Skip to main content

Supreme Court Allows Texas To Require Age Verification For Mobile Apps

2 days 11 hours ago
The Supreme Court allowed Texas to enforce a law requiring app stores to verify users' ages and obtain parental consent before minors can download apps. Tech industry groups argue the law broadly restricts young people's access to digital speech, but the court let a 5th Circuit order stand without explanation or noted dissents. CNN notes that the Supreme Court's decision "doesn't resolve the case but rather will allow Texas to enforce the law while the litigation continues to play out." From the report: "A minor child who downloads a software application from an app store agrees to contractual terms of service, including whether the child's location will be tracked, whether the child's privacy will be protected, whether information from the child's phone can be sold by the developer, and whether the child waives the right to sue," Texas told the Supreme Court in urging the court to allow its law to take effect. But the Computer & Communications Industry Association, a trade group whose members include Apple and Google, said the law would effectively bar young people from accessing a wide range of content, "be it a book by Ernest Hemingway or J.K. Rowling, a Taylor Swift album, or a subscription to National Geographic." Allowing the law to take effect, the group said, would have "profound consequences for the protection of digital speech." [...] In the new case, involving Texas' age verification for apps, a federal district court blocked the law's enforcement in December -- days before it was set to take effect. But a three-judge panel of the conservative 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals put that decision on hold in early June, allowing the state to enforce it. By declining to take up the emergency appeal from the computer and student groups, the Supreme Court has left the 5th Circuit's decision in place.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BeauHD

South Korea's SK Hynix Launching $28 Billion US Listing To Ride Global AI Wave

2 days 12 hours ago
SK Hynix is launching a Nasdaq listing expected to raise about $28 billion, giving US investors easier access to one of the biggest beneficiaries of the AI memory-chip boom. Reuters reports: The company will sell 17.79 million new shares in the depository receipt listing on the Nasdaq. Ten ADRs will represent one common share and the stock will be sold in a price range that is due to be revealed on Monday, based on SK Hynix's Seoul trading price. SK Hynix's share price was down 4% at 2,327,000 won each on Monday, but the stock is up about 273% this year, as it rides surging global investor demand for AI stocks. Korea's KOSPI was down 2.2% on Monday. [...] SK Hynix has been among the world's largest beneficiaries of the AI boom as it outperformed its major rivals Samsung and Micron. "This is more than a liquidity event," said Dave Mazza, the chief executive officer of Roundhill Investments in New York, which manages an exchange-traded fund tracking DRAM manufacturers, which is one of the most popular ways for U.S. investors to trade SK Hynix's stock. "SK Hynix has been one of the most important companies in the world that most U.S. institutions could not easily own." "The listing removes an accessibility discount, not a quality discount." [...] SK Hynix said the proceeds from the listing of the American Depositary Receipts will be used to build chip factories in South Korea and buy chipmaking equipment including an extreme ultraviolet scanner made by Dutch equipment maker ASML. The final price of the New York listing is due to be set on Thursday, ahead of the stock starting trade on Friday, regulatory filings showed. The company's management will meet global investors on a roadshow this week. The deal is expected to be the second-biggest share sale after a record $85.7 billion initial public offering by SpaceX last month, surpassing Saudi Aramco's $25.6 billion IPO in 2019 and Alibaba's similar-sized offering in 2014.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BeauHD

Zombie 'Who Owns Unix?' Lawsuit Comes Alive Again

2 days 13 hours ago
The long-running SCO/IBM Unix and Linux ownership dispute has resurfaced yet again, this time through SCO successor Xinuos, which is trying to pursue old license and copyright claims tied to Project Monterey. "The core issue seems to be whether Xinuos even has the right to litigate the matter, or if some ancient legalese in the original agreements means the window for legal argument has long since expired," reports The Register. From the report: [T]he roots of the case are the 1998 alliance between IBM and a company called the Santa Cruz Operation which sold a version of UNIX for x86 CPUs. Those two companies, plus Intel and Sequent, created "Project Monterey" -- an effort to create a unified version of UNIX that could run on multiple processors. By 2001, Project Monterey was close to delivering a unified UNIX, an achievement made possible by blending code from IBM and SCO. By then, a little project called "Linux" already ran on multiple processors. Big Blue decided Linux was the future and bailed from Project Monterey -- then allegedly contributed some Monterey code to the open-source project and to its own AIX and Z operating systems. SCO felt it owned some of that code, so sued IBM. SCO and its successors struggled to survive, but interested parties kept the lawsuit alive because the chance to emerge as owner of parts of the Linux codebase, and IBM's code, had the potential to turn into a colossal payday. The case and its successors ended in 2021, with a settlement that saw litigants agree to end the matter without IBM admitting fault. But by then, SCO had sold its software to a biz called Xinuos that decided to fight on. The Xinuos case has burbled along quietly since, and on June 22nd reached the milestone of a hearing. The matter has become a little more modern, if only because this hearing was held online and the presiding judge appeared to unwittingly be on mute at one point. But the arguments otherwise seemed to revisit Project Monterey, debated the relevance of past litigation, contested who owned what, when they owned it, and how they could prove it. Xinuos argued IBM never had a license for SCO code. Big Blue argued that it did nothing wrong.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BeauHD