The new version of COPPA comes into effect on July 1, and impacts apps and services which could be used by those under 13. If the app has some sort of “persistent identifier” which is used to recognize that user, it will likely need to modify its privacy and permissions policies. Notably, that identifier need not be a username or involve active registration: a cookie or device ID will count as well.

“Companies whose apps collect, store or transmit this information, as well as other personal information previously covered by the rule like a child’s name or address, must get parents’ consent before collecting the information. In addition, companies must also ensure that any third party receiving the information can keep it secure and confidential, as well as abiding by new rules affecting how the information is stored and retained” FTC

Four different versions of the notification letter have been prepared, depending on whether the recipient is a domestic US or foreign firm, and the nature of the data collection. For domestic companies, there’s an images/sounds version [pdf link] and a persistent identifiers version [pdf link]; the same counterparts for foreign apps collecting images/sounds [pdf link] of children in the US, or assigning them identifiers [pdf link].

Actually receiving a letter doesn’t mean that the FTC has actively evaluated a company and found it wanting in terms of COPPA compliance, the Commission is keen to point out. Instead, they’re intended to prompt a “COPPA check-up” ahead of the new rules coming into effect.

The changes to COPPA were announced back in December, as a way to bring the Act up to speed with the changing nature of applications and the user-data they collect. Among the tweaks are a new requirement that developers not only be responsible for a compliant privacy policy that covers their own data collection, but of any data that’s collected by third-party services – such as ad networks – that are incorporated into the software.

The list of companies which have received the letters has not been revealed, though ustwo – developer of randomized photo-sharing app Rando – took to Twitter to confirm that it had been couriered one. There’s more on COPPA compliance at the FTC; violating the rule can result in civil penalties of up to $16,000 per violation.

VIA ustwo

The award was split down the middle and given to two individuals – Aaron Foss and Serdar Danis – each of whom submitted their own entries for their own respective solutions, both of which apparently had equal appeal to the FTC. As such, each winner has been awarded $25,000 and will be flown to Washington D.C. at no expense, where each will present their solutions to an audience.

Foss’s idea centered around a cloud-based platform that operated a secondary phone line that initially accepted calls. The platform would have a way to identify the robotic calls, and would hang up on them, meaning the end destination would never receive the call. Danis’s entry involves an operator-provided device or app that recognized the robocalls and intercepted them, hanging up before the homeowner had to deal with it.

In addition to the cash award for entries, we also noted in October that the FTC was offering a Technology Achievement Award to companies with more than ten employees, which ended up going to Dean Jackson and Daniel Klein of Google. Said the FTC: “The solutions that our winners came up with have the potential to turn the tide on illegal robocalls, and they show the wisdom of tapping into the genius and technical expertise of the public.”

[via PC Magazine]

“If a disclosure is needed to prevent an online ad claim from being deceptive or unfair, it must be clear and conspicuous. Under the new guidance, this means advertisers should ensure that the disclosure is clear and conspicuous on all devices and platforms that consumers may use to view the ad. The new guidance also explains that if an advertisement without a disclosure would be deceptive or unfair, or would otherwise violate a Commission rule, and the disclosure cannot be made clearly and conspicuously on a device or platform, then that device or platform should not be used” FTC

That means, if you’re using promoted Tweets, Facebook messages, pop-ups, or other types of advert, you have to fit both your marketing content and any necessary disclosure into them. If you can’t accomodate both, then you shouldn’t do it at all, the FTC warns, lest you fall foul of its rules.

Meanwhile, the updated guidance also toughens up the FTC’s stance on where disclosures should be positioned. Originally, it was considered enough that they be “near, and when possible, on the same screen”; now, they must be “as close as possible” to any claims made.

Hyperlinks must be labeled, and pop-ups should be avoided for delivering disclosure information, since the FTC recognizes that many people actively block them. So, in the sample advert at the top of the page, the FTC takes issue with the lack of contrast between the background page color and the text of the two disclosures.

For 140-character tweets, meanwhile, the FTC suggests the easiest way to flag up promotional content is to put “Ad:” before the body of the message. Other disclosures – such as links to a separate site detailing any marketing obligations, or the hashtag “#spon” – are likely to cause confusion, the commission argues.

Aside from the annoyance factor, some of the recipients of the spam messages had to pay for them, with the FTC stating that up to 12-percent of mobile subscribers do not have a text messaging plan. In some instances, the information collected via the prize and gift card websites, which the text messages linked to, was sold to third-parties.

Those who went through with the process were subjected to a variety of conditions to get the gift card or prize that weren’t specified upfront, such as completing offers and getting friends to participate. Because of this, the defendants are said to have violated the FTC Act, which requires consumers to be informed about the various conditions that need to be satisfied to receive the gift. The agency seeks a restraining order that will keep the defendants from continuing with these activities.

The FTC’s Acting Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection Charles A. Harwood had this to say: “Today’s announcement says ‘game over’ to the major league scam artists behind millions of spam texts. The FTC is committed to rooting out this deception and stopping it. For consumers who find spam texts on their phones, delete them, immediately. The offers are, in a word, garbage.”

[via FTC]

The report published in 2011 was called Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change,” which sought for a Do Not Track functionality to be implemented for consumers. The big difference is that it was a call to voluntary action instead of the pursuit of legislation, giving the digital world a chance to regulate itself. According to Consumer Watchdog, this method has not worked, and so it is time for legislation to be issued.

This hasn’t been due to a lack of effort, however, with W3C creating the Tracking Protection Working Group and having it draw up two Do Not Track standards, one that details the existence of the Do Not Track message sent from consumer to website, and the second for the website that receives the message and how it should respond. While Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project director John M. Simpson has been involved with this, he still feels that more action is needed, having said:

“It’s now clear that Rockefeller’s action is necessary to ensure consumers get the protection they deserve and expect. Self-regulatory efforts to develop a Do-Not-Track standard have stalled. Rockefeller’s bill may spark action in such forums as the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), but at the end of the day, we’ll need legislation to get this done. Industry has had no real incentive to agree to a meaningful standard.”

[via International Business Times]

The security vulnerabilities, which are said to leave such information as location and call logs at risk, was discovered in 2011. In response, HTC rolled out patches to correct the problem. Those that have not been fixed, however, will be in the relatively near future, according to a statement from HTC earlier today. This is not the only thing the company has to do as part of the settlement, however.

