Reddit had filed a lawsuit against Anthropic, alleging that the AI company behind the Claude chatbot has been using its data for years without permission. The lawsuit comes after Reedit has increasingly taken a hardline stance against scrapers and companies that use its data to train AI models.

In their filing, Reddit alleges that Anthropic was training its Claude chatbot on Reddit data as early as December 2021. The lawsuit also includes a screenshot in which Claude seems to acknowledge it was trained on Reddit data. In a statement to Engadget, a Reddit spokesperson said the lawsuit was the company's "final option to force Anthropic to stop its unlawful practices" after repeated warnings.

"We believe in the Open Internet—that does not give Anthropic the right to scrape Reddit content unlawfully, exploit it for billions of dollars in profit, and disregard the rights and privacy of our users," the spokesperson said. "In clear violation of Reddit’s terms and despite repeated requests to stop, Anthropic has been caught accessing or attempting to access Reddit content via automated bots at least 100,000 times. This isn’t a misunderstanding, it’s a sustained effort to extract value from Reddit while ignoring legal and ethical boundaries."

Reddit's vast archive of online discussions has become a particularly valuable commodity for the company as generative AI companies race to train new models. The company has struck lucrative licensing deals with companies like Google and OpenAI for access to its data. Reddit CEO Steve Huffman has previously called out Anthropic (along with other AI firms) for scraping Reddit. Last year, the company took steps to limit automated scraping and warned AI companies that they would need to pay up.

In their lawsuit, Reddit says that "Anthropic refused to engage" in discussions about licensing. "Unlike its competitors, Anthropic has refused to agree to respect Reddit users’ basic privacy rights, including removing deleted posts from its systems," it says. "This case is about the two faces of Anthropic: the public face that attempts to ingratiate itself into the consumer’s consciousness with claims of righteousness and respect for boundaries and the law, and the private face that ignores any rules that interfere with its attempts to further line its pockets."

In a statement, a spokesperson for Anthropic said, “we disagree with Reddit's claims and will defend ourselves vigorously." 

Update, June 4, 2025 12:03 PM ET: This post was updated to include a statement from Anthropic.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/reddit-is-suing-anthropic-for-allegedly-scraping-its-data-without-permission-185833267.html?src=rss

©

© Reddit

The complex and consequential antitrust trial against Google and its search engine practices recently heard its closing arguments, and the tech giant is already planning to appeal. In a post made on X, Google confirmed it would file an appeal, explaining that the proposed solutions went too far and "would harm consumers."

“We will wait for the Court’s opinion,” Google wrote. “And we still strongly believe the Court’s original decision was wrong, and look forward to our eventual appeal.”

To challenge Google's dominance of the search engine market, the Department of Justice took on the tech giant by filing a lawsuit back in 2020. The monumental antitrust case has steadily evolved over the years, with the DOJ proposing remedies like Google opening up its search engine tech to licensing, prohibiting agreements with device makers like Apple and Samsung to ensure Google was the default search engine and forcing the sale of the Chrome browser and the open-source Chromium project. 

According to Google, the Department of Justice's proposed actions would open consumers up to "very real privacy issues," leave the government in charge of user data and help "well-funded competitors." Instead, Google offered to loosen its agreements to allow other search engines on devices and create an oversight committee to monitor the company's activities.

Since then, the federal judge presiding over the case, Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia, ruled in August 2024 that Google had an illegal monopoly of the search engine market. The judge agreed with the DOJ that Google owning the Chrome browser gives it an unfair advantage since it could use its search engine advantage to drive more traffic and generate more revenue for the company. 

The end result of this antitrust trial could have serious implications for the future of AI, which is closely tied to the search engine market. According to Google, this ruling could allow other companies with AI chatbots to step in and dominate the search engine market instead. During the trial, Nick Turley, an OpenAI executive, testified that the company would be interested in buying Chrome if Google was forced to sell it.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/google-plans-to-appeal-the-antitrust-ruling-against-its-search-engine-dominance-171748836.html?src=rss

©

© Google

If you purchased an Apple device in the last 10 years, you might be able to receive some of the money from the company's recently settled spying lawsuit. The original lawsuit claimed Apple was capturing sensitive information with its Siri voice assistant without users' consent, and sending it to third-party contractors. The company agreed to settle the case for $95 million in January 2025, and thanks to the new landing page for the settlement, there's now a way to file a claim on your own.

