Meta's Oversight Board "is spinning off a new appeals center," reports the Washington Post, "to handle content disputes from European social media users on multiple platforms".

It will operate under Europe's Digital Services Act, "which requires tech companies to allow users to appeal restrictions on their accounts before an independent group of experts." "I think this is really a game changer," Appeals Centre Europe CEO Thomas Hughes said in an interview. "It could really drive platform accountability and transparency."

The expansion arrives as the Oversight Board, an independent collection of academics, experts and lawyers funded by Meta, has been seeking to expand its influence beyond the social media giant... [The Board] has tried for years to court other major internet companies, offering to help them referee debates about content, The Post has reported...

Oversight Board members and Oversight Board Trust Chairman Stephen Neal said in statements that both the Appeals Centre Europe and the Oversight Board will play critical but complimentary roles in holding tech companies accountable for their decisions on content. "Both entities are committed to improving user redress, transparency and upholding users' rights online," Neal said...

Hughes, who used to be the Oversight Board's administration director, said that he was "proud" of what the Oversight Board is accomplishing but that it is different from what the Appeals Centre Europe will offer. When Facebook, YouTube or TikTok removes a post, European social media users will be able to appeal the decision to the center. Users also will also be able to flag the center with posts they think violate the rules but were not removed. While the Appeals Centre Europe's decisions will be nonbinding, the group will generate data that could power decisions by regulators, civil society groups and the general public, Hughes said. By contrast, the Oversight Board's decisions on Meta content are binding.
Last year the original Oversight Board completed more than 50 cases, "and is on track to exceed that number in 2024," according to the article. But this board is different, CEO Hughes told the Post. They'll have about two dozen staffers, with expertise in human rights and tech policy — or fluency in various languages.

And he added that though the center is funded by an initial grant, future operating costs will be covered by the fees social media companies pay the appeal center — roughly 90 euros ($100) per case.

The Wall Street Journal delves into the origin story of that teenaged Grand Theft Auto VI leaker. Arion Kurtaj, now 19 years old, is the most notorious name that has emerged from a sprawling set of online communities called the Com... Their youthful inventiveness and tenacity, as well as their status as minors that make prosecution more complicated, have made the Com especially dangerous, according to law-enforcement officials and cybersecurity investigators. Some kids, they say, are recruited from popular online spaces like Minecraft or Roblox.... [William McKeen, a supervisory special agent with the FBI's Cyber Division] said the average age of anyone arrested for a crime in the U.S. is 37, while the average age of someone arrested for cybercrime is 19. Cybersecurity investigators have found posts they say suggest Kurtaj has been involved in online attacks since he was 11.
"He had limited social skills and trouble developing relationships, records say — and ultimately looked for approval in the booming world of cybercrime..." [When Kurtaj was 14] he landed in a residential school serving children with severe emotional and behavioral needs. Kurtaj was physically assaulted by a staff member at his school who was later convicted as a result, according to a person familiar with the case. In early 2021, his mother brought him home and removed him from government care, court records say. He never returned to school. He was 16.

A month after his mother pulled him out of school, investigators say that Kurtaj was part of a hacking group called Recursion Team that broke into the videogame firm Electronic Arts and stole 780 gigabytes of data. When Electronic Arts refused to engage, they dumped the stolen data online. Within a week of that hack, investigators had identified Kurtaj and provided his name to the FBI. Later in that summer of 2021, according to court records, Kurtaj partnered with another teenager, known as ASyntax, and several Brazilian hackers, and started calling themselves Lapsus$. The group hacked into the British telecommunications giant BT in an effort to steal money using a technique called SIM swapping... The hacks weren't always for money. In late 2021, Lapsus$ hacked into a website operated by Brazil's Ministry of Health and deleted the country's database of Covid vaccinations, according to law enforcement...

