The district court “properly denied” appellant Ganiyu Jaiyeola’s emergency ex parte application for a temporary restraining order to halt Black Friday advertising of the iPhone 15 Pro on his allegations that the device is falsely advertised as a titanium phone when it’s mostly fashioned from aluminum (see 2401080002), said Apple’s answering brief Monday (docket 23-4027) at the 9th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court in Jaiyeola’s appeal.

An ESPN/Warner Bros. Discovery/Fox partnership creating a sports streaming platform is a further nail in the coffin of the traditional video programming bundle, video industry experts say. GlobalData analyst Tammy Parker said Tuesday it is "a blockbuster deal that will further decimate the traditional US pay-TV sector."

Federal officials “engaged in a far-reaching unconstitutional censorship campaign orchestrated to circumvent the First Amendment” by pressuring social media platforms to remove content that the federal government finds “objectionable,” said the right-leaning internet show Louder With Crowder in a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief Wednesday in Murthy v. Missouri (docket 23-411) in support of the injunction that bars the officials from coercing the platforms to moderate their content.

The U.K. government faced pressure from Parliament this week about whether it failed to sanction companies owned by Iran’s state-backed petrochemicals firm, allowing it to evade western restrictions by maintaining accounts with at least two London banks. Members of Parliament called for an investigation and said the government may need more sanctions enforcement resources.

The FCC seeks the dismissal of the petition for review of Maurine and Matthew Molak to vacate the FCC’s Oct. 25 declaratory ruling authorizing funding for Wi-Fi service and equipment on school buses under the commission’s E-rate program (see 2312200040), according to the commission’s motion Tuesday (docket 23-60641) at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The parties in a privacy class action vs. NBCUniversal and Peacock TV haven't engaged in any settlement discussions and anticipate a five-day trial, they said in a joint letter and proposed scheduling order Monday (docket 1:23-cv-09433). They were submitted under a Jan. 22 order and notice of initial conference from U.S. District Judge Vernon Broderick for Southern New York in Manhattan.

Of the 23 negligence class actions against Comcast arising from the October Citrix data breach, only the plaintiffs in Diamond v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC d/b/a Xfinity plaintiffs oppose transfer to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for coordinated pretrial proceedings in the data security breach litigation, said movant Kenneth Hasson in a Friday reply (docket 3099). The filing was in support of a motion for transfer and centralization (see 2401120011) before the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML).

Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Ted Cruz, R-Texas, raised concerns Thursday with the CPB-funded Independent Television Service (ITVS) about its Diversity Development Fund, which provides grants of up to $35,000 to filmmakers of color to develop documentaries for public media. ITVS reports it has funded 156 films via the diversity fund. “Because white filmmakers are facially ineligible for this seed money, the fund runs afoul of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866,” Cruz told ITVS CEO Carrie Lozano in a letter. “I therefore urge you to remove race as an eligibility criterion for” DDF. ITVS “can surely pursue its mandate to ‘expand the diversity and innovativeness’ of public programming without violating the law,” Cruz said. “Presumably, the goal of this racially exclusive funding opportunity is to further CPB’s directive to aid ‘producers of programs addressing the needs and interests of minorities.’ But programming need not be produced exclusively by minorities to address the needs and interests of minorities. Furthermore, ITVS’s requirement that an applicant ‘[i]dentify as a person of color’ violates federal law.” The fund may also “discriminate based on political ideology,” he said: “The ITVS website features an ‘Impact’ page demonstrating how its documentaries ‘inspir[e] audiences to take action’ on politically charged issues like criminal justice reform. These documentaries overwhelmingly reflect a liberal worldview” and “ITVS funds hardly any documentaries from a conservative perspective. A public organization that costs American taxpayers $17 million a year should not be a vehicle for left-wing agitprop.” Cruz wants Lozano to tell him by Feb. 15 whether ITVS will remove "race as an eligibility criterion” for DDF grants and detail how much money the fund has received since 2014. In addition, he wants more information about how ITVS will inject “objectivity and balance” as it decides on content befitting an entity receiving CPB funding. ITVS didn’t immediately comment. Cruz objected in December to CPB rules for member stations’ diverse workforce policies (see 2312110067). CPB CEO Patricia Harrison countered that the organization’s current and former diversity policies for Community Service Grants recipients “do not require any unlawful employment preferences or quotas” and are “no more discriminatory than the policies for federal agencies with which CPB, as a private corporation, voluntarily complies.”

Technology companies, trade groups, think tanks and researchers urged the government to be cautious as it evaluates its semiconductor-related export controls and prepares new ones, warning that misguided restrictions could cede American technology leadership to China, hurt the competitiveness of U.S. companies and raise the complexity of an already fraught compliance landscape.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong (D) sent more than a dozen violation notices under the state’s comprehensive consumer privacy law in the six months since it took effect July 1, 2023, the AG office reported Thursday. Businesses get 60 days to cure violations upon receiving a notice under the state law. “We have focused on key aspects of the law related to privacy policies, sensitive data and teens’ data,” said the report. “While many companies have taken prompt steps to address issues flagged in cure notices … all matters have resulted in additional follow-up.” The AG office issued 10 cure notices about privacy policy deficiencies, including missing, inadequate or confusing disclosures and missing, burdensome or broken opt-out mechanisms, it said. “Several companies updated privacy policies and/or consumer rights mechanisms quickly upon receiving cure notices.” But some didn’t fully alleviate the AG’s concerns, or their privacy disclosures raised new questions about compliance with other parts of the law, it said. “This process is an iterative one and only time will tell which companies fully satisfy our concerns and which matters will ultimately require more formal enforcement action.” The office received more than 30 consumer complaints, it said. “Many involved consumers’ attempts to exercise new data rights under the CTDPA, and primarily, the ‘right to delete.’” However, about one-third of the complaints involved data or entities exempted by the state privacy law, the AG office said. “A handful of others were exempt for other reasons, including under the CTDPA’s exemption for ‘publicly available information.’” The AG office recommended that legislators revise the law to scale back the number of entity-level exemptions, including one for nonprofits. Also, switch to a data-level rather than entity-level exemption for the federal Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, it said. Among its other recommendations: Enact a “one-stop-shop” deletion mechanism like California’s 2023 Delete Act (see 2309150063); add a right to know specific third parties that receive data from covered businesses; expand biometric data to include data capable of being linked to a consumer like in Oregon’s law; and clarify whether the legislature intended to ban targeted advertising to teens regardless of consent, and review possibly erroneous language on publicly available information.