HTC is also required to set up a “comprehensive security program,” which will presumably be in place to prevent such security vulnerabilities from happening again. Likewise, the company is not allowed to make misleading or otherwise false statement in regards to the security it offers, something that seems more or less common sense.

The FTC has been cracking down on the issue of mobile security for a while now, having recently published a manual of guidelines for app developers, providing information on how to deal with security issues. Likewise, last month California issued a report of mobile privacy recommendations, most of which were common sense.

[via Washington Post]

Path has agreed to settle with the FTC and pay an $800,000 fine for “allegedly collecting kids’ personal information without their parents’ consent.” In addition to the fine, Path is implementing a “comprehensive privacy program,” which includes a requirement that it conduct privacy assessments from third-party sources every other year for the next 20 years.

In the complaint, the FTC said that the user interface of Path’s iOS app was misleading and provided consumers no choice regarding how their personal information was collected. The app had the ability to find friends using the users’ contacts, but the app didn’t address that it would be accessing contacts in order to do so.

May this be a lesson for Path and other developers who walk the line of privacy issues. While an $800,000 fine would basically be pocket change for Facebook or Google, that amount of money for a startup isn’t anything to scoff at, and we’re sure that Path will be walking on egg shells for awhile from this point forward.

UPDATE: Path has posted up a response about the FTC settlement.

[via The Next Web]

Starting right off with mobile platforms, some of the things the FTC recommends include providing “just-in-time” disclosures and asking for a user’s “affirmative express consent” before allowing apps to access sensitive information. It would also like to see mobile platforms require app makers to make privacy discloses, and recommends an icon or something similar that can show when user data is being transmitted. One of the most intriguing recommendations is a “Do Not Track” list users can add their name to, saying they don’t want to be tracked by ad networks as they use apps.

On the app developer side of things, the FTC would like to see privacy policies that are accessible via app store listings, along with more just-in-time disclosures when an app is about to collect data. The FTC also recommends that app developers join self-regulatory programs that can help them make privacy policies that are clear and easy for users to read. The list of recommendations for app developers is quite a bit shorter than the list for mobile platforms, with the FTC clearly thinking that most of these privacy concerns can be solved by platform holders.

While mobile platforms and app developers play a big part in privacy concerns, there’s also advertising networks to worry about. The FTC suggests that ad networks and other third-parties work with app developers to make sure users are seeing truthful privacy disclosures. The organization is also pushing for advertising networks to implement the aforementioned Do Not Track list and make it work.

The FTC “strongly encourages” everyone in the mobile space to begin following these recommendations, but whether or not developers, mobile platforms, and ad networks will listen is another story entirely. The FTC makes some good recommendations in its report, but in the end, they don’t mean much if the parties at the heart of the privacy debate don’t follow them. There are more recommendations other than the ones mentioned here, so if you have a moment to read through the entire thing, you can find the FTC’s release through the source link below.

[via Federal Trade Commission]

Potential candidates to take Leibowitz place include Howard Shelanski, who is the commission’s Director of the Bureau of Economics, lawyer Leslie Overton, Julie Brill, Edith Ramirez, and Philip Weiser. Because the commission is split with two Republicans and two Democrats while the transition takes place, some fear this partisan nature could have a negative impact on the agency.

Leibowitz has stated that such fears are not necessary, saying, “We [the FTC] have been a largely functional agency in an often-dysfunctional Washington. I think we have done our job the way we are supposed to, and in a consensus-driven way.” Still, not everyone shares his optimism, and some feel that what is likely to be a long process in getting a new commissioner will further compound the issue.

The FTC has been in the news quite a bit over the last several months, mostly in regards to the antitrust probe against Google that ultimately fizzled out into little more than a wrist slapping. In line with that, some have criticized Chairman Leibowitz as too ready to take settlements rather than go after companies. Still, Leibowitz’ stint as chairman has had its upsides, particularly in consumer protection.

[via Washington Post]

United States Representative Darrel Issa is chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. On January 3, Issa sent a letter to Scott Wilson, Investigator General for the FTC, requesting an immediate investigation into the source of the leaks. Says Issa, the information that was made public ultimately influenced how the case was handled.

According to law, information from an FTC investigation must not be released to the media until a final decision has been made and an official announcement has been provided. This is obviously in contradiction to the repeat leaks that were provided by anonymous individuals from (we presume) within the FTC to various news sources. Likewise, Senator Ron Wyden has also reportedly expressed concern about the leaks.

In the letter Issa sent, he stated: “Throughout the process, nonpublic information about developments in the investigation has been inappropriately shared with the media. It is believed that the commission may be contributing to, or is the source of, this information … To determine whether the commission, or its staff, has shared nonpublic information with the public or the press about the investigation of Google, I request the Office of Inspector General promptly investigate the matter.”

At the core of the issue is whether Google’s practices harmed consumers, something that could not be proven over the course of the investigation. While it wasn’t denied that Google’s favoritism in Search for itself over competitors may be harmful to its competition, it was beneficial to consumers, and therein is the crux. Google hammered this point home to regulators relentlessly, it is said, via many trips to Washington by executives, lawyers, lobbyists, and more.

Said University of Iowa professor of antitrust law Herbert Hovenkamp: “The way [Google] managed to escape it is through a barrage of not only political officials but also academics aligned against doing very much in this particular case. The first sign of a bad antitrust case is lack of consumer harm, and there just was not any consumer harm emerging in this very long investigation.”

Among other things, Google argued that the nature of the industry meant that regulations would get in the way of its progression, and that what constitutes competition is always changing. An example it offered included Apple and Amazon, which it said shows the nature of how businesses in the industry can quickly shift into competitors. In addition, Google had Microsoft’s previous case to learn from, avoiding mistakes the aforementioned company made.

The FTC’s chairman Liebowitz offered this statement. “Some believe the commission should have done more in this case, perhaps because they are locked in a hand in hand combat with Google around the world. We really do follow the facts where they lead. The focus of our law is on protecting competition, not competitors.”

“The Commission’s complaint alleges that Google reneged on its FRAND commitments and pursued – or threatened to pursue – injunctions against companies that need to use MMI’s standard-essential patents in their devices and were willing to license them on FRAND terms” the FTC said today, with Google basically losing the sting from its 24,000 patent/patent application grab of Motorola Mobility. The FTC’s fear was that Google’s increasing control over what are deemed essential elements of technology might curtail product evolution.

