Following in the footsteps of competitors Netflix and Disney+, Apple is reportedly working on bringing advertisements to Apple TV+ through an ad-supported tier. MacRumors reports: Apple has apparently been in discussions with the UK's Broadcaster's Audience Research Board (BARB) to explore the necessary data collection techniques for monitoring advertising results. Currently, BARB provides viewing statistics for major UK networks including the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and Sky, as well as Apple TV+ programming.

While BARB already monitors viewing time for Apple TV+ content, additional techniques are required to track advertising metrics accurately. This data is vital for advertisers to assess the reach and impact of their campaigns on the platform. In addition to the UK, Apple has also reportedly held similar discussions with ratings organizations in the United States. Apple has already included limited advertising in its live sports events, such as last year's Major League Soccer coverage, where ads were incorporated even for Season Pass holders. It is also notable that in March Apple hired Joseph Cady, a former advertising executive from NBCUniversal, to bolster its video advertising team.

During Alphabet's second-quarter earnings call today, Alphabet CFO Ruth Porat announced the organization will spend an additional $5 billion on its self-driving subsidiary, Waymo. "This new round of funding, which is consistent with recent annual investment levels, will enable Waymo to continue to build the world's leading autonomous driving technology company," said Porat. TechCrunch reports: Porat noted that Google will focus on improving overall efficiencies in its "other bets" segment, which includes innovative projects that are distinct from the tech giant's core search and advertising business. Other companies in this segment are Verily, Calico, Google Ventures and drone company Wing. "Waymo is an important example of this, with its technical leadership coupled with progress on operational performance," Porat continued. The executive noted that parent company Alphabet's 10-Q form, which has yet to be filed, will have more details.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The European Commission (EC) has finally taken action to block Meta's heavily criticized plan to charge a subscription fee to users who value privacy on its platforms. Surprisingly, this step wasn't taken under laws like the Digital Services Act (DSA), the Digital Markets Act (DMA), or the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Instead, the EC announced Monday that Meta risked sanctions under EU consumer laws if it could not resolve key concerns about Meta's so-called "pay or consent" model. Meta's model is seemingly problematic, the commission said, because Meta "requested consumers overnight to either subscribe to use Facebook and Instagram against a fee or to consent to Meta's use of their personal data to be shown personalized ads, allowing Meta to make revenue out of it." Because users were given such short notice, they may have been "exposed to undue pressure to choose rapidly between the two models, fearing that they would instantly lose access to their accounts and their network of contacts," the EC said. To protect consumers, the EC joined national consumer protection authorities, sending a letter to Meta requiring the tech giant to propose solutions to resolve the commission's biggest concerns by September 1.

That Meta's "pay or consent" model may be "misleading" is a top concern because it uses the term "free" for ad-based plans, even though Meta "can make revenue from using their personal data to show them personalized ads." It seems that while Meta does not consider giving away personal information to be a cost to users, the EC's commissioner for justice, Didier Reynders, apparently does. "Consumers must not be lured into believing that they would either pay and not be shown any ads anymore, or receive a service for free, when, instead, they would agree that the company used their personal data to make revenue with ads," Reynders said. "EU consumer protection law is clear in this respect. Traders must inform consumers upfront and in a fully transparent manner on how they use their personal data. This is a fundamental right that we will protect." Additionally, the EC is concerned that Meta users might be confused about how "to navigate through different screens in the Facebook/Instagram app or web-version and to click on hyperlinks directing them to different parts of the Terms of Service or Privacy Policy to find out how their preferences, personal data, and user-generated data will be used by Meta to show them personalized ads." They may also find Meta's "imprecise terms and language" confusing, such as Meta referring to "your info" instead of clearly referring to consumers' "personal data." A Meta spokesperson said in a statement: "Subscriptions as an alternative to advertising are a well-established business model across many industries. Subscription for no ads follows the direction of the highest court in Europe and we are confident it complies with European regulation."

An anonymous reader writes: Windows users are being notified that their systems aren't backed up with the built-in Windows backup solution. A corresponding message appears with the advice that it's best to make backups so that all data is stored "in case something happens to the PC." It almost reads like an indirect threat, but Microsoft is actually just pointing out the option to store file backups on its own OneDrive cloud service. And it's also advertising more storage space.

