U.S. lawmakers have reintroduced the bipartisan Open App Markets Act, aiming to curb Apple and Google's control over mobile app stores by promoting competition, supporting third-party marketplaces and sideloading, and safeguarding developer rights. AppleInsider reports: The Open App Markets Act seeks to do a number of things, including:
- Protect developers' rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing;
- Protect sideloading of apps;
- Promote competition by opening the market to third-party app stores, startup apps, and alternative payment systems;
- Make it possible for developers to offer new experiences that take advantage of consumer device features;
- Give consumers greater control over their devices;
- Prevent app stores from disadvantaging developers; and
- Establish safeguards to preserve consumer privacy, security, and safety.

This isn't the first time we've seen this bill, either. In 2021, Senators Blumenthal, Klobuchar, and Blackburn had attempted to put forth the original version of the Open App Markets Act.However, the initial bill never made it to the floor for an office vote. Thanks to last-minute efforts by lobbying groups and appearances from chief executives, the bill eventually stalled out.

While the two bills are largely similar, the revised version introduces several key differences. Notably, the new version includes new carve-outs aimed at protecting intellectual property and addressing potential national security concerns.There's also a new clause that would prohibit punitive actions against developers for enabling remote access to other apps. The clause addition harkens back to the debacle between Apple and most game streaming services -- though in 2024, Apple loosened its App Store guidelines to allow cloud gaming and emulation.

There are a few new platform-protective clauses added, too. For instance, it would significantly lower the burden of proof for either Apple or Google to block platform access to a third-party app.Additionally, it reinforces the fact that companies like Apple or Google will not need to provide support or refunds for third-party apps installed outside of first-party app marketplaces. The full bill can be found here.

Psylo, a new privacy-focused iOS browser by Mysk, aims to defeat digital fingerprinting by isolating each browser tab with its own IP address, unique fingerprinting defenses, and proxy-based encryption. "Psylo stands out as it is the only WebKit-based iOS browser that truly isolates tabs," Tommy Mysk told The Register. "It's not only about separate storage and cookies. Psylo goes beyond that."

"This is why we call tabs 'silos.' It applies unique anti-fingerprinting measures per silo, such as canvas randomization. This way two Psylo tabs opening the same website would appear as though they originated on two different devices to the opened website." From the report: The company claims Psylo therefore offers better privacy than a VPN because the virtual networks mask the user's IP address but generally don't alter the data used for fingerprinting. Psylo, for example, will adjust the browser's time zone and browser language to match the geolocation of each proxy, resulting in more entropy that means fingerprints created by gathering data from silos will appear to be different.

The Mysk devs' post states that some privacy-focused browsers like Brave also implement anti-fingerprinting measures like canvas randomization, but those are more effective on the desktop macOS app due to Apple's iOS restrictions. They claim that they were able to achieve better results on iOS by using a client-side JavaScript solution. Mysk designed Psylo to minimize the information available to its maker. It doesn't log personally identifiable information or browsing data that the curious could use to identify the user, the company claims, noting that it also doesn't have customer payment information, which is handled by Apple. There are no user accounts, only randomized identifiers to indicate active subscriptions. According to Tommy Mysk, the only subscriber data kept is bandwidth usage, which is necessary to prevent abuse.

"We aggregate bandwidth usage based on a randomly generated ID that is created when a subscription is made," Mysk said. "The randomly generated ID is associated with the Apple subscription transaction. Apple doesn't share the identity of users making App Store purchases with developers." Asked whether Apple could identify users, Mysk said, "Theoretically and given a court order, Apple can figure out the randomly generated ID of the user in question. If we were to hand out the data associated with the randomly generated ID, it would only be the bandwidth usage of that user in the current month, and two months in the past. Older data is automatically deleted. "We don't associate any identifiable information with the randomly generated ID. We don't store IP addresses at all in every component of our system. We don't store websites visited by our users at all." The browser is only available on iOS and iPadOS, but Mysk says an Android version could be developed if there's enough interest. It costs $9.99 per month or $99 per year in the U.S.

U.S. banks have failed to prevent mass-scale money laundering in the face of approximately $44 billion per year in pig-butchering scams conducted by Asian crime syndicates, according to a ProPublica investigation.

Chinese-language Telegram channels openly advertise rental of U.S. bank accounts to scammers who use them to move victims' cash into cryptocurrency. Bank of America allowed hundreds of unverified customers to open accounts, prosecutors alleged, including 176 customers who claimed the same small home as their address.