If the Com has a social center, it's a website called Doxbin, where users publish personal details, such as home addresses and phone numbers, of their online rivals in an attempt to intimidate each other. Kurtaj bought Doxbin in November 2021 for $75,000, according to Chainalysis. But after a few months, the previous owners accused Kurtaj of mismanaging the site and pressured him to sell it back. He relented. Then in January 2022, cybersecurity investigators say, he doxxed the entire site, publishing a database that included usernames, passwords and email addresses that he'd downloaded when he was the owner. For cybersecurity experts, it was a gold mine. "It helped investigators piece together which crimes were done by who," said Allison Nixon, chief research officer at Unit 221B, an online investigations firm.

Doxbin's owners responded with a dox of Kurtaj and his family, including his home address and photos of him, investigators say — setting up the chain of events that would put Kurtaj in the Travelodge.
After two weeks of "protective custody" there — during which time he was supposed to be computer-free — Kurtaj "was arrested a third time and charged with hacking, fraud and blackmail. Authorities said that while at the Travelodge, he broke into Uber and taunted the company by posting a link to a photo of an erect penis on the company's internal Slack messaging system, then stole software and videos from Rockstar Games. Stolen clips had popped up in a Grand Theft Auto discussion forum from a user named teapotuberhacker and stirred a frenzy.

"As officers collected evidence, the teen stood by, emotionless, police say...."

"Kurtaj's lawyers and some experts on autism have said a potential lifetime of incarceration isn't appropriate for a teenager like Kurtaj..."

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader SpzToid for sharing the article.

Bluesky, the decentralized social network cofounded by Jack Dorsey, created a Threads account to court users frustrated by Meta's moderation issues. Thurrott reports: This week, the Bluesky team also used Threads to share some tips on how to get started on Bluesky, how to get more engagement, and more. The company also emphasized its decentralized structure and more extensive customization options, with the app recently introducing a new theme font, adjustable font sizing, and the ability to pin posts on top of profiles.

Bluesky also couldn't resist to engage in some strange trolling this week. "We're not like the other girls ... we're not owned by a billionaire," the team wrote on Threads yesterday. Of course, this the post that got the most engagement on the Bluesky Threads account with close to 500 comments as of this writing.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a copyright infringement verdict against Internet provider Grande, which failed to take action against allegedly pirating subscribers. The jury's $47 million damages award in favor of the major music label plaintiffs is vacated. According to the Court (PDF), individual tracks that are part of an album, should not be counted as separate works. TorrentFreak reports: After hearing both sides, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the jury verdict yesterday. Grande's arguments, suggesting that the district court mistakenly upheld the verdict earlier, were rejected. "The district court did not err in upholding the jury's unanimous liability verdict because Plaintiffs satisfied each element legally and factually," the decision reads. "The court correctly interpreted the law and instructed the jury on the relevant legal standards in light of the factual issues disputed by the parties, and Plaintiffs introduced ample evidence from which a reasonable jury could find in Plaintiffs' favor." [...]

In addition to the material contribution challenge, Grande and its supporters also pointed out that terminating Internet access isn't a "simple measure," as the jury concluded. Instead, it is drastic and overbroad, which could also impact innocent subscribers. The Court of Appeals rejects this reasoning. Instead, it states that the jury could and did conclude that terminations are a simple measure. There is no evidence to reach a different conclusion. All in all, the Court sees no reason to reverse the jury's verdict that Grande is liable for contributory infringement. This means that the jury verdict is affirmed.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR : For the first time, internal TikTok communications have been made public that show a company unconcerned with the harms the app poses for American teenagers. This is despite its own research validating many child safety concerns. The confidential material was part of a more than two-year investigation into TikTok by 14 attorneys general that led to state officials suing the company on Tuesday. The lawsuit alleges that TikTok was designed with the express intention of addicting young people to the app. The states argue the multi-billion-dollar company deceived the public about the risks. In each of the separate lawsuits state regulators filed, dozens of internal communications, documents and research data were redacted -- blacked-out from public view -- since authorities entered into confidentiality agreements with TikTok.

But in one of the lawsuits, filed by the Kentucky Attorney General's Office, the redactions were faulty. This was revealed when Kentucky Public Radio copied-and-pasted excerpts of the redacted material, bringing to light some 30 pages of documents that had been kept secret. A group of more than a dozen states sued TikTok on Tuesday, alleging the app was intentionally designed to addict teens, something authorities say is a violation of state consumer protection laws. After Kentucky Public Radio published excerpts of the redacted material, a state judge sealed the entire complaint following a request from the attorney general's office "to ensure that any settlement documents and related information, confidential commercial and trade secret information, and other protected information was not improperly disseminated," according to an emergency motion to seal the complaint filed on Wednesday by Kentucky officials.