“Google has agreed to a Consent Order that prohibits it from seeking injunctions against a willing licensee, either in federal court or at the ITC, to block the use of any standard-essential patents that the company has previously committed to license on FRAND terms” FTC

As for advertising, Google has agreed to two key concessions in order to dismiss concerns that it was using its search heft to undercut other services. Google will now give its advertising customers greater access to the APIs that deliver feedback on ad campaign results.

Meanwhile, sites will be able to “opt out” of inclusion in Google services like Places, after companies like Yelp complained that Google was scraping their data and leaving web users no reason to visit their sites specifically. “Some FTC Commissioners were concerned that this conduct might chill firms’ incentives to innovate on the Internet” the commission said today.

“Google also has promised to provide all websites the option to keep their content out of Google’s vertical search offerings, while still having them appear in Google’s general, or “organic,” web search results” FTC

However, allegations that Google was prioritizing its own results above those of rivals, and manipulating search results to benefit itself, were dismissed. Rivals had argued that “Universal Search” was in effect making a virtual-walled garden where Google’s own services were promoted, but the FTC said that it believed the changes were more in keeping with Google refining its own products.

“According to the Commission statement, however, the FTC concluded that the introduction of Universal Search, as well as additional changes made to Google’s search algorithms – even those that may have had the effect of harming individual competitors – could be plausibly justified as innovations that improved Google’s product and the experience of its users. It therefore has chosen to close the investigation” FTC

Chatter of a voluntary agreement by Google broke late last year, with the company tipped to be more willing to make a “gentleman’s agreement” if it could avoid legislation and potential fines. ”The changes Google has agreed to make will ensure that consumers continue to reap the benefits of competition in the online marketplace and in the market for innovative wireless devices they enjoy,” FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz said today. “This was an incredibly thorough and careful investigation by the Commission, and the outcome is a strong and enforceable set of agreements.”

“We’ve always accepted that with success comes regulatory scrutiny” Google said of the agreement. “But we’re pleased that the FTC and the other authorities that have looked at Google’s business practices … have concluded that we should be free to combine direct answers with web results. So we head into 2013 excited about our ability to innovate for the benefit of users everywhere.”

Unsurprisingly, though, activists aren’t quite so happy with the outcome. Fairsearch, the organization set up by Microsoft, Nokia, Yelp, and others to highlight the alleged Google antitrust behaviors, is yet to comment, but the  American Consumer Institute Center for Citizen Research has already compared the search company to Lindsey Lohan:

“As Google’s dominance grows, consumers have become extremely concerned about the search giant’s control of the marketplace, entrance into new markets, and a seeming indifference to the protection of privacy and the law in general. Letting Google off with a letter promising not to do it again is like believing Lindsey Lohan will stay out of trouble this time. The FTC had a long list of grievances against Google to choose from when deciding if they unfairly used their dominance to crush their competitors yet they failed to use their authority for the betterment of the marketplace and to the advantage of consumers by declining to take action against the dominant company” American Consumer Institute Center

According to Bloomberg, three individuals familiar with the proceeding have stated that Google will settle with the FTC on January 3 in its probe over practices that harm its competition. As has been stated for awhile, Google will settle with a consent decree and a voluntary agreement regarding its use of three patents to stymie its competition.

In addition, it is being said that the FTC also plans to close the probe into whether Google alters its search engine results in it own favor, giving itself preference over its competitors. Says the sources, Google will let advertisers export data and will alter its use of content from websites. Many critics have been vocal in their unhappiness with the FTC’s slap on the wrist response to the issues.

Earlier today, Microsoft’s Vice President Dave Heiner made a post criticizing the FTC’s lax response to the issues and lambasting Google for intentionally harming its competition. In the piece, Heiner claimed that Microsoft had recently received word that Google instructed YouTube not to “enable a first-class YouTube experience on Windows Phones.”

FairSearch.org issued this statement. “If the FTC fails to take decisive action to end Google’s anti-competitive practices, and locks itself out of any remedies to Google’s conduct that are offered in Europe later this month, the FTC will have acted prematurely and failed in its mission of protecting America’s consumers.”

[via Bloomberg]

Heiner states that Google is still blocking Microsoft from offering Windows Phone users a full-feature mobile YouTube app, forcing it to offer a sub-par web-like option instead. Meanwhile, obviously, its own Android OS has a full-feature YouTube app (as well as iOS). Microsoft complained about this to both the FTC and the European Commission back in early 2011.

As Heiner points out, YouTube was one of the most downloaded apps last year. Things get interesting, however, when he claims that Google specifically instructed YouTube to prevent Windows Phone from having access to a full-feature app like Android and iOS. “But just last month we [at Microsoft] learned from YouTube that senior executives at Google told them not to enable a first-class YouTube experience on Windows Phones.”

Heiner then goes on to point out that Google is going to get out of the issue of harmful practices with little more than a slap on the wrist and a mumbled promise to stop. This comes after the FTC came under fire when reports began surfacing that it planned to let Google off so easily. In response, sources have claimed that the FTC will likely extend the investigation while it considers additional penalties it may institute. The European Commission, however, has taken a harsher stance in addressing the issue, and is presently working with Google to form a legal order for dealing with the concerns.

The updates to the COPPA Rule included careful consideration and such transparency that both a public roundtable and several rounds of public comments sought by the agency were made apparent throughout the process. The core of this COPPA Rule centers around a requirement for websites and online services of all kinds to give notice to parents of children 13 or younger of any and all collection of personal information that they’re doing on a regular basis. From there, the following was listed in the Changes column:

The final amendments:

• modify the list of “personal information” that cannot be collected without parental notice and consent, clarifying that this category includes geolocation information, photographs, and videos;

• offer companies a streamlined, voluntary and transparent approval process for new ways of getting parental consent;

• close a loophole that allowed kid-directed apps and websites to permit third parties to collect personal information from children through plug-ins without parental notice and consent;

• extend coverage in some of those cases so that the third parties doing the additional collection also have to comply with COPPA;

• extend the COPPA Rule to cover persistent identifiers that can recognize users over time and across different websites or online services, such as IP addresses and mobile device IDs;

• strengthen data security protections by requiring that covered website operators and online service providers take reasonable steps to release children’s personal information only to companies that are capable of keeping it secure and confidential;

• require that covered website operators adopt reasonable procedures for data retention and deletion; and

• strengthen the FTC’s oversight of self-regulatory safe harbor programs.