Major financial institutions whose accounts pig-butchering scammers have exploited include Bank of America, Chase, Citibank, HSBC and Wells Fargo. The scams typically involve fake cryptocurrency trading platforms that convince victims to wire money to seemingly legitimate business accounts. Banks are reluctant to share account information with each other even after identifying suspicious activity, and "no real standards" exist for what banks must do to detect fraud or money laundering.

Australia's eSafety Commissioner has urged the government to deny YouTube an exemption from upcoming child safety regulations, citing research showing it exposes more children to harmful content than any other platform. YouTube pushed back, calling the commissioner's stance inconsistent with government data and parental feedback. "The quarrel adds an element of uncertainty to the December rollout of a law being watched by governments and tech leaders around the world as Australia seeks to become the first country to fine social media firms if they fail to block users aged under 16," reports Reuters. From the report: The centre-left Labor government of Anthony Albanese has previously said it would give YouTube a waiver, citing the platform's use for education and health. Other social media companies such as Meta's Facebook and Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok have argued such an exemption would be unfair. eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant said she wrote to the government last week to say there should be no exemptions when the law takes effect. She added that the regulator's research found 37% of children aged 10 to 15 reported seeing harmful content on YouTube -- the most of any social media site. [...]

YouTube, in a blog post, accused Inman Grant of giving inconsistent and contradictory advice, which discounted the government's own research which found 69% of parents considered the video platform suitable for people under 15. "The eSafety commissioner chose to ignore this data, the decision of the Australian Government and other clear evidence from teachers and parents that YouTube is suitable for younger users," wrote Rachel Lord, YouTube's public policy manager for Australia and New Zealand.

Inman Grant, asked about surveys supporting a YouTube exemption, said she was more concerned "about the safety of children and that's always going to surpass any concerns I have about politics or being liked or bringing the public onside". A spokesperson for Communications Minister Anika Wells said the minister was considering the online regulator's advice and her "top priority is making sure the draft rules fulfil the objective of the Act and protect children from the harms of social media."

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a major federal campaign to promote wearable health tech, aiming for every American to adopt a device within four years as part of a broader effort to "Make America Healthy Again." Gizmodo reports: RFK Jr. announced the initiative Tuesday afternoon during a House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee meeting to discuss the HHS' budget request for the upcoming fiscal year. In response to a question from representative Troy Balderson (R-Ohio) about wearables, Kennedy revealed that HHS will soon conduct one of the agency's largest ever advertising campaigns to promote their use. He added that in his ideal future, every American will be donning a wearable within the next four years. "It's a key part of our mission to Make America Healthy Again," RFK Jr. stated in an X post following the question.

Western Digital has succeeded in having the sum it owed from a patent infringement case reduced from $553 million down to just $1 in post-trial motions, when the judge found the plaintiff's claims had shifted during the course of the litigation. From a report: The storage biz was held by a California jury to have infringed on data encryption patents owned by SPEX Technologies Inc in October, relating to several of its self-encrypting hard drive products.

WD was initially told to pay $316 million in damages, but District Judge James Selna ruled the company owed a further $237 million in interest charges earlier this year, bringing the total to more than half a billion dollars. In February, WD was given a week to file a bond or stump up the entire damages payment. Selna granted Western Digital's post-trial motion to reduce damages, writing that "SPEX's damages theory changed as certain evidence and theories became unavailable" and there was "insufficient evidence from which the Court could determine a reasonable royalty."

A federal judge has ruled that Anthropic's use of copyrighted books to train its Claude AI models constitutes fair use, but rejected the startup's defense for downloading millions of pirated books to build a permanent digital library.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup granted partial summary judgment to Anthropic in the copyright lawsuit filed by authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson. The court found that training large language models on copyrighted works was "exceedingly transformative" under Section 107 of the Copyright Act. Anthropic downloaded over seven million books from pirate sites, according to court documents. The startup also purchased millions of print books, destroyed the bindings, scanned every page, and stored them digitally.

