Microsoft pledges to store European cloud data in Europe

Yahoo – AFP, May 6, 2021 

Microsoft's European clients have long been concerned over the legal status
of data they store with US companies in the cloud and the extent to which
they could be scrutinised by US authorities. 

US tech giant Microsoft on Thursday pledged to store all European cloud-based client data in Europe amid unease on the continent over the reach of US legislation on personal data collection. 

Microsoft's European clients have long been concerned over the legal status of data they store with US companies in the cloud and the extent to which they could be scrutinised by US authorities. 

Those worries came to a head last July when the European Court of Justice struck down the EU-US Privacy Shield, a framework allowing firms to transfer personal data to the United States in compliance with Brussels' General Data Protection Regulation. 

The court found the mechanism did not adequately protect EU data from US authorities over which Europe has neither control nor right of redress. 

In a blog post on Thursday, Microsoft president Brad Smith said: "If you are a commercial or public sector customer in the EU, we will go beyond our existing data storage commitments and enable you to process and store all your data in the EU. 

"In other words, we will not need to move your data outside the EU." 

He said the commitment -- dubbed the EU Data Boundary for the Microsoft Cloud -- would apply across all of Microsoft's core cloud services -– Azure, Microsoft 365, and Dynamics 365 and would take effect by the end of next year.

Anti-5G activists go to court to stop ‘gamble with public health’

DutchNews, May 5, 2020 

A Dutch courtroom. Photo: Odi Busman

A group of anti-5G activists went to court on Monday in an effort to stop the nationwide roll-out of the faster telecommunications system. 

The group, Stop5GNL, argues that the government is taking a gamble by sanctioning the roll-out even though it has not been established that the technology does not form any risk to public health. 

‘This is unethical. You do not gamble with the health of the public,’ lawyer Thom Beukers said during Monday’s hearing in The Hague. 

According to the foundation, ‘thousands’ of academic publications and research projects raise at least doubts about whether the electromagnetic radiation used by 5G services could lead to a risk to health. 

The foundation has also stressed it has no connection to the recent wave of arson attacks on telecom masts. 

Although the public health institute RIVM and the national health council have both said that 5G will not expose people to higher than permitted levels of electromagnetic radiation, the council is working on a new report, ordered by parliament, the Volkskrant has reported. 

The results of that report are due in July. 

And in January, Telecoms supervisory body Agenschap Telecom and the RIVM said that while radiation from 5G mobile networks testing sites in the Netherlands is within European limits, it does need to monitored as telecoms providers prepare to activate the new mobile core networks. 

Some 15 licences for testing sites have been granted in the Netherlands and random testing of five sites has not produced worrying levels of radiation, the report published by both organisations said. It is important, however, to ‘keep a finger on the pulse’. 

The court will rule on the case on May 25.

Vopak goes digital, but staff are unhappy about their movements being monitored

DutchNews, November 20, 2019

The Vopak terminal in Eemshaven. Wutsje via Wikimedia Commons

Workers at chemical storage company Vopak are concerned about a new electronic pass card that all workers will have to carry from next year, which will monitor everything they do, the Financieele Dagblad said on Wednesday. 


The card will record where people are, if they are standing up or sitting down and even if they have a work permit, the paper said.

‘We have our real doubts about this,’ Cees den Breejen, of the company works council, told the paper. ‘We have no problem if this is about safety but this is very privacy-sensitive. Where someone walks, if he has gone to the loo… what is the company going to do with all this data?’ 

Vopak argues that the new system will boost safety and will, for example, send out a signal if the wearer is lying on the ground. ‘If someone is horizontal for some time, then the other badges in the neighbourhood will get a signal,’ CIO Leo Brand said. 

The pass cards will first be tested in January and will also get an update allowing sound to be recorded, the FD said. Visitors to Vopak storage facilities will also be given such a card to wear. 

The personnel monitoring is part of the company’s plans to implement the use of digital technology across all aspects of its operations, including the placement of robots in tanks to monitor for leaks and sensors to check if pumps and taps are working properly. 

‘I think it will be very hard to prove that this monitoring falls within the bounds of privacy legislation,’ lawyer Thomas van Essen told the paper. ‘I’ve not come across a system which goes this far.’

