In a brand new filing, Google is taking a stand against multiple Fortnite developers, Epic Games proposed remedies after the court found that Google had engaged in anti-competitive practices in its Play Store. Following the jury’s decision late last yr, either side presented their arguments about how Google should change its behavior in light of the verdict. For its part, Epic Games issued a crazy list of demands, this included access to the Play Store’s catalog of apps and games for six years, the ability to distribute your personal app store on Google Play without spending a dime, and way more. It also desired to put an end to any deals, incentives and offers, in addition to penalties that will allow the Play Store or Google Play Billing to realize a bonus over its rivals.

The tech giant’s surprising and quick defeat was a historic ruling, especially since Epic Games largely lost an identical antitrust case against Apple that was not heard by a jury. In the Epic-Apple lawsuit, the court ruled that Apple isn’t a monopoly, but agreed that developers should have the option to direct their customers to alternative routes to pay online. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which refused to listen to it, leaving the lower court’s ruling in force.

Although the jury in the Google case was convinced that the tech giant had used its market power illegally, it didn’t choose next steps – that is as much as the judge. The recent filing, together with Epic’s proposal, will help inform Judge James Donato during a hearing scheduled for May 23 on what actions must be taken next to examine Google’s power.

Epic Games had it in April specific your demands in the proposed injunction, found here. Overall, Epic wants Google to permit users to download apps from any app store or the Internet, depending on their preferences. He doesn’t want Google to have the option to dam OEMs or carriers or force them to favor Google Play. He also doesn’t want Google to have the option to impose additional fees for routing through the Play Store, which Epic Games also argues is an anti-competitive practice.

The Fortnite creator moreover asked the court to implement other changes, including giving Epic access to the Play Store catalog so it will probably update users’ apps by surprise screens or additional fees. Additionally, Epic wants developers to have the option to inform users learn how to pay for his or her apps and services elsewhere and how much they’ll save by doing so. It desires to eliminate the requirement to make use of Google’s “User Choice Billing” service, which offers only small discounts to developers who process payment transactions themselves, and way more.

Google obviously disagrees on how the court should proceed.

In an announcement, Google’s vp of government affairs and public policy, Wilson White, called Epic’s demands excessive and unnecessary.

“Epic’s demands would harm the privacy, security and overall experience of consumers, developers and device manufacturers,” it said. “Not only does their proposal go far beyond the scope of the recent US trial verdict – which we will be challenging – it is also unnecessary given the agreement we reached last year with state attorneys general from all states and many territories. We will continue to vigorously defend our right to a sustainable business model that allows us to keep people safe, work with developers to innovate and grow their businesses, and maintain a thriving Android ecosystem for all.”

In an injunction filed Thursday in a U.S. District Court in California, Google argues that Epic’s demands threaten users’ security and privacy because they deprive it of the ability to implement trust and security measures regarding the use of third-party app stores. (Apple has used an identical technique to fight regulations opening its App Store to competition, arguing that it’s liable for user privacy and security.)

Additionally, Google says it will be required to inform all third-party app stores, without the user’s consent, what apps the user has installed. This would expose the use of personal apps, including in sensitive areas resembling religion, politics and health, without rules on how this data is used.

The company also said Epic is asking it to remove protections related to sideloading of apps.

And if those arguments fail, Google uses a distinct tactic to indicate that Epic’s proposed remedies are unnecessary since it has already agreed with state attorneys general that it is going to not sign broad exclusivity agreements with developers. Epic’s proposal would further prevent Google from working with developers to deliver exclusive content through Play Store apps, which it says represents a crucial opportunity for developers.

Finally, the AG’s state settlement would allow any app store to compete for space on Android devices, Google argues, but Epic’s proposal would exclude it from the process, limiting competition. It said that without Google’s involvement, competing app stores can be underpriced, impacting OEM margins.

The judge’s upcoming decision on the treatment on this case might be interesting because it is going to set the stage for a way app stores considered monopolies could have to make concessions to permit for more competition. Although Epic lost its battle with Apple, the Justice Department’s case against the iPhone maker remains to be pending, as is its lawsuit against Google over its alleged monopoly on search. The end result of these cases will determine the extent to which the power of the tech giants stays unchecked, given the glaring lack of laws in the US to rein in tech monopolies.

Apple CFO Luca Maestri allayed investor concerns about an 8% revenue decline in China, noting that sales in other emerging markets are rising.

“When we start looking at places like India, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Turkey, Brazil… and Indonesia, the numbers get bigger and bigger and we are very happy because these are markets where our market share is (currently) low” – Maestri said Thursday during Apple’s second-quarter earnings call.

Revenue in China fell to $16.37 billion in the second quarter

“Populations are large and growing, and our products are really making great progress in these markets,” Maestri continued. “The level of interest in the brand is very high.”