An anonymous reader shared this report from CNN: Netflix will start phasing out its Basic plan, its cheapest advertising-free plan, which costs $11.99 per month in the United States, the company said on Thursday. The company had previously stopped accepting new sign-ups for the Basic plan, instead pushing customers to Netflix's ad-supported plan, which costs $6.99 per month. However, existing users were allowed to keep the basic plan. In January, the company said it would retire its cheapest ad-free tier in Canada and the UK. On Thursday, the company said the US and France are next.

Basic users in the US who want an ad-free viewing experience on Netflix will now have two choices: Netflix's Standard plan, which costs $15.49 per month, and its Premium plan, which costs $22.99 per month...

The company reported a record-high 277.65 million subscribers on its streaming platform Thursday, far outpacing streaming competitors like Disney+, Peacock and Max... Overall, Netflix added 8.05 million new subscribers in its second quarter. Netflix's surge in new subscribers has been fueled in part by the company's effort to push users who share passwords to create their own accounts.
The article adds that Netflix's stock has climbed more than 35% in 2024.

"Many people over the past few days have been lashing out at Mozilla," writes the blog Its FOSS, "for enabling Privacy-Preserving Attribution by default on Firefox 128, and the lack of publicity surrounding its introduction."

Mozilla responded that the feature will only run "on a few sites in the U.S. under strict supervision" — adding that users can disable it at any time ("because this is a test"), and that it's only even enabled if telemetry is also enabled.

And they also emphasize that it's "not tracking." The way it works is there's an "aggregation service" that can periodically send advertisers a summary of ad-related actions — again, aggregated data, from a mass of many other users. (And Mozilla says that aggregated summary even includes "noise that provides differential privacy.") This Privacy-Preserving Attribution concept "does not involve sending information about your browsing activities to anyone... Advertisers only receive aggregate information that answers basic questions about the effectiveness of their advertising."

More from It's FOSS: Even though Mozilla mentioned that PPA would be enabled by default on Firefox 128 in a few of its past blog posts, they failed to communicate this decision clearly, to a wider audience... In response to the public outcry, Firefox CTO, Bobby Holley, had to step in to clarify what was going on.

He started with how the internet has become a massive cesspool of surveillance, and doing something about it was the primary reason many people are part of Mozilla. He then expanded on their approach with Firefox, which, historically speaking, has been to ship a browser with anti-tracking features baked in to tackle the most common surveillance techniques. But, there were two limitations with this approach. One was that advertisers would try to bypass these countermeasures. The second, most users just accept the default options that they are shown...

Bas Schouten, Principal Software Engineer at Mozilla, made it clear at the end of a heated Mastodon thread that "[opt-in features are] making privacy a privilege for the people that work to inform and educate themselves on the topic. People shouldn't need to do that, everyone deserves a more private browser. Privacy features, in Firefox, are not meant to be opt-in. They need to be the default.

"If you are 'completely anti-ads' (i.e. even if their implementation is private), you probably use an ad blocker. So are unaffected by this."
This has already provoked a discussion among Slashdot readers. "It doesn't seem that evil to me," argues Slashdot reader geekprime. "Seems like the elimination of cross site cookies is a privacy enhancing idea." (They cite Mozilla's statement that their goal is "to inform an emerging Web standard designed to help sites understand how their ads perform without collecting data about individual people. By offering sites a non-invasive alternative to cross-site tracking, we hope to achieve a significant reduction in this harmful practice across the web.")

But Slashdot reader TheNameOfNick disagrees. "How realistic is the part where advertisers stop tracking you because they get less information from the browser maker...?"

Mozilla has provided simple instructions for disabling the feature:

• Click the menu button and select Settings.
• In the Privacy & Security panel, find the Website Advertising Preferences section.
• Uncheck the box labeled Allow websites to perform privacy-preserving ad measurement.

J. Michael Cline, the co-founder of Fandango, died from suicide this week after falling from the twentieth floor of a Manhattan hotel. The New York Times reports: Mr. Cline, who was 64, co-founded Fandango in 2000 and left the company in 2011, according to his LinkedIn profile. The company -- familiar to many from its splashy logo, an orange "F" in the shape of a ticket stub -- was later acquired by Comcast and is currently owned by NBCUniversal and Warner Bros. For years, the company dominated movie-ticket sales, handling ticketing for several major theater chains and making money by charging a processing fee for online ticket sales and by selling advertising on its site.

