- both on the issue of whether or not simply running a file sharing network is inducement and on whether or not there really is an antitrust claim here. If the case does go forward and the RIAA loses on the antitrust issue, it could have a big impact on the traditional labels, and could actually be a catalyst towards forcing them to accept the changing nature of the market. This is becoming a case well worth watching.
This is interesting (but overwhelmed by Digg at the moment) Think of it as an online study group!
http://digg.com/software/New_Free_Collaborative_Notes_Site_for_Students_by_Students
New, Free Collaborative Notes Site for Students by Students!
mikekreein submitted by mikekreein 20 hours 40 minutes ago (via http://www.notemesh.com )
Just in time for midterms, NoteMesh is a new website that allows students to add class notes in a wiki format, so everyone in the class can view, add, or edit the same notes. Created by UT students, NoteMesh is an excellent resource for posting those tough unanswered study guide questions and letting other students fill them out for you!
So those batteries are safe?
http://www.spymac.com/news/article.php?contentid=5221
Virgin lifts Apple laptop flight ban
23 hours ago09-25-2006 08:26 AM by Kristie Masuda
Virgin Atlantic Airways has lifted its total ban on in-flight use of Apple and Dell laptop batteries.
Apparently not!
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/display/20060925152824.html
Lenovo to Probe Batteries from Sony, as ThinkPad Catches Fire.
Lenovo to Investigate Sony-Made Batteries’ Exposions
Category: Mobile by Anton Shilov [ 09/25/2006 | 03:29 PM ]
Lenovo, the maker of IBM ThinkPad-branded laptops, said it would investigate an incident with its laptop, when the notebook started to smoke and spark. The company also admitted that the device used battery cells made by Sony, which are already known for causing such issues.
“A Lenovo ThinkPad T43 notebook computer overheated and began smoking and sparking on September 16 at Los Angeles International Airport, but no one was injured,” a Lenovo spokesman in Tokyo is reported to have said, according to Reuters news-agency.
It was not yet clear what caused the malfunction, however, the highly-likely scenario is that problematic battery cells from Sony were the source of the issue again. Even though Lenovo spokesman admitted that the ThinkPad T43 used a battery that contained cells made by Sony, a representative for the latter said that his company could not determine whether this was true. [“Our customers frequently lie...” Bob]
So what's the worst that could happen? There is a half-second video of the battery burning. I sure wouldn't what that on my lap!
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/09/25/man_saves_laptop/
Man saves laptop from battery blaze
By Reg Hardware 25th September 2006 14:27 GMT
An HP notebook was left damaged but not destroyed last week when it became the latest laptop to suffer a battery meltdown - the hasty removal of the power cell prevented a notebook fire like the one that took out a Lenovo ThinkPad two weeks ago. This time the incendiary incident was captured on video. [http://regmedia.co.uk/2006/09/25/battfile.mp4 ]
According to witnesses, the notebook began to emit smoke, at which point the clearly asbestos-fingered owner pulled out the smoking power cell and punted it outside into his firm's parking lot. Just in time: the battery caught fire almost immediately.
It's clear from the pictures the battery must have reached temperatures high enough to melt and scorch the laptop's battery bay.
For that reason, we'd never recommend removing an smoking battery. Quite apart from what the heat could do to your hand, here's what happened to the battery after it was removed:
You wouldn't want you hands on that...
It's unclear what make of battery was fitted into the HP laptop, and whether it was the original HP-supplied power cell or a third-party add-in. In April this year, HP asked 15,700 customers to return their notebook batteries, which posed a fire risk.
Isn't this an act of war? Why no news coverage? (Perhaps if Al Queda did it?)
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002794.html
Chinese Laser vs. U.S. Sats?
"China has fired high-power lasers at U.S. spy satellites flying over its territory in... a test of Chinese ability to blind the spacecraft," Defense News is reporting. And, at least in theory, those lasers might be able temporarily take offline America's most powerful orbiting spies, like the giant electro-optical Keyhole spacecraft or radar-based satellites like the Lacrosse.
No comments:
Post a Comment