Dutch media mogul wins case against fake bitcoin ad and Facebook

DutchNews, November 12, 2019

Photo: Depositphotos.com

Facebook has been ordered by a Dutch court to tackle fraudulent advertising for bitcoin which uses Dutch celebrities without their permission to promote crypto currencies. 

The case was brought by media tycoon John de Mol, with the backing of other television personalities such as Eva Jinek and Jort Kelder, whose faces were also used to promote fake bitcoin sales. 

More than 150 Dutch nationals were persuaded by the adverts to buy bitcoins and other crypto currency, losing a total €1.7m in the process. 

Judges in Amsterdam have now ruled Facebook cannot hide behind its role as a ‘neutral’ platform, and say they will fine it up to €1.1m unless the company takes action. 

‘The company, which has adverts as its primary source of earnings, takes too active a role [to be neutral],’ the court said in a press statement. ‘Facebook not only sets the prices, but has an active policy about which adverts appear on Facebook and Instagram.’ 

Cost 

The cost of filtering out fake ads is not a reason not to take action, the court said, and the fact that ads featuring De Mol have now largely gone shows that it can be done. ‘Facebook’s responsibility for its own advertising platform is too big and fake adverts have too much impact,’ the court said. 

Facebook has also been ordered to make the names of people behind the fake adverts known to De Mol’s lawyers. 

‘I hope this ruling will lead Facebook to take steps as quickly as possible so that innocent people can no longer be conned by fake bitcoin adverts,’ De Mol said in a statement. ‘My legal advisors and I will be following Facebook closely to see if it does take the necessary steps.’

Facebook suffers legal blow in EU court over hate speech

Yahoo – AFP, October 3, 2019

The EU's top court has ruled that national courts in Europe can order Facebook and other
online platforms to remove defamatory content worldwide (AFP Photo/DENIS CHARLET) 

Luxembourg (AFP) - Facebook on Wednesday was dealt a major blow in the EU's top court, which ruled that national courts in Europe can order online platforms to remove defamatory content worldwide.

The decision will be seen as a victory for EU regulators, who are ambitious to see US tech giants meet tightened European standards over hate speech and offensive content.

Last week, the same court decided that Google was not legally compelled to apply the EU's strict "right to be forgotten" rules globally, in a victory for the search giant.

In a closely watched judgment, the European Court of Justice said EU law "does not preclude" courts from ordering "the removal of information or to block access worldwide," a statement said.

The latest case was brought originally to an Austrian court by Greens party politician Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek, who requested the removal of Facebook posts that the judges found defamed her and could be seen by users of the social network around the world.

The complaint also concerned messages from fictitious accounts, which according to the Greens, had called Glawischnig-Piesczek a "corrupt" person and which the social network refused to delete.

A higher Austrian court referred the case to the EU's top court for an opinion and the judgment, which cannot be appealed, will now be used as a reference Europe-wide.

With the decision, Facebook and similar platforms such as Twitter, face a greater obligation to monitor their content and take down content found to be offensive or hateful, even from fake accounts.

Facebook slammed the EU court's decision, saying "it undermines the long-standing principle that one country does not have the right to impose its laws on speech on another country."

It also deplored the obligation to track down "equivalent" content that duplicates offensives or hateful language.

'Chilling effect'

"In order to get this right, national courts will have to set out very clear definitions on what 'identical' and 'equivalent' means in practice," a Facebook statement said

"We hope the courts take a proportionate and measured approach, to avoid having a chilling effect on freedom of expression," it said.

Glawischnig-Piesczek, the victim of the hate speech, hailed the decision as "a historic success for human rights against web giants".

"It in no way infringes freedom of opinion," Glawischnig-Piesczek told the Austrian news agency APA.

EU-wide rules on hate speech are limited.

So far, online giants including Google's Youtube, have agreed to voluntarily take down hateful or dangerous content, including those linked to terrorism, within 24 hours.

However, the EU is expected to propose tougher Europe-wide measures including fines if Facebook and others fail to comply with orders.

Google wins EU fight against worldwide 'right to be forgotten'

Yahoo – AFP, Catherine KURZAWA, 24 September 2019

Google hailed the ruling, saying it has worked Google has worked "to strike a
sensible balance between people’s rights of access to information and privacy"

Google is not required to apply an EU "right to be forgotten" to its search engine domains outside Europe, the EU's top court ruled Tuesday in a landmark decision.