The main rule also makes clear that any personal information collected from persons ages 13 and under must be kept entirely secure. If a website wishes to collect, use, or disclose any personal information from a person 13 years or younger they must get parental consent. The rule also notes that websites may not require a person under 13 to submit more personal information than is reasonably necessary to participate in said website, and that a “safe harbor” provision will be kept in the rule for industry groups “or others” to seek out FTC approval of any and all self-regulatory guidelines – just incase!

This update also included several modified definitions for terms such as Operator, Website, Online Service, Personal Information, and Collection. Personal Information will now be including geological information, photos, videos, and audio files that contain a child’s image or voice.

At the moment, the only way a website can receive official consent from a parent for their child is through a double email system called “email plus”, aka the “sliding-scale mechanism of parental consent”. This system works only for operators collecting information for internal use, the FTC also noting that they’re at this moment encouraging the development of new consent methods to make things easier on burgeoning websites of all kinds.

[via FTC]

According to the tipsters, “the decision to keep the investigation open was made after a barrage of criticism hurled at the agency by state attorneys general, Google rivals and others who thought that the European Union was liable to get a better deal requiring a deeper level of commitment” Politico reports.

The chatter of a voluntary US agreement – although unconfirmed by Google or the FTC – was swiftly followed by a statement by EU competition commissioner Joaquin Almunia on the ongoing negotiations in Europe. While Almunia commented that he felt a conclusion to the investigation was in sight, after another meeting with Google chairman Eric Schmidt, he also reiterated his significant concerns into the search company’s behaviors, and expectation that an agreement would be pinned down early in 2013.

Those concerns include how Google presents search results – and, according to critics, prioritizes its own services above theirs – and how it integrates data from other sites into its own offerings. For instance, review site Yelp accused Google of scraping its content and including it in Google Places records. Advertising has also been criticized, with Google said to be too clandestine with its systems and too restrictive in how campaign data can be exported to rival services.

Neither the FTC nor the EU is expected to find Google guilty of antitrust, but the fashion in which the inevitable hand-smack is delivered has observers concerned. While initially the FTC looked to be readying a far more stringent investigation, drafting a hardcore litigator and leading to suggestions that the Commission was chasing a result similar to the pivotal Microsoft antitrust findings of the 1990s, the approach appears to have softened in more recent weeks. Google’s proposed agreement in the US was reportedly a promise to open up its advertising systems and curtail scraping of rival sites, though it would not be legally bound by that agreement.

In Europe, however, more commitment is apparently being demanded. FairSearch, a campaign group including Microsoft, Nokia, TripAdvisor, Yelp, Expedia, and others, said that it “applauds” Almunia “for seeking to extract a binding set of commitments from Google to end biased search results and other potential legal violations he has identified, and to submit that proposal for market testing.”

“This is in contrast to reports suggesting that the US Federal Trade Commission may be willing to accept a voluntary commitment from Google” FairSearch continued, “instead of a binding consent decree that is subject to public comment to ensure any proposed remedies are effective at restoring competition in online services.”

Google’s next step in Europe is to draft a list of proposed remedies; that is likely to be submitted for EU approval in January 2013, followed by a period of market testing. In the US, meanwhile, the parallel investigation is set to stretch into 2013 with little in the way of insight as to what case the agency will make against Google.

In this case the rules do not cover Facebook “like” button tracking (and similar items) if they do not have “actual knowledge” of the buttons being pressed by children. This makes sense as, after all, it’s not generally realistic to assume an online source can really know what the age of a person using their service is. Thus is the nature of the internet – read Ender’s Game for more info on that aspect of the web.

As for the rest of the FTC’s newly updated rules, you’ll find that app platforms – such as app stores of basically every kind – do not have to worry about making sure the apps they sell comply with the law. We’re certain we’ll be hearing more about that little gem in the near future due to the vague nature of its execution.

These new rules agree to continue allowing parental consent via email for programs across the web just so long as apps and websites collect data from the allowed under-age users for internal use. The final set of rules will be analyzed by SlashGear over the coming week at length, so stay tuned. Meanwhile we leave you with this lovely quote from FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz:

“[These rules] strike the right balance between protecting innovation that will provide rich and engaging content for children, and ensuring that parents are informed and involved in their children’s online activities.” – Leibowitz

[via WSJ]

The agency met a lot of criticism over the settlement, with many claiming that Google was getting out of the issue with a mere slap on the wrist. Two unnamed individuals close to the matter are reported to have said that two FTC commissioners requested additional time to mull over penalties in response to the criticism. It was reported that the FTC had planned to accept a letter from Google promising that it would change its search practices.

Google’s competitors who have claimed to have been hurt by the search engine giant’s practices expressed extreme displeasure at the FTC’s decision to accept a written assurance from Google. Now, the extended time frame during which the agency will consider penalties it may apply to Google will likely fall during the first two weeks of January.

This investigation is in addition to others that are examining whether the search engine giant has run afoul in other areas, including patents. Thus far, Google’s comment on the matter echoes its typical statement for these issues: that it will keep working with the FTC. The agency, meanwhile, declined to offer a comment on the situation.

According to the tipsters, the concessions are voluntary, but will allow Google to avoid a trial or any financial settlement. The FTC would still have to accept Google’s offer, of course; spokespeople for both Google and the Commission declined to comment, either on whether the concessions rumor was true or if the FTC had communicated some willingness to accept such a deal.

Unsurprisingly, however, Google’s rivals – and the leading forces behind the investigation demands in the first place – aren’t keen on the idea that the search company could escape with only a self-administered slapped wrist. Microsoft, Yelp, and Expedia all complained vocally about Google’s actions; Yelp, for instance, argued that Google had scraped its reviews content to include in its own Places service, and then prioritized its own results over those of third-parties.

Fairsearch - a pressure group with members including Microsoft, Expedia, TripAdvisor, Nokia, and Oracle, set up to campaign against what’s described as Google “abusing its search monopoly to thwart competition” – warns that should Google be allowed to claim penitence and bypass official censure, it will only lead to bigger problems down the line.