To file a claim, you you need to have bought an "iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, MacBook, iMac, HomePod, iPod touch or Apple TV" between September 17, 2014 and December 31, 2024, and believe Siri accidentally activated on your device during a private conversation. From the $95 million Apple is paying out, you can receive up to $20 per device you believe called up Siri, provided you swear under oath it happened.

You have until July 2, 2025 to file your claim. If you qualify for the settlement, you may have already been notified with information on your Claim Identification Number and Claim Confirmation Code. If you haven't received either but believe the settlement applies, you're free to submit a claim on your own.

Apple claims that Siri was designed with protecting users' privacy in mind, and agreeing to share data to improve the voice assistant — through your device's Privacy & Security settings — never uses audio recordings or transcripts for anything other than training. In the case of newer devices, voice data is processed locally anyway, so agreeing to share your data is supposed to be the only way Apple could ever access it.

Given the growing focus on AI, and the large amounts of data needed to train it, there's good reason to be skeptical about where companies are getting their training material. Apple prefers to get its customers consent, but the company has turned to new sources to help its AI research along. For example, Apple recently disclosed that it will start using the images captured for its Street View-esque feature in Apple Maps to train its models.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/you-can-now-claim-your-piece-of-apples-95-million-siri-privacy-settlement-213020351.html?src=rss

©

© Apple

Nintendo's lawyers have killed another Palworld gameplay mechanic. Pocketpair issued a patch on Thursday that changes how gliding works in the cheeky "Pokémon with guns" satire.

You can still glide in Palworld, but you can no longer use your Pal to do so. Starting with patch v0.5.5, you can only soar with a boring, inanimate glider in your inventory. Although Glider Pals can still passively buff gliding, it's no longer as fun as flinging out the creature and using their aerodynamics to cross a ravine.

As you'd expect, Pocketpair's decision traces back to its legal defense. Nintendo and The Pokémon Company sued the developer in Japan last year, claiming Palworld infringes on multiple patents. Since then, Nintendo has filed a flurry of patent applications in the US in an apparent scheme to go global with its legal assault.

"We understand that this will be disappointing for many, just as it is for us," Pocketpair wrote. "But we hope our fans understand that these changes are necessary in order to prevent further disruptions to the development of Palworld."

Pocketpair

Today's update isn't the first to bork the game to try to stave off the Mario maker's legal barrage. In November, Palworld removed the ability to summon Pals by throwing Spheres, one of the game's more Pokémon-esque details. But gliding is a much less established Pokémon gameplay mechanic. On top of that, it's a common one in the industry, found in franchises as diverse as Far Cry, Fortnite and Batman: Arkham.

The lawsuit sparks fears that industry behemoths using the courts to snuff out smaller competitors will become more widespread. "Video game patent mechanics has to utterly die given how it's either abused by major companies to cripple any competition or utterly wasted like with the Nemesis system from Middle-earth games," u/DenseCalligrapher219 opined on Reddit.

Another way to view Nintendo's move is that it masks the stench of a stagnant franchise. "If Nintendo is going to sabotage other Pokémon-like games, the least they could do is get Game Freak to develop a Pokémon game that isn't garbage," wrote u/VacantThoughts. "The world's biggest franchise with the world's laziest half-ass devs."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/nintendo/palworld-removes-pal-gliding-as-it-continues-its-legal-battle-with-nintendo-200644597.html?src=rss

©

© u/Lexyvil / Reddit

Apple has filed an emergency motion, asking a federal appeals court to put a pause on orders that would significantly change how the App Store works. Those changes, the company argued in its motion, will cost the company "substantial sums annually" and are based on conduct that hasn't been "adjudicated to be (and is not) unlawful." It said those orders were made to punish Apple for "purported non-compliance" to previous orders.  

If you'll recall, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers recently ruled that Apple had violated her 2021 ruling on the lawsuit Epic Games filed against Apple. In her original decision, the judge told the company to allow developers to direct users to other payment systems that would let them bypass the 30 percent commission fee Apple collects. But Apple still collected up to a 27 percent cut for external purchases, and it also showed users a "scare screen" warning them that paying outside the App Store would mean they wouldn't have the company's protection.

In her new ruling, Gonzalez Rogers ordered Apple to stop collecting fees for external payments immediately. She also prohibited Apple from creating rules that would prevent developers from presenting customers with buttons and links for external payments. Apple changed its guidelines to remove prohibitions on buttons and external links that direct customers to non-App Store purchasing mechanisms. However, it also appealed Gonzalez Rogers' decision and is now asking the court to put a stay on those two particular orders while its appeal is ongoing. 