Both sets of books were used to train various versions of Claude, which generates over $1 billion in annual revenue. While the judge approved using books for AI training purposes, he ruled that downloading pirated copies to create what Anthropic called a "central library of all the books in the world" was not protected fair use. The case will proceed to trial on damages related to the pirated library copies.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: After a court ordered OpenAI to "indefinitely" retain all ChatGPT logs, including deleted chats, of millions of users, two panicked users tried and failed to intervene. The order sought to preserve potential evidence in a copyright infringement lawsuit raised by news organizations. In May, Judge Ona Wang, who drafted the order, rejected the first user's request (PDF) on behalf of his company simply because the company should have hired a lawyer to draft the filing. But more recently, Wang rejected (PDF) a second claim from another ChatGPT user, and that order went into greater detail, revealing how the judge is considering opposition to the order ahead of oral arguments this week, which were urgently requested by OpenAI.

The second request (PDF) to intervene came from a ChatGPT user named Aidan Hunt, who said that he uses ChatGPT "from time to time," occasionally sending OpenAI "highly sensitive personal and commercial information in the course of using the service." In his filing, Hunt alleged that Wang's preservation order created a "nationwide mass surveillance program" affecting and potentially harming "all ChatGPT users," who received no warning that their deleted and anonymous chats were suddenly being retained. He warned that the order limiting retention to just ChatGPT outputs carried the same risks as including user inputs, since outputs "inherently reveal, and often explicitly restate, the input questions or topics input."

Hunt claimed that he only learned that ChatGPT was retaining this information -- despite policies specifying they would not -- by stumbling upon the news in an online forum. Feeling that his Fourth Amendment and due process rights were being infringed, Hunt sought to influence the court's decision and proposed a motion to vacate the order that said Wang's "order effectively requires Defendants to implement a mass surveillance program affecting all ChatGPT users." [...] OpenAI will have a chance to defend panicked users on June 26, when Wang hears oral arguments over the ChatGPT maker's concerns about the preservation order. In his filing, Hunt explained that among his worst fears is that the order will not be blocked and that chat data will be disclosed to news plaintiffs who may be motivated to publicly disseminate the deleted chats. That could happen if news organizations find evidence of deleted chats they say are likely to contain user attempts to generate full news articles.

Wang suggested that there is no risk at this time since no chat data has yet been disclosed to the news organizations. That could mean that ChatGPT users may have better luck intervening after chat data is shared, should OpenAI's fight to block the order this week fail. But that's likely no comfort to users like Hunt, who worry that OpenAI merely retaining the data -- even if it's never shared with news organizations -- could cause severe and irreparable harms. Some users appear to be questioning how hard OpenAI will fight. In particular, Hunt is worried that OpenAI may not prioritize defending users' privacy if other concerns -- like "financial costs of the case, desire for a quick resolution, and avoiding reputational damage" -- are deemed more important, his filing said.

IYO filed a trademark infringement lawsuit [PDF] against OpenAI and Jony Ive's company earlier this month, alleging the defendants deliberately adopted a confusingly similar name for competing products. The lawsuit surfaced after the Microsoft-backed startup quietly pulled promotional materials about its $6.5 acquisition billion deal with Ive's firm.

The Northern District of California complaint targets OpenAI's $6.5 billion acquisition of "IO Products, Inc.," announced May 21, 2025. IYO, which spun out from Google X in 2021, produces the "IYO ONE," an ear-worn device that allows users to interact with computers and AI through voice commands without screens or keyboards.

IYO has invested over $62 million developing its audio computing technology, it says in the filing. According to the complaint, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Ive's design studio LoveFrom met with IYO representatives multiple times between 2022 and 2025, learning details about IYO's technology and business plans. In March 2025, Altman allegedly told IYO he was "working on something competitive" called "io." IO Products, formed in September 2023, develops hardware for screenless computer interaction similar to IYO's products. The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief and damages for trademark infringement and unfair competition.

OpenAI appears to have pulled a much-discussed video promoting the friendship between CEO Sam Altman and legendary Apple designer Jony Ive (plus, incidentally, OpenAI's $6.5 billion deal to acquire Ive and Altman's device startup io) from its website and YouTube page. [Though you can still see the original on Archive.org.]