“Enforcement authorities should not allow Google to retain an unfair advantage in the market gained through years of anti- competitive behavior” a Fairsearch spokesperson said of the rumored deal. “If the FTC fails to take meaningful action after a nearly two-year investigation, Google will only be emboldened to act in ways that are more harmful to consumers and innovators.”

For its part, Google has constantly argued that it is working on behalf of web users, not other sites and companies, and that it presents the search results that best serve those users. Still under investigation by the EC over similar anti-competitive behavior concerns, Google made some concessionary moves earlier this year, though the inquiry is yet to be closed.

The unnamed sources told Bloomberg that, likely later this week, the Federal Trade Commission will announce a settlement with Google that all but blocks the company’s ability to seek injunction against products from competitors that use standard essential patents. The exception is that the web search giant will be able to seek injunction in situations where it has made an agreement to provide a license with “fair and reasonable terms.”

The FTC didn’t offer a comment on the claims, but Google spokesperson Adam Kovacevich had this to say. “We take our commitments to license on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms very seriously and are happy to answer any questions the FTC may have.” This comes after Google moved to block Apple and Microsoft products that it claimed infringed on its patents.

At the core of this issue is standard essential patents, which cover technology required by devices, such as various wireless connectivity. The patent issue aside, the FTC has also been poking around Google while trying to determine whether the company has hurt its competition via advertisement, mobile, and search practices. For now, there’s no official word on the matter, but if the sources are correct, we should be hearing from the FTC in the near future.

It’s the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) that has the FTC – and privacy advocates – hot under the color, with claims that games and other software aimed at young people aren’t toeing the line when it comes to data protection. In an FTC survey of 200 different titles, approximately 80-percent failed to show a privacy policy, 59-percent collected personal information for the developer and/or advertisers, and 58-percent showed ads despite just 15-percent of those doing so revealing that they were ad-supported.

Mobbles insists that its games “never stored any location-related date” and that “nor do we give any data to third parties.” However, the company confirmed it intended on updating its privacy policy – a new version of which is now online - and for the moment none of its software is available.

“We have been informed by various members of the media that Mobbles has been or will be identified in a filing with the FTC regarding the manner in which it collects, stores and uses consumer information. At this point, however, we have not received any official notice or service of any such filing. Thus it is impossible for us to respond in any intelligent way to allegations that we have neither seen nor analyzed in full. Assuming the media is reporting accurate information, we will review any such allegations with our legal counsel and will be better able to respond following such review. Mobbles is committed to providing our users with the most positive experience possible. We’re gamers ourselves and take the privacy of our users extremely seriously. In case that wasn’t clear enough, we never stored any location-related data nor do we give any data to third parties. We’ll put a clearer privacy policy on our website later today. We are committed to ensuring the safety and protection of our users’ privacy, and we have elected to take our app temporarily offline in order to focus on these objectives and ways that we can continue to improve on all fronts. We will always do what we believe is best for our users in the long term, and we thank you, our loyal and valued users, for your understanding” Mobbles

Among the FTC’s concerns are apps that contain in-app purchasing which could be abused by younger gamers, apps that use geolocation to identify the position of those players, and titles that gather up information that COPPA cautions against.

Mobbles is unlikely to be the only developer moving to yank software distribution until the investigation is fully explained, and we’re expecting to see other app producers move to clarify their position on titles aimed at young people. There’s more on the FTC report here.

[via Adweek]

For this report, the FTC studied 200 different apps that were aimed at children. The organization discovered that about 80% of the apps didn’t show a privacy policy either in the app or the developers’ websites, while 59% of the apps send information to either the developer or third-party advertising companies, potentially handing out information like location data or phone numbers. To make matters worse, 58% show advertising with only 15% of those apps actually saying that they’re ad supported.

In one case, an app showed advertisements for an online dating site that kids definitely have no business browsing. 22% of the apps contain links to social networking sites that parents probably don’t want their children visiting, while another 17% contained in-app purchases. We’ve heard many stories about children racking up major bills on their parents’ credit cards by going hog wild on in-app or otherwise digital purchases, so that’s a bit of an issue.

The FTC expects developers to get better at alerting parents to these things by the time its ready to do its next review, but in the meantime it will be investigating some app developers in particular. The agency didn’t say which developers it’s investigating, and it won’t disclose that information until a complaint is filed. We’ll have to wait and see how this whole thing plays out, so stay tuned.

[via ABC News]

We had a lot of talk about Black Friday deals and sales today, with Apple kicking off its Black Friday festivities at midnight on November 23. Xbox Live has plenty of deals for you to take advantage of as well, while we heard that Steam will be kicking off its autumn sale tomorrow. T-Mobile strengthened its 4G network in a number of markets today, while the 2013 Nissan Leaf was revealed in Japan. A new survey is saying that kids want Apple products most for Christmas, with new rumors tipping the Galaxy S IV for a February 2013 launch.

A snazzy looking white Nexus 4 has popped up on TalkTalk, while Lenovo unveiled the new ThinkPad Carbon Touch today. The FTC may not have enough evidence to hit Google with an antitrust lawsuit, and Razer has released its new Death Adder 2013 gaming mouse. Reggie Fils-Aime is saying that the Wii U has a long way to go, while Nintendo says that more Wii U stock is on the way, with the US as a priority. Skype 3.0 has landed on Android, and today was the 27th birthday of Windows 1.0 (they grow up so fast).

RIM’s stock took a jump after an analyst predicted that BlackBerry 10 has a 20 to 30 percent chance of success, and Nokia released HERE Maps for iOS. Sony pushed update 2.0 for the PlayStation Vita out the door today, while Gearbox released Mr. Torgue’s Campaign of Carnage for Borderlands 2. Finally tonight, we’ll end with a couple of interesting stories from NASA: it turns out that the Mars Curiosity Rover has discovered something big that NASA isn’t telling us, while scientists have snapped a picture of the Super-Jupiter planet Kappa Andromedae b. That does it for tonight’s Evening Wrap-Up, enjoy the rest of your night everyone!

The FTC investigation stems from anti-competitive claims from Google’s competitors. According to them, Google pushes its own results higher up in search rankings, while pushing those of its competitors down. The problem there is that consumers may not get the best information in regards to low prices if Google is weighing the search results in its favor. With that potentially being the case, it’s easy to see why the FTC would want to investigate such claims.