NPR reviewed all the portions of the suit that were redacted, which highlight TikTok executives speaking candidly about a host of dangers for children on the wildly popular video app. The material, mostly summaries of internal studies and communications, show some remedial measures -- like time-management tools -- would have a negligible reduction in screen time. The company went ahead and decided to release and tout the features. Separately, under a new law, TikTok has until January to divest from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, or face a nationwide ban. TikTok is fighting the looming crackdown. Meanwhile, the new lawsuits from state authorities have cast scrutiny on the app and its ability to counter content that harms minors.

Microsoft will offer direct game purchases through its Xbox app for Android starting November, following a U.S. court ruling against Google's app store monopoly. The move allows Microsoft to circumvent Google's revenue cut on in-app purchases and signals renewed focus on mobile gaming, bolstered by its recent $75.4 billion Activision Blizzard acquisition.

U.S. officials are racing to understand the full scope of a China-linked hack of major U.S. broadband providers, as concerns mount from members of Congress that the breach could amount to a devastating counterintelligence failure. From a report: Federal authorities and cybersecurity investigators are probing the breaches of Verizon Communications, AT&T and Lumen Technologies. A stealthy hacking group known as Salt Typhoon tied to Chinese intelligence is believed to be responsible. The compromises may have allowed hackers to access information from systems the federal government uses for court-authorized network wiretapping requests, The Wall Street Journal reported last week.

Among the concerns are that the hackers may have essentially been able to spy on the U.S. government's efforts to surveil Chinese threats, including the FBI's investigations. The House Select Committee on China sent letters Thursday asking the three companies to describe when they became aware of the breaches and what measures they are taking to protect their wiretap systems from attack. Spokespeople for AT&T, Lumen and Verizon declined to comment on the attack. A spokesman at the Chinese Embassy in Washington has denied that Beijing is responsible for the alleged breaches.

Combined with other Chinese cyber threats, news of the Salt Typhoon assault makes clear that "we face a cyber-adversary the likes of which we have never confronted before," Rep. John Moolenaar, the Republican chairman of the House Select Committee Committee on China, and Raja Krishnamoorthi, the panel's top Democrat, said in the letters. "The implications of any breach of this nature would be difficult to overstate," they said. Hackers still had access to some parts of U.S. broadband networks within the last week, and more companies were being notified that their networks had been breached, people familiar with the matter said. Investigators remain in the dark about precisely what the hackers were seeking to do, according to people familiar with the response.

TorrentFreak's Andy Maxwell reports: In August, New Zealand's Justice Minister authorized Kim Dotcom's immediate arrest and extradition. Dotcom's response to his followers on X was simple: "I'm not leaving." Another post mid-September -- "we are very close to disaster" -- led to Dotcom disappearing for three weeks. On his return, Dotcom said X had suspended his account, based on an extremely serious allegation. After accusing Elon Musk of failing to help, yesterday Dotcom warned that a Trump loss would see Musk indicted and "fighting for his life." Dotcom has a plan to avoid extradition; chaos like this provides the fuel.

The details of Dotcom's "plan" to stay in New Zealand are yet to be revealed. Given Dotcom's history, exhausting the judiciary with every possible avenue of appeal is pretty much guaranteed, no matter how unlikely the prospects of success. At the same time, it's likely that Dotcom will use social media to preach to the existing choir. He will also try to appeal to those who loathe him, and those who merely hate him, by focusing on a common grievance. "People keep suggesting that I should leave this corrupt US colony like a fugitive on the run. Hell no," he told 1.7 million X followers recently. "Corrupt US colony" and the interchangeable "obedient" variant are clearly derogatory, catering to theories of joint complicity and sniveling weakness. This rhetoric has been visible on Dotcom's social media accounts for some time, but the main theme is Dotcom's belligerent, out-of-the-blue support for Russia's invasion of Ukraine. [...]