Apple insisted in its motion that it is unlawful to prevent the company from taking a cut on linked transactions, because the original decision didn't say anything about commissions or pricing. It also argued that it's unlawful to prevent the company from setting conditions for link placement and language as the original injunction didn't say anything about it. That provision violates the First Amendment, Apple said, by forcing it to "accommodate messages it would prefer to exclude." The company accused the court of punishing it because, in its view, Apple "flouted the court's order."

"Without a stay, these extraordinary intrusions into Apple’s business will cause grave irreparable harm. Depriving Apple of control over core features of the App Store is, standing alone, sufficient to warrant a stay," the company wrote. "The district court acknowledged that compliance will cost Apple 'hundreds of millions to billions' of dollars annually... which Apple can never recoup. Consumers would suffer from the destabilizing effects of the new injunction, while Epic would not be harmed by a stay."

Epic Games called Apple's motion a "last ditch effort to block competition and extract massive junk fees at the expense of consumers and developers." In addition to the video game developer, other companies are also keen to offer external payments that would allow them to bypass Apple's commission. Spotify, for one, already submitted an update that would let users pay outside the App Store for customers in the US. 

When Gonzalez Rogers handed down her decision, it had revealed that App Store lead Phil Schiller advocated for the company to stop collecting fees on web links back in 2023. However, Apple's former Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri convinced Tim Cook to do the opposite. She said the company's Vice-President of Finance, Alex Roman, lied under oath and told the court that Apple didn't decide on collecting a 27-percent fee on external purchases until early 2024, whereas the truth was that Apple had already decided on that percentage back in 2023. The judge has referred the case to the US attorney for the Northern District of California to investigate Apple and Roman for possible criminal contempt.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/apple-files-emergency-hold-to-challenge-app-store-payment-injunction-123030879.html?src=rss

©

© Apple

In April, a US District Court ruled that Google monopolized open-web digital ad markets. Now, the tech giant and the US Justice Department are at odds about what Google must do about it. The DOJ argues that Google should sell AdX, or Ad Exchange, a platform for publishers to sell unused ad space in real-time. It also wants the company to offload Google Ad Manager, previously DoubleClick for Publishers (Google DFP). 

The DOJ claims that both platforms minimize competition and contribute to Google's monopoly in the advertising space. The executive department has also pushed Google to sell Chrome due to a separate ruling that the company held a monopoly on search engines. 

Unsurprisingly, Google has no interest in getting rid of its products — it also plans to appeal the Court's ruling on Google Ad Manager. Google has announced "a proposal that fully addresses the Court’s findings." These changes include allowing all rival publisher ad servers to make real-time bids on AdX and letting publishers set different price floors for each bidder. 

"In contrast, the DOJ is seeking remedies that go significantly beyond the Court’s narrow ruling by forcing a divestiture of Google Ad Manager," Google stated in its announcement. "This would risk breaking a tool advertisers use to connect with publishers and efficiently reach their customers, and that app and video publishers use to monetize their content — businesses that aren’t even part of the narrow market of 'open web display ads' at issue in this case."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/doj-pushes-for-google-to-sell-its-advertising-platforms-134250436.html?src=rss

©

© REUTERS / Reuters

Apple may see further fallout over its failure to comply with a court order that led to last week’s contempt ruling. A class action suit filed on behalf of developers claims that Apple's actions cost Pure Sweat Basketball (and other developers) revenue during the period it was found to have violated the original court order. "Had Apple complied with the injunction, as required, Pure Sweat would have been able to sell subscriptions to its app directly to its customers," the law firm, Hagens Berman, alleges. 

The original 2021 court ruling forced Apple to allow App Store developers to direct user to other payments systems so that they could bypass the 30 percent of of in-app payments taken by Apple. The App Store was supposed to stop preventing developers from including buttons or links in their apps and metadata that would allow allow users to make purchases outside the App Store environment.

However, developer Epic Games accused Apple of "malicious compliance" with the ruling because it still charged a commission of up to 27 percent on any sales made through links to external payment systems. It also said Apple came up with onerous restrictions on external buttons, among other violations.

In her ruling last week, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said Apple "chose the most anticompetitive option" at every turn. She even alleged that Apple lied under oath to hide the truth about its actions and referred the case to a US attorney for a criminal contempt investigation. 

