The US Government Is Also Looking At Increasing Domestic Surveillance To Fight The Spread Of The Coronavirus

from the big-brother-just-wants-to-make-sure-you're-healthy dept

Say hello to the coronavirus and goodbye to privacy. The government is working with a variety of tech companies -- including infamous analytics companies like Palantir -- to get a grasp on the spread of the virus. Unfortunately, this means the data citizens have generated for a variety of tech companies will become a handy way to track them and their movements, especially if they're infected or in contact with those who are.

Technology giant Palantir Inc., which was credited with helping to find Osama bin Laden, is helping the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention model the virus outbreak. Other companies that scrape public social-media data have contracts in place with the agency and the National Institutes of Health, documents show.

The push is in part being coordinated by a task force working in conjunction with the White House, and includes startups as well as tech giants such as Alphabet Inc.’s Google unit, Facebook Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. The task-force discussions involving the White House and tech companies were reported by The Wall Street Journal on Sunday.

The legal limits on what the government can grab from service providers and platforms are pretty much waived if there's a national emergency. No one's arguing the spread of the virus isn't at least a crisis. But only a few people are arguing this justifies domestic surveillance aided and abetted by an abundance of third party records. Normally, the government would have to show at least reasonable suspicion before collecting these records from third parties, but it won't even need this minimal, individualized showing if it can declare this an emergency.

Even privacy-focused legislators seem to be on board with broad harvesting of location data for this reason.

Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, is among the lawmakers who have been briefed on the discussions. In a statement, Sen. Wyden said the efforts are sensible as long as the appropriate conditions are in place. “There must be procedures to keep this information safe, to delete information once it’s no longer in use, and to ensure it isn’t used against Americans by law enforcement,” he said.

Good luck ensuring it isn't used by law enforcement. The only thing keeping them honest, for the most part, is their own honesty -- something that seems rarely an innate part of US law enforcement. Even if things appear to be above-board, parallel construction can whitewash info gathered by government agencies purportedly for tracking the spread of the coronavirus.

What we don't have at this point in time is many details on how this would happen and what constraints would be placed on data collection and use. But what little we do have isn't promising.

Public-health experts are interested in the possibility that private-sector companies could compile the data in anonymous, aggregated form, which they could then use to map the spread of the infection, according to three people familiar with the effort, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the project is in its early stages.

First off, anonymized data is never truly "anonymized." With very little effort, data can be stripped of its anonymity to identify the people who generated the data. Second, if efforts already in place in other countries are any indication, this is only the starting point, not the entire plan. Government agencies are going to want to track infected citizens in order to ensure/enforce self-quarantining and track potentially-infected friends and acquaintances of those who've tested positive for COVID-19.

Location data is what the administration wants -- something no longer under the purview of the Third Party Doctrine thanks to the Supreme Court's Carpenter decision.

In recent interviews, Facebook executives said the U.S. government is particularly interested in understanding patterns of people’s movements, which can be derived through data the company collects from users who allow it.

Google is saying pretty much the same thing. Government officials and health experts want access to location data. At this point, the government seems willing to collect this data in aggregate form to predict trends and determine the impact of social distancing and local bans on gatherings.

An open letter to tech companies from dozens of engineers and epidemiologists suggests the government should have this data, but possibly only with the approval of platform users who would have to opt-in. It's a little disconcerting to read a call for handing over user location info to the government coupled with complimentary reference to China's surveillance state.

Apple, Google, and other mobile operating system vendors should work to provide an opt-in, privacy preserving OS feature to support contact tracing. Users who opt in could be notified in a non-identifiable way if they had been in the same spaces as subsequently identified cases, in order to enable self-quarantine, monitoring, early detection and prevention of tertiary cases. If such a feature could be built before SARS-CoV-2 is ubiquitous, it could prevent many people from being exposed. In the longer term, such infrastructure could allow future disease epidemics to be more reliably contained, and make large scale contact tracing of the sort that has worked in China and Korea, feasible everywhere.

At this point, everything is still in the planning and development stages. Google and Facebook collect tons of user info, including their locations, and it is true tracking people's movements -- even in "anonymized" form -- might slow the spread of the virus. There's a tradeoff here, one that isn't limited to this disease. The government -- without directly asking -- wants people to sacrifice some of their privacy for the benefit of the nation as a whole. But there's no expiration date on the request and there's no ensuring this will actually benefit the nation. And once the government is in, it's going to be very hesitant to step back out. There's always another emergency just over the horizon.

I'm all for a completely voluntary system that fully informs citizens who opt in what their rights are, one of which should be the right to revoke consent at any point in time. Anything else sounds like a convenient way to engage in domestic surveillance and ignore the Constitutional protections afforded to these particular third-party records. And while I appreciate tech companies' willingness to do anything they can to curb the spread of the virus, they should be asking the tough questions that need to be asked on behalf of their millions of users, rather than deciding they can contribute to the greater good of the public without asking for the public's permission.