There are other complaints against Google the FTC is currently looking into, but the search complaint is definitely the big one. According to Bloomberg’s sources, Google has been told to “propose a resolution to a host of antitrust concerns in the coming days or face a lawsuit,” though without enough evidence for a solid antitrust suit, that may not go anywhere. The FTC is expected to decide on whether or not to take Google to court by the end of the month, which is coming up pretty quickly.

Considering that recent rumors were telling us that the FTC would deliver a decision by the end of the year, it may not be long before we know if Google is being taken to court. If Google is found guilty of anti-competitive behavior, then it could mean bad news for the way the big G displays search results, so don’t expect the company to just take these claims lying down. Keep it tuned to SlashGear for more information.

According to the FTC, Google violated a previous agreement it had with the agency by telling users that they weren’t being tracked while secretly monitoring browsing habits. Google had a post on its website encouraging users not to change their security settings, assuring them that by leaving them as they were, Google would not be able to track their Internet activities. In reality, the altered settings enabled the tracking.

Google retorted, saying that the settings change was performed to let users recommend products on Google+, its social network. The company did not admit to any wrongdoing over the issue, but did agree to disable the tracking cookies. Now the FTC has slammed the company with the biggest fine that has been issued over a case like this.

Not everyone is satisfied, however. According to Consumer Watchdog, Google generates $22.5 million in revenue every four hours, making this fine a mere slap on the wrist. The agency’s attorney, Gary Reback, says that Google should be fined at least $3 billion due to the number of possible users affected. The agency estimates that Google made about $4 million from tracking Safari users.

[via Washington Post]

For those not in the know, the FTC has been looking at claims that peg Google with anti-competitive behavior. According to some of Google’s competitors, the big G has been giving its own services precedence over their services in search results. That, obviously, has Google’s competitors upset, which is why the FTC launched an investigation that has now lasted 18 months. Google has also had to deal with claims that it isn’t being fair in licensing out Motorola‘s standard-essential patents.

Google’s fate may not be as grim as the one suggested above, however, as the FTC could simply force Google to change its search results so that the listings more clearly show what’s being offered by Google and what isn’t. Google continues to claim that it has done nothing wrong, but ultimately, that will be up to the FTC. Shutting down services certainly isn’t something Google wants to do, so it’s pretty easy to understand why Google has been fighting these claims.

Whatever’s actually going on behind the scenes, we should have the FTC’s decision at least relatively soon. If the commission’s decision on whether or not to take Google to court is really coming up before the end of the year, then things should be ramping up (or alternatively dying down) pretty quick. Keep it tuned here to SlashGear for more information.

According to the sources, most of the FTC’s five commissioners are in favor of a lawsuit. The final decision on the matter isn’t expected to be made until after the elections on the 6th. Google’s issues revolve around the patents it acquired after taking over Motorola. The company is trying to block Apple and Microsoft products that it says infringe on its patents.

The patents concern 3G, wifi, and video streaming technologies, which are standard-essential. Motorola was originally slinging around lawsuits, which Google received after acquiring the company, and it has elected to carry on those suits. If allowed, the blockage would affect such devices as Apple’s iPad and Microsoft’s Xbox.

The FTC has declined comment. Google’s spokeswoman, Niki Fenwick, however, stated, “We take our commitments to license on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms very seriously and are happy to answer any questions.” Google is also being probed into whether its advertisement, search, and mobile are harming competitors, with sources saying that the FTC has also recommended a lawsuit over that issue.

[via Business Week]

According to the FTC, facial recognition tech has been adopted for variety of uses including online social networks to mobile apps and digital signs. The technology is able to do things such as determine an individual’s age range and gender to deliver targeted ads. The technology is also able to assess a viewers emotions to see if they are engaged in a video or a game.

Law enforcement also uses facial recognition technology to match faces and identify anonymous individuals in photographs or videos. The FTC recommends that companies that are using facial recognition technology design services with consumer privacy in mind. The FTC also recommends that companies develop security precautions for the information collected and develop methods for determining what information should be kept and what information should be disposed of.

The report also recommends that companies consider the sensitivity of information when developing products and services that use facial recognition. The report says, for example, that digital signs that use facial recognition technology should not be used in places where children congregate. The report also calls on companies using facial recognition technology to make it clear when the technology is being used and data about users is being collected.

Two specific scenarios are called out by the FTC that state when companies should get a consumer’s affirmative consent before collecting or using data from facial images. Those situations include:

First, they should obtain consent before using consumers’ images or any biometric data in a different way than they represented when they collected the data. Second, companies should not use facial recognition to identify anonymous images of a consumer to someone who could not otherwise identify him or her, without obtaining the consumer’s affirmative consent first.

The potential issue comes from the Motorola patents, and how Google handled them after buying Motorola in May. With the company came a roster full of lawsuits that Motorola had filed against various competitors, claiming that they violated its patents. Also in the baggage for Google was a variety of lawsuits filed against Motorola over its refusal to license certain patents.

As a result, the FTC has threatened a case against Google via Section 5 of the FTC Act, something that concerns deceptive and/or unfair business practices. The case would be brought with the claim that Motorola’s wireless-technology patents were being used “as a weapon” against its competitors, a source told the WSJ. According to this source, the Federal Trade Commission feels that it has evidence of Google workers telling colleagues that the way it was handling the patents is wrong.

Google declined comment on the matter, except to say that it would cooperate. The FTC declined comment altogether. The potential terms for a settlement are unknown. Google has also been the subject of probing by antitrust authorities in Europe, in this case over how it displays it search results.

[via WSJ]

According to the FTC’s Robocall Challenge page, the solution must block calls on both mobiles and landlines, and can operate via either proprietary or non-proprietary platforms or devices. Entries can be in the form of proposals, functional solutions, and proofs of concept. The winner will get a $50,000 reward, plus a trip to D.C, where he or she will present the winning solution.

A secondary prize is offered for runner-up solutions, which will receive the Federal Trade Commission Technology Achievement Award, which does not include a cash prize. Judging criteria is split into three categories: 50% of the criteria focuses on “Does it Work,” 25% on “Is it easy to use?”, and 25% on “Can it be rolled out?” The judges are the FTC’s Chief Technology Officer Steve Bellovin, the FCC’s Chief Technology Officer Henning Schulzrinne, and AllThingsD’s co-executive editor Kara Swisher.

