As TechCrunch reports, the plaintiffs of the Kadrey v. Meta case submitted court documents talking about the company's use of of the LibGen dataset for AI training. LibGen is generally described as a "shadow library" that provides file-sharing access to academic and general-interest books, journals, images and other materials. The counsel for the plaintiffs, which include writers Sarah Silverman and Ta-Nehisi Coates, accused Zuckerberg of approving the use of LibGen for training despite concerns raised by company executives and employees who described it as a "dataset [they] know to be pirated." In addition, the counsel mentioned that Meta admitted to torrenting LibGen materials, even though its engineers felt uneasy about sharing them "from a [Meta-owned] corporate laptop." They accused the companies of using pirated materials from shadow libraries to train their AI models.

Against the company's wishes, a court unredacted information alleging that Meta used Library Genesis (LibGen), a notorious so-called shadow library of pirated books that originated in Russia, to help train its generative AI language models. Its outcome, along with those of dozens of similar cases working their way through courts in the United States, will determine whether technology companies can legally use creative works to train AI moving forward and could either entrench AI's most powerful players or derail them. Vince Chhabria, a judge for the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, ordered both Meta and the plaintiffs on Wednesday to file full versions of a batch of documents after calling Meta's approach to redacting them "preposterous," adding that, for the most part, "there is not a single thing in those briefs that should be sealed." Chhabria ruled that Meta was not pushing to redact the materials in order to protect its business interests but instead to "avoid negative publicity." The documents were originally filed late last year but remained publicly unavailable until now.

Apple has affirmed its Siri privacy policies following a lawsuit settlement that revived rumors that the voice assistant was spying on users. "Apple has never used Siri data to build marketing profiles, never made it available for advertising, and never sold it to anyone for any purpose," said a statement published on Wednesday. The statement was prompted by the settlement of a 2019 class-action lawsuit against Apple that was filed on Dec. 31, 2024. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, pertained to allegations that Siri was inadvertently activated on Apple devices without the wake word and private conversations were recorded and listened to by third-party contractors. A 2021 filing from the same lawsuit detailed how plaintiffs reported conversing about specific brands, such as "Air Jordans" and "Olive Garden. " Then, they saw targeted ads for those brands appear in Apple Safari and third-party apps.

Annie Altman, the sister of OpenAI founder and CEO Sam Altman, has sued her brother accusing him of sexually assaulting her when she was a minor. In a complaint filed this week with a Missouri federal court, Annie Altman alleges her older brother committed "numerous acts of rape, sexual assault, sexual abuse, molestation, sodomy, and battery" from 1997 to 2006, with the abuse starting when she was only three years old. In a joint statement he made alongside his mother and two younger brothers, Sam Altman said "all of [Annie's] claims are utterly untrue." The Altmans say they've tried to support Annie in "many ways" over the years, including by offering direct financial assistance. My sister has filed a lawsuit against me.

The sister of the OpenAI chief executive, Sam Altman, has filed a lawsuit alleging that he regularly sexually abused her for several years, starting when they were children. The lawsuit filed on 6 January in a US district court in the Eastern District of Missouri alleges that the abuse began when Ann Altman was three and Sam Altman was 12. The filing alleges that the last instance of abuse took place when he was an adult but his sister, known as Annie, was still a child. The chief executive of the ChatGPT developer posted a joint statement on X, which he had signed along with his mother, Connie, and his younger brothers, Max and Jack, denying the allegations and calling them "utterly untrue". "Our family loves Annie and is very concerned about her wellbeing," the statement said.

Apple has settled a class action lawsuit in which tens of millions of users can expect a slice of the payout. Last Tuesday, the iPhone maker agreed to pay 95 million to settle a 2019 lawsuit claiming that Siri violated the privacy of Apple users by recording their conversations, as reported by Reuters. Known as Lopez v. Apple, Inc., the class action lawsuit was filed by three plaintiffs who alleged that Apple programmed Siri to intercept conversations even when no hot word, such as "Hey Siri," was spoken. Further, the plaintiffs claimed that Apple violated their privacy by sharing recordings of the conversations with third-party contractors. Specifically, two of the plaintiffs said that mentioning Air Jordan sneakers and Olive Garden restaurants prompted ads for both products.

Apple has agreed to pay 95m in cash to settle a proposed class-action lawsuit claiming that its voice-activated assistant Siri violated users' privacy, listening to them without their consent. A preliminary settlement was filed on Tuesday night in the Oakland, California, federal court, and requires approval by US district judge Jeffrey White. Voice assistants typically react when people use "hot words" such as "Hey, Siri". Two plaintiffs said their mentions of Air Jordan sneakers and Olive Garden restaurants triggered ads for those products. Another said he was served ads for a brand name surgical treatment after discussing it, he thought privately, with his doctor.

Apple has settled a class action lawsuit in which tens of millions of users can expect a slice of the payout. On Tuesday, the iPhone maker agreed to pay 95 million to settle a 2019 lawsuit claiming that Siri violated the privacy of Apple users by recording their conversations, as reported by Reuters. Known as Lopez v. Apple, Inc., the class action lawsuit was filed by three plaintiffs who alleged that Apple programmed Siri to intercept conversations even when no hot word, such as "Hey Siri," was spoken. Further, the plaintiffs claimed that Apple violated their privacy by sharing recordings of the conversations with third-party contractors. Specifically, two of the plaintiffs said that mentioning Air Jordan sneakers and Olive Garden restaurants prompted ads for both products.

Apple has agreed to pay 95 million to settle a lawsuit accusing the privacy-minded company of deploying its virtual assistant Siri to eavesdrop on people using its iPhone and other trendy devices. The proposed settlement filed Tuesday in an Oakland, California, federal court would resolve a 5-year-old lawsuit revolving around allegations that Apple surreptitiously activated Siri to record conversations through iPhones and other devices equipped with the virtual assistant for more than a decade. The alleged recordings occurred even when people didn't seek to activate the virtual assistant with the trigger words, "Hey, Siri." Some of the recorded conversations were then shared with advertisers in an attempt to sell their products to consumers more likely to be interested in the goods and services, the lawsuit asserted. The allegations about a snoopy Siri contradicted Apple's long-running commitment to protect the privacy of its customers -- a crusade that CEO Tim Cook has often framed as a fight to preserve "a fundamental human right."

The Sixth Circuit US Court of Appeals ruled yesterday that the FCC does not have the "statutory authority" to implement net neutrality rules. Since the rules were established in 2015, the FCC argued that classifying ISPs as "telecommunication services" gives it broad authority to regulate them. The decision to redefine ISPs as "information services" during the first Trump Administration led to the repeal of net neutrality in 2017. The current FCC voted to restore net neutrality on April 25 last year. The difference between 2015 and now is the Supreme Court's recent, radical reinterpretation of an important legal doctrine.