Filed Under: coronavirus, covid-19, mission creep, privacy, surveillance, us government

Awful, Awful People Keep Trying To Trademark COVID And Coronavirus

from the stop-it,-stop-it-now dept

Nothing like a pandemic to really make it clear what a terrible person you are, huh? Law360's Bill Donahue (who is not a terrible person!) has cataloged attempts by terrible people to register trademarks related to the pandemic:

As of Wednesday, more than a dozen applications have been filed at the USPTO seeking to register trademarks involving "COVID" or "coronavirus."

One filed by a New York company wants to register "Coronavirus Survival Guide" as a trademark for "magazines in the field of survival, protection, medicine and pandemics." Another, filed by a California man, aims to register "We Cured COVID-19" as a mark for both apparel and "providing information in the field of medicine."

As the article notes, this isn't new behavior. Whenever there's a big news story (can I at least get a pat on the back for not saying a "viral" news story?), profiteers and opportunists rush into to try to trademark stuff. Now, as the Law360 article notes, that's not how trademark law works anyway:

For starters, U.S. trademark law doesn't simply reward whoever is quickest to file a piece of paper with the government. Applicants must show that they have a bona fide intent to use the term on a particular set of goods and services — something most "coronavirus" applicants are unlikely to do.

Remember, unlike patents or copyrights, trademarks are, effectively, a consumer protection tool, to make sure that if you're buying a product that says it's Coca-Cola, you know it's actually Coca-Cola and not Bob's Cola made to look like Coca-Cola. The whole idea is to accurately label something such that you know who is actually behind the product, and can trust the brand.

Indeed, that fact is part of the reason that no COVID or coronavirus trademarks should be allowed. Unless someone is stepping up to say that they created it and they are the sole maker of coronavirus, their entire claim is bullshit in the first place, and USPTO officials (working from home, hopefully) should quickly dump the applications in the trash.

But, in this world in which people are incorrectly taught that "intellectual property" is "the most important thing" America has, and the unfortunate lumping of trademarks in with copyrights and patents, it should be no surprise at all that people seek to opportunistically try to grab monopoly rights to profit off of something that is in the news.

In looking through the USPTO's database, I actually found six different attempts to trademark variations on "I survived the Coronavirus." Nearly all seem to be filed for by individuals who probably just don't know enough to know that they're just wasting everyone's time. On the COVID-19 front, a company named, I kid you not" "The Edibles Club" has tried to trademark a COVID-19 logo for t-shirts -- though, at the very least the application makes it clear that "no claim is made to the exclusive right to use "COVID 19" apart from the mark as shown." Still don't think that will be effective in actually getting the trademark.

One of the "Coronavirus" trademark applications is filed by a company that, I kid you not, claims that is called "Coronavirus LLC" and they want to use a logo for music albums. From the look of the logo, I'm going to assume we're talking some real heavy metal music here. At least that one was filed in early February:

The very first of the Coronavirus-related trademarks appears to have been filed on February 4th, by an enterprising, but small, magazine publisher, Centennial Media LLC, who wanted a trademark on "Coronavirus Survival Guide." As far as I can tell, the company seems to do more trademark hoarding than actual magazine publishing, but perhaps they're publishing them somewhere in secret, which would explain why I'm having trouble finding evidence of any of their actual magazines anywhere on the web despite a bunch of time just spent Googling...

Either way, it's still not going to get the trademark its seeking here.

Some of the other applications are truly ridiculous -- like the LLC trying to trademark "Covid-19 Vax" for any vaccine (no, sorry, not happening). Someone is trying to trademark "Please, Disinfect" with the explanation that they need the trademark "to help prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus, but with gentler tone." I'm sure that will win over the PTO examiners. Another company is trying to set itself up as "Kovid Kare" to "help communities and individuals of all ages, educate, document, protect and recover from the impact of Coronaviruses, specifically COVID-19." Yeah, okay. In fact, Kovid Kare has tried to trademark a bunch of related terms, like "Quaranteen," "2020: The Bug War," "I Survived a Real Pandemic," and (I kid you not) "Please, Viruses."

The other multi-filer is one Charles McDermott of Encinatas, California, who actually got a real trademark attorney, Louis C. Cullman of K&L Gates to file almost certainly doomed trademark applications for "I Survived Covid-19" and "Together We Survived Covid-19" that he wants to put on clothing... but also for "charitable fundraising." The USPTO is unlikely to allow any of that.

So, look, please don't file any more of these trademarks. It's wasteful and bad and you should feel bad if you do.