The European Court of Justice handed victory to Google in the case, seen as crucial in determining whether EU online regulation should apply beyond Europe's borders or not.

The US internet giant had argued that the removal of search results required under EU law should not extend to its google.com domain or its other non-EU sites.

The court ruled that, while a search engine operator such as Google must carry out "de-referencing" of links as demanded by a regulator or court in an EU state to all European versions of its sites, that "right to be forgotten" did not need to go further.

"There is no obligation under EU law" for search engine operators such as Google "to carry out such a de-referencing on all the versions of its search engine," the court said.

But it did stress that de-referencing on EU sites must include measures to "seriously discourage" a European internet user being able to get around the "right to be forgotten" by accessing unrestricted results from a search engine on a non-EU domain.

That demands "geo-blocking", which Google says it already uses effectively in Europe.

Savvy internet users, however, can get around that measure with a VPN that masks the user's location, or by going to some non-Google search engines.

Google hails win

The EU court case, seen as pitting individuals' rights to privacy online against freedom of information, stemmed from a legal battle waged by France since 2014 to have Google apply the "right to be forgotten" to all its search domains.

If France had won, it could have deepened a rift between Europe and the United States, which is home to most of the internet's behemoths and whose President Donald Trump has railed against what he sees as EU meddling in US business.

In the end, though, the court found that EU law on the issue did not seek to have the "right to be forgotten" extend beyond its borders.

Google hailed Tuesday's decision by the EU court.

"It's good to see that the court agreed with our arguments," its lawyer, Peter Fleischer, said in a statement, adding that Google has worked "to strike a sensible balance between people's rights of access to information and privacy".

The US company and other stakeholders had warned that authoritarian countries outside Europe could abuse global de-referencing requests to cover up rights violations.

"It's a balanced decision. You can't impose extraterritorial effects when it comes to de-referencing a person," said Yann Padova, a data privacy lawyer with the Baker McKenzie firm in Paris who was not involved in arguing the case.

"What would we say if China started demanding de-referencing of content accessible to French users?" he asked.

Closely watched case

Google's position was bolstered in January by a non-binding opinion from the EU court's top legal advisor, advocate general Maciej Szpunar, who recommended judges "should limit the scope of the de-referencing that search engine operators are required to carry out, to the EU".

The case had been closely watched, especially as Europe has also already emerged as a global rule-setter in terms of data protection on the internet.

A 2016 General Data Protection Regulation it enacted that covers all EU citizens and residents has forced many sites and companies around the globe to comply with its measures.

In terms of the "right to be forgotten" legal fight, France's data regulator, the Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertes (CNIL), had argued that, for de-referencing to be effective, it must apply to all domains wherever they are.

In 2016, CNIL fined Google 100,000 euros ($110,000) for non-compliance. Google appealed to France's highest court, which in turn referred to the European Court of Justice, ending up with Tuesday's ruling.

Murder victim's plight prompts EU order on emergency calls

Yahoo – AFP, 5 September 2019

The European Court of Justice ordered that mobile phone operators hand over
data enabling calls to 112 to be localised

A horrific rape and murder of a kidnapped teen in Lithuania prompted the European Court of Justice on Thursday to order mobile phone operators to hand over data enabling the localisation of calls made to the international emergency number 112.

The 17-year-old girl, who was abducted and burnt alive in the boot of a car in 2013, made 10 desperate calls to 112 begging for help. However her number did not show in the call answering centre, preventing her being located.

The girl's family lodged a lawsuit, accusing Lithuania of failing to implement an EU directive requiring telecom operators to provide for free caller information to locate calls made to 112.

Thursday's decision by the court ordered that all phone operators in the EU give that information. They must do so even for phones which do not have a SIM card inserted but which are still able to connect to the 112 service.

Currently eight of the EU's 28 member states, among them France, do not allow phones without a SIM card to make 112 calls, according to the European Emergency Number Association.

In many cases, that was to prevent children playing with old mobile phones accidentally calling the emergency services number, it said.

The EU forms the core of the countries using 112 as an emergency number for mobile phones, originally offered on the GSM standard that Europe championed.

Later other countries adopted the number too, often alongside their own national emergency numbers, including Australia, China, India, Turkey and the United States.