At the time of its launch, Mr. Cline offered a pithy explanation for the company's name: "A Fandango is fast and fun," he told Variety. "Fandango is the perfect match to a service designed to make going to the movies easier and more enjoyable than ever before." Art Levitt, the co-founder and former chief operating officer and president of Fandango, remembered Mr. Cline as brilliant, creative and loyal, sticking it out even in "tough" times. TechCrunch provides additional information about Mr. Cline: He left the company in 2011, roughly four years after the company was acquired by Comcast. Some early investors in the online ticketing service were General Atlantic and TCV. Cline was also managing partner of Accretive, a venture capital firm he founded in 1999. He built startups throughout his career, including R1 RCM, Accumen, Accolade, Everspring, Dresr and Insureon. Starting in 2018, Cline served as the executive chairman at the venture firm Juxtapose, which invests in technology businesses. During his time there, Cline enjoyed investing in healthcare companies, according to his staff page. Some of Juxtapose's portfolio companies include Tend, Nectar and Great Jones.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: The U.S. Postal Service was sharing the postal addresses of its online customers with advertising and tech giants Meta, LinkedIn and Snap, TechCrunch has found. On Wednesday, the USPS said it addressed the issue and stopped the practice, claiming that it was "unaware" of it. TechCrunch found USPS was sharing customers' information by way of hidden data-collecting code (also known as tracking pixels) used across its website. Tech and advertising companies create this kind of code to collect information about the user -- such as which pages they visit -- every time a webpage containing the code loads in the customer's browser.

In the case of USPS, some of that collected data included the postal addresses of logged-in USPS Informed Delivery customers, who use the service to see photos of their incoming mail before it arrives. It's not clear how many individuals had their information collected or for how long. Informed Delivery had more than 62 million users (PDF) as of March 2024. [...] The code also collected other data, such as information about the user's computer type and browser, which appeared as partly pseudonymized -- essentially scrambled in a way that makes it more difficult for humans to know where data came from, or who it relates to, by using randomized identifiers in place of real customer names. But researchers have long warned that pseudonymous data can still be used to re-identify seemingly anonymous individuals.

TechCrunch also found that tracking numbers entered into the USPS website were also shared with advertisers and tech companies, including Bing, Google, LinkedIn, Pinterest and Snap. Some in-transit tracking data was also shared, such as the real-world location of the mail in the postal system, even if the customer was not logged in to USPS' website. USPS spokesperson Jim McKean said in a statement: "The Postal Service leverages an analytics platform for our own internal purposes, so that we understand the usage of our products and services and which we use on an aggregated basis to market our products. The Postal Service does not sell or provide any personal information that is collected from this analytics platform to any third party, and we were unaware of any configuration of the platform that collected personal information from the URL and that shared it without our knowledge with social media."

"We have taken immediate action to remediate this issue," the spokesperson added, without saying what action was taken.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: Just before the weekend, dozens of record labels including UMG, Warner, and Sony, filed a massive copyright infringement lawsuit against Verizon at a New York federal court. In common with previous lawsuits that accused rivals of similar inaction, Verizon Communications Inc., Verizon Services Corp., and Cellco Partnership (dba Verizon Wireless), stand accused of assisting subscribers to download and share pirated music, by not doing enough to stop them. The labels' complaint introduces Verizon as one of the largest ISPs in the country, one that "knowingly provides its high-speed service to a massive community of online pirates."

Knowledge of infringement, the labels say, was established at Verizon over a period of several years during which it received "hundreds of thousands" of copyright notices, referencing instances of infringement allegedly carried out by its subscribers. The complaint cites Verizon subscribers' persistent use of BitTorrent networks to download and share pirated music, with Verizon allegedly failing to curtail their activity. "While Verizon is famous for its 'Can you hear me now?' advertising campaign, it has intentionally chosen not to listen to complaints from copyright owners. Instead of taking action in response to those infringement notices as the law requires, Verizon ignored Plaintiffs' notices and buried its head in the sand," the labels write.

