Cases of Note

An artificial intelligence safety bill named  SB 1047  was overwhelmingly approved by California Congress on Wednesday and now heads to the Senate for final consideration. If enacted, the "fiercely debated" bill would require tech companies to safety-test AI programs prior to release, and empower the attorney general to sue AI companies for any major harm caused by their technologies. The bill earned cautious support from the likes of Elon Musk and Anthropic, while its opponents include OpenAI and former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. This bill seeks to establish guardrails for the development of the most powerful AI models to avoid the more catastrophic possibilities about which experts have raised alarms. It places a series of obligations on developers of “covered models” and providers of the cloud compute for training such models. This bill also seeks to establish a framework for developing a public cloud-computing cluster that facilitates equitable participation in th

Assembly Bill  2390  Social Media Harm Reduction Pilot Program Summary This bill establishes the Social Media Harm Reduction Pilot Program and would require the California Health and Human Services Agency to designate a nonprofit organization to undertake the responsibilities of the program. The responsibilities include recommending statewide standards for the use of online social networks by kindergarten and grades 1 to 12 pupils, inclusive, and would require the program to coordinate with existing laws regulating social media platforms to ensure consistency and avoid duplication of effort until December 31, 2029. The  Social Media Harm Reduction Pilot Program  enacts the following: 1) Establishes the Social Media Harm Reduction Pilot Program (program). Requires the California  Health and Human Services Agency to designate a nonprofit organization to undertake the responsibilities of the program. 2) Requires the program to: a) Develop model educational materials and methods to leverag

Hyundai Motors and Kia Motors America will compensate owners' theft-related vehicle losses. Case Summary Kia and Hyundai thefts skyrocketed because a viral TikTok video in the summer of 2022 showed people how to steal the cars with just a USB cable and screwdriver. And while the manufacturers made a software update available to owners, there was not a mandatory recall of any make and model related to this issue. Also, the update was only effective when the vehicle alarm is armed. The law firm Hagens Berman brought a national class-action lawsuit on behalf of the owners of affected vehicles in August 2022, and reached a proposed settlement in May of 2023 that covered roughly 8 million vehicles and is valued at more than $200 million.  Since May 2023, the companies worked with law enforcement agencies to provide more than 26,000 steering wheel locks to 77 law enforcement agencies in 12 states. The class action was enjoined by Governmental Entities and Insurers and sought relief for t

Update In an Antitrust Deal with States Google will pay $700 million and allow app makers to collect payments directly from consumers in a settlement it hopes will help resolve other legal challenges. Google deal is the result of an antitrust suit brought by state attorneys general, in the company’s latest move to navigate increased regulatory scrutiny of its power. The suit, brought in July 2021, alleged Google’s app store of abusing its market power and forcing aggressive terms on software developers. The tech giant is facing several antitrust challenges in the United States, including a trial in which the federal government claims Google has abused its dominance in online search. In its announcement on Dec. 18, Google said it would now allow apps to charge consumers directly rather than having to charge through Google. The company will pay $630 million to create a settlement fund for consumers, as well as pay $70 million into a fund to be used by the states. To highlight the choice

Case Summary October 24, 2023 --The Federal Trade Commission or  FTC and the Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) entered into a $1.1 million settlement with a group of Wisconsin auto dealers for allegedly charging customers illegal junk fees and unlawfully discriminating against American Indian customers. The complaint was pursued under the FTC Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), the Wisconsin Deceptive Trade Practices Act , and the Wisconsin Consumer Act alleging that the defendants deceived customers into paying junk fees by charging for additional "add-on" services and products without customers' consent. The complaint further alleges that the defendants misled customers into thinking the add-on services were mandatory. The defendants also engaged in unlawful discrimination by charging American Indian customers higher fees and financing costs. American Indian customers were charged junk fees at a higher rate than non-Latino White customers. On average Am