ReportWire

Tag: Ron Wyden

  • TikTok Reaches Deal With US Investors: Here’s Who Owns What

    [ad_1]

    An Oracle-backed investor group is set to take majority control of TikTok’s U.S. operations, pending regulatory approval. Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

    A yearslong saga over the future of TikTok in America is nearing its end. The U.S. division of the popular social media app, which is owned by Chinese tech giant ByteDance, will soon be majority-owned by a coalition of U.S. investors that includes Oracle.

    The agreement was detailed in an internal memo from TikTok CEO Shou Chew, first reported by Axios. Oracle, alongside private equity firm Silver Lake and the Abu Dhabi-based investment firm MGX, will own 45 percent of TikTok’s U.S. operations. ByteDance will retain a stake just below 20 percent, and affiliates of existing ByteDance investors will own the remaining roughly one-third.

    MGX did not respond to requests for comment from Observer. Oracle and Silver Lake declined to comment.

    The development follows years of concern over ByteDance’s access to data on U.S. citizens, an estimated 170 million of whom use TikTok. Efforts to either ban the app in the U.S. or force a sale to American owners began last year under the Biden administration, with deadlines later extended multiple times by President Donald Trump.

    The terms of TikTok’s new deal appear to closely mirror a framework laid out by the White House in September to place the company’s U.S. division in domestic hands. Under that proposal, Oracle would be responsible for recreating TikTok’s algorithm by retraining a new version for the U.S. market and protecting American user data in a secure cloud. At the time, Trump said Chinese President  Xi Jinping had expressed approval of the plans.

    Oracle will play a similar role in TikTok’s new agreement, which is expected to close on Jan. 22. The American owners of the division will oversee “retraining the content commendation algorithm on U.S. user data to ensure the content feed is freed from outside manipulation,” according to the Chew’s memo, which also notes that Oracle will serve as a “trusted security partner” upon the deal’s completion.

    Austin-based Oracle, co-founded by billionaire Larry Ellison, has emerged as the winner among a crowded group of U.S. players—including MrBeast and Perplexity AI—bidding for ownership of TikTok. The deal is set to further deepen ties between TikTok and the tech company, which already helps the platform store U.S. user data. Oracle’s shares are up by more than 7 percent today (Dec. 19).

    The new deal is expected to value TikTok at approximately $14 billion, according to Axios. After it closes, TikTok’s U.S. operations “will operate as an independent entity with authority over U.S. data protection, algorithm security, content moderation and software assurance,” the memo said, while “TikTok global’s U.S. entities will manage global product interoperability and certain commercial activities, including e-commerce, advertising and marketing.” The U.S. venture will be governed by a seven-member, majority-American board.

    The agreement, which is still pending approval from Chinese regulators, would resolve a longstanding point of contention between Washington and Beijing. Not all lawmakers, however, are convinced that it goes far enough to safeguard national security or protect the data of U.S. citizens.

    “This deal won’t do a thing to protect the privacy of American users,” said Senator Rob Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, in a statement.”It’s unclear that it will even put TikTok’s algorithm in safer hands.”

    TikTok Reaches Deal With US Investors: Here’s Who Owns What

    [ad_2]

    Alexandra Tremayne-Pengelly

    Source link

  • Senators demand ICE cease use of facial recognition app

    [ad_1]

    Senators Edward J. Markey, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley Thursday to Acting US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director Todd Lyons urging the agency to stop using “Mobile Fortify,” a smartphone app that uses biometric identification, including facial recognition. The lawmakers said facial recognition and warned that real-time surveillance could have a chilling effect on constitutionally protected activities.

    “As studies have shown, when individuals believe they are being surveilled, they are less likely to engage in First Amendment-protected activities, such as protests or rallies — undermining the very core of our democracy,” the senators wrote.

    They requested answers from the agency by October 2 as to who built the app, when it was deployed, whether ICE tested its accuracy, the legal basis for its use and current agency policies governing the tool’s use. They also asked whether ICE would commit to ending the use of Mobile Fortify, and to explain why if they would not. The letter was also signed by Senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Chris Van Holle, Tina Smith, Bernie Sanders and Adam Schiff.

    Earlier this summer The Washington Post reported that the New Orleans police were secretly using facial recognition on a private camera network of over 200 live feeds. This went on for two years despite city ordinances requiring the technology only be used to search for specific suspects of violent crimes, and that the use be documented and reported to the city council. Facial recognition technology remains controversial, though a plurality of Americans support its use in both law enforcement and the workplace, with limitations.

    As there is still no federal regulation on the use of facial recognition, states have been left to craft their own guardrails, with states like allowing individuals to sue for damages over misuse of biometric data and requiring written consent for its use. Last year Meta to the state of Texas (the largest financial settlement ever paid out to a single state) for allegedly collecting biometric data on millions of Texans without their consent.