"The court ultimately held that Apple willfully violated the injunction to protect its revenues, and then ‘reverse engineered’ justifications to proffer to the court, often with ‘lies on the witness stand," the class action lawsuit states. "The evidence showed that while one senior Apple executive [Phil Schiller] ‘advocated that Apple comply with the injunction,’ Mr. Cook ignored this advice and allowed others in his finance team to convince him otherwise. Cook chose poorly."

The class action seeks to recover lost revenue for up to 100,000 or more developers forced to pay Apple commissions that shouldn't have existed. Hagens Berman obtained a $100 million settlement for iOS developers in a previous App Store class action suit. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apps/apple-hit-with-class-action-suit-from-developers-after-app-store-ruling-120058208.html?src=rss

©

© Steve Dent for Engadget

DoorDash is asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Uber in February, calling it meritless and a "cynical and calculated scare tactic." Uber sued the biggest food delivery provider in the US earlier this year, accusing it of putting pressure on restaurants to exclusively use its services. At the time, Uber said that it heard from "restaurants across the country" that DoorDash was charging higher commission rates from restaurants that also sell their food on Uber Eats. It also accused DoorDash of threatening to demote restaurants in its listings if they're also available on the Uber Eats app. But in its motion for dismissal, DoorDash said Uber's lawsuit isn't about protecting competition but avoiding it.

The food delivery provider asserted that Uber "has been unable to offer merchants, consumers, and couriers the high-quality services" that it provides, so Uber "resorted to asserting baseless legal claims" instead of competing on its own merits. It wrote in its motion that Uber's complaint is "rooted in the misguided notion" that it has to change its business practices, which it argued are pro-competitive, to give way to Uber's business. The company explained, however, that the law is "concerned with the protection of competition, not competitors."

Meanwhile, Uber told TechCrunch that DoorDash was "having a hard time understanding" its complaint. "When restaurants are forced to choose between unfair terms or retaliation, that’s not competition — it’s coercion," its spokesperson said. The Superior Court of San Francisco County, California is scheduled to hear Uber's lawsuit on July 11. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apps/doordash-calls-ubers-lawsuit-accusing-it-of-anti-competitive-practices-a-scare-tactic-130040299.html?src=rss

©

© DoorDash

Google has been paying Samsung tons of cash every month to pre-install the AI app Gemini on its smartphones, according to a report by Bloomberg. This information comes to us as part of a pre-existing antitrust case against Google.

Peter Fitzgerald, Google’s VP of platforms and device partnerships, testified in federal court that it began paying Samsung for this service back in January. The pair of companies have a contract that’s set to run at least two years.

Fitzgerald told Judge Amit Metha, who is overseeing the case, that Google provides Samsung with a monthly payout. The monetary figures are unknown, but DOJ lawyer David Dahlquist called it an "enormous sum of money in a fixed monthly payment."

This antitrust case started with an accusation that Google had been illegally abusing a monopoly over the search engine industry. Part of the testimony surrounding that case involved Google paying Apple, Samsung and other companies to ensure it was the default search engine on its devices.

Judge Mehta agreed and found that this practice constitutes a violation of antitrust law. He’s currently hearing additional testimony to decide what measures Google must take to remedy the illegal behavior, which is where this Gemini reveal comes from.

Testimony from another case involving Epic Games indicated that Google handed over $8 billion from 2020 to 2023 to ensure that Google Search, the Play Store and Google Assistant were used by default on Samsung mobile devices. A California federal judge later ruled that the company must lift restrictions that prevent rival marketplaces and billing systems. Google is in the process of appealing that ruling.

As an aside, if Google is hellbent on handing out Scrooge McDuck-sized bags of money to increase adoption rates of its generative AI app, why not give the regular people who have to actually use the bloatware some of that cash? Just saying.

Update, April 22 2025, 10:15AM ET: This story has been updated to reflect today's testimony that noted that Gemini doesn't offer advertising. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/google-pays-samsung-an-enormous-amount-of-money-to-pre-install-gemini-on-phones-153439068.html?src=rss

©

© Unsplash / Glen Carrie

OpenAI has filed a countersuit against Elon Musk, accusing him of staging press attacks and malicious campaigns on "the social media platform he controls," as well as of making "harassing legal claims" and a "sham bid for OpenAI's assets." In its filing, courtesy of TechCrunch, the ChatGPT-maker said Musk could not tolerate seeing such "success for an enterprise he had abandoned and declared doomed" and had made it his own project to take down the organization. It also said that Musk's efforts have ramped up in recent months after it announced its plans to restructure and become a for-profit entity with a non-profit division. 