The European Court of Justice ordered that mobile phone operators hand over data enabling calls to 112 to be localised.

Trump can't block Twitter critics, appeals court affirms

Yahoo – AFP, July 9, 2019

US President Donald Trump is not legally entitled to block his critics on Twitter, an
appeals court ruled, because he has been using the account in his official capacity
(AFP Photo/Eric BARADAT)

Washington (AFP) - A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that US President Donald Trump cannot legally block users on Twitter based on their political differences with him, affirming a lower court decision.

The three-judge panel agreed with last year's ruling by a federal judge that Trump was using "viewpoint discrimination" in violation of the constitutional rights of people with opposing views.

The Second Circuit Appeals Court sidestepped the question of the president's free speech rights under the constitution's First Amendment on a privately owned internet platform, but affirmed that Trump had effectively created a public forum for official White House business.

"The First Amendment does not permit a public official who utilizes a social media account for all manner of official purposes to exclude persons from an otherwise‐open online dialogue because they expressed views with which the official disagrees," the judges wrote in a 29-page opinion.

The ruling comes in response to a lawsuit filed by a group of Twitter users and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, alleging that Trump improperly blocked comments from his political opponents.

Plaintiffs, including a University of Maryland professor, a Texas police officer and a New York comic, said they were blocked from the @realDonaldTrump account after posting tweets critical of his policies.

Trump's legal response is that he is not acting in his official capacity when he blocks users, but the court disagreed.

US President Donald Trump's decision to block people on Twitter who voiced
disagreement with him prompted a federal lawsuit arguing he was using his
personal account as an official forum (AFP Photo/Brendan SMIALOWSKI)

"The president and multiple members of his administration have described his use of the account as official," the appeals court ruling said.

"We conclude that the evidence of the official nature of the account is overwhelming. We also conclude that once the president has chosen a platform and opened up its interactive space to millions of users and participants, he may not selectively exclude those whose views he disagrees with."

Another appeal?

The Justice Department, which represented the president, has the option to appeal the decision to the US Supreme Court.

"We are disappointed with the court's decision and are exploring possible next steps," Justice Department spokesperson Kelly Laco said in an emailed statement.

"As we argued, President Trump's decision to block users from his personal Twitter account does not violate the First Amendment."

The Knight Institute said the ruling could set an important precedent as more public officials turn to social media for official business.

"Public officials' social media accounts are now among the most significant forums for discussion of government policy," said Jameel Jaffer, the Knight Institute's executive director.

"This decision will ensure that people aren't excluded from these forums simply because of their viewpoints, and that public officials aren't insulated from their constituents' criticism. The decision will help ensure the integrity and vitality of digital spaces that are increasingly important to our democracy."

Dutch to get tough on hosting companies with child porn clients

DutchNews, May 28, 2019

Photo: Depositphotos.com

The Dutch public prosecution department is going to get tougher on website hosting companies which allow child pornography on their servers, the Financieele Dagblad said on Tuesday. 

The department receives some 25,000 reports of child pornography a year and says this is being partly facilitated by providers who claim not to be aware of the problem.

‘We have been too cautious,’ public prosecutor Martijn Egberts told the paper. 

Currently some hosting companies only remove illegal material when ordered to do so in court. But the department wants to be able to take legal action against hosting companies which it sees as complicit, despite the legal problems. 

‘It is extremely difficult to prove that hosting companies are deliberately closing their eyes to material which they are storing or which is being exchanged via their networks,’ Egberts told broadcaster NOS. 

There are some 600 to 800 hosting companies in the Netherlands, the FD said.

Indian extradited to US from Singapore in call center fraud

Yahoo – AFP, April 20, 2019

Workers in a call center in India: in 2016 US authorities charged five such call centers
with operating fraud schemes targetting South Asians living in the United States
(AFP Photo/AFP)

Washington (AFP) - Singapore has extradited an Indian national to the United States to face charges in a call center fraud that scammed millions of dollars from victims in the United States, the Justice Department announced Friday.

Hitesh Madhubhai Patel, 42, of Ahmedabad, India, was scheduled to be arraigned Friday in a Houston, Texas federal court for his role in a case that was first announced in 2016, charging 60 people with wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy.