"Undeterred, infringing subscribers identified in Plaintiffs' notices continued to use Verizon's services to infringe Plaintiffs' copyrights with impunity. Meanwhile, Verizon continued to provide its high-speed service to thousands of known repeat infringers so it could continue to collect millions of dollars from them." Through this lawsuit, which references piracy of songs recorded by artists including The Rolling Stones, Ariana Grande, Bob Dylan, Bruno Mars, Elvis Presley, Dua Lipa, Drake, and others, the labels suggest that Verizon will have no choice but to hear them now. [...]

Attached to the complaint, Exhibit A contains a non-exhaustive list of the plaintiffs' copyright works allegedly infringed by Verizon's subscribers. The document is over 400 pages long, with each track listed representing potential liability for Verizon as a willful, intentional, and purposeful contributory infringer, the complaint notes. This inevitably leads to claims based on maximum statutory damages of $150,000 per copyrighted work infringed on Count I (contributory infringement). The statutory maximum of $150,000 per infringed work is also applied to Count II (vicarious infringement), based on the labels' claim that Verizon derived a direct financial benefit from the direct infringements of its subscribers. The labels' complaint can be found here (PDF).

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica, written by Samuel Axon: In one of the most egregiously unethical uses of AI we've seen, a web advertising company has re-created some defunct, classic tech blogs like The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) and iLounge by mimicking the bylines of the websites' former writers and publishing AI-generated content under their names. The Verge reported on the fiasco in detail, including speaking to Christina Warren, a former writer for TUAW who now works at GitHub. Warren took to the social media platform Threads yesterday to point out that someone had re-launched TUAW at its original domain and populated it with fake content allegedly written by her and other past TUAW staff. Some of the content simply reworded articles that originally appeared on TUAW, while other articles tied real writers' names to new, AI-generated articles about current events.

TUAW was shut down in 2015, but its intellectual property and domain name continued to be owned by Yahoo. A Hong Kong-based web advertising firm named Web Orange Limited claims to have purchased the domain and brand name but not the content. The domain name still carries some value in terms of Google ranking, so Web Orange Limited seems to have relaunched the site and then used AI summarization tools to reword the original content and publish it under the original authors' names. (It did the same with another classic Apple blog, iLounge.) The site also includes author bios, which are generic and may have been generated, and they are accompanied by author photos that don't look anything like the real writers. The Verge found that some of these same photos have appeared in other places, like web display ads for iPhone cases and dating websites. They may have been AI-generated, though the company has also been caught reusing photos of real people without permission in other contexts.

At first, some of Web Orange Limited's websites named Haider Ali Khan, an Australian currently residing in Dubai, as the owner of the company. Khan's own website identified him as "an independent cyber security analyst" and "long-time advocate for web security" who also runs a web hosting company, and who "started investing in several technology reporting websites" and "manages and runs several news blogs such as the well-known Apple tech-news blog iLounge." However, mentions of his name were removed from the websites today, and the details on his personal website have apparently been taken offline. Warren emailed the company, threatening legal action. After she did that, the byline was changed to what we can only assume is a made-up name -- "Mary Brown." The same goes for many of the other author names on Web Orange Limited's websites.

The company likely tried to use the original authors' names as part of an SEO play; Google tracks the names of authors and gives them authority rankings on specific topics as another layer on top of a website's own authority. That way, Google can try to respond to user queries with results written by people who have built strong reputations in the users' areas of interest. It also helps Google surface authors who are experts on a topic but who write for multiple websites, which is common among freelance writers. The websites are still operational, even though the most arguably egregious breach of ethics -- the false use of real people's names -- has been addressed in many cases.

Amazon has introduced new advertising strategies for its Fire TV platform, displaying full-screen ads before screensavers activate on idle devices, CordCutters reports. Users have observed ads from various brands during these pre-screensaver intervals, the report added.

Google is intensifying efforts to decrease its dependency on Apple's Safari browser, as a U.S. antitrust lawsuit threatens its default search engine status on iPhones. The tech giant has been trying to shift more iPhone searches to its own apps, with the percentage rising from 25% five years ago to the low 30s recently, The Information reported Friday.