Does that suggest something is amiss with the acquisition, or with plans for Ive to lead design work at OpenAI? Not exactly, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman, who reports [on X.com] that the "deal is on track and has NOT dissolved or anything of the sort." Instead, he said a judge has issued a restraining order over the io name, forcing the company to pull all materials that used it.
Gurman elaborates on the disappearance of the video (and other related marketing materials) in a new article at Bloomberg: Bloomberg reported last week that a judge was considering barring OpenAI from using the IO name due to a lawsuit recently filed by the similarly named IYO Inc., which is also building AI devices. "This is an utterly baseless complaint and we'll fight it vigorously," a spokesperson for Ive said on Sunday.
The video is still viewable on X.com, notes TechCrunch. But visiting the "Sam and Jony" page on OpenAI now pulls up a 404 error message — written in the form of a haiku:

Ghost of code lingers
Blank space now invites wonder
Thoughts begin to soar

by o4-mini-high

An anonymous reader shared this report from the Washington Post: Over the past three years, companies have invested tens of billions of dollars toward making electric vehicles in the United States, buoyed by tax incentives aimed at helping American businesses compete with China. Now, those companies are facing a strange problem: too much manufacturing capacity, not enough demand.

As sales of electric vehicles slow and congressional Republicans take aim at EV tax credits and incentives, the United States is slated to have more battery and EV manufacturing than it needs, according to a report released Wednesday by the Rhodium Group, a research firm. That could leave factories — many of which are already operating or under construction — stranded if car sales continue to slump. "The rug is being pulled out from under these manufacturers," said Hannah Pitt, a director in Rhodium's energy and climate practice...

After [America's 2022 climate bill], battery investment in the U.S. skyrocketed. Companies went from investing about $1 billion per quarter in 2022 to $11 billion per quarter in 2024. Most of that battery investment went to red states, including in the South's "Battery Belt," where manufacturers were drawn to inexpensive land and a nonunionized workforce. Now, however, that battery boom is teetering. In the first three months of 2025, companies canceled $6 billion in battery manufacturing — a record. EV sales have slowed...

According to the new report, the United States has almost enough battery capacity announced or under development to meet demand all the way to 2030 if EV sales continue to slump. That might sound like a good thing — but if EV sales drop further, it means companies will be left with factories they won't be able to use. At the same time, China has excess battery capacity. The country has enough manufacturing to meet the entire world's demand for batteries — and may be looking to off-load them onto other markets... And if the incentives for using U.S.-made batteries disappear, the nation's manufacturers would be left high and dry.

Ancient Slashdot reader Alain Williams shares a report from The Guardian: The BBC is threatening legal action against Perplexity AI, in the corporation's first move to protect its content from being scraped without permission to build artificial intelligence technology. The corporation has sent a letter to Aravind Srinivas, the chief executive of the San Francisco-based startup, saying it has gathered evidence that Perplexity's model was "trained using BBC content." The letter, first reported by the Financial Times, threatens an injunction against Perplexity unless it stops scraping all BBC content to train its AI models, and deletes any copies of the broadcaster's material it holds unless it provides "a proposal for financial compensation."

The legal threat comes weeks after Tim Davie, the director general of the BBC, and the boss of Sky both criticised proposals being considered by the government that could let tech companies use copyright-protected work without permission. "If we currently drift in the way we are doing now we will be in crisis," Davie said, speaking at the Enders conference. "We need to make quick decisions now around areas like ... protection of IP. We need to protect our national intellectual property, that is where the value is. What do I need? IP protection; come on, let's get on with it." "Perplexity's tool [which allows users to choose between different AI models] directly competes with the BBC's own services, circumventing the need for users to access those services," the corporation said.

Perplexity told the FT that the BBC's claims were "manipulative and opportunistic" and that it had a "fundamental misunderstanding of technology, the internet and intellectual property law."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Large-scale attacks designed to bring down Internet services by sending them more traffic than they can process keep getting bigger, with the largest one yet, measured at 7.3 terabits per second, being reported Friday by Internet security and performance provider Cloudflare. The 7.3Tbps attack amounted to 37.4 terabytes of junk traffic that hit the target in just 45 seconds. That's an almost incomprehensible amount of data, equivalent to more than 9,300 full-length HD movies or 7,500 hours of HD streaming content in well under a minute.

Cloudflare said the attackers "carpet bombed" an average of nearly 22,000 destination ports of a single IP address belonging to the target, identified only as a Cloudflare customer. A total of 34,500 ports were targeted, indicating the thoroughness and well-engineered nature of the attack. [...] Cloudflare said the record DDoS exploited various reflection or amplification vectors, including the previously mentioned Network Time Protocol; the Quote of the Day Protocol, which listens on UDP port 17 and responds with a short quote or message; the Echo Protocol, which responds with the same data it receives; and Portmapper services used identify resources available to applications connecting through the Remote Procedure Call. Cloudflare said the attack was also delivered through one or more Mirai-based botnets. Such botnets are typically made up of home and small office routers, web cameras, and other Internet of Things devices that have been compromised.