Some people believe that Dotcom genuinely supports Russia and, with his quotes regularly appearing on state-run news channels, arguing otherwise is a pretty tough ask. A different assessment starts with the things Dotcom values most -- his family, his wealth, and his freedom -- and applies that to a reputation of doing whatever it takes to protect and maintain those three, non-negotiable aspects of his life. Right now, his best chance is to tilt the chess board via a change at the White House, and then carefully exploit a change in policy. Dotcom's colleagues took a plea deal from the U.S. and New Zealand that Dotcom insists he would never accept; certainly not if Biden was in power. A Donald Trump win, on the other hand, would introduce an administration Dotcom could be seen to negotiate with, on previously unthinkable terms, without losing face. Previous reluctance to admit any wrongdoing could suddenly seem trivial after the prevention of World War 3.

[Since 2022, Dotcom supported narratives more closely aligned with those of the Kremlin, in particular the claim that United States policy is the root cause of the current conflict. The amplification of anti-Ukraine rumors in the United States, strategically links alleged U.S. policy failures to billions of dollars in military aid, all at taxpayers' expense. This toxic mix, Dotcom insists, heralds the collapse of the dollar, the dismantling of the "US Empire," and ultimately a global human catastrophe; World War 3, no holds barred.]

Turkey has blocked access to Discord after the messaging platform refused to share potentially illegal information with authorities. Reuters reports: Justice minister Yilmaz Tunc said an Ankara court decided to block access to Discord from Turkey due to sufficient suspicion that crimes of "child sexual abuse and obscenity" had been committed by some using the platform. The block comes after public outrage in Turkey caused by the murder of two women by a 19-year-old man in Istanbul this month. Content on social media showed Discord users subsequently praising the killing. Transport and infrastructure minister Abdulkadir Uraloglu said the nature of the Discord platform made it difficult for authorities to monitor and intervene when illegal or criminal content is shared.

"Security personnel cannot go through the content. We can only intervene when users complain to us about content shared there," he told reporters in parliament. "Since Discord refuses to share its own information, including IP addresses and content, with our security units, we were forced to block access." Russia also recently blocked Discord for violating Russian law, after previously fining the company for failing to remove banned content.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Fisker's Chapter 11 bankruptcy has hit a major snag, as the company buying the startup's remaining fleet of electric SUVs says it might not complete the purchase because of a surprising technical issue. The buyer, a New York-area leasing company called American Lease, says in a new filing that Fisker now believes there is no way to transfer the information connected to each SUV to a new server not owned by the bankrupt EV startup. Since American Lease needs that information to operate the vehicles after Fisker is dissolved, the leasing company has filed an emergency objection to the startup's liquidation plan. Fisker was expected to have that plan confirmed in bankruptcy court as early as this Wednesday.

American Lease has already handed over "tens of millions of dollars" after the purchase agreement of the 3,000-plus Ocean SUVs was approved in July. These funds have been crucial because Fisker was using them to pay for the bankruptcy process. Fisker needed that money to keep itself alive long enough to settle its debts and also prepare to liquidate what it says is around $1 billion in assets that were, until recently, under control of an Austrian subsidiary that was going through its own insolvency process. [...] American Lease says in its filing that Fisker first brought up the possibility that it wouldn't be able to transfer the information to a new server on Friday, October 4, at 8 p.m. ET. And it says that this week, Fisker informed American Lease that it won't be possible at all.

"[American Lease] cannot overstate the significance of this unwelcome news, conveyed to it only after it has paid [Fisker] tens of millions of dollars under the Purchase Agreement," the leasing company's lawyers write in the filing. "It is unclear at the present time what, if anything, Debtor representatives have known about the impossibility or impracticability of implementing Porting of the Purchased Vehicles, and when they learned or otherwise knew of that critical information." American Lease is asking to delay Wednesday's hearing and be allowed to perform "expedited and targeted discovery" of Fisker and its representatives to find out more about when Fisker learned of this problem.