Last year, Musk sued OpenAI, accusing it of ditching its nonprofit mission, becoming a "closed-source de facto subsidiary" Microsoft and of violating its foundational agreement to develop generative AI "for the benefit of humanity." But Musk, OpenAI said in its new lawsuit, is only pretending to represent the public and in truth is seeking to stop it from restructuring. Musk "advised that a similar reorganization was needed to salvage OpenAI's mission" years ago when he was still part of the company, it said.

After Musk filed a lawsuit last year, OpenAI published old emails from when he was still involved in its operations. The organization said Musk was there when it first started talking about going for-profit and even wanted majority equity, control of the initial board of directors and the CEO position. It also published an email wherein Musk suggested merging OpenAI with Tesla so that the automaker could fund its work. Musk left OpenAI in 2018 and eventually founded his own generative AI company, xAI. The AI company recently purchased X, formerly known as Twitter, for $33 billion. 

In a tweet, OpenAI said that Musk's actions are just "bad-faith tactics to slow down OpenAI" and that he's spreading false information about the organization, as well as aiming to seize control of its technology for his personal benefit. In its lawsuit, it said that Musk "should be enjoined from further unlawful and unfair action" and should be "held responsible for the damage he has already caused." OpenAI has to complete its reorganization by the end of this year or its private funding could be cut by as much as $10 billion. 

In response, Musk's legal team told Reuters that if OpenAI had taken a close look at his offer for the company, then it would know that the bid was serious and not a sham. "It's telling that having to pay fair market value for OpenAI's assets allegedly 'interferes' with their business plans," Musk's lawyer Marc Toberoff told the news agency. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/openai-files-countersuit-against-elon-musks-bad-faith-attacks-123030861.html?src=rss

©

© OpenAI

The Guardian reported that the UK's Ministry of Justice has been developing an algorithm designed to identify people who could become killers. Initially dubbed the "homicide prediction project," this tool used data from UK police forces, possibly including victims and witnesses as well as suspects.

Civil liberty watchdog Statewatch discovered the program through Freedom of Information Act requests. Based on the documents acquired by the group, Statewatch claimed that the program developed its prediction tool based on police data about between 100,000 and 500,000 people. Different categories of information shared with the Ministry of Justice appeared to also cover sensitive topics such as mental health, addiction, suicide and disability.

"​​Time and again, research shows that algorithmic systems for ‘predicting’ crime are inherently flawed," Statewatch researcher Sofia Lyall said. "This latest model, which uses data from our institutionally racist police and Home Office, will reinforce and magnify the structural discrimination underpinning the criminal legal system."

"This project is being conducted for research purposes only. It has been designed using existing data held by HM Prison and Probation Service and police forces on convicted offenders to help us better understand the risk of people on probation going on to commit serious violence. A report will be published in due course," a representative from the MOJ told The Guardian.

Law enforcement has long had a questionable relationship with AI tools. From AI being used to create police reports (bad idea) to misusing programs like ShotSpotter (another bad idea) to adopting tech that poses privacy threats to citizens (also a bad idea), history is not on the side of these being well-implemented technologies.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/uk-is-going-full-minority-report-with-murder-prediction-research-214254968.html?src=rss

©

© peshkov via Getty Images

The US Department of Justice has disbanded its unit focused on prosecuting cryptocurrency scams. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the end of the National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team in a memo sent on Monday, Reuters reported.

When the NCET launched, its focus was prosecuting cryptocurrency used in money laundering, fraud and theft. In recent years, the Department of Justice secured several high-profile wins in cases involving Binance, Tornado Cash and Bitfinex. However, the dissolution of NCET marks the latest government move to implement the current administration's crypto-friendly attitude.

Shortly after taking office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at encouraging the creation of blockchain networks. Blanche cited this as his rationale, and ordered the department's cryptocurrency efforts to focus on "individuals who victimize digital asset investors, or those who use digital assets in furtherance of criminal offenses such as terrorism, narcotics and human trafficking, organized crime, hacking, and cartel and gang financing." Any investigations that run counter to this agenda "should be closed."

The US Securities and Exchange Commission has also been walking back its regulation of cryptocurrency, such as ending an enforcement case against Coinbase. However, cryptocurrency remains a risky endeavor, with theft still rampant at the individual and national levels. Additionally, the Trump family already has a vested interest in encouraging crypto operations, claiming a majority of revenue from World Liberty Financial's token sales.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/doj-to-disband-its-cryptocurrency-enforcement-unit-200347077.html?src=rss

©

© REUTERS / Reuters