    [ad_2]

    Andre Revilla

    Source link

  • Senators demand ICE cease use of facial recognition app

    [ad_1]

    Senators Edward J. Markey, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley sent a letter Thursday to Acting US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director Todd Lyons urging the agency to stop using “Mobile Fortify,” a smartphone app that uses biometric identification, including facial recognition. The lawmakers said facial recognition remains unreliable and warned that real-time surveillance could have a chilling effect on constitutionally protected activities.

    “As studies have shown, when individuals believe they are being surveilled, they are less likely to engage in First Amendment-protected activities, such as protests or rallies — undermining the very core of our democracy,” the senators wrote.

    They requested answers from the agency by October 2 as to who built the app, when it was deployed, whether ICE tested its accuracy, the legal basis for its use and current agency policies governing the tool’s use. They also asked whether ICE would commit to ending the use of Mobile Fortify, and to explain why if they would not. The letter was also signed by Senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Chris Van Holle, Tina Smith, Bernie Sanders and Adam Schiff.

    Earlier this summer The Washington Post reported that the New Orleans police were secretly using facial recognition on a private camera network of over 200 live feeds. This went on for two years despite city ordinances requiring the technology only be used to search for specific suspects of violent crimes, and that the use be documented and reported to the city council. Facial recognition technology remains controversial, though a plurality of Americans support its use in both law enforcement and the workplace, with limitations.

    As there is still no federal regulation on the use of facial recognition, states have been left to craft their own guardrails, with states like Illinois allowing individuals to sue for damages over misuse of biometric data and requiring written consent for its use. Last year Meta paid a $1.4 billion settlement to the state of Texas (the largest financial settlement ever paid out to a single state) for allegedly collecting biometric data on millions of Texans without their consent.

    [ad_2]

    Andre Revilla

    Source link

  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr. faces congressional grilling amid CDC turmoil

    [ad_1]

    U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., facing pointed bipartisan questioning at a rancorous three-hour Senate committee hearing on Thursday, tried to defend his efforts to pull back COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and explain the turmoil he has created at federal health agencies.Kennedy said the fired CDC director was untrustworthy, stood by his past anti-vaccine rhetoric, and disputed reports of people saying they have had difficulty getting COVID-19 shots.A longtime leader in the anti-vaccine movement, Kennedy has made sweeping changes to agencies tasked with public health policy and scientific research by laying off thousands of workers, firing science advisers and remaking vaccine guidelines. The moves — some of which contradict assurances he made during his confirmation hearings — have rattled medical groups and officials in several Democratic-led states, which have responded with their own vaccine advice.Medical groups and several Democrats in Congress have called for Kennedy to be fired, and his exchanges with Democratic senators on the panel repeatedly devolved into shouting, from both sides.But some Republican senators also expressed unease with his changes to COVID-19 policies.The GOP senators noted that Kennedy said President Donald Trump deserved a Nobel Prize for the 2020 Operation Warp Speed initiative to quickly develop mRNA COVID-19 vaccines — and that he also had attacked the safety and continued use of those very shots.”I can’t tell where you are on Operation Warp Speed,” said Republican North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis.Tillis and others asked him why the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was fired last week, less than a month into her tenure.Kennedy said she was dishonest, and that CDC leaders who left the agency last week in support of her deserved to be fired.He also criticized CDC recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic tied to lockdowns and masking policies, and claimed — wrongly — that they “failed to do anything about the disease itself.””The people at CDC who oversaw that process, who put masks on our children, who closed our schools, are the people who will be leaving,” Kennedy said. He later said they deserved to be fired for not doing enough to control chronic disease.Democrats express hostility from the startThe Senate Finance Committee had called Kennedy to a hearing about his plans to “Make America Healthy Again,” but Democratic senators pressed Kennedy on his actions around vaccines.At the start of the hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon tried to have Kennedy formally sworn in as a witness, saying the HHS secretary has a history of lying to the committee. The committee’s chair, Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, denied the Democrat’s request, saying “the bottom line is we will let the secretary make his own case.”Wyden went on to attack Kennedy, saying he had “stacked the deck” of a vaccines advisory committee by replacing scientists with “skeptics and conspiracy theorists.”Last week, the Trump administration fired the CDC’s director — a Trump appointee who was confirmed by the Senate — less than a month into her tenure. Several top CDC leaders resigned in protest, leaving the agency in turmoil.The ousted director, Susan Monarez, wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that Kennedy was trying to weaken public health protections.”I was told to preapprove the recommendations of a vaccine advisory panel newly filled with people who have publicly expressed antivaccine rhetoric,” Monarez wrote. “It is imperative that the panel’s recommendations aren’t rubber-stamped but instead are rigorously and scientifically reviewed before being accepted or rejected.”Kennedy told senators he didn’t make such an ultimatum, though he did concede that he had ordered Monarez to fire career CDC scientists. Monarez’s attorneys later responded that she stood by the op-ed and “would repeat it all under oath.”Kennedy pushed back on concerns raised by multiple Republican senators, including Tillis and Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. Both Barrasso and Cassidy are physicians.Shouting matches and hot comebacksThe health secretary had animated comebacks as Democratic senators pressed him on the effects of his words and actions.When Sen. Raphael Warnock, of Georgia, questioned Kennedy about his disparaging rhetoric about CDC employees before a deadly shooting at the agency this summer, Kennedy shot back: “Are you complicit in the assassination attempts on President Trump?”Kennedy called Sen. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico “ridiculous,” said he was “talking gibberish” and accused him of “not understanding how the world works” when Lujan asked Kennedy to pledge to share protocols of any research Kennedy was commissioning into autism and vaccines.He also engaged in a heated, loud exchanges with Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Tina Smith of Minnesota.”I didn’t even hear your question,” Kennedy replied to Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto as the Nevada Democrat repeatedly asked what the agency was doing to lower drug costs for seniors.He also told Sen. Bernie Sanders that the Vermont independent was not “making any sense.”Some senators had their own choice words.”You’re interrupting me, and sir, you’re a charlatan. That’s what you are, ” said Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Washington Democrat. “The history on vaccines is very clear.”As the hearing neared its end, Kennedy pulled his cellphone from his pocket and then tapped and scrolled as Wyden asked about mifepristone, a drug used for medication abortion.Kennedy disputes COVID-19 dataIn May, Kennedy announced COVID-19 vaccines would no longer be recommended for healthy children and pregnant women, a move opposed by medical and public health groups.In June, he abruptly fired a panel of experts that had been advising the government on vaccine policy. He replaced them with a handpicked group that included several vaccine skeptics, and then shut the door to several doctors groups that had long helped form the committee’s recommendations.Kennedy has voiced distrust of research that showed the COVID-19 vaccines saved lives, and at Thursday’s hearing even cast doubt on statistics about how people died during the pandemic and on estimates about how many deaths were averted — statistics produced by the agencies he oversees.He said federal health policy would be based on gold standard science, but confessed that he wouldn’t necessarily wait for studies to be completed before taking action against, for example, potential causes of chronic illness.”We are not waiting for everything to come in. We are starting now,” he said.A number of medical groups say Kennedy can’t be counted on to make decisions based on robust medical evidence. In a statement Wednesday, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and 20 other medical and public health organizations issued a joint statement calling on him to resign.”Our country needs leadership that will promote open, honest dialogue, not disregard decades of lifesaving science, spread misinformation, reverse medical progress and decimate programs that keep us safe,” the statement said.Many of the nation’s leading public health and medical societies, including the American Medical Association, American Public Health Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have decried Kennedy’s policies and warn they will drive up rates of vaccine-preventable diseases.___Stobbe reported from New York. Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.___The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., facing pointed bipartisan questioning at a rancorous three-hour Senate committee hearing on Thursday, tried to defend his efforts to pull back COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and explain the turmoil he has created at federal health agencies.

    Kennedy said the fired CDC director was untrustworthy, stood by his past anti-vaccine rhetoric, and disputed reports of people saying they have had difficulty getting COVID-19 shots.

    A longtime leader in the anti-vaccine movement, Kennedy has made sweeping changes to agencies tasked with public health policy and scientific research by laying off thousands of workers, firing science advisers and remaking vaccine guidelines. The moves — some of which contradict assurances he made during his confirmation hearings — have rattled medical groups and officials in several Democratic-led states, which have responded with their own vaccine advice.

    Medical groups and several Democrats in Congress have called for Kennedy to be fired, and his exchanges with Democratic senators on the panel repeatedly devolved into shouting, from both sides.

    But some Republican senators also expressed unease with his changes to COVID-19 policies.

    The GOP senators noted that Kennedy said President Donald Trump deserved a Nobel Prize for the 2020 Operation Warp Speed initiative to quickly develop mRNA COVID-19 vaccines — and that he also had attacked the safety and continued use of those very shots.

    “I can’t tell where you are on Operation Warp Speed,” said Republican North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis.

    Tillis and others asked him why the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was fired last week, less than a month into her tenure.

    Kennedy said she was dishonest, and that CDC leaders who left the agency last week in support of her deserved to be fired.

    He also criticized CDC recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic tied to lockdowns and masking policies, and claimed — wrongly — that they “failed to do anything about the disease itself.”

    “The people at CDC who oversaw that process, who put masks on our children, who closed our schools, are the people who will be leaving,” Kennedy said. He later said they deserved to be fired for not doing enough to control chronic disease.

    Democrats express hostility from the start

    The Senate Finance Committee had called Kennedy to a hearing about his plans to “Make America Healthy Again,” but Democratic senators pressed Kennedy on his actions around vaccines.

    At the start of the hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon tried to have Kennedy formally sworn in as a witness, saying the HHS secretary has a history of lying to the committee. The committee’s chair, Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, denied the Democrat’s request, saying “the bottom line is we will let the secretary make his own case.”

    Wyden went on to attack Kennedy, saying he had “stacked the deck” of a vaccines advisory committee by replacing scientists with “skeptics and conspiracy theorists.”

    Last week, the Trump administration fired the CDC’s director — a Trump appointee who was confirmed by the Senate — less than a month into her tenure. Several top CDC leaders resigned in protest, leaving the agency in turmoil.

    The ousted director, Susan Monarez, wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday that Kennedy was trying to weaken public health protections.

    “I was told to preapprove the recommendations of a vaccine advisory panel newly filled with people who have publicly expressed antivaccine rhetoric,” Monarez wrote. “It is imperative that the panel’s recommendations aren’t rubber-stamped but instead are rigorously and scientifically reviewed before being accepted or rejected.”

    Kennedy told senators he didn’t make such an ultimatum, though he did concede that he had ordered Monarez to fire career CDC scientists. Monarez’s attorneys later responded that she stood by the op-ed and “would repeat it all under oath.”

    Kennedy pushed back on concerns raised by multiple Republican senators, including Tillis and Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. Both Barrasso and Cassidy are physicians.

    Shouting matches and hot comebacks

    The health secretary had animated comebacks as Democratic senators pressed him on the effects of his words and actions.

    When Sen. Raphael Warnock, of Georgia, questioned Kennedy about his disparaging rhetoric about CDC employees before a deadly shooting at the agency this summer, Kennedy shot back: “Are you complicit in the assassination attempts on President Trump?”

    Kennedy called Sen. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico “ridiculous,” said he was “talking gibberish” and accused him of “not understanding how the world works” when Lujan asked Kennedy to pledge to share protocols of any research Kennedy was commissioning into autism and vaccines.

    He also engaged in a heated, loud exchanges with Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Tina Smith of Minnesota.

    “I didn’t even hear your question,” Kennedy replied to Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto as the Nevada Democrat repeatedly asked what the agency was doing to lower drug costs for seniors.

    He also told Sen. Bernie Sanders that the Vermont independent was not “making any sense.”

    Some senators had their own choice words.

    “You’re interrupting me, and sir, you’re a charlatan. That’s what you are, ” said Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Washington Democrat. “The history on vaccines is very clear.”

    As the hearing neared its end, Kennedy pulled his cellphone from his pocket and then tapped and scrolled as Wyden asked about mifepristone, a drug used for medication abortion.

    Kennedy disputes COVID-19 data

    In May, Kennedy announced COVID-19 vaccines would no longer be recommended for healthy children and pregnant women, a move opposed by medical and public health groups.

    In June, he abruptly fired a panel of experts that had been advising the government on vaccine policy. He replaced them with a handpicked group that included several vaccine skeptics, and then shut the door to several doctors groups that had long helped form the committee’s recommendations.

    Kennedy has voiced distrust of research that showed the COVID-19 vaccines saved lives, and at Thursday’s hearing even cast doubt on statistics about how people died during the pandemic and on estimates about how many deaths were averted — statistics produced by the agencies he oversees.

    He said federal health policy would be based on gold standard science, but confessed that he wouldn’t necessarily wait for studies to be completed before taking action against, for example, potential causes of chronic illness.

    “We are not waiting for everything to come in. We are starting now,” he said.

    A number of medical groups say Kennedy can’t be counted on to make decisions based on robust medical evidence. In a statement Wednesday, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and 20 other medical and public health organizations issued a joint statement calling on him to resign.

    “Our country needs leadership that will promote open, honest dialogue, not disregard decades of lifesaving science, spread misinformation, reverse medical progress and decimate programs that keep us safe,” the statement said.

    Many of the nation’s leading public health and medical societies, including the American Medical Association, American Public Health Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have decried Kennedy’s policies and warn they will drive up rates of vaccine-preventable diseases.

    ___

    Stobbe reported from New York. Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

    ___

    The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Calls Grow For DOJ To Appoint Special Counsel To Investigate Jared Kushner

    Calls Grow For DOJ To Appoint Special Counsel To Investigate Jared Kushner

    [ad_1]

    [ad_2] Jason Easley
    Source link

  • WNBA awards Portland an expansion franchise that will begin play in 2026

    WNBA awards Portland an expansion franchise that will begin play in 2026

    [ad_1]

    The WNBA is headed back to Portland, with Oregon’s biggest city getting an expansion team that will begin play in 2026.

    The team will be owned and operated by Raj Sports, led by Lisa Bhathal Merage and Alex Bhathal, who also own the Portland Thorns of the National Women’s Soccer League. They paid $125 million for the franchise.

    “This is huge for Portland. We are so honored and humbled to be the vessel that delivers this WNBA franchise to Portland,” Bhathal Merage said. “And that’s really how we consider ourselves. Portland is this incredibly diverse, enthusiastic community. We saw the passion first-hand when we started looking into the Portland Thorns and this is Basketball City. So we’re very excited about the future.”

    Some 300 invited guests attended a kickoff event at Portland’s Moda Center on Wednesday afternoon with the Bhathals, WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert and U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden and other state and local officials. Afterward, there was community-wide event outside the stadium.

    The Bhathals started having conversations with the WNBA late last year after a separate bid to bring a team to Portland fell through.

    The city is well known for its embrace of women’s sports. In addition to the Thorns, who are drawing more than 18,000 fans on average to each home game, Portland is home to the nation’s first bar exclusively for women’s sports, the Sports Bra, which opened in 2022 and recently announced plans for additional franchises.

    “It really wasn’t our intention when we came to the Portland community, but we saw the opportunity, the stars aligned and here we are. We are at the epicenter of women’s professional sports,” Bhathal Merage said.

    It’s the third expansion franchise the WNBA will add over the next two years, with Golden State and Toronto getting the other two. The Golden State Valkyries will begin play next season and Toronto in 2026.

    “We’ve been working on Portland for a while, so when we did our original data analysis, I guess two and a half years ago, Portland was one at the top of the list, after the Bay Area,” Engelbert said. “So I’ve had my eye on Portland.”

    Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek was unable to attend at the Moda Center, home of the Portland Trail Blazers, but issued a statement.

    “The decision to choose Portland for the next WNBA team is just as much a recognition of our past as it is about faith in our future,” Kotek said. “Portland has an unequivocal love of women’s sports. ”

    Engelbert has said she hopes to have more teams by 2028 but doesn’t think that the league will be adding any more that will start playing before 2027.

    Portland had a WNBA team, the Fire, from 2000 until it folded in 2002. That franchise averaged more than 8,000 fans when games were played at the Rose Garden. The new franchise will play at the same arena, now known as the Moda Center, and the Bhathals plan to build a dedicated practice facility for the team as well.

    In addition to the Thorns, the Bhathal family has been a co-owner of the Sacramento Kings since 2013. The Bhathals added to their sports portfolio earlier this year when they bought the women’s soccer team for $63 million.

    “When you look at our numbers, not just the Thorns’ off-the-charts attendance, which is incredible, what you’ve seen, in Eugene, what you’ve seen in Oregon State, we knew that this was going to be one of the great moments in sports for Oregon,” Wyden said. “We saw, February of 2023, what was possible. So I can tell you that right now there are women playing in Portland. They’re rebounding in Roseburg, they’re hooping in Hermiston. Every nook and cranny of our state is into this.”

    The new Portland WNBA team is not yet named. The Bhathals said they wanted to tap into the community to select one.

    ___

    AP Sports Writer Anne M. Peterson in Oregon contributed to this report.

    ___

    AP WNBA: https://apnews.com/hub/wnba-basketball

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Senators call on Federal Trade Commission to investigate automakers’ sale of driving data to brokers

    Senators call on Federal Trade Commission to investigate automakers’ sale of driving data to brokers

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT (AP) — Two U.S. senators are calling on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate automakers selling customers’ driving data to brokers who package it and then sell it to insurance companies.

    In a letter to FTC Chairwoman Linda Khan, Democrats Ron Wyden of Oregon, and Edward Markey of Massachusetts allege that General Motors, Hyundai, Honda and perhaps others are sharing drivers’ data, such as sudden braking and acceleration.

    The automakers, the senators said in a statement Friday, used deceptive tactics to manipulate customers into signing up for disclosure of the data to brokers.

    After reading a report in The New York Times, Wyden’s office looked into the three automakers and found that they shared data with broker Verisk Analytics. In the letter to Khan, the senators wrote that all three automakers confirmed disclosure of the data. GM also confirmed that it disclosed customer location data to two other companies that the automaker would not name, the letter said.

    Verisk used the data to prepare reports on driving-behavior history and sold them to insurance companies, the letter said. Some automakers may have deceived customers by advertising data disclosures as a way to reduce insurance bills, without telling them that some insurers could charge more, the senators wrote.

    “If the FTC determines that these companies violated the law, we urge you to hold the companies and their senior executives accountable,” the senators wrote to Khan.

    GM wouldn’t say how many cars’ data was sent to brokers or what it was paid, according to the letter. Wyden’s office found that Hyundai shared data from 1.7 million vehicles and was paid just over $1 million, while Honda got just under $26,000 for data from 97,000 vehicles, the senators said.

    A message was left Friday after business hours seeking comment from the FTC.

    In an email, GM denied that it deceived customers into enrolling in the data-sharing program with Verisk. Data-sharing partnerships with Verisk and LexisNexis were canceled in March, and its data-sharing program called “Smart Driver” ended in June, GM said.