Filed Under: coronavirus, covid-19, trademark, uspto

Charter Spectrum Under Fire For Putting The Public At Risk During Coronavirus

from the monopolizing-stupidity dept

Charter Communications literally has some of the worst customer satisfaction ratings of any company in any industry in America. Like Comcast, Charter has spent years merging its way to market domination, and now enjoys a notable monopoly over broadband in numerous U.S. markets. This monopoly, combined with regulatory capture, has resulted in a company that literally doesn't have to give a damn about its customers.

As it turns out, the company doesn't treat its employees much better.

For the last few days, both Gizmodo and TechCrunch have been fielding complaints from a torrent of Spectrum employees who say the company is putting them at unnecessary risk. Employees who say there's no technical reason they can't perform their work remotely have been mandated to continue coming into the office, despite CDC warnings that social distancing will be essential to slow the spread of the pandemic across the United States. Several employees sent internal memos warning all employees the company was ignoring CDC recommendations:

"The CDC guidelines are clear. The CDPHE guidelines are clear. The WHO guidelines are clear. The science of social distancing is real. We have the complete ability to do our jobs entirely from home,” he wrote, reeling off the advice from several state and federal government departments and international health organizations. “Coming into the office now is pointlessly reckless. It’s also socially irresponsible. Charter, like the rest of us, should do what is necessary to help reduce the spread of coronavirus. Social distancing has a real slowing effect on the virus — that means lives can be saved."

But employees who are raising alarm bells that Charter is putting lives at risk are being told to take sick leave or quit:

"Wheeler said he was given an ultimatum. Either he could work from the office or take sick leave. Staff are not allowed to work from home, he was told. Wheeler offered his resignation, but was sent home instead and asked to think about his decision until Monday.

Later in the day, he received a call from work. Charter accepted his resignation, effective immediately."

In some instances, staff are being told to report to work despite positive COVID-19 tests being found at Charter offices. At the heart of the problem is Charter CEO (and formerly Comcast executive) Tom Rutledge, who, much like his belief that streaming password sharing is the biggest problem facing the industry at the moment, doesn't think much of this whole modern telework thing:

"The employees we spoke to said that while Charter has the means to allow staff to work from home, executives are reluctant to relax the policy. Charter chief executive Tom Rutledge said in an internal email to staff this week that employees are “more effective from the office."

The same monopoly mindset -- in which the reality on the ground doesn't, can't, and won't matter because there's no organic or regulatory penalty for bad behavior -- is certainly evident in the way Charter treats its employees. Though it's not just monopoly power, given that Comcast is not only letting its employees work from home but is doling out hazard pay. Which means at the end of the day it comes down to terrible management, and an unwillingness to listen to your own employees, and a top down failure in leadership that's literally now putting human lives at risk. Not just those of Charter employees, but, given the symptomless transmission evident in COVID-19, everybody in the regions that Charter does business.

Update: It sounds like Charter may finally be getting the message.

Filed Under: coronavirus, covid-19, efficiency, health and safety, remote work, tom rutledge, work from home
Companies: charter communications

Two Senators Sold A Bunch Of Stock After Being Briefed About COVID-19; While Telling The World Things Were Going To Be Fine

from the all-grifting-all-the-time dept

Senator Richard Burr is a real piece of work. In 2012 he was one of only three Senators to vote against the STOCK Act. This was a law put in place following a 60 Minutes expose about how Congress was getting filthy stinkin' rich off of insider trading, since Congress was exempt from insider trading laws. The bill did pass -- Burr's vote against notwithstanding -- and President Obama signed into law. Unfortunately, the next year, Congress passed (and Obama signed) an amendment that rolled the rules back for staffers, though it still does apply to elected officials themselves.

So, it's quite interesting to see the news that Senator Burr just sold off a "significant percentage" of his stock holdings, according to a ProPublica article detailing the sale. A big chunk of that stock sale? In the hospitality industry that has been so hard hit. He had a big chunk of stock in Wyndam Hotels and Extended Stay America, but sold those off just before everything went bad. The timing is interesting:

Soon after he offered public assurances that the government was ready to battle the coronavirus, the powerful chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Richard Burr, sold off a significant percentage of his stocks, unloading between $628,000 and $1.72 million of his holdings on Feb. 13 in 33 separate transactions.

As the head of the intelligence committee, Burr, a North Carolina Republican, has access to the government’s most highly classified information about threats to America’s security. His committee was receiving daily coronavirus briefings around this time, according to a Reuters story.

Now, you might say that there might be another reason why he sold stuff off, but it certainly appears that Burr knew full well what was coming. And that's because in another news bombshell from just a few hours earlier, a recording was leaked of Burr telling a private luncheon gathering that things were going to be bad -- all at the same time he was insisting that the US was totally prepared for COVID-19. A month after he sold all that stock, and a few weeks after he told the private luncheon that the coronavirus was "much more aggressive in its transmission than anything that we have seen in recent history" and compared it "to the 1918 pandemic" he publicly was claiming that we had everything under control:

“Luckily, we have a framework in place that has put us in a better position than any other country to respond to a public health threat, like the coronavirus."