Patel ran the HGlobal call center, one of five India-based operations which allegedly worked together in an operation which targeted mostly South Asians living in the United States.

Callers pretending to be US tax or immigration officials threatened them with arrest and deportation if they did not remit money to the government.

The victims were then directed to people working with the call centers in the United States to collect the "fines" through prepaid debit cards or wire transfers, and the money was quickly laundered out of the country.

"This extradition once again demonstrates the Department's unwavering commitment to disrupt and dismantle the India-based call center scam industry and to work with our foreign partners to hold accountable those who perpetrate schemes that defraud our citizens," said Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski in a statement.

Justice officials said that in the past six years more than 15,000 people have been cheated of over $75 million in scams in which callers pose as agents of the Internal Revenue Service, the federal tax agency.

So far, in the Indian call center case, 24 domestic US defendants have been convicted and sentenced to up to 20 years in prison, the Justice Department said.

"The remaining India-based defendants have yet to be arraigned in this case," they said.

Related Article:

US charges dozens in India-based call center fraud racket

Dutch privacy watchdog fines Uber for keeping quiet about hack

DutchNews, November 27, 2018

Photo: DutchNews.nl

The Dutch data protection agency (DPA) has fined taxi company Uber €600,000 for failing to report a data leak which took place in 2016. 

Uber was hacked in 2016 and the email addresses, names and phone numbers of 57 million users came into the hands of hackers. In the Netherlands, 174,000 clients and drivers were affected. 

Uber paid the hackers €100,000 to keep quiet about the hack and did not go public with the news, which only emerged a year later. By law the company should have informed the DPA within 72 hours. 

The taxi company reached an out of court settlement in the US equivalent to some €130m and was also fined €434,000 in Britain.

Internet con men ripped off Pathe NL for €19m in sophisticated fraud

DutchNews, November 12, 2018

Photo: Depositphotos.com

The Dutch operation of the Pathé cinema group was ripped off by internet con men to the tune of over €19m, court documents published on Friday show. 

The con cost both the chief executive and financial director of the Dutch operation their jobs, and it is unclear if any of the money has been recovered. 

The court documents, which cover the unfair dismissal case brought by sacked finance chief Edwin Slutter, show in detail how the thieves went about scamming Pathé Nederland earlier this year. 

The first email arrived on March 8, and was apparently sent by the chief executive of the French cinema group to the Dutch chief Dertje Meijer. 

The message asked if KPMG had contacted Meijer that morning. After discussing the issue with financial director Edwin Slutter, Meijer replied to the email: ‘We did not receive anything or a call from him. If you want me to contact him, do you have contact details?’ 

The respondent said the company was involved in a takeover in Dubai and needed her to make a confidential payment of €826,521. The money would be repaid on the 26th of the same month. 

Confidential 

‘The transaction must remain strictly confidential. No one else must be made aware of it for now in order to give us an advantage over our competitors,’ the email said. ‘I and I alone will notify the affected parties in due time.’ 

After more to-ing and fro-ing, Meijer sent the correspondence on to Slutter with the comment ‘strange don’t you think?’ 

On March 9 she received a new mail, confirming the takeover and sending an invoice for the money, which was the first 10% of the acquisition price. The money was to be paid into the bank account operated by Towering Stars General Trading LLC in Dubai. 

On March 13, a second payment of €2,479,563 was made to the same account, followed by a third and fourth payments. By March 27, Pathé Nederland had paid over a total of €19,244,304. 

Questions 

On March 28, Meijer received a final email from the fake company boss, pledging to repay the cash. But that same day questions then began coming in from Pathé headquarters in Paris. 

It was immediately clear that Meijer and Slutter had been victims of fraud. Both Meijer and Slutter were suspended. Their sacking was made public at the end of the month with Pathé ‘s owners stating they no longer had any confidence in them. 

Meijer, who used to run the Amsterdam port authority, had been in the job for less than a year. Slutter, who had years of experience as a KPMG accountant, decided to fight his sacking in court, hence the detailed examination of the fraud in legal documents. 

Outside investigators brought in by Pathé said they had no evidence that both Meijer and Slutter were involved in the fraud or that they had any knowledge of it.

‘Pathe had been the target of a professional group of con men, who had used refined communication techniques to win the trust of several Pathé employees,’ the report is quoted as saying in the court documents. 

Sophisticated 

The court decided that Slutter had been lured in by the con men in a sophisticated trap and that he should not have been sacked in the spot, even though he ignored several red flags.

Nevertheless, there is no question he can return to the company, the court ruled. 

The court went on to state that the employment contract between Slutter and Pathé should be formally dissolved on December 1, but that the former finance chief should be paid his monthly salary of over €13,500 from March until then. 

DutchNews.nl has asked Pathé ‘s head office in Paris to comment on the case. Neither Meijer or Slutter were named in the court documents but both Dutch and French media have identified them as such.

US Supreme Court says warrant needed to get cell phone location data

Yahoo – AFP, Chris Lefkow, June 22, 2018

The US Supreme Court ruled that police need a warrant before obtaining cell phone tower
location data about a suspect from telecom companies (AFP Photo/JUSTIN SULLIVAN)

Washington (AFP) - In a landmark digital privacy case, the US Supreme Court ruled Friday that police need a warrant before obtaining cell phone location data about a suspect from telecom companies.

In a 5-4 decision, the nation's highest court said such data is protected under the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, which guards against unreasonable search and seizure.

The case revolved about police acquisition of mobile phone location information about a robbery suspect, Timothy Carpenter, without a warrant.

Data from Carpenter's cell phone -- 12,898 location points over a period of 127 days -- was used to show the device was in the vicinity when several robberies took place, and the suspect was convicted.

Carpenter's attorneys and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argued that the seizure of his cell phone location data records was unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court reversed a lower court's ruling which said police did not need a warrant to obtain such data.

Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the four liberal justices on the court in the decision.

"We decline to grant the state unrestricted access to a wireless carrier's data base of physical location information," the court said in its opinion.

"The government's position fails to contend with the seismic shifts in digital technology that made possible the tracking of not only Carpenter's location but also everyone else's, not for a short period but for years and years," it said.

"Prior to the digital age, law enforcement might have pursued a suspect for a brief stretch," the court said.

"(But) when the government tracks the location of a cell phone it achieves near perfect surveillance, as if it had attached an ankle monitor to the phone's user," it said.

"Whoever the suspect turns out to be, he has effectively been tailed every moment of every day," it said. "Only the few without cell phones could escape this tireless and absolute surveillance."

'Groundbreaking victory'

Nathan Freed Wessler, an attorney with the ACLU who argued the case before the court in November, called the ruling a "groundbreaking victory for Americans' privacy rights in the digital age."

"Today's decision rightly recognizes the need to protect the highly sensitive location data from our cell phones," Wessler said.

"But it also provides a path forward for safeguarding other sensitive digital information in future cases -- from our emails, smart home appliances, and technology that is yet to be invented."

Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon described the ruling as a "BIG win for privacy."

"I've argued for years that the sheer volume of information about every single American that's collected by our phones and computers requires a fundamental rethinking of the idea that giving your information to a company means the government can get it too," Wyden said.

In its opinion, the court left open the possibility of warrantless collection of data in what it described as "urgent" situations such as "bomb threats, active shootings and child abductions."

Paris prosecutors probe Apple over 'planned obsolescence'

Yahoo – AFP, 8 January 2018

Apple admitted that it intentionally slowed down older models of its iPhones over time

Paris prosecutors have launched a probe of US tech giant Apple over suspected "planned obsolescence" in some of its iPhone models, a judicial source told AFP on Monday.

It comes after a complaint by the association Stop Planned Obsolescence (HOP or Halte a l'Obsolescence Programmee) that followed Apple's admission last month that it intentionally slowed down older models of its iPhones over time.

The investigation was opened on Friday and is being led by anti-trust and consumer protection specialists in the French economy ministry.

When contacted by AFP, Apple France gave no comment on the matter.

Planned obsolescence is a widely criticised commercial practice in which manufacturers build in the expiry of their products so that consumers will be forced to replace them.

It is decried by consumer groups as being unethical and is suspected of being particularly prevalent in the electronics industry, which produces mountains of unrecyclable waste each year

To tackle the problem, France passed landmark legislation in 2015 known as "Hamon's law" which made the practice illegal and -- in theory -- obliged retailers to say whether replacement parts were available.