Digging a bit into the details, we see that the judging criteria’s “Does it work category” looks at whether the proposed solution will end up blocking wanted calls as well, with the ideal solution being one that doesn’t block any non-robocalls. The “Is it easy category” looks at the difficulty it would take for the average consumer to learn the solution, and its efficiency, possible problems and their severity that consumers might encounter, among others. The “Can it be rolled out” category looks at how realistic it is economically, how rapidly it can be deployed, and what changes have to be made to implement it.

[via Robocall Challenge]

The FTC are claiming that Google tweaked its search rules and algorithms to favor the company’s own products over their competitors. Both Yelp and Nextag have complained about Google to the FTC during open hearings in Congress. It’s said that the FTC will make an official decision on what they’re going to do either late next month or early December.

Since users are a lot more likely to click on top search results, Google has been accused of unfairly giving competitors’ websites lower rankings in search results in order to steer users away from Google’s rivals and toward their own products instead that provide similar services. This accusation isn’t anything new; it was brought up around a year ago by several websites and online services, which sparked the FTC investigation in the first place.

Google has repeatedly denied that it doesn’t favor itself over its competitors in search results, and the company is more than happy to cooperate with the FTC. Google spokeswoman Niki Fenwick says, “We are happy to answer any questions that regulators have about our business.” It’s not known what the stakes would be for Google if it loses an antitrust case against the FTC, but we’re guessing the company will face some pretty stuff fines at the very least.

[via Reuters]

The Kindle Paperwhite has officially sold out, so expect a wait of 4-6 weeks if you order one today, while listings for a 32GB variant of the Nexus 7 and the Galaxy Nexus 2 popped up in a warehouse database. Apple will require approval for third-party Lightning accessories, and EE’s 4G network will go live across the UK on October 30. Oracle says that the rumors aren’t true and it isn’t planning to purchase NetApp, while Google was awarded a patent for its smartwatch today as well.

A tape featuring an eerily accurate Steve Jobs Q&A session from 1983 was made public today, and an Apple job posting suggests that an all-new SoC is on the way. The FTC has hit a former scareware distributor with a massive $163 million fine, and iFixit gave us a look inside the new Super Slim PS3 today. iFixit also told us that the amount of toxins in smartphones is on the decline, which is only a good thing, and HP CEO Meg Whitman is saying that the company will probably have issues making a profit next year.

The first presidential debate is tonight, do you know where you’ll be watching it? If not, we have a few suggestions for you. The budget-priced Nokia Lumia 510 was spotted in the wild today, and Facebook has started testing promoted posts for all regular users. Apple struck up a deal with biometrics firm Microlatch today, while Twitter Surveys were introduced as a paid service for advertisers and Sony’s PlayStation Mobile launched on the PS Vita and select Android devices.

Finally tonight, we have a couple of original articles for you to check out – Don Reisinger asks if there can ever be another Apple, while Chris Davies goes hands-on with a BlackBerry 10 Alpha B device. That does it for tonight’s Evening Wrap-Up, enjoy the rest of your night folks!

Those people, Kristy Ross, Sam Jain, and Daniel Sundin, were hit with the $163 million fine to repay the victims they ripped off throughout the years. In addition, Ross has been banned from selling software that interferes with a user’s computer. Ross and co. were responsible for one of these seemingly endless scareware schemes, alerting Internet-goers to non-existent problems on their computers, and then charging $39.95 and up to “fix” the issues. The scam ran from 2000 to 2008, and in that time, the trio pulled in tens of millions of dollars from confused and scared PC users.

Three other people involved in the case, Marc D’Souza, Maurice D’Souza, and James Reno, settled with the FTC in 2010, and aren’t required to pay back the $168 million. The group operated under the name of Innovative Marketing Inc., which bought space for legitimate-looking ads on major websites. When users would click on the ads, they would be taken to an Innovative Marketing website, where they were told that any number of malicious programs were discovered on their computer and then urged to purchase bogus software to fix the issues.

This is a big step in the right direction for the FTC, but unfortunately, scareware still runs rampant today. It’s a problem that probably won’t ever go away entirely, so users need to stay vigilant when it comes to surfing the Internet and believing those illegitimate alerts. This may not be the last we’ve heard of scareware, but it’s definitely the last we’ve heard of Innovative Marketing Inc.

[via Threat Post]

The FTC has ended its investigation of Facebook’s Instagram purchase, though the FTC wrapped things up rather silently. LG has a massive new 4K HDTV available now in South Korea, HP posted less-than-stellar results for quarter 3 of its fiscal year, and today NASA talked about how the Curiosity rover has been getting around on the surface of Mars. Today also brought some new sample shots of the Nikon CoolPix S800c Android camera, along with a new video demo for the device.

We got a closer look at the Archos Gen10 XS tablet line today, and the struggling HTC is planning to cut the price on its One series of phones after the line posted disappointing sales. T-Mobile announced that it will begin offering nationwide unlimited 4G next month, while Rockstar delivered a new round of Grand Theft Auto V screenshots today, and we have a feeling that move screenshots are coming sometime later this week, so keep an eye out for those.

AT&T has reiterated its decision to block FaceTime, and cited an FCC ruling in support of it. Verizon looks be gearing up to offer a Nokia Windows Phone 8 later this year, and sadly, Nintendo confirmed that Nintendo Power magazine will be shutting down in December. NASA has kicked off a simulation meant to test landing on a near-Earth asteroid, and there’s a new iPhone app on the scene that will help you determine which Super PACs are putting out those constant political ads. Black Isle Studios appears to have risen from the dead, but no one seems to know the circumstances surrounding the re-opening.

Finally tonight, we have a review of the new Archos 101 XS tablet by Chris Burns. Enjoy the rest of your evening, everyone!

Now that the FTC has approved of the deal here in the United States, Facebook and Instagram may move forward – of course there’s always your international regulatory groups snooping around the deal, but once the FTC has had their say, generally a deal such as this pretty much hits the afterburners. The Commission this week voted to close the investigation of the deal with a vote of 5-0 to complete – to a degree.

April J Tabor, Acting Secretary for the Federal Trade Commission’s letter to Councel for Instagram read in part as follows:

“Upon further review of this matter, it now appears that no further action is warranted by the Commission at this time. Accordingly, the investigation has been closed. This action is not to be construed as a determination that a violation may not have occurred, just as the pendency of an investigation should not be construed as a determination that a violation has occurred. The Commission reserves the right to take such further action as the public interest may require.”