He also said the same thing just days before selling all that stock:

Thankfully, the United States today is better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats, like the coronavirus, in large part due to the work of the Senate Health Committee, Congress, and the Trump Administration.

That op-ed also said:

The public health preparedness and response framework that Congress has put in place and that the Trump Administration is actively implementing today is helping to protect Americans. Over the years, this framework has been designed to be flexible and innovative so that we are not only ready to face the coronavirus today but new public health threats in the future.

And then he sold most of his stock earning somewhere between half a million and a million and a half dollars -- most of which would have plunged in value if he'd kept it invested. And, the fact that such a large chunk was in the hospitality industry is telling: he would have likely realized were going to be hit hard by any form of lock down and the expected decline in travel due to the pandemic.

Hours after the Burr story broke, The Daily Beast highlighted how another Senator, the new Senator from Georgia, Kelly Loefler, sold off millions of dollars of stock the very day she was briefed about the COVID-19 threat. She literally tweeted that day:

And then she dumped tons of stock:

Loeffler assumed office on Jan. 6 after having been appointed to the seat vacated by retiring Sen. Johnny Isakson. Between then and Jan. 23 she did not report a single stock transaction from accounts owned by her individually or by her and her husband jointly.

Between Jan. 24 and Feb. 14, by contrast, Loeffler reported selling stock jointly owned with her husband worth between $1,275,000 and $3,100,000, according to transaction reports filed with Senate ethics officials.

For what it's worth, it's probably worth noting that Loeffler's husband, Jeffrey Sprecher, is the chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange. The stock sales included a bunch of retailers: Ross Stores, TJX (owners of TJ Maxx, Marshalls and a bunch of similar brands), and Autozone. All of those are struggling -- TJX just announced it's closing all its stores for at least two weeks.

Like Burr, Loeffler toed the Trumpian line that the country was all set to handle this pandemic that (spoiler alert!) it's still not ready to handle:

Some might argue that while she didn't have any transactions in the weeks leading up to that coronavirus briefing, and then sold a bunch of stock, she did make two purchases of stock in that period. But those really don't help her case:

One of Loeffler’s two purchases was stock worth between $100,000 and $250,000 in Citrix, a technology company that offers teleworking software...

Yes, sold a bunch of other stock, but purchased stock in a company that enables telework, just weeks before practically the whole country moved to telework. The other purchase? Oracle. While Oracle stock has declined along with most of the rest of the market, given how much Oracle pushes itself as a "cloud" provider, you could see someone thinking it might get a boost as well.

Given all, a little other spelunking through the newly released financial disclosures for stocks sales in this period from three other Senators as well: Ron Johnson, Dianne Feinstein, and Jim Inhofe. The details of those sales don't look quite as suspicious as the other two, but still might raise some eyebrows. Inhofe sold a bunch of Paypal, Intuit, and Apple stock. Feinstein sold a bunch of Allogene Therapeutics stock, a biotech firm doing cancer research -- so it's not clear that that's related to pandemic info. Johnson made a bundle: between $5 million and $25 million in selling all of his share of a plastic extrusion company, Pacur, but that's a private family company that he ran before becoming a Senator (his brother now runs the firm), and the sale was made to a private equity firm, and shows no evidence of being connected in any way to the pandemic (indeed, the company does plastic extrusion for medical devices, and you can see why that might suddenly be in more demand these days).

In a just world, someone would be looking into the Burr and Loeffler sales as insider trading. I'm not convinced that we're in that world right now, though. In the meantime, as many of us are isolated at home, we can rest safe, knowing that Senator Burr and Senator Loeffler socked away a bunch of money while the rest of us suffer. The only surprising thing I will note, is that Burr, at least, is now receiving heavy criticism from both Democrats and Republicans, and even Tucker Carlson -- usually a trusty voice repeating Trumpian talking points, has called for Burr to resign.

Of course, it's worth highlighting one more point: profiting off the coming disaster is horrible and disgusting and awful. But it's much, much worse to have spent weeks or even months knowing what disaster was about to befall the country and lying to the public about it.

Filed Under: congress, coronavirus, covid-19, insider trading, kelly loeffler, richard burr

US ISPs Drop Usage Caps, Pledge To Avoid Kicking Users Offline During Coronavirus

from the every-bit-helps dept

While it required some nudging, several of the nation's biggest ISPs this week announced they would be suspending their usage caps and overage fees as millions of Americans prepare to hunker down to slow the spread of COVID-19. Comcast, AT&T, and Centurylink all stopped imposing such limits for at least the next 90 days. Critics (and even leaked Comcast memos) have long made it clear such restrictions (particularly on fixed line networks) aren't technically useful in managing congestion as the industry once claimed, and are little more than glorified price hikes on captive customers.