Progress has stalled in recent months, however. To attract users, Google has run advertising campaigns showcasing unique features like Lens image search. The company recently hired former Instagram executive Robby Stein to lead this initiative, potentially leveraging AI to enhance its apps' appeal. Google paid Apple over $20 billion last year for default status on Safari. Reducing this dependency could protect Google's mobile search advertising revenue if the antitrust ruling goes against it. The report adds: Google executives considered having its new AI Overviews feature, which shows AI-generated responses to search queries, appear on its mobile apps but not on Safari, people who have worked on the product said. But Google ultimately decided against that move.

Netflix has started booting subscribers off its cheapest ad-free subscription tier, "starting with the UK and Canada, with more countries inevitably to follow," reports MacRumors. From the report: The streaming giant has reportedly begun notifying users via on-screen messages about the last day they can access the service unless they upgrade. One Reddit user shared a notification they had received from the Netflix app, saying: "Your last day to watch Netflix is July 13th. Choose a new plan to keep watching." Customers are being prompted to instead choose the cheaper Standard with ads, or the more expensive Standard or Premium 4K plans.

The Basic plan, which costs $11.99 per month in the United States, has not been available to new subscribers since last year. In its early 2024 earnings call, Netflix announced its intention to retire its Basic plan in some countries where the ads plan has been introduced, starting with Canada and the UK in the second quarter, and then "taking it from there." Netflix said in May that its ad-supported streaming tier has 40 million global monthly active users, up 35 million from a year ago.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Meta continues to hit walls with its heavily scrutinized plan to comply with the European Union's strict online competition law, the Digital Markets Act (DMA), by offering Facebook and Instagram subscriptions as an alternative for privacy-inclined users who want to opt out of ad targeting. Today, the European Commission (EC) announced preliminary findings that Meta's so-called "pay or consent" or "pay or OK" model -- which gives users a choice to either pay for access to its platforms or give consent to collect user data to target ads -- is not compliant with the DMA. According to the EC, Meta's advertising model violates the DMA in two ways. First, it "does not allow users to opt for a service that uses less of their personal data but is otherwise equivalent to the 'personalized ads-based service." And second, it "does not allow users to exercise their right to freely consent to the combination of their personal data," the press release said.

Now, Meta will have a chance to review the EC's evidence and defend its policy, with today's findings kicking off a process that will take months. The EC's investigation is expected to conclude next March. Thierry Breton, the commissioner for the internal market, said in the press release that the preliminary findings represent "another important step" to ensure Meta's full compliance with the DMA. "The DMA is there to give back to the users the power to decide how their data is used and ensure innovative companies can compete on equal footing with tech giants on data access," Breton said. A Meta spokesperson told Ars that Meta plans to fight the findings -- which could trigger fines up to 10 percent of the company's worldwide turnover, as well as fines up to 20 percent for repeat infringement if Meta loses. The EC agreed that more talks were needed, writing in the press release, "the Commission continues its constructive engagement with Meta to identify a satisfactory path towards effective compliance." Meta continues to claim that its "subscription for no ads" model was "endorsed" by the highest court in Europe, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), last year.

"Subscription for no ads follows the direction of the highest court in Europe and complies with the DMA," Meta's spokesperson said. "We look forward to further constructive dialogue with the European Commission to bring this investigation to a close."

Meta rolled out its ad-free subscription service option last November. "Depending on where you purchase it will cost $10.5/month on the web or $13.75/month on iOS and Android," said the company in a blog post. "Regardless of where you purchase, the subscription will apply to all linked Facebook and Instagram accounts in a user's Accounts Center. As is the case for many online subscriptions, the iOS and Android pricing take into account the fees that Apple and Google charge through respective purchasing policies."

Samantha Cole reports via 404 Media: A woman is suing Microsoft and two major U.S. sex toy retailers with claims that their websites are tracking users without their consent, despite promising they wouldn't do that. In a complaint (PDF) filed on June 25 in the Northern District of California, San Francisco resident Stella Tatola claims that Babeland and Good Vibrations -- both owned by Barnaby Ltd., LLC -- allowed Microsoft to see what visitors to their websites searched for and bought.

