Tech News

Apple has agreed to pay $95 million to resolve a long-running legal battle accusing it of using its virtual assistant, Siri, to eavesdrop on unsuspecting users. The proposed settlement, filed in federal court in Oakland, California, aims to settle a lawsuit that has been ongoing for five years. The case centers on claims that Apple secretly activated Siri on iPhones and other Apple devices, recording private conversations even when users didn’t utter the trigger phrase, “Hey, Siri.”

Gotta admit, we all had our fears. Now this kind of validates much of the concerns that Siri has been listening!

Here’s A Background of Siri and Privacy Concerns

Siri, Apple’s voice-activated assistant, was launched in 2011 as a key feature on iPhones and later expanded to other Apple devices, including iPads, Macs, and HomePods. Siri was designed to help users perform tasks such as sending messages, setting reminders, and searching the web, all through voice commands. Over the years, however, concerns have been raised about the amount of personal data Siri collects and how it handles that data.

While Siri is intended to respond only when a user activates it with the “Hey, Siri” command or by pressing a button, the lawsuit alleges that the assistant was sometimes activated without explicit user input. These unauthorized activations allegedly led to recordings of private conversations, which were then shared with third parties, including advertisers, to refine targeted advertising strategies.

Now Onto The Allegations and Settlement

The lawsuit, which spans over a decade, asserts that Apple violated users’ privacy by secretly recording conversations and sharing the data with advertisers. Some of these recordings allegedly took place without users’ knowledge or consent, even when they hadn’t invoked Siri. The lawsuit claims that these recordings were part of a broader effort to help advertisers tailor ads to consumers based on their conversations, suggesting that Apple used private, unspoken information to boost advertising revenues.

Is this advertising 101 or corporate greed at it’s finest?

In a court filing on Tuesday, Apple agreed to settle the case with a $95 million payout, though the company has not admitted to any wrongdoing. According to court documents, the settlement will provide compensation to consumers who owned an eligible Apple device between September 17, 2014, and the end of 2023, including iPhones, iPads, and other Siri-equipped products.

Okay, What Do Consumers Stand to Gain?

If the settlement is approved, affected consumers could receive up to $20 per Siri-enabled device. However, the final payout may be adjusted depending on the number of claims filed, with only an estimated 3% to 5% of eligible consumers expected to take part. Each eligible consumer can file for compensation for up to five devices.

$20 bucks may not sound like much but some of us have like 5-10 apple devices per household!

The $95 million payout represents a small fraction of Apple’s enormous profits over the past decade. Since 2014, the company has earned over $705 billion in profits, and while the settlement is significant, it pales in comparison to the $1.5 billion in damages that the plaintiffs’ legal team estimated Apple could have faced if the case had gone to trial and resulted in a ruling against the company for wiretapping and privacy violations.

Of Course There’s Next Steps and Legal Fees

The settlement is not yet final. A U.S. District Judge, Jeffrey White, must approve the terms, with a hearing scheduled for February 14, 2025, to review the settlement details. If the deal is approved, the funds will be distributed to eligible consumers. Additionally, the lawyers representing the plaintiffs are requesting up to $29.6 million in fees and expenses for their work on the case.

This settlement marks a significant chapter in the ongoing debate over tech companies’ handling of user data and privacy. While Apple is not admitting to any legal violations, this case underscores the growing concern over how much personal information tech giants can gather, often without users’ full awareness. As the legal landscape around digital privacy continues to evolve, the outcome of this case may have broader implications for both consumers and the tech industry.

What do ya’ll think, should we deactivate Siri as a precaution or even in protest? Let us know!

The post Apple Settles $95M Suit Over Siri Eavesdropping: Here’s What You Need to Know appeared first on .

If you love TikTok, you might have it for a little while longer. Former President Donald Trump and soon to be incoming POTUS just urged the U.S. Supreme Court to delay the implementation of a law that would ban TikTok in the United States unless its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, sells the platform.

What ya’ll think, should TikTok get the boot or nah?

The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on January 10, with a decision potentially coming just days before the law’s effective date of January 19, which coincides with Trump’s incoming administration.

In a court filing submitted on Friday, Trump’s legal representative, D. John Sauer, argued that while Trump does not take a position on the law’s merits, he requested that the court pause the deadline for the divestment requirement, which would force ByteDance to sell TikTok to an American company. This pause, Trump’s team contends, would allow the incoming administration time to explore a political resolution to the issue before a final ruling is made.

“President Trump takes no position on the underlying merits of this dispute,” Sauer wrote, emphasizing that the former president’s goal was to provide his administration the opportunity to negotiate a solution. “He respectfully requests that the Court consider staying the Act’s deadline for divestment of January 19, 2025, while it considers the merits of this case,” Sauer added.

The law in question, known as the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, was passed in April with bipartisan support and signed into law by President Joe Biden. It mandates that TikTok’s Chinese owner, ByteDance, either sell the app to an American company or face a nationwide ban. The law is a direct response to growing concerns over national security, particularly regarding the potential for the Chinese government to access personal data of U.S. users or use the app for political manipulation.

Seems like a reasonable concern. If you take off the blinders.

While the law’s passage and its potential impact on TikTok have drawn bipartisan support, it has also sparked significant controversy. Critics, including TikTok, argue that a ban would violate free speech rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. The company contends that it operates independently of the Chinese government and should not be subject to a sweeping ban based on national security concerns.

In addition to the Justice Department, which filed a brief in defense of the law, Trump’s filing also highlighted his belief that he alone has the “dealmaking expertise” to broker a political solution. “President Trump alone possesses the consummate dealmaking expertise, the electoral mandate, and the political will to negotiate a resolution to save the platform while addressing the national security concerns expressed by the Government—concerns which President Trump himself has acknowledged,” Sauer wrote.

In case you’re wondering, this legal battle isn’t the first time Trump has tried to ban TikTok. In 2020, he attempted to force a sale of the app under national security grounds but was blocked by the courts. Despite this, Trump’s recent comments show a softened stance toward the platform, especially after meeting with TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew in December. At the time, Trump expressed having a “warm spot” for TikTok, marking a reversal from his previous opposition to the app.

The monumental case is heating up as the January 10 arguments approach, with TikTok’s defenders making their case against the law’s implementation. In previous court rulings, including one from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, judges upheld the law, citing legitimate concerns over national security. However, the Chinese government continues to deny any claims that TikTok poses a threat to U.S. national security.

With the law set to take effect on January 19, the Supreme Court’s decision could have significant implications not only for TikTok’s future in the U.S. but also for broader discussions about data privacy, national security, and free speech.

The post Trump Asks Supreme Court to Pause TikTok Ban Pending Review of Case appeared first on .