The speed at which such restrictions were dispatched (during a time when overall bandwidth consumption is up, no less) supports industry executive claims that such limits are arbitrary, confusing, and unnecessary.

That said, numerous ISPs say they're taking additional steps to ensure users can stay online during the outbreak. For example, a coalition of several dozen ISPs struck a voluntary "Keep Americans Connected Pledge" that they wouldn't kick users offline during the outbreak for lack of payment due to Coronavirus, and wouldn't impose late fees either. From the FCC announcement:

"Given the coronavirus pandemic and its impact on American society, [[Company Name]] pledges for the next 60 days to:

(1) not terminate service to any residential or small business customers because of their inability to pay their bills due to the disruptions caused by the coronavirus pandemic;

(2) waive any late fees that any residential or small business customers incur because of their economic circumstances related to the coronavirus pandemic; and

(3) open its Wi-Fi hotspots to any American who needs them.

To be clear, this is a good thing. Those struggling during the obvious economic difficulties to come should not be kicked offline during a pandemic. That said, this is all voluntary and there's no genuine legal mandate for ISPs to do follow up. Given this FCC's tendency toward giving industry a pass for pretty much anything, it's unlikely it would penalize any ISP for non-compliance barring the most obvious instances of attention-grabbing misbehavior. At lobbyist behest, the FCC has stripped away much of its industry oversight as it applies to everything from sneaky fees to transparent billing, making this sort of thing notably more difficult to actually police.

Again, that's not to say that much of these efforts won't be a good thing in the weeks or months to come. Comcast and Spectrum in particular lay claim to tens of thousands of hot spots across the United States, and opening them up to the general public should prove greatly beneficial. Especially if the nation's libraries -- often the first place lower income Americans go to connect to the internet -- are forced to close their doors. Other ISPs, like T-Mobile, have announced they're effectively getting rid of caps and will be giving all of the company's customers unlimited data:

Starting now - ALL current T-Mobile and Metro by T-Mobile customers who have plans with data will have unlimited smartphone data for the next 60 days (excluding roaming).

Providing T-Mobile and Metro by T-Mobile customers an additional 20GB of mobile hotspot / tethering service for the next 60 days – coming soon.

In the weeks and months to come, Americans will face notable financial hardships as the country struggles with business closures as the country attempts to "flatten the curve." At the very least, they won't have to worry about usage restrictions and consumption fees that shouldn't have existed in the first place.

Filed Under: broadband, broadband caps, coronavirus, covid-19, usage caps
Companies: at&t, centurylink, comcast, t-mobile, verizon

SoftBank Owned Patent Troll, Using Monkey Selfie Law Firm, Sues To Block Covid-19 Testing, Using Theranos Patents

from the and-that's-not-even-all-the-insane-parts dept

Honestly, I wasn't sure how to begin this story or how to fit all the insanity into the title. It's a story involving patents, patent trolling, Covid-19, Theranos, and even the company that brought us all WeWork: SoftBank. Oh, and also Irell & Manella, the same law firm that once claimed it could represent a monkey in a copyright infringement dispute. You see, Irell & Manella has now filed one of the most utterly bullshit patent infringement lawsuits you'll ever see. They are representing "Labrador Diagnostics LLC" a patent troll which does not seem to exist other than to file this lawsuit, and which claims to hold the rights to two patents (US Patents 8,283,155 and 10,533,994) which, you'll note, were originally granted to Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos -- the firm that shut down in scandal over medical testing equipment that appears to have been oversold and never actually worked. Holmes is still facing federal charges of wire fraud over the whole Theranos debacle.

However, back in 2018, the remains of Theranos sold its patents to Fortress Investment Group. Fortress Investment Group is a SoftBank-funded massive patent troll. You may remember the name from the time last fall when Apple and Intel sued the firm, laying out how Fortress is a sort of uber-patent troll, gathering up a bunch of patents and then shaking down basically everyone. Lovely, right?

So, this SoftBank-owned patent troll, Fortress, bought up Theranos patents, and then set up this shell company, "Labrador Diagnostics," which decided that right in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic it was going to sue one of the companies making Covid-19 tests, saying that its test violates those Theranos patents, and literally demanding that the court bar the firm from making those Covid-19 tests.