    “Data was only shared with an insurer if a customer initiated a quote directly with their chosen carrier and provided a separate consent to that carrier,” the email said.

    The company said it does share “de-identified” data with partners to aid city infrastructure and make roads safer.

    In a statement, Hyundai said the senators’ letter mischaracterizes its data policies and that it has safeguards to make sure customers agree to sharing driving information with insurers.

    Customers, it said, had the option to connect driving scores to their insurers through Verisk for possible benefits such as good-driving discounts.

    “It is important to note that Verisk was not authorized by Hyundai or the customer to share the Drive Score data with insurers until the customer affirmatively consented to this on an insurer’s website or app,” Hyundai said.

    Honda also said that customers had to opt into the program with Verisk. Some customers with good driving scores were given the chance to agree to discount offers from insurers. “Without that clear second opt-in by the customer, no identifiable consumer information was shared with any insurance company,” Honda said.

    Verisk also disagreed with Wyden and Markey and said in a statement that it “acts to ensure data is accessed and used appropriately.” The company said using data responsibly “is the cornerstone of our business.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden quietly shelves trade pact with UK before 2024 elections

    Biden quietly shelves trade pact with UK before 2024 elections

    [ad_1]

    LONDON — President Joe Biden has quietly shelved plans for a “foundational” trade agreement with the U.K. ahead of the 2024 election — following Senate opposition and disagreements over the scope of the deal.

    A draft outline of the pact and its 11 proposed chapters, prepared by the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) office earlier this year, indicated negotiations would begin before the end of 2023.

    But after facing multiple headwinds, the deal is not expected to go ahead, two people briefed by the British and U.S. governments respectively told POLITICO. Both were granted anonymity to speak on a sensitive matter.

    “I don’t think we’re going to see that re-emerge,” said one of the people briefed on the proposed negotiations. 

    The proposal’s timeline for talks — which would not consider market access or meet the World Trade Organization’s definition of a free trade agreement — set out that negotiations would wrap up ahead of elections in Britain and the U.S. next year.

    The deal was closer in substance to the U.S.-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) — which tackles regulation and non-tariff barriers — than a full trade agreement.

    But last month IPEF talks fell apart after senior Democrats criticized the Biden administration’s negotiation of trade provisions that did not contain enforceable labor standards.

    The British government has long coveted a trade agreement with the U.S. as a significant post-Brexit prize.

    The draft was considered a road map to eventually securing a full-fledged, comprehensive deal. Business and Trade Secretary Kemi Badenoch pitched the IPEF-style deal in April during Biden’s visit to Belfast, Bloomberg reported, to reinvigorate talks first started under the Trump administration.

    Congressional oversight

    Key voices in the U.S. have expressed concern about the nature of a pact with the U.K.

    “Trade negotiations should be driven by substance,” said a spokesperson for Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, chairman of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, which provides congressional oversight for trade.

    “It is Senator Wyden’s view that the United States and United Kingdom should not make announcements until a deal that benefits Americans is achievable,” the spokesperson added.

    When POLITICO first reported on proposed talks in October, Wyden said it was “extremely disappointing” the Biden administration was attempting to proceed “with a ‘trade agreement’ that will neither benefit the American public, nor respect the role of Congress in international trade.”

    Wyden’s spokesperson said Congress “must have a clear role in approving any future trade agreements” and that the senior Democrat “believes it is important for USTR to be significantly more engaged with Congress on any future negotiations.”

    ‘The vibes were quite tough’

    USTR has gone back to Congress to ask for its input on a potential U.K. trade deal. But major outstanding issues between the U.S. and U.K. remain, including agriculture and whether any agreement would benefit American workers.

    In a recent meeting with U.S. diplomats “the vibes were quite tough,” said the second person briefed on the proposed negotiations cited earlier. “They just doubled down on ‘you guys really need to lean into the worker-centric trade policy’ and ‘put yourself in the shoes of somebody in Pennsylvania.’”

    The message, the person added, was “does this improve the lot of the farmers in Iowa? Does this help the U.S. economy? And if it doesn’t, they’re not going to do it.”

    The U.S. approach “seems to be very focused on labor standards, on environmental issues on these very worthy things,” said the first person briefed on the proposed negotiations quoted at the top of this story.

    Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s Cabinet also pushed back on a chapter dealing with agriculture regulations in the draft after the British leader told a food summit earlier this year that he would not allow chemical washes or hormone-injected beef imports like those from the U.S. into Britain.

    Scottish ministers meanwhile complained they hadn’t been consulted. Agriculture regulations are a devolved issue in Scotland.

    In the meantime, the focus of the U.K.-U.S. trade relationship is predominantly on securing a critical minerals agreement that would allow British automotive firms to tap into electric vehicle rebates offered in the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act.