"Unbeknownst to Plaintiff and other Barnaby website users, and constituting the ultimate violation of privacy, Barnaby allows an undisclosed third-party, Microsoft, to intercept, read, and utilize for commercial gain consumers' private information about their sexual practices and preferences, gleaned from their activity on Barnaby's websites," the complaint states. "This information includes but is not limited to product searches and purchase initiations, as well as the consumer's unique Microsoft identifier." The complaint claims that Good Vibrations and Babeland sites have installed trackers using Microsoft's Clarity software, which does "recording in real time," and tracks users' mouse movements, clicks or taps, scrolls, and site navigation. Microsoft says on the Clarity site that it "processes a massive amount of anonymous data around user behavior to gain insights and improve machine learning models that power many of our products and services."

"By allowing undisclosed third party Microsoft to eavesdrop and intercept users' PPSI in such a manner -- including their sexual orientation, preferences, and desires, among other highly sensitive, protected information -- Barnaby violates its Privacy Policies, which state it will never share such information with third parties," the complaint states. The complaint includes screenshots of code from the sexual health sites that claims to show them using Machine Unique Identifier ("MUID") cookies that "identifies unique web browsers visiting Microsoft sites," according to Microsoft, and are used for "advertising, site analytics, and other operational purposes." The complaint claims that this violates the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the Federal Wiretap Act, and Californians' reasonable expectation of privacy.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Starting with those builds, Windows 11 will show a Game Pass recommendation / ad within the Settings app. The advertisement will appear on both Windows 11 Home and Windows 11 Pro if you actively play games on your PC. Microsoft lists this feature first under the "Highlights" section of its blog post about the update. Some users aren't pleased. "Microsoft has gone too far," news blog TechRadar wrote.

Thomas Claburn reports via The Register: Mozilla Corporation was sued this month in the US, along with three of its executives, for alleged disability discrimination and retaliation against Chief Product Officer Steve Teixeira. Teixeira, according to a complaint filed in King County Superior Court in the State of Washington, had been tapped to become CEO when he was diagnosed with ocular melanoma on October 3, 2023. Teixeira then took medical leave for cancer treatment from October 30, 2023, through February 1, 2024. "Immediately, upon his return, Mozilla campaigned to demote or terminate Mr Teixeira citing groundless concerns and assumptions about his capabilities as an individual living with cancer," the complaint [PDF] says. "Interim Chief Executive Officer Laura Chambers and Chief People Officer Dani Chehak were clear with Mr Teixeira: He could not continue as Chief Product Officer -- and could not continue as a Mozilla employee in any capacity beyond 2024 -- because of his diagnosis."

Chambers and Chehak are both named in the complaint, along with Mitchell Baker, the former CEO of Mozilla who stepped down in February and announced Chambers as her successor. "Mr Teixeira was enthusiastic to resume his critical role after treatment, but Mozilla would not tolerate an executive with cancer," said Amy Kangas Alexander, an attorney with law firm Stokes Lawrence who is representing the plaintiff, in an email to The Register. "When Mr Teixeira refused to be marginalized because of his disability, Mozilla retaliated and placed him on leave against his will. Mozilla has sidelined Mr Teixeira at the very moment he needs to be preparing his family for the possibility of a future without him."

The complaint claims that Teixeira, appointed in August 2022, helped reverse the decade-long decline of Firefox, which generates about 90 percent of Mozilla's revenue and is the company's only profitable product. He's further credited with growing Mozilla's advertising business, and AI capabilities, and with reducing investment in the money-losing Pocket service. These and other successes, it's alleged, led to conversation in September 2023 when Baker outlined a plan for Teixeira to become CEO. Then he took medical leave and before he could return, the complaint says, Chambers was appointed interim CEO and Baker was removed, becoming Executive Chair of the Board of Directors. [...] A Mozilla spokesperson said in a statement: "We are aware of the lawsuit filed against Mozilla. We deny the allegations and intend to vigorously defend against this lawsuit. Mozilla has a 25-plus-year track record of maintaining the highest standards of integrity and compliance with all applicable laws. We look forward to presenting our defense in court and are confident that the facts will demonstrate that we have acted appropriately. As this is an ongoing legal matter, we will not be providing further comments at this time."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: A hacker is advertising customer data allegedly stolen from the Australia-based live events and ticketing company TEG on a well-known hacking forum. On Thursday, a hacker put up for sale the alleged stolen data from TEG, claiming to have information of 30 million users, including the full name, gender, date of birth, username, hashed passwords, and email addresses. In late May, TEG-owned ticketing company Ticketek disclosed a data breach affecting Australian customers' data, "which is stored in a cloud-based platform, hosted by a reputable, global third party supplier."

The company said that "no Ticketek customer account has been compromised," thanks to the encryption methods used to store their passwords. TEG conceded, however, that "customer names, dates of birth and email addresses may have been impacted" -- data that would line up with that advertised on the hacking forum. The hacker included a sample of the alleged stolen data in their post. TechCrunch confirmed that at least some of the data published on the forum appears legitimate by attempting to sign up for new accounts using the published email addresses. In a number of cases, Ticketek's website gave an error, suggesting the email addresses are already in use. There's evidence that the company's "cloud-based platform" provider is Snowflake, "which has been at the center of a recent series of data thefts affecting several of its customers, including Ticketmaster, Santander Bank, and others," notes TechCrunch.

"A now-deleted post on Snowflake's website from January 2023 was titled: 'TEG Personalizes Live Entertainment Experiences with Snowflake.' In 2022, consulting company Altis published a case study (PDF) detailing how the company, working with TEG, 'built a modern data platform for ingesting streaming data into Snowflake.'"

Mozilla has acquired ad metrics firm Anonym in a move to "support user privacy" while delivering effective online advertising. Anonym, founded by former Meta executives in 2022, helps advertisers and ad networks measure the performance of online ads while preserving user privacy. The acquisition comes amid growing consumer concerns and regulatory scrutiny over current data practices in the advertising industry.

Mozilla CEO Laura Chambers sees this as a pivotal shift in the coexistence of privacy and advertising. Mozilla maintains that advertising is the underlying business model of the web, but it can be reformed to minimize societal harms.

Thomas Claburn reports via The Register: Meta allegedly tried to discredit university researchers in Brazil who had flagged fraudulent adverts on the social network's ad platform. Nucleo, a Brazil-based news organization, said it has obtained government documents showing that attorneys representing Meta questioned the credibility of researchers from NetLab, which is part of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ). NetLab's research into Meta's ads contributed to Brazil's National Consumer Secretariat (Senacon) decision in 2023 to fine Meta $1.7 million (9.3 million BRL), which is still being appealed. Meta (then Facebook) was separately fined of $1.2 million (6.6 million BRL) related to Cambridge Analytica.

As noted by Nucleo, NetLab's report showed that Facebook, despite being notified about the issues, had failed to remove more than 1,800 scam ads that fraudulently used the name of a government program that was supposed to assist those in debt. In response to the fine, attorneys representing Meta from law firm TozziniFreire allegedly accused the NetLab team of bias and of failing to involve Meta in the research process. Nucleo says that it obtained the administrative filing through freedom of information requests to Senacon. The documents are said to date from December 26 last year and to be part of the ongoing case against Meta. A spokesperson for NetLab, who asked not to be identified by name due to online harassment directed at the organization's members, told The Register that the research group was aware of the Nucleo report. "We were kind of surprised to see the account of our work in this law firm document," the spokesperson said. "We expected to be treated with more fairness for our work. Honestly, it comes at a very bad moment because NetLab particularly, but also Brazilian science in general, is being attacked by far-right groups."

On Thursday, more than 70 civil society groups including NetLab published an open letter decrying Meta's legal tactics. "This is an attack on scientific research work, and attempts at intimidation of researchers and researchers who are performing excellent work in the production of knowledge from empirical analysis that have been fundamental to qualify the public debate on the accountability of social media platforms operating in the country, especially with regard to paid content that causes harm to consumers of these platforms and that threaten the future of our democracy," the letter says. "This kind of attack and intimidation is made even more dangerous by aligning with arguments that, without any evidence, have been used by the far right to discredit the most diverse scientific productions, including NetLab itself." The claim, allegedly made by Meta's attorneys, is that the ad biz was "not given the opportunity to appoint a technical assistant and present questions" in the preparation of the NetLabs report. This is particularly striking given Meta's efforts to limit research into its ad platform. A Meta spokesperson told The Register: "We value input from civil society organizations and academic institutions for the context they provide as we constantly work toward improving our services. Meta's defense filed with the Brazilian Consumer Regulator questioned the use of the NetLab report as legal evidence, since it was produced without giving us prior opportunity to contribute meaningfully, in violation of local legal requirements."