In a new 32-page filing (PDF), the Department of Justice indicated that it was considering a possible breakup of Google as an antitrust remedy for its search and advertising monopoly. The remedies necessary to "prevent and restrain monopoly maintenance could include contract requirements and prohibitions; non-discrimination product requirements; data and interoperability requirements; and structural requirements," the department said in the filing. CNBC reports: The DOJ also said it was "considering behavioral and structural remedies that would prevent Google from using products such as Chrome, Play, and Android to advantage Google search and Google search-related products and features -- including emerging search access points and features, such as artificial intelligence -- over rivals or new entrants."

Additionally, the DOJ suggested limiting or prohibiting default agreements and "other revenue-sharing arrangements related to search and search-related products." That would include Google's search position agreements with Apple's iPhone and Samsung devices -- deals that cost the company billions of dollars a year in payouts. The agency suggested one way to do this is requiring a "choice screen," which could allow users to pick from other search engines. Such remedies would end "Google's control of distribution today" and ensure "Google cannot control the distribution of tomorrow."

X has been restored in Brazil after being shut down nationwide for over a month. According to court documents released today, X ultimately complied with all of Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes' demands. "They included blocking certain accounts from the platform, paying outstanding fines and naming a legal representative in the country," reports NPR. "Failure to do the latter had triggered the suspension." From the report: Elon Musk's X was blocked blocked on Aug. 30 in the highly online country of 213 million people -- and one of X's biggest markets, with estimates of its user base ranging from 20 to 40 million. De Moraes ordered the shutdown after a monthslong dispute with Musk over free speech, far-right accounts and misinformation. Musk had disparaged de Moraes, calling him an authoritarian and a censor, even though his rulings, including X's suspension, were repeatedly upheld by his peers.

Brazilian law requires foreign companies to have a local legal representative to receive notifications of court decisions and swiftly take any requisite action -- particularly, in X's case, the takedown of accounts. Conceicao was first named X's legal representative in April and resigned four months later. The company named her to the same job on Sep. 20, according to the public filing with the Sao Paulo commercial registry. In an apparent effort to shield Conceicao from potential violations by X -- and risking arrest -- a clause has been written into Conceicao's new representation agreement that she must follow Brazilian law and court decisions, and that any legal responsibility she assumes on X's behalf requires prior instruction from the company in writing, according to the company's filing.

There is nothing illegal or suspect about using a company like BR4Business for legal representation, but it shows that X is doing the bare minimum to operate in the country, said Fabio de Sa e Silva, a lawyer and associate professor of International and Brazilian Studies at the University of Oklahoma. "It doesn't demonstrate an intention to truly engage with the country. Take Meta, for example, and Google. They have an office, a government relations department, precisely to interact with public authorities and discuss Brazil's regulatory policies concerning their businesses," Silva added. [...] "The concern now is what comes next and how X, once back in operation, will manage to meet the demands of the market and local authorities without creating new tensions," he said.

The District of Columbia and 13 states sued social media giant TikTok on Tuesday, accusing the company of knowingly creating an addictive product and getting children hooked with "digital nicotine." From a report: D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb brought Washington's suit in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, asserting that the app's design -- including its algorithm, "infinite scroll," push notifications, filters and in-app currency -- boost the company's profits at the expense of children's health. "TikTok's platform, designed to be dangerously addictive, inflicts immense damage on an entire generation of young people," Schwalb said in a statement announcing the suit. "In addition to prioritizing its profits over the health of children, TikTok's unregulated and illegal virtual economy allows the darkest, most depraved corners of society to prey upon vulnerable victims." More than a dozen states brought similar suits against TikTok in their courts Tuesday, including New York, California, Kentucky and New Jersey. Each stems from a national investigation into the company that a bipartisan coalition of attorneys general launched in March 2022.

A Nintendo Switch modder has entered a legal battle against Nintendo without legal representation, Torrent Freak reports. Ryan Daly, alleged owner of Modded Hardware, denied all allegations in a lawsuit filed by Nintendo in July. Nintendo claims Modded Hardware offers hardware and firmware for creating and playing pirated games, as well as providing customers with pirated Nintendo titles.

The company filed suit after Daly allegedly ignored warnings to cease operations in March and May 2024. Daly's court response denies wrongdoing and ownership of the business. His defenses include fair use, invalid copyrights, and unjust enrichment. The Modded Hardware website is now password-protected.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: The U.S. Federal Trade Commission's case accusing Amazon of stifling competition in online retail will move forward, though some of the states that sued alongside the agency had their claims dismissed, court documents showed. U.S. District Judge John Chun in Seattle unsealed his ruling from Sept. 30, which dismissed some of the claims brought by attorneys general in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Oklahoma. Last year, the FTC alleged Amazon.com, which has 1 billion items in its online superstore, was using an algorithm that pushed up prices U.S. households paid by more than $1 billion. Amazon has said in court papers it stopped using the program in 2019.

The FTC has accused the online retailer of using anti-competitive tactics to maintain dominance among online superstores and marketplaces. Amazon asked Chun to dismiss the case in December, saying the FTC had raised no evidence of harm to consumers. The judge said in his ruling that he cannot consider Amazon's claims that its actions benefited competition at this early stage in the case.

An anonymous Slashdot reader shared the EFF's "Deeplink" blog post: EFF, along with the ACLU and the ACLU of Mississippi, filed an amicus brief on Thursday asking a federal appellate court to continue to block Mississippi's HB 1126 — a bill that imposes age verification mandates on social media services across the internet. Our friend-of-the-court brief, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argues that HB 1126 is "an extraordinary censorship law that violates all internet users' First Amendment rights to speak and to access protected speech" online.

HB 1126 forces social media sites to verify the age of every user and requires minors to get explicit parental consent before accessing online spaces. It also pressures them to monitor and censor content on broad, vaguely defined topics — many of which involve constitutionally protected speech. These sweeping provisions create significant barriers to the free and open internet and "force adults and minors alike to sacrifice anonymity, privacy, and security to engage in protected online expression." A federal district court already prevented HB 1126 from going into effect, ruling that it likely violated the First Amendment.

At the heart of our opposition to HB 1126 is its dangerous impact on young people's free expression. Minors enjoy the same First Amendment right as adults to access and engage in protected speech online. "No legal authority permits lawmakers to burden adults' access to political, religious, educational, and artistic speech with restrictive age-verification regimes out of a concern for what minors might see" [argues the brief]. "Nor is there any legal authority that permits lawmakers to block minors categorically from engaging in protected expression on general purpose internet sites like those regulated by HB 1126..."
"The law requires all users to verify their age before accessing social media, which could entirely block access for the millions of U.S. adults who lack government-issued ID..." And it also asks another question. "Would you want everything you do online to be linked to your government-issued ID?"

And the blog post makes one more argument. "in an era where data breaches and identity theft are alarmingly common." So the bill "puts every user's personal data at risk... No one — neither minors nor adults — should have to sacrifice their privacy or anonymity in order to exercise their free speech rights online."

Long-time Slashdot reader Bismillah writes: Python New Zealand has gone through some rough times lately, with its then-treasurer stealing money from the society.. Things were looking really serious for a while, with Python NZ looking at being liquidated due to the theft of funds.

However, there is a silver lining to the story, as the free and open source movement rallied behind Python NZ and got them out of a serious pickle.
"Our friends at Linux Australia and at the Python Software Foundation went well above and beyond to support us, and save us," says Tom Eastman president of Python New Zealand, in an article from interest.co.nz.

He also says he hopes the treasure is ordered by the court to pay restitution. (In the article the treasurer confirms that he's pleaded guilty to the theft, which took place between February 2019 and October 2023 — leaving Python NZ owing conference supplies around $55,000.) "We had $26 in the bank accounts," Eastman tells the site.

The group now has new transparency and accountability measures...

An anonymous reader shared this report from the Washington Post: Hundreds of Americans have been arrested after being connected to a crime by facial recognition software, a Washington Post investigation has found, but many never know it because police seldom disclose their use of the controversial technology...