    “The U.K. and U.S. are rapidly expanding co-operation on a range of vital economic and trade issues building on the Atlantic Declaration announced earlier this year,” said a U.K. government spokesperson.

    Some in the U.K. are taking a philosophical view on whether a wider ranging trade deal with the U.S. is really needed. Michael Mainelli, who, as lord mayor of the City of London, opened a new outpost for the U.K.’s powerhouse financial district in New York City on Monday said: “The trade has been going on fine without it. It might go a bit better with it.”

    The latest numbers show total two-way trade between the nations grew 23.8 percent in the year to the end of Q2 2023.

    But in the U.S. a trade deal with the U.K. is just “not that high on the list,” Mainelli said.

    [ad_2]

    Graham Lanktree

    Source link

  • US: Senators hail Health Dept. recommendation to ease restrictions on marijuana – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    US: Senators hail Health Dept. recommendation to ease restrictions on marijuana – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    [ad_1]

    The US Department of Health and Human Services has delivered a recommendation to the Drug Enforcement Administration on marijuana policy, and Senate leaders hailed it Wednesday as a first step toward easing federal restrictions on the drug.

    HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said Wednesday on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, that the agency has responded to President Joe Biden’s request “to provide a scheduling recommendation for marijuana to the DEA.” “We’ve worked to ensure that a scientific evaluation be completed and shared expeditiously,” he added.

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement that HHS had recommended that marijuana be moved from a Schedule I to a Schedule III controlled substance.

    USDA Certified Organic Tinctures and salves

    “HHS has done the right thing,” Schumer, D-N.Y., said. “DEA should now follow through on this important step to greatly reduce the harm caused by draconian marijuana laws.” Rescheduling the drug would reduce or potentially eliminate criminal penalties for possession. Marijuana is currently classified as a Schedule I drug, alongside heroin and LSD. According to the DEA, Schedule I drugs ”have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.” Schedule III drugs “have a potential for abuse less than substances in Schedules I or II and abuse may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence.” They currently include ketamine and…

    Original Author Link click here to read complete story..

    [ad_2]

    MMP News Author

    Source link

  • Congress Wants To Know What The Biggest Game Companies Are Doing To ‘Combat Extremism’

    Congress Wants To Know What The Biggest Game Companies Are Doing To ‘Combat Extremism’

    [ad_1]

    Image for article titled Congress Wants To Know What The Biggest Game Companies Are Doing To 'Combat Extremism'

    Photo: Mark Wilson (Getty Images)

    A group of seven lawmakers are sending a letter to the world’s biggest video game companies tomorrow, asking each of them what steps they’re taking to combat “harassment and extremism” in online video games.

    As Axios reports, the seven Democratic representatives—including Lori Trahan (Massachusetts), Katie Porter (California) and Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon—have all co-signed a letter, which is looking to “better understand the processes you have in place to handle player reports of harassment and extremism encounters in your online games, and ask for consideration of safety measures pertaining to anti-harassment and anti-extremism”.

    Unsurprisingly, the list includes companies like Activision Blizzard (Call of Duty, Overwatch), Microsoft (Xbox), Sony (PlayStation), Roblox, Take-Two Interactive (Grand Theft Auto, NBA 2K), Riot Games (League of Legends, Valorant), Epic (Fortnite) and Electronic Arts (Battlefield, FIFA & Madden).

    Those are all massive international companies, most of them with thousands of employees spread out all over the world, and responsible for some of the planet’s most popular and enduring online games. To want to grill them, when so many of them are based in the US—or at least most popular in the US—is a pretty obvious move!

    Hilariously, though, whoever put the list together of which companies to target has clearly just gone down a list of “most popular games”, not “biggest companies”, because among those titans of industry are Innersloth, the developers of Among Us.

    Among Us may be a huge hit, but Innersloth are also a tiny team. How tiny? This tiny:

    Among Us Wins Best Mobile Game at The Game Awards 2020

    Innsersloth’s webiste says the studio currently has 20 employees. I don’t know how much they’re going to be able to explain when their game has you playing as a cute little astronaut, doesn’t have voice chat and only lets players communicate via a menu of pre-written lines.

    But then nobody has to legally reply to the letter at all, it’s just a letter, so maybe they can just reply “sorry, think this is meant for Xbox!” and get on with their day.

    [ad_2]

    Luke Plunkett

    Source link

  • First on CNN: New bipartisan bill in Senate could address TikTok security concerns without a ban | CNN Business

    First on CNN: New bipartisan bill in Senate could address TikTok security concerns without a ban | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Five US senators are set to reintroduce legislation Wednesday that would block companies including TikTok from transferring Americans’ personal data to countries such as China, as part of a proposed broadening of US export controls.

    The bipartisan bill led by Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden and Wyoming Republican Sen. Cynthia Lummis would, for the first time, subject exports of US data to the same type of licensing requirements that govern the sale of military and advanced technologies. It would apply to thousands of companies that rely on routinely transferring data from the United States to other jurisdictions, including data brokers and social media companies.

    The legislation comes amid a flurry of proposals to regulate how TikTok and other companies may handle the sensitive and valuable data of Americans — not just their names, email addresses and phone numbers but also potentially their behavioral data such as location information, search and browsing histories and personal interests.

    “Massive pools of Americans’ sensitive information — everything from where we go, to what we buy and what kind of health care services we receive — are for sale to buyers in China, Russia and nearly anyone with a credit card,” Wyden said in a statement. “Our bipartisan bill would turn off the tap of data to unfriendly nations, stop TikTok from sending Americans’ personal information to China, and allow nations with strong privacy protections to strengthen their relationships.”

    Lawmakers have scrutinized TikTok, in particular, for its ties to China through its parent company, ByteDance. Much of the existing legislation addressing TikTok at the federal and state level has focused on bans of the app. But Wyden’s bill subjecting US data to export licensing could address the issue without wading into the thorny legal issues surrounding a potential ban, an aide said, and simultaneously avoid giving broad new powers to the executive branch.

    Wednesday’s legislation, known as the Protecting Americans’ Data From Foreign Surveillance Act, does not identify TikTok by name. Instead, it directs the Commerce Department to maintain lists of countries that are considered trustworthy and untrustworthy for the purposes of receiving US data.

    There would be no restrictions applied to personal information transferred to trustworthy states, and no restrictions on individual internet users’ own transfers of their personal data, but companies seeking to transfer Americans’ personal information to countries outside of the trustworthy list would be required to apply for a license. Transfers to countries on the untrustworthy list would be automatically prohibited unless companies could prove they have a valid reason for a transfer, according to a copy of the bill text reviewed by CNN.

    Factors the Commerce Department would need to consider when building its lists include whether a country has enough of its own privacy safeguards — reflected in laws, regulations and norms — to prevent sensitive US data from being transferred further to one of the untrustworthy countries. Another factor includes whether a country has engaged in “hostile foreign intelligence operations, including information operations, against the United States,” language that appears to refer to China, Russia and other foreign adversaries.

    The Commerce Department would also be authorized to identify the specific types of information that would be subject to licensing requirements, based on their sensitivity, as well as how much information a company could transfer to a non-approved country before needing a license.

    A previous version of the bill was introduced last summer. The newest version, the Wyden aide said, includes fresh language that targets TikTok indirectly by prohibiting data transfers from one company to a parent company that may receive data requests by a hostile foreign government, when the company holds data on more than one million users.

    TikTok has faced criticism from US officials who say the company’s links to China pose a national security risk. TikTok has said it has never received a request for US user data from the Chinese government and would never comply with such a request.

    TikTok has also said it is working on securing US user data by storing it on servers controlled by Oracle and by establishing special US access protocols to prevent unauthorized use of the information.

    Should TikTok abide by its plan, known as Project Texas, Wednesday’s legislation would not affect the company, according to the Wyden aide, but if TikTok or ByteDance did seek to move US user data to China, then those transfers would potentially be subject to the proposed Commerce Department restrictions.

    Congress has made several attempts in recent months to address data transfers to foreign adversaries. In February, House lawmakers advanced a bill that would all but require the Biden administration to ban TikTok over national security concerns about the app. The next month, Senate lawmakers introduced a bill that would give the Commerce Department wide latitude to assess all foreign-linked technologies and to take virtually any measures, up to and including imposing a nationwide ban, to restrict their domestic use.

    Those bills have provoked a backlash from industry and civil liberties groups, as well as among some fellow lawmakers. Among the concerns are their potential impact on Americans’ First Amendment rights and a potential conflict with laws facilitating the free flow of media to and from foreign rivals. Other concerns include whether the breadth of the legislation could give the US government too much power and whether it could end up harming industries that are not the target of the legislation.

    The new bill includes language requiring more input from privacy, civil rights and civil liberties experts, said Justin Sherman, founder and CEO of the research firm Global Cyber Strategies and a senior fellow at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy who has seen the bill.

    “You don’t load up Excel sheets in a shipping crate and send them to a foreign port,” Sherman said, but data transfers are a “hugely and often ignored problem in national security.”

    “We need to get beyond just looking at a couple mobile apps and platforms, and start looking at all parts of this ecosystem, including how data gets sold and transferred,” Sherman added, “and this bill takes an important look at that issue.”

    Other senators co-sponsoring Wednesday’s legislation include Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, Tennessee Republican Sen. Bill Hagerty, New Mexico Democratic Sen. Martin Heinrich and Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio. A companion bill in the House will also be unveiled Wednesday, sponsored by Ohio Republican Rep. Warren Davidson and California Democratic Rep. Anna Eshoo.

    [ad_2]

    Source link