Apple is facing a proposed class-action lawsuit from shareholders who allege the company misled investors about the readiness of its AI-powered Siri upgrades, contributing to a $900 billion drop in market value. Reuters reports: Shareholders led by Eric Tucker said that at its June 2024 Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple led them to believe AI would be a key driver of iPhone 16 devices, when it launched Apple Intelligence to make Siri more powerful and user-friendly. But they said the Cupertino, California-based company lacked a functional prototype of AI-based Siri features, and could not reasonably believe the features would ever be ready for iPhone 16s.

Shareholders said the truth began to emerge on March 7 when Apple delayed some Siri upgrades to 2026, and continued through this year's Worldwide Developers Conference on June 9 when Apple's assessment of its AI progress disappointed analysts. Apple shares have lost nearly one-fourth of their value since their December 26, 2024 record high, wiping out approximately $900 billion of market value.

The DOJ has filed a civil complaint to seize $225.3 million in cryptocurrency linked to pig butchering scams -- long-con frauds where victims are tricked into fake crypto investments. The funds were laundered through a blockchain network, and the DOJ says recovered money will go toward reimbursing victims. The Verge reports: The 75-page complaint (PDF) filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia lays out more detail about the seizure. According to it, the US Secret Service (USSS) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) tied scammers to seven groups of Tether stablecoin tokens. The fraud fell under what's typically known as "pig butchering": a form of long-running confidence scam aimed at tricking victims -- sometimes with a fake romantic relationship -- into what they believe is a profitable crypto investment opportunity, then disappearing with the funds. Pig butchering rings often traffic the workers who directly communicate with victims to Southeast Asian countries, something the DOJ alleges this ring did.

The DOJ says Tether and crypto exchange OKX first alerted law enforcement in 2023 to a series of accounts they believed were helping launder fraudulently obtained currency through a vast and complex web of transactions. The alleged victims include Shan Hanes (referred to in this complaint as S.H.), the former Heartland Tri-State Bank president who was sentenced to 24 years in prison for embezzling tens of millions of dollars to invest in one of the best-known and most devastating pig butchering scams. The complaint lists a number of other victims who lost thousands or millions of dollars they thought they were investing (and did not commit crimes of their own). An FBI report (PDF) cited by the press release concluded overall crypto investment fraud caused $5.8 billion worth of reported losses in 2024.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Cybernews: Several collections of login credentials reveal one of the largest data breaches in history, totaling a humongous 16 billion exposed login credentials. The data most likely originates from various infostealers. Unnecessarily compiling sensitive information can be as damaging as actively trying to steal it. For example, the Cybernews research team discovered a plethora of supermassive datasets, housing billions upon billions of login credentials. From social media and corporate platforms to VPNs and developer portals, no stone was left unturned.

Our team has been closely monitoring the web since the beginning of the year. So far, they've discovered 30 exposed datasets containing from tens of millions to over 3.5 billion records each. In total, the researchers uncovered an unimaginable 16 billion records. None of the exposed datasets were reported previously, bar one: in late May, Wired magazine reported a security researcher discovering a "mysterious database" with 184 million records. It barely scratches the top 20 of what the team discovered. Most worryingly, researchers claim new massive datasets emerge every few weeks, signaling how prevalent infostealer malware truly is.

"This is not just a leak -- it's a blueprint for mass exploitation. With over 16 billion login records exposed, cybercriminals now have unprecedented access to personal credentials that can be used for account takeover, identity theft, and highly targeted phishing. What's especially concerning is the structure and recency of these datasets -- these aren't just old breaches being recycled. This is fresh, weaponizable intelligence at scale," researchers said. The only silver lining here is that all of the datasets were exposed only briefly: long enough for researchers to uncover them, but not long enough to find who was controlling vast amounts of data. Most of the datasets were temporarily accessible through unsecured Elasticsearch or object storage instances. Key details to be aware of: - The records include billions of login credentials, often structured as URL, login, and password.
- The datasets include both old and recent breaches, many with cookies, tokens, and metadata, making them especially dangerous for organizations without multi-factor authentication or strong credential practices.
- Exposed services span major platforms like Apple, Google, Facebook, Telegram, GitHub, and even government services.
- The largest dataset alone includes 3.5 billion records, while one associated with the Russian Federation has over 455 million; many dataset names suggest links to malware or specific regions.
- Ownership of the leaked data is unclear, but its potential for phishing, identity theft, and ransomware is severe -- especially since even a - Basic cyber hygiene -- such as regularly updating strong passwords and scanning for malware -- is currently the best line of defense for users.