A bit more background here: the company they're suing, BioFire, recently launched three Covid-19 tests built off of the company's FilmArray technology. And that's what "Labrador" (read: SoftBank) is now suing over. From the lawsuit:

The Accused Products embody at least claim 1 of the '155 Patent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, as set forth below. The further descriptions below, which are based on publicly available information, are preliminary examples and are non-limiting. On information and belief, the FilmArray 2.0, FilmArray EZ, and FilmArray Torch devices operate, together with the FilmArray pouches and software, similarly as pertinent to the non-limiting examples set forth below. On information and belief, the FilmArray EZ operates in substantially the same manner as the FilmArray 2.0, and as such is not separately addressed below. For the purposes of infringement, Plaintiff Labrador's non-limiting examples relating to the FilmArray 2.0 are equally applicable to the FilmArray EZ, albeit with use of at least the RP EZ Panel designed for use with the FilmArray EZ. See BioFire Diagnostics Website, https://www.biofiredx.com/products/the-filmarraypanels/ filmarray-respiratory-panel-ez/.

So, let's summarize: The firm that basically created the mess that is WeWork by dumping billions of dollars into the company, also owns a patent troll that bought up the patents from the sham medical testing firm Theranos, and is now using those patents to sue one of the few diagnostics companies that is actually making a Covid-19 test... in the middle of a pandemic. And, demanding the use of those tests be blocked:

That Defendants be enjoined from infringing the Asserted Patents, or if their infringement is not enjoined, that Defendants be ordered to pay ongoing royalties to Labrador for any post-judgment infringement of the Asserted Patents;

Honestly, I'm used to all sorts of awfulness, but this one piles awfulness upon awfulness, and takes it to a level of pure evil. The lawyers filing this lawsuit on behalf of "Labrador" should remember what they've done -- filing a bullshit patent trolling lawsuit, on behalf of a shell company for a notorious giant patent troll, using patents from a sham company, and using them to try to block the use of Covid-19 diagnostic tests in the middle of a pandemic. I wonder how they sleep at night. For the record, there are two law firms behind this filing. Irell & Manella is the big one, and they list out 7 different lawyers on this complaint: Morgan Chu, Alan Heinrich, Keith Orso, Adina Stohl, Dennis Courtney, Brian Weissenberg and Chaplin Carmichael. Their local firm is Farnan LLP, and the lawyers there are Brian and Michael Farnan. Morgan Chu is the big shot at Irell and runs its litigation group. He should take on much of the responsibility for this awful, awful lawsuit. Farnan LLP was formed by a former federal district court judge, Joseph Farnan, and I'll just note that 4 out of its 6 attorneys, including the two on this case have the same last name.

I understand the need for zealous representation of a client in court, but this seems even more despicable than your every day patent trolling, and people should associate these lawyers names with the truly despicable behavior on display here. Similarly, it should be a reminder of why its a good thing that the Supreme Court decided a decade and a half ago that injunctions are often inappropriate in patent cases. I know that there's an effort underway to have Congress change the law to overrule the Supreme Court decision on that point, but imagine how that would play out in this scenario, in which necessary diagnostic testing might get blocked due to some patent troll with deep pockets.

Filed Under: coronavirus, covid-19, diagnostics, elizabeth holmes, filmarray, injunctions, patent trolling, patents
Companies: biofire, biomerieux, farnan llp, fortress investment group, irell & manella, labrador diagnostics, softbank

Coronavirus Telecommuting To Further Highlight Shoddy US Telecom Market

from the completely-unprepared dept

To be clear, there are going to be layers of life and death dysfunction that the Coronavirus shines a bright spotlight on, most notable being a shaky US healthcare system and incompetent government leadership. But the outbreak and response is also going to shine a bright light on the broken US telecom market, and the millions of Americans that won't be able to effectively telecommute in a crisis.

We've noted time and time again how a lack of competition in the US broadband market means consumers pay some of the highest prices in the developed world for broadband that usually ranks somewhere in the middle of the pack. While we talk a lot about this problem, few actually do much about it. Similarly, few really have noticed how as US telcos effectively give up on upgrading antiquated DSL lines, they're giving cable giants like Comcast even bigger monopolies across vast swaths of America. In turn, those cable giants are facing less incentive than ever to improve customer service, upgrade rural networks, or compete on price.

With little competition and federal regulators that are little more than a rubber stamp to their every monopolistic whim, these companies have also been given a green light to gouge US consumers with usage caps and overage fees. Worse, a recent report suggested that 40 million Americans can't get broadband at all, nearly double FCC estimates. The Trump administration and FCC's response to this problem so far has been to blow sweet kisses at the nation's biggest telecom providers in the form of regulatory favors, massive tax breaks for doing nothing, and a lot of overheated rhetoric.

This has always been a problem, but as FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel notes, it's going to become a more obvious problem as millions of Americans are suddenly asked to work (and learn) from home to avoid spreading the virus further and faster:

While the overlaid teleconferencing technology has come a long way in recent years, millions of Americans will need to rely on expensive, slow, capped broadband that comes with what is statistically some of the worst customer service and satisfaction rates of any industry in America. Assuming these Americans have the luxury of working from home at all, many will be forced to rely on throttled, capped, and otherwise restricted cellular and satellite connections, since incumbents have effectively frozen expansion into rural markets, and fought tooth and nail against communities building their own, better networks.

While (as usual) this won't be as big of a problem for the white and affluent (many of whom have long insisted this isn't a big deal), it's going to be a particular problem for the minority, tribal, and low income communities that have been overlooked for decades. Especially as a growing number of colleges and schools try to shift the entirety of their workload online. It's a problem America has historically found relatively easy to ignore. And while broadband is likely to be the least of our issues over the next few months, recommending that millions of Americans work and learn from home will make ignoring that problem exponentially more difficult.

Filed Under: broadband, coronavirus, covid-19, fcc, working from home

Content Moderation At Scale Is Impossible; Naughty Kids In Wuhan Edition

from the masnick's-impossibility-theorem dept

I keep trying to point out that content moderation at scale is impossible to do well for a whole variety of reasons, including the fact that sooner or later some people -- or some large groups of people -- may try to game the system in totally unexpected ways. Witness this amusing example from the London Review of Books, reporting on the situation in Wuhan, China, which was ground zero for the Covid-19 coronavirus outbreak. With everything shut down in and around Wuhan, schools have moved to online learning -- and some naughty kids seem to have worked out a way to try to get out of having to do schoolwork: getting the app the schools rely on pulled from the app store via fake negative ratings.

Schools are suspended until further notice. With many workplaces also shut, notoriously absent Chinese fathers have been forced to stay home and entertain their children. Video clips of life under quarantine are trending on TikTok. Children were presumably glad to be off school – until, that is, an app called DingTalk was introduced. Students are meant to sign in and join their class for online lessons; teachers use the app to set homework. Somehow the little brats worked out that if enough users gave the app a one-star review it would get booted off the App Store. Tens of thousands of reviews flooded in, and DingTalk’s rating plummeted overnight from 4.9 to 1.4. The app has had to beg for mercy on social media: ‘I’m only five years old myself, please don’t kill me.’

Must tip my cap to the cleverness here, but on the content moderation side it shows, yet again, just how difficult it is to handle content moderation. No one running an app store or other platform prepares for a situation like this. In this case, at least, it seems likely that with so many negative reviews -- and now press attention -- the platform might take notice and discount the most recent thousands of reviews, but imagine having to keep track of every case where this is happening, often on a much smaller, less obvious, scale?

What seems easy about content moderation almost never is. Everyone seems to think it's easy until they're actually running a platform.

Filed Under: content moderation, content moderation at scale, coronavirus, covid-19, dingtalk, ios, remote learning, students, wuhan
Companies: apple

China Bans 'Plague Inc.' Amid Coronavirus Outbreak

from the that'll-show-'em dept

Unless you're somehow living in a cabin without electricity somewhere (in which case, how are you even reading this, bro?), you've heard all about the coronavirus. The virus is the subject of roughly all the news and at least half of our brainwaves these days, with an unfortunate amount of misinformation and spin floating around far too many governments and media. Some folks, such as social media groups used by law enforcement types, seem to think this is all a joke. Others, such as our very own United States Senate, seem to think an illness infecting and killing thousands is the perfect excuse to reauthorize surveillance powers by those same law enforcement types.

China, meanwhile, isn't fucking around. While there is some analysis to do as to whether the country did enough in the early stages of the outbreak, not to mention whether it tried to downplay risks and silence dire warnings in a gamble to keep its economy going, there is no question that eventually it went full on heavy-handed to combat the virus. Since then, quarantines of metropolitan cities have been put in place, travel restrictions abound, and shutdowns of commercial and public services are the norm.

But China's still gonna China, meaning the government is also banning a popular mobile game about infecting humanity with sicknesses after it surged in popularity in the country.

In a statement, Ndemic Creations said: "We have some very sad news to share with our China-based players. We've just been informed that Plague Inc. 'includes content that is illegal in China as determined by the Cyberspace Administration of China' and has been removed from the China App Store. This situation is completely out of our control.

"It's not clear to us if this removal is linked to the ongoing coronavirus outbreak that China is facing. However, Plague Inc.'s educational importance has been repeatedly recognised by organisations like the CDC [Centre for Disease Control and Prevention] and we are currently working with major global health organisations to determine how we can best support their efforts to contain and control Covid-19."

Let's be clear: this is absolutely about the coronavirus. Let's also be clear: this is China trying desperately to control the sentiments and minds of its population. I've played Plague Inc. It's great. It's also a game about inhabiting an anthropomorphic virus/bacteria/illness and developing or evolving that illness to literally kill all of humanity on literally all of the planet. That, to put it mildly, could strike the average person as somewhat morbid in the context of a world now dealing with coronavirus.

On the other hand, the only reason China is taking this action is because Plague Inc. went wild in terms of popularity in China after the virus outbreak. China saw that as a problem and is trying to ban it to death. The reality, it seems, is that Plague Inc. actually makes it clear how hard it is for outbreaks to spread and can be therapeutic to those worried about pandemics.

It said that it was "devastated" for its Chinese players, adding that the game "encourages players to think and learn more about serious public health issues".

Plague Inc. has become a huge hit since it was launched eight years ago. It now has 130 million players worldwide and soared in popularity in China amid the coronavirus outbreak, becoming the bestselling app in the country in January. Some players suggested they were downloading the game as a way to cope with fears surrounding the virus.

Games can be a lot of things to a lot of people. They can be therapy. They can be entertainment. They can be education.

What they can't be, no matter the Chinese government's actions, is dangerous in the context of coronavirus.

Filed Under: authoritarianism, censorship, china, coronavirus, games, mobile games, plauge inc.
Companies: ndemic creations

Cop Shops Around The Nation Think It's Hilarious To Crack Jokes About Coronavirus-Contaminated Drugs

from the shitposting-away-your-credibility dept

At a time when people are getting hit with a lot of misinformation, and trust in law enforcement is at an all-time low, why in world would you do something like this?

Two dozen police departments, 10 journalists and radio stations, one Army substance abuse program, and a candidate for local sheriff have spread a claim on Facebook about meth possibly being contaminated with the novel coronavirus.

Some spread the false claim in an attempt at humor or to trick people into turning in their drugs, while others appear to have believed it was real.

“P.S.A WARNING: If you have recently purchased Meth, it may be contaminated with the Corona Virus. Please take it to the Merrill Police Department and we will test it for free,” said the most popular post from the Merrill Police Department in Wisconsin, which has been shared over 6,500 times and further spread through screenshots.

The Merrill Police Department updated its post 24 hours later with a non-apology and a "we're just concerned about the well being of the people we lied to" statement.

It’s been 24 hrs so let’s bring this full circle. That last post really made the rounds and it sparked a lot of opinions, emotions, and touched some tender spots. Unfortunately it spawned some rather personal commentary too.

Just to give you some history, we have actually experienced people report their illegal drugs being stolen, being ripped off in a drug deal, being sold a look-a-like illegal substance, etc. We have even experienced drunk drivers coming to pick up arrested drunk drivers as their "sober responsible party". So this attempt, although a long shot, still had some possibility behind it. We will take those easy grabs at removing poison from our community whenever we can. That is our role which we un-apologetically must fulfill.

I'm sure it's the "personal commentary" that hurt the most, as commenters showed up to tell the Merrill PD just how stupid and wrong its original post was. The tone deafness continues throughout the update, culminating in the ridiculous assertion that the best thing that could happen to someone struggling with addiction is some time in jail and an arrest on their record.

It is our hope that an arrest would be the positive catalyst someone may need to start recovery.

This wasn't the only police department to capitalize on coronavirus fears in hopes of making some easy arrests. While some of these posts may have been poor attempts at humor, local reporters made things worse by covering these announcements as though they were factual. Here's a Texas ABC affiliate acting as a stenographer for pure bullshit:

Police in central Texas say they have reason to believe methamphetamine in Blanco County may be contaminated with the coronavirus and should be checked.

The offer comes in a public service announcement posted by the Johnson City Police Department to Facebook.

And, as if to demonstrate law enforcement's lack of originality, here's coverage of an Arkansas police department's version of the coronavirus/meth hoax, although this one does at least points out the post was not well-received by residents.

St. Francis County Sheriff’s Office in Arkansas shared a post on their Facebook page saying any recently purchased methamphetamine could be contaminated with coronavirus.

The department is offering to test the meth for free in the privacy of your home, if you’re uncomfortable with bringing drugs to a police department.

The sheriff’s Office posted the announcement to its official Facebook page Wednesday morning and it’s causing a lot of backlash.

Here's an NBC affiliate with some straightforward reporting that inadvertently highlights everything that's wrong with these "jokes."

Bennington Police tap into coronavirus fears to catch meth users

Those who think -- as these law enforcement agencies clearly do -- that this is all harmless fun need to recalibrate their definitions of "harmless" and "fun." It is not harmless when government agencies lie about health concerns. It makes them yet another untrustworthy source. The next time they need to insert themselves into the discussion about health -- say, during a quarantine -- people will be less likely to believe them and will have every reason to doubt their motives.

The same goes for the journalists who delivered uncritical reporting of these bogus PD statements. When your credibility is undermined, it's hard to win that trust back. In the case of coronavirus, lives will be on the line and sources of life-saving info will be viewed skeptically. That hurts everyone. And all for a couple of cheap law enforcement laughs.

Filed Under: coronavirus, covid19, meth, police