The law, named after former Socialist minister Benoit Hamon, stipulates that a company found to be deliberately shortening the life of its products can be fined up to five percent of its annual sales while executives can face up to two years in jail.

Activists of the Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions and Citizen's 

Action stand outside an Apple Store during a protest against tax evasion in 

December 2017 in Marseille, southern France

'Wide-scale tax evasion'

Last month Apple confirmed what critics had suspected for years: that it intentionally slows performance of older iPhones as their batteries weaken with age.

The company said this was to extend the performance of the phone, which uses less power when running at slower speeds, and was to prevent unexpected shutdowns due to a low battery charge.

It denied incorporating planned obsolescence.

However in late December the company issued an apology for slowing older models and said it would discount replacement batteries for some handsets.

"We know that some of you feel Apple has let you down. We apologize," Apple said in a message to customers on its website on December 28.

"We've always wanted our customers to be able to use their iPhones as long as possible. We're proud that Apple products are known for their durability, and for holding their value longer than our competitors' devices."

Critics have accused Apple of nudging iPhone users to upgrade to newer models by letting them think it was the handsets that needed replacing, rather than just the battery.

HOP believes Apple could be liable for a fine in line with the value of all of its iPhone sales in France since Hamon's law came into force on August 17, 2015.

The California-based group also faces a class-action suit in the United States.

In another headache for Apple in France, the company announced last week that it has filed a lawsuit against the Attac activist group after about 100 of its supporters occupied the tech giant's flagship store in Paris last month, protesting alleged "wide-scale tax evasion" by the firm.

French prosecutors have also launched a probe into Japanese printer maker Epson for alleged planned obsolescence in its products.

Related Articles:

Letterbox in Luxembourg one way Apple avoids paying billions in worldwide tax

Apple hit with record EU tax bill

"Wild Cards" (3) - Nov 19 - 20, 2016 (Kryon Channelling by Lee Carroll)- (Text version)

"...Then there was Steve Jobs. He was a wild card. What he did had little to do with technology, for that would have happened anyway soon enough. Instead, it had to do with the paradigm of the business of music on Earth. He freed it, and the paradigm of how music is obtained and heard will never be the same. However, Steve Jobs did basically one thing for all of you, and then he died. Do you see any kind of connecting of the dots to some of the inventors who come and give you the one thing, then leave? If he had lived, would there be more? Yes, but you’re not ready for it. Consciousness has to support what happens.  ...."

Top tech lobby joins legal battle to keep 'net neutrality'

Yahoo – AFP, January 6, 2018

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai pushed the rollback
of net neutrality (AFP Photo/ALEX WONG)

Washington (AFP) - The lobby group for some of the most powerful US tech firms said Friday it would join the legal challenge to the planned rollback of "net neutrality" rules requiring internet service providers to treat all online traffic equally.

The Internet Association -- a group which includes Google, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft, among others -- announced it would support legal efforts to block the rollback voted last month by the Federal Communications Commission.

The association gave no specifics but suggested it would seek to intervene in lawsuits expected by several attorneys general, including from Washington and New York states.

Internet Association president Michael Beckerman said the FCC action voted December 14 "defies the will of a bipartisan majority of Americans and fails to preserve a free and open internet."

He said the association "intends to act as an intervenor in judicial action against this order and, along with our member companies, will continue our push to restore strong, enforceable net neutrality protections through a legislative solution."

Last month's vote capped a heated partisan debate and is just the latest twist in a battle over more than a decade on rules governing internet service providers.

FCC chairman Ajit Pai, who pushed the latest effort, has argued that the neutrality rule enacted in 2015 served to stifle investment and innovation in a fast-evolving sector.

But net neutrality backers have argued that clear rules are needed to prevent internet service providers from blocking or throttling services or websites for competitive reasons, and that the rollback would increase the power of a few dominant providers to control what users see online.

Lawsuits could not be filed until the FCC's order was published, which occurred this week. Some lawmakers have also begun efforts to invalidate the FCC's action.

The battle over net neutrality has raged for over a decade in the FCC and the courts, with both sides contending they represent "internet freedom."

The 2015 net neutrality rules were backed by then-president Barack Obama and endorsed by a 3-2 Democratic majority at the time. But the election of President Donald Trump reversed the FCC party majority and it quickly reversed course.