Iranian state television has instructed residents to delete WhatsApp from their smartphones, claiming the messaging platform gathers user information to share with Israel.

The local media provided no evidence supporting these allegations but additionally encouraged residents to avoid other "location-based" apps. WhatsApp has disputed the claims, with a spokesperson telling Time magazine the Meta-owned platform uses end-to-end encryption and does not track precise locations, keep messaging logs, or provide bulk information to governments.

The episode comes at a time when Iran is simultaneously experiencing a "near-total national Internet blackout," according to NetBlock, an internet governance monitoring organization. The disruption follows earlier partial outages amid escalating military tensions with Israel after days of missile strikes between the countries.

Further reading, from earlier this week: Iran Bans Officials From Using Internet-Connected Devices.

The daughter of a Seattle woman who died during the 2021 Pacific Northwest heatwave has filed the first wrongful death lawsuit directly linking fossil fuel companies to an individual's climate-related death.

Misti Leon is suing seven oil and gas companies, including ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell and BP, claiming they caused her mother Juliana Leon's death from hyperthermia on June 28, 2021, when temperatures reached 108 degrees Fahrenheit. The lawsuit alleges the companies created a "fossil fuel-dependent economy" that resulted in "more frequent and destructive weather disasters and foreseeable loss of human life." Attribution science research determined the 2021 heatwave would have been "virtually impossible" without human-made climate change and was at least 150 times rarer without warming.

The case seeks damages and funding for a public education campaign about fossil fuels' role in planetary heating.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: Napster, the brand synonymous with the music piracy boom of the early 2000s, has a new copyright challenge. Together with audio giant Sonos, Napster faces a lawsuit demanding over $3.4 million in alleged unpaid copyright royalties. Filed by collective rights management organization SoundExchange, the complaint (PDF) centers on missed payments related to the "Sonos Radio" service, which until 2023 was powered by Napster's music catalog. [...]

Sonos Radio launched in April 2020 with Napster as the authorized agent, submitting the required royalty reports and royalties to SoundExchange. While all went well initially, payments stopped around May 2022. At the time, Napster had been acquired by venture capital firms Hivemind and Algorand, with a focus on "web3" technologies, including cryptocurrencies and blockchain. According to the complaint, the takeover resulted in a "complete breakdown of reporting and payment for the Sonos Radio service." The alleged payment problems eventually came to light during an audit initiated by SoundExchange in 2023, which concluded that Sonos and Napster owed millions in unpaid royalties.

Sonos and Napster are no longer partners in the radio service, as the audio equipment manufacturer switched to Deezer around April 2023. That appears to have solved the royalty issues, but SoundExchange still believes it is owed more than $3 million. "In total, Sonos, and its agent Napster, have failed to pay at least $3,423,844.41 comprising royalties owed for the period October 2022 to April 2023, interest, late fees, and auditor fee-shifting costs, and subtracting Sonos and Napster's payments made to date. "Late fees and interest continue to grow," SoundExchange adds, while requesting compensation in full. The complaint lists one count of "underpayment" of statutory royalties, and one count of "non-payment" of royalties, as determined by the audit. For both Copyright Act violations, SoundExchange requests damages of at least $3.4 million.

Facebook now supports passkeys for login, offering users a more secure, phishing-resistant alternative to passwords by using biometrics or a PIN stored on their device. The feature is rolling out to iOS and Android "soon," while Messenger will get the feature "in the coming months." Lifehacker reports: Meta seems pretty excited about the news -- and not just because the company happens to be a member of the FIDO Alliance, the organization that developed passkeys. Aside from logging into your Facebook account, Meta says you'll be able to use passkeys to autofill your payment info when buying things with Meta Pay. You'll also be able to use the same passkey between both Facebook and Messenger, and your passkey will act as a key to lock out your encrypted Messenger chats.