One thing, Maestri says, might be verified: Populations in emerging markets are in fact large and growing. However, available data shows that Apple’s growth in these regions is not as rosy as the manager tried to paint.

Net sales in the Americas – which incorporates places like Brazil and Mexico – fell barely year-over-year from $37.8 billion to $37.3 billion, the info showed. Apple Q2 2024 Report. Sales in the “rest of Asia-Pacific,” which incorporates emerging markets corresponding to India and Vietnam, fell 17% from $8.1 billion in the second quarter of 2023 to $6.7 billion as of March 31.

To play devil’s advocate, Apple’s declining sales in these regions can have more to do with pricing than product hype.

Maestri noted that Apple has introduced several financing solutions and trade-in programs that “lower the affordability threshold” in order that customers should purchase high-end products.

“This is very valuable to us in developed markets, but especially in emerging markets where affordability issues are more pronounced,” Maestri said.

However, pointing to a glimmer of hope in emerging markets may not be enough to reassure investors. China is Apple’s third-largest market and has grow to be a battleground for fierce competition with dominant domestic firms corresponding to Oppo and Xiaomi. According to counterpoint researchHuwaei has seen a sea change in the country after being completely sidelined by US sanctions. The company’s phone sales were up nearly 70% from a 12 months earlier, while Apple’s sales were down 19%. In September 2023, Beijing imposed a ban on using iPhones for presidency officials in the workplace, echoing U.S. actions against Huawei.

China and emerging markets weren’t the one declines in Apple’s balance sheet this quarter. The company also saw a ten% decline in iPhone sales across all markets. Apple’s slow adoption of artificial intelligence compared to competitors like Google and Microsoft also potentially played a job in slowing iPhone sales.

Despite unimpressive hardware numbers, Apple managed to beat Wall Street expectations. He also called for a rise in the corporate’s shares greater than 10% in after-hours trading, driven by each growth in service revenues and large $110 billion in share repurchases, a jump from last 12 months’s $90 billion purchase.

Investors on the decision tried to get Maestri and Apple CEO Tim Cook to reveal additional details concerning the upcoming generative artificial intelligence launches that Apple has been teasing over the past few months, however the executives only revealed that announcements were imminent.

We’ll be following Apple’s Global Developer Conference closely for more news.

A new form of “image-based sexual abuse” is becoming increasingly popular amongst American teenagers using artificial intelligence-based “nudification” apps to taunt schoolgirls.

New research shows that a development trend amongst highschool students from across the country who use these apps to generate and share fake nude photos of their classmates, reports. Students in schools from California to Illinois have fallen victim to having fake nudes shared without their consent.

While revenge porn has been a problem for years, the arrival of deepfake technology means “anyone can just put their face into this app and get an image of someone – friends, classmates, co-workers, anyone – with no clothes on at all” – Britt Paris assistant professor of library and knowledge science at Rutgers who has researched deepfakes, said.

Male students at Issaquah High School in Washington used a nude app to “undress” photos of girls who attended homecoming last fall. Tenth-grade boys at Westfield High School in New Jersey shared fake X-rated photos of their classmates throughout the varsity. The growing fad is leader to laws which might impose penalties on people found guilty of sharing doctored photos.

Washington, South Dakota and Louisiana have already passed laws prohibiting the creation and sharing of fake deeds by states like California and others that follow close behind. Representative Joseph Morelle (D-NY) recently reintroduced a bill that may make sharing fake records a federal crime.

He continues to point to the applications behind the growing AI nudification trend. Amy Hasinoff, a communications professor on the University of Colorado in Denver, believes the new regulations will only be a “symbolic gesture” if no motion is taken to combat apps used to generate images.

“I try to imagine a reason why these apps would exist,” Hasinoff said.

Lawmakers are also working to manage app stores offering nude apps to stop them from being worn without explicit consent provisions. Apple and Google have removed several apps offering fake nudes from the App Store and Google Play.

15-year-old Westfield student Francesca Mani was a victim of the fake image and shared how traumatic the experience was for her.

“I was in the counselor’s office, emotional and crying,” Mani said. “I couldn’t believe I was one of the victims.”

Hasinoff notes that even when the photos are fake, victims can deal with “shaming, blaming and stigmatization” brought on by stereotypes that sexualize female victims and make them appear more sexually lively.

“These images put these young women at risk of exclusion from future employment opportunities and also expose them to physical violence if recognized,” said Yeshi Milner, founder of the nonprofit Data for Black Lives.

To combat fake images, nine states have adopted or updated laws to punish people affiliated with more states, and the number is growing. A federal bill introduced in 2023 would give victims or parents the power to sue perpetrators for damages and impose criminal penalties. Although the bill has not yet passed Congress, it enjoys growing bipartisan support.

Some remain skeptical in regards to the impact of the regulations as AI nudification applications remain available to be used.

“Until companies can be held accountable for the kinds of harm they cause,” Paris said. “I don’t see much changing.”