In fact, the records show that officers often obscured their reliance on the software in public-facing reports, saying that they identified suspects "through investigative means" or that a human source such as a witness or police officer made the initial identification... The Coral Springs Police Department in South Florida instructs officers not to reveal the use of facial recognition in written reports, according to operations deputy chief Ryan Gallagher. He said investigative techniques are exempt from Florida's public disclosure laws... The department would disclose the source of the investigative lead if it were asked in a criminal proceeding, Gallagher added....

Prosecutors are required to inform defendants about any information that would help prove their innocence, reduce their sentence or hurt the credibility of a witness testifying against them. When prosecutors fail to disclose such information — known as a "Brady violation" after the 1963 Supreme Court ruling that mandates it — the court can declare a mistrial, overturn a conviction or even sanction the prosecutor. No federal laws regulate facial recognition and courts do not agree whether AI identifications are subject to Brady rules. Some states and cities have begun mandating greater transparency around the technology, but even in these locations, the technology is either not being used that often or it's not being disclosed, according to interviews and public records requests...

Over the past four years, the Miami Police Department ran 2,500 facial recognition searches in investigations that led to at least 186 arrests and more than 50 convictions. Among the arrestees, just 1 in 16 were told about the technology's use — less than 7 percent — according to a review by The Post of public reports and interviews with some arrestees and their lawyers. The police department said that in some of those cases the technology was used for purposes other than identification, such as finding a suspect's social media feeds, but did not indicate in how many of the cases that happened. Carlos J. Martinez, the county's chief public defender, said he had no idea how many of his Miami clients were identified with facial recognition until The Post presented him with a list. "One of the basic tenets of our justice system is due process, is knowing what evidence there is against you and being able to challenge the evidence that's against you," Martinez said. "When that's kept from you, that is an all-powerful government that can trample all over us."

After reviewing The Post's findings, Miami police and local prosecutors announced plans to revise their policies to require clearer disclosure in every case involving facial recognition.
The article points out that Miami's Assistant Police Chief actually told a congressional panel on law enforcement AI use that his department is "the first to be completely transparent about" the use of facial recognition. (When confronted with the Washington Post's findings, he "acknowledged that officers may not have always informed local prosecutors [and] said the department would give prosecutors all information on the use of facial recognition, in past and future cases".

He told the Post that the department would "begin training officers to always disclose the use of facial recognition in incident reports." But he also said they would "leave it up to prosecutors to decide what to disclose to defendants."

The British Post Office scandal "was first exposed by Computer Weekly in 2009, revealing the stories of seven subpostmasters and the problems they suffered due to Horizon accounting software," remembers Computer Weekly, "which led to the most widespread miscarriage of justice in British history."

But now the Post Office "is investigating allegations that a senior executive instructed staff to destroy or conceal documents that could be of interest to the Post Office scandal public inquiry," Computer Weekly writes. A company employee acknowleged a report in an internal whistleblower program "regarding destroying or concealing material... allegations that a senior Post Office member of staff had instructed their team to destroy or conceal material of possible interest to the inquiry, and that the same individual had engaged in inappropriate behaviour." The shocking revelation echoes evidence from appeals against wrongful convictions in 2021. During the Court of Appeal trials it was revealed that a senior Post Office executive instructed employees to shred documents that undermined an insistence that its Horizon computer system was robust, amid claims that errors in the system caused unexplained accounting shortfalls.

An anonymous reader shared this report from Reuters: Brazil's Supreme Court said on Friday that lawyers representing social media platform X did not pay pending fines to the proper bank, postponing its decision on whether to allow the tech firm to resume services in Brazil.

The payment of the fines, which X lawyers argued that the company had paid correctly, is the only outstanding measure demanded by the court in order to authorize X to operate again in Brazil... Earlier on Friday, X, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, filed a fresh request to have its services restored in Brazil, saying it had paid all pending fines. In response to the request, Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes requested the payment to be transferred to the right bank. He also determined that once fines are sorted out, Brazil's prosecutor general will give his opinion on the recent requests made by X's legal team in Brazil, which has been seeking to have the platform restored in the country.

Following Moraes' decision on Friday, X lawyers again asked the court for authorization to resume operations in Brazil, denying that the company had paid the fines to the wrong account and saying they do not see the need for the prosecutor general to be consulted before the ban is lifted.