The same letter was sent to Councel for Facebook, citing in both cases a possible violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act or Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Have a peek at our timeline below to track this deal back to its roots, and let the Instagram flow through you, you Facebook-loving socialite!

BONUS: the image you see at the head of this post comes from a conceptual design rendering of a Facebook phone designed by Tolga Tuncer – complete with an Instagram button!

[via FTC]

This settlement is the end of a process which started in November of 2011, today’s date being the final announcement and cut-off time for Facebook to comply with said orders. Each violation of these orders will result in a penalty from the FTC for up to $16,000 apiece. The investigation itself began back in 2009 when initial complains from privacy watchdogs suggested private information was being shared by Facebook from users who had opted out of such activities.

This settlement comes just one day after the FTC’s settlement with Google which resulted in a $22.5 million dollar fine. That fine was the largest ever levied by the company for a violation of their orders. The agency’s commissioners issued a joint statement today which read in part as follows.

“We intend to monitor closely Facebook’s compliance with the order, and will not hesitate to seek civil penalties for any violations.

… A statement from Facebook about an app’s conduct may well amount to a promise that Facebook is taking steps to assure the level of privacy or security that the app provides for consumers’ information.” – FTC

Have a peek at the timeline below to see other FTC activities as of late to see how they’re taking care of business across the web in the USA here in the summer of 2012.

OUYA’s Kickstarter campaign wrapped up early this morning, and if you missed your chance to pledge, you’ll be pleased to know that the Android-based console is available for pre-order starting today. Google was hit with the largest FTC fine in history today over its breach of Apple’s Safari browser, and we tell you why Google’s new Gmail Search feature won’t result in your more private emails being shown to everyone in view of your computer screen. The Google Translate app for Android added image translation functionality today, and the makers of Cyanogenmod 9 have officially released the stable version for the Galaxy Nexus.

Apple Stores will now price match on the iPhone 4 and all models of the iPhone 4S, and a new Microsoft job listing seems to suggest that the next Xbox will be arriving within the next 18 months. The ASUS Transformer Pad TF300TL may be launching with 4G LTE capabilities in Germany and Austria within the month, Samsung has unsurprisingly denied any interest in acquiring RIM once again, and the Sony Xperia tablet suffered yet another leak today. Finally, the international community is considering outlawing cyber-attacks in times of war, the Nikon 1 J2 camera became official (and subsequently became available for pre-order), and HTC may be announcing a Windows Phone 8 device next month, so keep an eye out for more news on that.

As is typically the case, we’ve also got a handful of original articles for you to peruse this evening, with Chris Davies examining the problems with Windows 8 tablets, and providing a warning to those who think that they’re actually purchasing a product when they pledge money to a Kickstarter. Chris Burns has a review of the new Samsung Galaxy Beam, and he also goes hands-on with Google’s official Nexus 7 cover, so be sure to have a look at those. Enjoy the rest of your evening, everyone!

Apple’s software privacy settings were to block certain functions of websites if the user so chose, but Google has been found guilty of bypassing those limits and planting cookies which then tracked user’s internet browsing. While this might seem like a rather terrifying concept, you should know that it goes on all the time, and that it’s rare (at the moment, anyway) to be browsing the web without a website noting in some way or another that you are present at it. This is different from a tracking virus which could much more maliciously track everything you do on your computer – Google isn’t involved in such things as far as we know.

“The record-setting penalty in this matter sends a clear message to all companies under an FTC privacy order. No matter how big or small, all companies must abide by FTC orders against them and keep their privacy promises to consumers, or they will end up paying many times what it would have cost to comply in the first place.” – FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz

Google’s penalty for breaking the FTC’s regulations against recording browsing behavior without consent is just $22.5 million USD – that is, again, the largest fine for a case such as this, but basically a drop in the bucket for a company as large as Google. David Vladeck, director of the FTC’s bureau of competition, spoke today on a conference call for the issue.

“Google is paying what we think is a heavy price for violating our prior order. We hope this sends a clear message to Google that violations of the order and failure to keep commitments on privacy is going to be punished severely. This sends the message that the FTC isn’t kidding around.” – Vladeck

The FTC’s previous largest penalty pushed to a company was against a data broker by the name of ChoicePoint Inc. in 2006 for $10 million in civil penalties and $5 million in consumer redress. According to Business Week, the FTC is also currently in settlement talks on privacy allegations with no less than MySpace, Twitter, and Facebook as well. The cash shall be flowing imminently!

“The record setting penalty in this matter sends a clear message to all companies under an FTC privacy order,” FTC chairman Jon Leibowitz said of the fine today. “No matter how big or small, all companies must abide by FTC orders against them and keep their privacy promises to consumers, or they will end up paying many times what it would have cost to comply in the first place.”

Google’s mistake had been to circumnavigate blocking systems in Safari to use its own DoubleClick cookie, exploiting a loophole in the browser to store a temporary file. In the process, however, it also allowed through more permanent cookies from the DoubleClick domain, contravening FTC privacy rules.

In a vote by members of the Commission, four voted in favor of the complaint and one against; dissenting Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch wrote that [pdf link] while he agreed that Google had broken rules, he could not accept “this consent decree because it arguably cannot be concluded that the consent decree is in the public interest when it contains a denial of liability.”

That uncertainty wasn’t enough to save Google from the fine, which works out to $16,000 per violation per day. However, Google made $22.5m in the space of less than five hours based on its 2011 full-year financial results.

More important is how this affects FTC and Google relations moving forward. Google had previously committed to a settlement in October 2011, following concerns about deceptive tactics and privacy issues in Buzz,  which along other things said it would no longer misrepresent data collection policies.

The fine you may already have heard of racks up to $22.5 million dollars USD – just a few hours work for Google, in other words. This information, again, comes from a source with knowledge of the settlement speaking with the news source mentioned earlier. This information is crowned by a lovely little blip you’ll see here, as spoken by a Google spokesperson earlier today:

“We cannot comment on any specifics. However we do set the highest standards of privacy and security for our users.” – Google

This bit of information does not do one whole heck of a lot for the credibility of either the FTC or Google’s claims in this case, but it does let us know that Google is, at least on the surface, trying to remain true to their claim to not be evil in the world of public privacy. Have a peek at our timeline below to check out what Google actually may have done to deserve this case and its outcome: