Menu

Saturday, October 22, 2016

AT&T Confirms $85 Billion Acquisition Of Time Warner Inc.

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

After two days of “people close to situation” leaking information about a possible merger between AT&T and Time Warner Inc., the two companies have confirmed the deal which is valued at around $85 billion.

The merger combines the vast Time Warner media empire — which includes cable networks (HBO, TBS, TNT, CNN, HLN, among others), movies and home video (Warner Bros., New Line), comic books (DC, Vertigo), and other ventures — with the nation’s largest satellite provider, its second-largest wireless provider, and the operator of a sprawling landline telecom network.

As we’ve mentioned before — because it can get confusing — Time Warner Inc. is not Time Warner Cable. Time Warner spun TWC off into its own company in 2009 and was recently acquired by Charter. Additionally, Time Warner Inc. is not Time Inc., the publishing mega-house (People, Sports Illustrated, Fortune, among others); that division of the company was spun off in 2014.

The confirmation of the merger jives with earlier reports that said Time Warner shareholders would get around $110/share in the deal. The final number, as announced by AT&T, is $107.50/share.

AT&T says the boards of both companies gave unanimous approval to the deal.

Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T and chief ninja of the Robocall Strike Force, calls the deal a “perfect match of two companies with complementary strengths who can bring a fresh approach to how the media and communications industry works for customers, content creators, distributors and advertisers.”

Let’s be honest. You fell asleep halfway through that quote, didn’t you?

The merger, if approved (more on that in a bit), would give AT&T control over the biggest premium channel on TV: HBO, along with its HBO Go and HBO Now streaming services (“And don’t forget about me,” holler Cinemax from its wood-paneled room in the basement.)

“Premium content always wins,” continues Stephenson, who felt the need to dump this news just as Game 6 of a potentially historic National League Championship Series was starting. “We’ll have the world’s best premium content with the networks to deliver it to every screen. A big customer pain point is paying for content once but not being able to access it on any device, anywhere. Our goal is to solve that. We intend to give customers unmatched choice, quality, value and experiences that will define the future of media and communications.”

The big question remains: How much resistance will there be to this merger. AT&T’s $48 billion purchase of DirecTV went through with relative ease, both because the two companies provided complementary services without causing any obvious harm to their respective industries, and because the FCC and DOJ were so focused on investigating and blocking the failed merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable (again: not the same company as Time Warner).

One of the big reasons the Comcast/TWC marriage was never allowed to happen was because Comcast had recently purchased NBC Universal, producing an all-in-one media giant with that provided cable, provided channels and shows that were on that cable, and many of the residential broadband connections for people seeking competition to Comcast/NBC’s products.

When AT&T acquired DirecTV, it increased its pay-TV audience by more than 20 million subscribers, and on Saturday night the company disclosed that it has actually added to its satellite customer base since taking over DirecTV. The Texas-based telecom giant (when you add in the existing AT&T U-Verse customers) the largest pay-TV company in the U.S.

There will almost certainly be a number of objections to the idea of allowing another huge pay-TV company to also own some of the most popular channels on cable.

This was a concern with the Comcast acquisition of NBC, but in most cases Comcast has little reason to charge another cable company an anticompetitive price. That’s because Comcast and other non-telecom terrestrial cable companies generally have very little overlap of service areas. So while Comcast is probably getting a better deal on carrying CNBC than other pay-TV providers, it has little motive to gouge Jim’s Cable Company since they don’t compete directly.

However, with AT&T/DirecTV, the landscape is different. AT&T offers U-Verse and GigaPower service in areas where it has landline phone networks. DirecTV is available anywhere with a clear view of the southern sky. So both brands go head-to-head with cable providers — large and small — virtually everywhere. We’re not saying AT&T would overcharge for Time Warner channels if this merger were approved, but we expect other cable and satellite companies will raise this objection a lot over the coming months.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Friday, October 21, 2016

Report: Dick’s Won Auction For Golfsmith’s Intellectual Property, U.S. Stores

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

According to “a person familiar with the matter,” Dick’s Sporting Goods picked up the U.S. business and intellectual property of bankrupt specialty retailer Golfsmith for $70 million, as expected. Serving as its caddies for this round were well-known names in the retail liquidation business, Hilco Global and Tiger Capital Group.

The liquidators are involved because while the trio bid on the entire business, Dick’s only plans to keep about 30 stores open out of the 109 that Golfsmith has in this country. According to the source, the liquidators will take care of closing the remaining stores and selling off merchandise.

What the source who gave this information to Reuters didn’t know is whether the stores will stay open as Golfsmith, or change to something else. Dick’s owns the Golf Galaxy specialty chain, and converting them to that brand would make sense.

Buying the intellectual property entitles Dick’s to the store’s name, brands, and most valuable of all: its customer mailing lists and social media accounts. People on Golfsmith’s mailing lists will at minimum be given a chance to opt out of receiving messages from Dick’s and/or Golf Galaxy.

The transaction won’t be final until the judge assigned to Golfsmith’s case in bankruptcy court approves it.

Exclusive: Dick’s wins auction for U.S. business of bankrupt Golfsmith – sources [Reuters]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Reports: Possible AT&T/Time Warner Merger Valued At $85 Billion

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

This morning, the world woke to find out that AT&T and Time Warner were getting cozy and maybe thinking about moving in together. Now comes news that talks have heated up and that a nearly $90 billion deal could be in the offing.

This is according to Bloomberg and Reuters, whose sources say the current offer being discussed is for $110 per Time Warner share. That’s $20/share more than the current stock price of the media giant (and $30 more than its share price yesterday). That would put the total value of the merger at around $85-$86 billion.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that a deal could be hammered out as soon as this weekend.

The big remaining question is whether the deal would get regulatory approval, especially in light of AT&T’s recent $48 billion acquisition of DirecTV.

One of the many objections to the failed merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable (note: a different company from Time Warner Inc., as the latter’s CEO has to occasionally remind people) was that a combined TWC/Comcast would exert a huge amount of leverage over the pay-TV industry because of Comcast’s earlier, heavily criticized acquisition of NBC Universal. The idea of having a pay-TV provider (and the nation’s largest broadband provider) also being one of its largest broadcasters and distributors rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.

AT&T and DirecTV avoided that fate by offering services that complemented each other. AT&T’s pay-TV growth has long been limited by its existing landline footprint, so adding DirecTV immediately gave the company access to a national audience. Meanwhile, DirecTV may have more TV customers than Comcast, but those subscribers were not getting broadband from the satellite company. The AT&T deal allowed DirecTV to bundle wired and wireless data.

What happens when you throw in the company that owns HBO, CNN, TNT, TBS — not to mention the vast Warner Bros. movie, TV, music, and video game empire? Only time will tell what the FCC and antitrust regulators think of this, or what concessions would have to be made to make this deal palatable.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Are You Entitled To A Refund After A Cable/Satellite Blackout? Probably Not

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

It seems like every time a major pay-TV company has to renew its contract with a big cable/broadcast network, customers have to sit through ugly media campaigns from both sides threatening blackouts. Those shutdowns are usually averted at the last minute, but if they happen they can last weeks or even months. When that happens, are you due a refund? Maybe you feel like you do, but a recent federal court ruling casts doubt on the likelihood of you ever getting anything.

From late 2014 through early 2015, Dish Network went through two separate high-profile blackouts. First, there was the month-long standoff between the satellite company and Turner, resulting in blackouts for CNN, Cartoon Network, HLN and others. This was followed almost immediately by the three-week blackout of Fox News on Dish.

As a result of not getting the content they were paying for — and the satellite company not agreeing to their refund requests — two Dish subscribers sued in federal court, alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and violations of various state consumer protection laws.

In July 2015, a federal court in Missouri threw out [PDF] the unjust enrichment and state law counts but allowed the breach of contract complaint to move forward.

At issue is the “Limitations of Liability” section of the Dish residential customer agreement. At the time of the lawsuit (it’s since been updated slightly), the “Interruptions and Delays” subsection of the agreement stated that Dish could not be held liable “for any interruption in any service or for any delay.”

Taken broadly, the District Court judge said, this could be taken to imply that Dish “cannot be held liable for any interruption or delay of any or all programs for any period of time or for a failure to perform. If that’s the case, then this language could render the “illusory,” meaning that it uses terms that seem to promise something but in actuality promise nothing.

Dish appealed the lower court’s ruling to the Eighth Circuit, where earlier this month a three-judge panel overturned the District Court judge’s decision.

In its opinion [PDF], the Eighth Circuit concluded that “An illusory contract is unenforceable from its inception,” meaning it would be illusory in every aspect to which it is supposed to apply.

But because the plaintiffs had both been Dish subscribers for years — more than a decade in one case — and because Dish “continued to provide many uninterrupted channels to its subscribers,” the appeals panel said that the contract was not, under the applicable law of Dish’s home state of Colorado, illusory.

The plaintiffs had also accused Dish of breaching its duty of good faith and fair dealing by unfairly charging for satellite TV programming that the company did not provide “without providing a credit or other monetary relief… for the failure to provide the programming.”

The District Court judge had determined that the plaintiffs could challenge whether or it was reasonable for Dish to “keep the payments it would have been paying previously to the providers for those channels, and provide no recompense to its customers.”

But in its appeal, Dish countered that the terms of its contract explicitly bar a customer from being entitled to a refund.

A different section of the Dish agreement (now funder under “Changes in Services, Features and Functionalities Offered”) states that customers are not “entitled to any credits, refunds, price reductions or any other form of compensation because of any… addition, deletion, rearrangement, alteration, change and/or elimination” of programming.

As such, the Eighth Circuit concluded monetary relief for a service interruption “is unambiguously precluded by the express terms of the parties’ contractual bargain.”

In other words: tough luck, kid.

What About Other Cable Companies?

We looked at the terms for several other major pay-TV providers and while most don’t language that is as explicit as Dish’s “no refunds” policy, they generally seem to have contract terms that are heavily tilted in their favor.

DirecTV reserves the “unrestricted right to change, rearrange, add or delete our programming packages, the selections in those packages, our prices, and any other Service we offer, at any time.” The satellite company reminds you of your right to “cancel your Service, in whole or in part, if you do not accept the change.” Of course, canceling could hit you with huge early termination fees and other charges. Not canceling constitutes acceptance of programming changes.

Comcast also grants itself the authority to “rearrange, delete, add to, or otherwise change programming or features or offerings… including, but not limited to, content, functionality, hours of availability, customer equipment requirements, speed, and upstream and downstream rate limitations.” And just like DirecTV, “If you find a change in the Service(s) unacceptable, you have the right to cancel your Service(s). However, if you continue to receive Service(s) after the change, this will constitute your acceptance of the change.”

The closest we found to Dish’s terms are those of Optimum (now owned by Altice USA). That provider’s terms state that the customer “has no right to receive, and Altice has no obligation to provide, any particular programming service or channel as part of Altice’s Service and that Subscriber is not entering into this agreement or purchasing Altice’s Service in reliance on an expectation or promise (explicit or implicit) that any particular programming service or set of programming services shall be included as part of Altice’s Service.” Put another way: You’re agreeing to buy cable TV to have cable TV, not to have CNN and Fox News (or any other channels) specifically.

The Optimum agreement then goes on to explicitly address the issue of contract negotiations with broadcasters.

“[I]n the event particular programming becomes unavailable, either on a temporary or permanent basis, due to a dispute between Altice and a third party programmer, Altice shall not be liable for compensation, damages… credits or refunds of fees for the missing or omitted programming,” states the agreement, which does have an exception for truly a la carte programming, like premium cable networks that you purchase specifically. In such cases, an Optimum customer “shall only be entitled to a pro rata credit of amounts pre-paid for the specific programming to which Subscriber subscribes on an a la carte basis.”

Some of the pay-TV providers do have contract conditions that allow for full blackouts of service that last more than 24 hours, but you often have to request the credit within a limited window of time.

The bottom line: If your pay-TV provider gets involved in a blackout for a channel that isn’t HBO or Showtime, you’re probably stuck paying for it or leaving for some other service — just like the hundreds of thousands that left Time Warner Cable during its protracted blackout of CBS in its biggest markets.

[via DSLreports.com]


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

The ATM Liability Shift Is Here, And Most Don’t Have Chip Readers

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Hey, remember the ATM liability shift? You know, how MasterCard’s liability shift means that the operator of any ATMs not equipped with EMV (computer chip) card readers by October of this year would be liable for fraud, and not the credit card network. That deadline was today, and most ATMs in the wild aren’t yet equipped with card readers.

That’s according to an analysis by Consumer World’s Edgar Dworsky, checking with banks in his home state of Massachusetts, as well as consulting public data about MasterCard’s ATM network across the country.

In Boston, for example, about 8% of all ATMs had been upgraded, even as some banks could boast that their networks have been 100% upgraded.

Dworsky reports that according to a Mastercard spokeswoman, only about 33% of ATMs in its network currently use EMV technology to make it harder to clone cards with a skimmer.

Yet according to self-reported figures by ATM operators, in some cities the figures are lower than that: 11% of machines in Atlanta were reportedly upgraded, according to the analysis, and only 7% in New York City. Let’s hope that banks are just so busy upgrading their ATMs that they haven’t had time to update the website.

Why should this matter to you, an ATM user? ATMs are vulnerable to attacks: the shift to chip readers in retail means that thieves have turned to ATMs and debit cards while the magnetic stripe party is still going on at the majority of cash machines.

Machines that use chips aren’t invulnerable, but are less vulnerable to attacks, and more importantly an upgraded machine means that the liability shift is on the card network, not on the bank or even the grimy locally owned bar where you found the ATM.


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Dear New Yorkers: Your Short-Term Airbnb Listing Could Lead To $7,500 Fine

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

It’s already illegal for New York residents to list their unoccupied apartments on Airbnb for less than 30 days, but now it’s illegal and it could cost them: Governor Andrew Cuomo on Friday signed into law a measure that penalizes hosts up to $7,500 for such listings. 

NBC New York reports that the restrictions build on previous laws in the state and aim to ensure needed housing isn’t taken off the market in the city.

Under the new law, hosts are barred from advertising short-term apartment rentals on Airbnb for increments of fewer than 30 days. Hosts caught advertising in violation of the law could face a fine of up to $7,500.

Hosts renting spare bedrooms, row houses, or single-family homes are exempt under the new law.

The bill, which passed both houses of the New York Legislature in June, represents one of the harshest restrictions on Airbnb rentals in the U.S, according to NBC New York.

“This is an issue that was given careful, deliberate consideration, but ultimately these activities are already expressly prohibited by law,” Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi said in a statement to the Albany Times-Union.

Proponents of the law say it will protect affordable housing in the city, and penalize those who blatantly flout the law.

“These illegal rentals are not just breaking the law, they are breaking the back of an already dangerously thin affordable housing supply,” New York City Councilmember Corey Johnson told NBC New York.

Cuomo’s spokesperson added that the rental compromise efforts to maintain and promote affordable housing in the city by allowing apartments to be used as unregulated hotels.

Airbnb, which opposed the measure, tells The Times-Union that it plans to sue to block the law from going into effect.

“A majority of New Yorkers have embraced home sharing, and we will continue to fight for a smart policy solution that works for the people, not the powerful,” Airbnb spokesman Peter Schottenfels said in a statement. “We are filing a lawsuit in New York this afternoon.”

The short-term rental company contends that the bill violates the Federal Communications Decency Act, the First and Fourth amendments of the U.S. Constitution and the home rule clause of the state Constitution.

The new law comes two years after New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman’s office found that 72% of the units listed on Airbnb in the city were illegal.

Of the 35,354 private, short-term listings included in this data, Schneiderman’s office believes that 25,532 violated either New York State’s Multiple Dwelling Law, which prohibits rentals of fewer than 30 days in most apartment buildings, and/or New York City’s Administrative Code, which prohibits the use of non-residential buildings for housing.

These 25,532 properties accounted for nearly 301,000 bookings on Airbnb and brought in $304 million in revenue, from which Schneiderman claims that Airbnb earned almost $40 million. The report went on to calculate that NYC was owed nearly $33.5 million by Airbnb hots who did not collect the city’s hotel room occupancy tax.

Cuomo signs bill prohibiting Airbnb listings in NYC [Albany Times-Union]
Gov. Cuomo Authorizes Fines for Illegal Airbnb Rentals in New York state [NBC New York]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Science Says: Cheese Makes Wine Taste Better

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Your Friday night plans have just been validated by science: a new study finds that eating cheese with wine makes wine taste better.

French scientists, from the Centre for Taste and Feeding Behavior in Dijon, published the results of their study in the Journal of Food Science, detailing how they paired two kinds of white and two kinds of red wine (Pacherenc, Sancerre, Bourgogne, and Madiran) with four cheeses (Epoisses, Comté, Roquefort, and Crottin de Chavignol).

They then had 31 expert tasters — who were already familiar with both products — describe their experience drinking the wine before eating the cheese, and then again after sampling some dairy. Lucky.

Most of the time, tasters said the wine tasted better after eating cheese, as it boosted the fruitiness and bouquet of the beverages, and improved feelings of enjoyment for drinkers. Or, if it didn’t improve it, eating cheese at least didn’t affect the taste adversely.

Some also lessened the mouth-drying impact of the tannins, The Telegraph notes, which is in line with previous research that has suggested that wine and cheese go so well together because the fat in cheese lubricates the mouth after tannins in wine dry it out.

“Thanks to our research we learned the duration of the perception of astringency of a certain wine could be reduced after having cheese and the four evaluated cheeses had the same effect,” said lead researcher Mara Galmarini. “In short, when having a plate of assorted cheeses, the wine will probably taste better no matter which one they choose.”

FINE. If you’re going to insist.

Use of Multi-Intake Temporal Dominance of Sensations (TDS) to Evaluate the Influence of Cheese on Wine Perception [Journal of Food Science]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

FCC Chair Tom Wheeler Talks Privacy, 5G & Set-Top Box Reform

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

When Tom Wheeler was appointed FCC Chair in 2013, some questioned whether a former frontman for both the cable and telecom industries could possibly keep consumers’ needs in mind when dealing with the companies he’d known intimately for decades. John Oliver even likened the naming of Wheeler as FCC Chair to “needing a babysitter and hiring a dingo.” Yet, not only has Wheeler demonstrated that he’s not a dingo, he’s also gone toe-to-toe with the companies he once represented, enacting new net neutrality rules that regulate broadband as a utility, challenging phone companies to put an end to robocalls, going after wireless providers for misleading “unlimited” plans, and trying to shake up the pay-TV monopoly on set-top boxes.

Earlier this week, Wheeler paid a visit to the Consumer Reports headquarters in Yonkers, NY, where he toured our science-loving sibling’s test labs and met with staff for CR and Consumerist. He also sat down with Consumer Reports editor Glenn Derene for an exclusive interview about his time at the FCC, what he hopes to get accomplished in the time he has left, and his thoughts on some of the technologies on the near horizon.

[Ed. Note: This interview has been condensed and edited]

CR: I want to start with a few specifics about some policies that are being debated right now. First, I’d like to discuss the proposed broadband provider privacy rules, since those are very important to us at Consumer Reports. You have your next meeting on the 27th. Are you confident that the commission will approve your proposal?

WHEELER: I’m hopeful. I think that what we have put before the commissioners is a thoughtful, important proposal that could be adopted. And we are working with their offices now to make sure everybody’s comfortable and see what their thoughts are.

CR: You don’t have to go through all of them, but can you explain some of the consumer benefits?

WHEELER: The key concept in privacy is that it’s your information. And you turn that information over to a network. And that network ought to respect the fact that it’s not their information, it’s your information. And this is not to say that the network can’t use that information but if they do, they have to have your permission.

And it’s a model that we’ve had for decades with the telephone network. That you make a telephone call and all of the information that is necessary for the network to operate, who you’re calling and all this kind of information, cannot be released without your permission. The same kind of concept ought to apply in the internet.

CR: So critics have raised concerns about why your proposed rules are different from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rules for edge providers, for instance. I know that many of our readers might be confused as to the distinction between regulatory environments.

WHEELER: We have two different approaches. The FCC has the ability to make rules and broad policy. The FTC for the most part, does not have rulemaking authority and deals on a case-by-case adjudicatory model.

What we’re trying to do with the privacy rules for networks is to say that the network that holds my information is different from the non-network activities, the so-called edge providers, the websites that you go to.

The network sees everything I do. A website sees what I do on that website. But the network sees all the websites I go to. If I don’t like the privacy practices of a website, I can say I don’t want to go to that website. But I don’t really have too much choice in my broadband provider and my ability to easily get in and out of the broadband service and go to another provider with different privacy expectations.

CR: I want to switch to the cable box proposal that you have on the books, too. I assume that is also going to be brought up on the 27th? I know it got postponed during the last meeting.

WHEELER: We’re in the midst of discussions on that and that will determine when it gets scheduled.

CR: So the plan would effectively force cable companies to offer their pay TV services as apps they can run on hardware from third parties, right?

WHEELER: There was a law passed in 1996 that said that the FCC shall—not “may,” not “ought to think about”— but shall, put in place rules that provide competitive choices for consumers for what were called navigation devices—the ability to switch amongst channels of your cable or satellite provider. Yet, 20 years later, 99% percent of all pay TV subscribers have to rent their set-top box from their provider. And pay a monthly fee, month after month after month.

And so what we’re trying to do is to say that the law is the law and that Congress mandated that there be choice in set-top boxes. There are great things happening in terms of technology that makes those boxes cheaper and with greater functionality than they have ever had and that the competitive marketplace ought to be available for consumers. And that’s the proposal that is on the table.

CR: So what is to stop cable companies, if this passes, from a variety of other mechanisms they could do to essentially make back the money—charging special fees that are not directly related to the apps or putting these apps in a special class of service? Is it up to the FCC to police that if this rule does go through?

WHEELER: It would be pretty obvious if something like that happens. I think there would probably be some consumer reaction. I think there would probably also be some political reaction. But what’s important is that what our rulemaking does is give the consumer a choice to say rather than paying $10 a month, month after month, I want to go to Best Buy and buy something for $50 and be done with it.

CR: So would having these apps also allow, if they wanted, cable companies to compete across geography? In the way that Sling TV, for instance, has sort of opened the door to allow for pay-TV services to be offered over competing networks. So one, is that possible under this rule, and two, was it one of the intentions?

WHEELER: They all tend to have exclusive geographic franchises and they license the product for that. I think what you will see is an integrated search function so that on the same search mechanism where you go to find what’s on your cable system, you’ll also be able to see what’s on the internet. You know today, we’ve got this incredibly confusing situation where if I want to watch my cable service, I’ve got one remote that I use. If I want us watch on Netflix, I’ve got another remote that I use. And where is the show?

So if you could have an integrated search function, then what would happen would be the consumers would have a great deal more choice. And a very exciting aspect is that independent programmers who can’t get on the cable system but are over there on the internet, suddenly are out of this purgatory of being out here separate from what’s available on cable. And they have new opportunities.

So I think what this is going to mean is a significant increase in consumer choice which is going to drive a significant increase in independent video programming.

CR: You’ve been arguably one of the more aggressive chairman of the FCC in modern history, what is it about the telecommunications industry that requires aggressive oversight?

WHEELER: Well, let me see if I can look at that from a slightly different vantage point. I happen to be fortunate enough to be the chairman of the FCC in a time of incredible network change. The manner in which we connect as a society is going through the greatest upheaval that we’ve seen for the last 100, maybe 150 years. And I’m just a guy who happens to be sitting in the seat when decisions have to be made about how are we going to deal with those kind of changes. Because the way in which society deals with technological change that affects them is through their coming together in government and looking for solutions.

CR: You’ve been an advocate for the aggressive deployment of 5G cellular networks in America. Why are they necessary? And what is the consumer use of a 5G network?

WHEELER: Think about wireless fiber optic. Think about a wireless signal that moves 10 to 100 times faster than what you’re used to today. Think about the ability to do in a mobile environment, from anywhere, the things that today you can only do in a fixed environment where you’re lucky enough to hook onto a fiber optic cable. Think about what 5G and wireless fiber could mean in those areas of the country like remote rural areas where there isn’t fiber or where it’s too expensive to string fiber.

We’ve identified where the spectrum is going to be. We’re the first country in the world to do that. And that is going to give our wireless providers and manufacturers an opportunity to lead the world in this new and really important technology.

CR: Last question. There’s an administration change coming up soon. And there will be another one after that, what can be done to protect the legacy of what you’ve accomplished, and may still accomplish, during your tenure?

WHEELER: This is an issue of trying to make the best decisions at a point in time when decisions were called for. And they will stand or fall on their own over the course of history.

The people who are fortunate enough to follow me as chair of the FCC will have their own set of issues to deal with. I’m just trying to deal with the issues that are in front of us, not to try to make decisions for somebody else down the road.


by consumerist.com via Consumerist

Amtrak Now Prohibiting Passengers From Bringing Galaxy Note 7 Devices On Trains

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

First planes, now trains: the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 is no longer welcome on Amtrak.

The company announced the update on Twitter, saying the recalled devices are not permitted on Amtrak trains, as well as on thruway buses, stations, and platforms, because of the risk that they’ll catch fire.

“The safety of our passengers and employees is paramount,” Amtrak said in a statement (via CNET). “Effective immediately, Samsung Galaxy Note 7 cell phones are not permitted on Amtrak property due to potential serious safety risks. This ban includes Amtrak trains, Thruway buses, facilities, stations, platforms, Amtrak vehicles, and as an item carried within a vehicle on Auto Train.”

The decision follows the Federal Aviation Administration’s move last week banning Note 7 devices from all commercial flights.

Ever since Samsung officially recalled the devices, the company has been urging consumers to exchange their devices before they get to the airport.

“We have encouraged airlines to issue similar communications directly to their passengers,” the company said in a statement upon the FAA’s airplane ban. “Any Galaxy Note 7 owner should visit their carrier and retail store to participate in the U.S. Note 7 Refund and Exchange Program now. We realize this is an inconvenience but your safety has to remain our top priority.”

It’s unclear what Amtrak employees will do if they find a passenger with a Note 7, but if you’d rather avoid being phoneless, it’s a good idea to exchange your device before riding the rails.


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

How Bad Test Results From Theranos Led To Bad Real-Life Consequences For Patients

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Something as simple and routine as a blood test can have life-changing consequences, and some patients whose test results from medical startup Theranos were later found to be inaccurate faced stress and worry, had to be re-tested, and made life-altering medical decisions based on wrong information. What did that look like in real life?

It was the Wall Street Journal that broke the story that Theranos wasn’t quite the medical and technological miracle it pretended to be. The paper reported that the company’s machines weren’t as accurate as advertised, and the Customers who were confident in the company’s ability to perform accurate lab tests. After all, Walgreens wouldn’t have partnered with Theranos if there were questions about its tests’ accuracy, right?

Theranos had labs in California and in Arizona, having successfully lobbied in Arizona for direct-to-consumer blood tests, which the company performed alongside tests ordered by doctors.

Here’s one real-life example: a man had blood tests performed by Theranos after heart surgery, and one showed that his blood was taking six times longer than it should to clot. Follow-up tests had varied results. Based on this information, his doctor changed his blood-thinning medication.

It wasn’t until a year later that he learned his test results had been voided along with others from the same period, and the company didn’t issue a revised report until after the Wall Street Journal stepped in. The inaccurate results and change in medication didn’t affect his health, but could have.

Other patients described having blood tests screening for diabetes with varying results, when that test (A1C) measures the average blood glucose level over the last three months. It shouldn’t vary from test to test within a few days, which is what happened, when patients used Theranos and then other labs.

Agony, Alarm and Anger for People Hurt by Theranos’s Botched Blood Tests [Wall Street Journal]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Target Recalls 127K Halloween Window Clings Over Choking Hazard

http://ift.tt/2ePywO8

One of the easiest — and less messy — ways to decorate for any holiday is to slap a few plastic clings to your windows, and if those decorations happen to include lights, even better. Except, of course, if you bought some of those products from Target, as the retailer has recalled 127,000 Halloween-themed LED gel clings. 

Target announced the recall of six different cling designs after determining that the products could pose a choking hazard to children.

According to a notice posted with the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Halloween-themed LED gel clings can separate and expose the inner decal and LED/button battery compartment. If a child were to find the button, they could choke.

The recall covers six clings that come with two non-replaceable button cell batteries. The gel clings are for window use only and light up with a blinking light when you push on them.

clings

The clings — sold nationally from from Aug. 2016 to Sept. 2016 for $1 — feature a green skeleton, pink skeleton, purple spider, black cat, orange pumpkin, and black bat. The recalled products can be identified by the model number 234-25-0904 printed on the gel cling’s packaging.

screen-shot-2016-10-21-at-1-42-29-pm

So far, Target has not received any reports of injuries or choking incidents.

Customers who purchased the clings should remove them from areas where children can reach them and return them to Target for a full refund.


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Striking Jim Beam Workers Accept New Contract

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

If you were worried that a walkout at two Jim Beam distilleries in Kentucky was going to threaten supplies of whiskey, rest easy: striking workers voted today to accept a new contract from parent company Beam Suntory.

The president of Union Food and Commercial Workers 111D told The Courier-Journal [warning: link contains video that autoplays] that the deal is a win for all involved.

“After months of negotiation and feeling like the voice of UFCW 111D was not being heard, we had hoped that we would not have to go on strike to reach an agreement with Beam Suntory management,” president Janelle Mudd told the publication. “In the end, we made a strong statement and we were heard.”

The deal has many of the elements the union wanted included: equal pay for qual work, a limit on temporary employees, and the hiring of more full-time employees.

“We appreciate management’s diligence to reach an agreement with the Union,” she said. “They met with employees from a cross-section of departments from both the Clermont and Boston plants, and representatives talked to employees on the picket line to clarify the areas of greatest need.”

More than 200 union workers walked off the job over the weekend after voting to reject a previous contract offer from the world’s top bourbon producer, prompting concerns that a strike could affect whiskey production.

All is well now, however: employees will be back at work making whiskey on Monday morning.

Jim Beam workers approve new contract [The Courier-Journal]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

DOJ, States To Sue Moody’s Credit Rating Agency For Role In Mortgage Meltdown

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

What drove the mortgage bubble in the years leading up to the 2008 financial crisis wasn’t just ill-prepared home-buyers signing on to subprime, adjusted-rate mortgages they couldn’t afford, or the lenders who effectively gave up on underwriting these loans so as to bundle and resell as many of them as possible. There were also credit rating agencies that gave these mortgage-backed bonds the seal of approval, even when they were worthless.

In a filing [PDF] this morning with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Moody’s Corp. — the nation’s second-largest rating agency — revealed that lawsuits are likely pending from both state and federal agencies over the company’s ratings on toxic mortgage-backed bonds.

According to Moody’s, the company received a letter from the Department of Justice on Sept. 29 that federal prosecutors are preparing a civil complaint “alleging certain violations of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) in connection with the ratings MIS assigned to residential mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations in the period leading up to the 2008 financial crisis.”

In addition to the DOJ letter, Moody’s disclosed that “A number of states attorneys general have indicated that they also expect to pursue similar claims under state law, which claims may include additional periods, theories, asset classes or activities.”

The filing did not disclose which states have thus far mentioned the possibility of litigation, or if any of these states are working together to bring a joint action.

Moody’s and competitor S&P have long been suspected of giving inflated ratings to mortgage-backed securities during the housing boom. The theory was that the agencies gave top ratings in order to keep doing business with the banks and lenders that were selling them. However, once homeowners began to default on these loans, it became clear that the mortgage-backed securities had often not merited the ratings they received.

S&P settled with the U.S. last year, admitting no wrongdoing but paying a $1.5 billion penalty.

Sen. Al Franken (MN) has remained critical of the rating industry, arguing that SEC reforms instituted since the collapse have not halted the practice of “rate-shopping,” wherein the bank does business with the agency that will likely give their securities the most favorable rating.

“During the 2008 financial meltdown, Wall Street cut the ground out from under millions of hardworking Americans who lost their jobs, homes, and retirement savings,” said Franken in a statement. “And at the heart of the crisis was an inherent conflict of interest between credit rating agencies — like Moody’s, Fitch, and S&P — and big financial institutions like banks.”

He has pushed for an independent board, overseen by the SEC, to assign ratings to the agencies. The hope is that the agencies would then not worry about losing business if they provided less-than-ideal ratings.

“We can’t let Wall Street be above the law,” says the senator. “We must have a fair and honest credit rating industry in this country, and I am glad the Department of Justice has pursued this matter.”


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Report: Coach, Burberry Not Actively Discussing A Merger, Despite Rumors

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Though rumors have been swirling that luxury brands Burberry and Coach are considering a merger — leading to a spike in both companies’ stock prices — inside sources say there aren’t any active discussions happening between the two companies at the moment.

On Friday, financial blog Betaville cited sources who said Coach was working with investment bank Evercore on a potential merger with Burberry.

Not so fast, those ever-mysterious “sources familiar with the matter” tell Reuters.

“This is completely speculative. There are no negotiations underway, Burberry is not talking to Coach,” one of the sources said.

Another person with knowledge of the situation said a merger isn’t in the stars, because the two companies have very different strategies.

“Contrary to Coach, most of the efforts at Burberry in the past 20 years have gone in the direction of elevating the brand and moving it into mega-brand price territory, rather than squarely into accessible luxury,” Exane BNP Paribas analyst Luca Solca wrote in a note. “A merger of Coach and Burberry would primarily be a merger of problems,” he said, adding that historically, mergers in the luxury category don’t usually help companies regain “brand traction and desirability.”


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Apple Investigating Report Of iPhone 7 Catching Fire

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

While we’ve heard numerous reports of Samsung smartphones and tablets overheating and catching fire — sometimes destroying property and injuring customers — now Apple is on the receiving end of at least one similar report. 

Apple says it has opened an investigating into the alleged fire of an iPhone 7 device in Australia, Business Insider reports.

The incident, which happened last week, reportedly occurred when the owner of the week-old phone left it in his pants’ pocket inside his car while he went surfing.

Australia’s 7 News reports that when the man returned to his car it was filled with smoke and its interior was destroyed. The man says that he hadn’t dropped the phone or used a foreign charger.

Photos taken by the man show the phone destroyed: broken in two pieces and charred from the fire.

A spokesperson for Apple told Business Insider that it is aware of the incident and has opened an investigation.

A search of the Consumer Product Safety Commissions’ SaferProducts.gov database shows several reports of customers experiencing fires with their iPhones, however, most were related to the device’s charging cable or an older version of the phone.

In a report from 2013, the owner of a iPhone 3GS tells the CPSC that his device was working fine when he noticed the battery had exploded.

“The phone is now useless,” the report states. “This could have caused serious harm if I had been holding the device to my head and talking on it.”

The Australian incident comes after dozens of customers reported similar fires or smoking of Samsung devices. The issues eventually led the tech company to recall and discontinue production of its Galaxy Note 7 smartphone.

Apple is investigating the iPhone 7 a surfer says caught on fire [Business Insider]
iPhone 7 bursts into flames, destroys vehicle [Australia’s 7 News]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Have You Paid Attention This Week? Take The Consumerist Quiz To Find Out

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

There’s a lot of important stuff going on in the news right now — the baseball playoffs, the split-up of Brad and Angelina, the pedestrianization of Norwich City Centre… and probably something else that’s obvious but slipped our mind. We can’t possibly cover it all, but we can quiz you on the things we do cover.

Perhaps all those distractions explain last week’s sub-par scores; the median result was 58%. If we were school teachers, we’d keep you after class for a heart-to-heart about your potential. Unfortunately, we’re quiz-givers so we have to do that thing.

Enough tough talk. Quiz away…


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

7 Things We Learned About The History Of The Slurpee

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Slurpee, which grew along with 7-Eleven to become the preeminent frozen sugary beverage in this country, and perhaps in the world. Like any product that old, the Slurpee has a fascinating history.

Here are a few highlights from Eater’s recent brief history of the drink:

  • You might think of the ICEE as a competitor or knockoff of the Slurpee, but it’s actually a semi-estranged parent: the ICEE was invented in the late ’50s, and 7-Eleven licensed the beverage-freezing technology behind the machine in 1965.
  • The inventor of the ICEE machine used parts of a car air conditioner to create the machine, and the legend says that he drew inspiration from a bottle of soda left in the freezer overnight that became delicious.
  • Frozen beverages have the familiar texture they do because of a few important ingredients: heavily sugared water doesn’t freeze at the same temperature as plain water, and a small amount of carbonation gives the semi-frozen beverage a smoother texture.
  • Slurpees arrive in stores in 5-gallon bags which are attached to the machine, so employees don’t have to do any mixing. Their flavor comes from super-concentrated syrups, since it’s harder to form a delicious flavor around ice crystals than to simply dilute it in liquid.
  • There are dozens of Slurpee flavors, including a few that are only available in certain regions. My new life goal is to try the Vernors Ginger Ale varety in Detroit.
  • As consuming huge quantities of sugar falls out of favor for people of all ages, the company began marketing a “light” Slurpee in 2012, under the name Slurpee Lite. It uses saccharin as a sweetener.
  • Following the “natural” sweetener trend, the company is also developing Slurpees that use cane sugar and stevia, and that have bases of fruit juice.

A Brief History of the Slurpee, a Frozen American Icon [Eater]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

What’s Holding Up Merger Of Alaska Airlines & Virgin America?

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Alaska Airlines’ proposed $4 billion merger with Virgin America is taking longer than either airline anticipated. Days after the companies’ targeted merger completion date passed, federal regulators continue to probe the validity and affect the merger would have on competition. 

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Justice Department’s prolonged review of the merger could be a signal that regulators are worried that airline consolidation — which came under increased scrutiny last year — has taken too much of a toll on competition in the industry.

The Justice Department’s review process began shortly after Alaska proposed to Virgin America in April and continued when regulators asked for additional information on the deal in May.

Alaska and Virgin America previously anticipated closing the deal — which would create the fifth largest airline — on Sept. 30, but extended the deadline to Oct. 17.

While that date has now passed, officials with Alaska tell the WSJ that they aren’t too worried about the deal’s validity, noting that “there is a process at play” and it’s “not quite there yet.”

When asked if there was a back-up plan in case the merger fails regulatory scrutiny, Alaska CEO Brad Tilden said during an earnings call that he just “couldn’t go there.”

One thing is for sure though, if the deal falls through, Virgin America would have to pay Alaska a $78.5 million breakup fee.

The WSJ notes that the Justice Department’s prolonged review process suggests the regulators are worried that previous mega-mergers between American Airlines and U.S. Airways, and United and Continental weren’t good for competition and customer choice.

In fact, the Department announced last year that it would investigate whether airlines — American, United, Delta, and Southwest — colluded to keep ticket prices high by merging together.

Of course, the WSJ points out that the merger between Alaska and Virgin America is on a much smaller scale than those previously approved. Additionally, the two companies have few overlapping routes.

Still, analysts tell the WSJ that the Justice Department could request Alaska make concessions to win approval, such as changing code-share agreements with larger airlines.

Alaska Air, Virgin America Cool Their Jets, as They Await Deal’s Approval [The Wall Street Journal]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

McDonald’s Says It Has All-Day Breakfast To Thank For Beating Earnings Expectations

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

McDonald’s is probably patting itself on the back right about now: the Golden Arches managed to beat earnings expectations and also achieved solid growth in same-restaurant sales for the most recent quarter. The company says the boost is due in part to its all-day breakfast menu, “McPick” promotions, and its recently revamped chicken nuggets.

The company reported a 1.3% uptick in sales at established U.S. restaurants, just barely exceeding analysts’ expectations of 1.2% growth, The Wall Street Journal notes. International sales were up as well, growing by 3.3%, outstripping projected growth of 1.8%.

McDonald’s says those U.S. numbers were “supported by All Day Breakfast, everyday value under the McPick 2 platform and the introduction of Chicken McNuggets with no artificial preservatives.” In September, the chain introduced an expanded all-day breakfast menu nationwide.

Chief Executive Steve Easterbrook has been working to simplify McDonald’s menu and to offer more transparency about how its food is made. And despite the success of all-day breakfast, Easterbrook emphasized that the company remains “committed to driving long-term, profitable results while pursuing our goal of being recognized by our customers as a modern, progressive burger company.” As in, not a breakfast company.

“We are putting the customer at the center of everything we do and are directing our resources towards those innovations and investments that will strengthen our ability to deliver a better McDonald’s experience over time,” he said in a statement.


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Cisco Says It Can Now Shut Down Pirated Live Video Feeds Mid-Stream

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

There are a growing number of pirated live video streams available online, giving viewers unauthorized access to pay-TV, pay-per-view events, and other feeds. Copyright holders say the usual method of sending a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice isn’t fast or effective enough, as hosts of these streams either ignore the demands or quickly move to a different host. Now, Cisco says it has developed a way for copyright holders to play a better game of Anti-Piracy Whac-A-Mole by giving them a way to cut off feeds mid-stream.

TorrentFreak reports on a new project recently announced by Cisco called Streaming Piracy Prevention (SPP) that aims to expedite the takedown process by skipping the whole “sending a DMCA notice” step.

SPP uses forensic digital “watermarks” to identify the original source of the stream; not just the site hosting it, but where the site is pulling the video from. To use a plumbing analogy, this is like shutting off the main water supply to a house full of leaking pipes.

Content providers would have to embed these watermarks — invisible without the right software — into each of their distributors’ feeds. Cisco and its partner Friend MTS would identify pirate feeds, automatically detect the watermark. Friend MTS also has technology to identify individual subscribers who are re-transmitting this content online. Once SPP has an idea of where the pirate is getting their feed from, access is cut off.

If SPP works as advertised, broadcasters like HBO and Showtime would be able to shut down pirates of important event feeds — like last year’s Mayweather/Pacquiao boxing match — in real-time, rather than scrambling to shut them down in advance of the event or going after them in court after the fact.

Cisco claims the process is fully automated. Because it cuts off the allegedly offending feed before it reaches the pirate, the company says that there’s no need for DMCA takedown notices that may go completely disregarded, or might not be attended to until after a live feed is finished.

“Gone are the days of sending a legal notice and waiting to see if anyone will answer,” writes the company. “SPP acts without the need to involve or gain cooperation from any third parties, enabling an unmatched level of cross-device retransmission prevention and allowing service providers to take back control of their channels, to maximize their revenue.”


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Wells Fargo Employees Say High-Pressure Atmosphere Caused Panic Attacks, Shingles

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Wells Fargo employees caught up in the bank’s fake account fiasco lost more than their jobs if they did or didn’t meet sales goals: they also say they suffered physically and emotionally from the pressure placed on them by management to “sell, sell, sell.”

The New York Times compiled several first-hand stories from these employees, who recall coercing customers into opening accounts they never needed and the physical toll the job — and their illegal activities — took on their lives.

Angie, a former banker from Wisconsin, outlined the steps she took to meet sales goals, including opening travel checking accounts for customers by convincing them that it was unsafe to travel without a separate checking account and debit card.

She also opened and closed accounts without customer permission and coerced customers to open credit card accounts to use as overdraft protection.

“I started to have extreme physical stress-related symptoms as well as random panic attacks,” she recalls. “ At some point during that summer, the stress was so intense that I could no longer handle the pressure.”

After that, she says she began drinking hand sanitizer before meetings to help deal with “severe panic attacks” brought on by knowing she had to sell unneeded services.

The woman eventually took a leave of absence to seek treatment in December 2012, at which time she was drinking at least one bottle of sanitizer a day.

For Scott, who worked as a teller and sales rep in Illinois, the pressure from higher-ups to meet sales goals affected both his physical and emotional health.

“There were numerous days where I would hide in the men’s bathroom crying. It got so bad that one day I left work to go to the emergency room because I thought I was having a heart attack. It turns out it was an anxiety attack,” he said. “I thought I was going to have a heart attack or stroke if I stayed any longer.”

He tells the Times that the pressure from management was relentless when it came to up-selling customers. In fact, he recalls one day being scolded for not selling an elderly woman a credit card by telling her that she could use it as a form of ID.

Other tactics the bankers used included pressuring customers to open online banking accounts at all costs, even going as far as creating an email account for them.

Dennise, another banker in Texas, tells the Times she believes that management’s notion that nothing was ever enough contributed to her health issues while working for Wells Fargo.

Although she says she was reaching her sales goals, every morning she would have to sit with her boss and go over the previous day and her relationship with each customer.

“ I had to tell them why I didn’t force them into opening that third, fourth, fifth checking account that they could have used for Christmas, their son’s birthday, school, a pet and so on,” she recalls. “I had to explain why I did not feel comfortable with pushing people into paying for something they did not need.”

In the end, she says the stress was too much.

“I developed shingles,” she said. “The last straw was when the district manager laughed at me in front of my manager because I explained that I did not feel comfortable with the sales culture and the robotic paragraphs they had us memorize to force people into giving in. The following day I put in my two weeks’ notice.”

The stories the former Wells Fargo employees tell the Times are similar to those reported previously by other workers.

These stories include the former bank manager and retail banking employee who spoke about the sales goals they characterized as aggressive and often unreasonable — and the bogus accounts they claim that managers knew about but ignored – and the personal banker who recalled working late on Christmas Eve, after the bank had closed and her co-workers had all gone home, trying to persuade her family members and friends to open accounts with the bank so she could meet sales quotas.

Voices From Wells Fargo: ‘I Thought I Was Having a Heart Attack’ [The New York Times]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Comcast Doubles Down On Buzzfeed With Another $200M Investment

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

In its continuing quest to take over the content world, Comcast is once again splashing out with a big investment into journalism and listicle juggernaut BuzzFeed.

According to sources cited by Recode, NBCUniversal — Comcast’s TV and movie division – is finalizing a deal to pour $200 million into the digital publisher, which will result in a valuation of about $1.7 billion for BuzzFeed.

If this sounds familiar, it’s because NBCUniversal invested $200 million in BuzzFeed in 2015, with a resulting valuation of $1.5 billion.

A rep for BuzzFeed wouldn’t comment on the deal to Recode, but did say the company has a “great relationship” with NBCUniversal.

“We’re always talking about broadening the relationship as part of our plan to grow as an independent company,” she said. NBCUniversal declined to comment.

Although BuzzFeed missed its revenue goals in 2015, since then the publisher has been nabbing some revenue dollars, largely in part to its video brand Tasty and other branded video projects. To that end, half of BuzzFeed’s revenue this year could come from video, The New York Times reported, with that share predicted to hit 75% in the next two years. Getting this $200 million will no doubt help with that effort.

Comcast has striving to break into the curated online video craze that has all the marketing and advertising kids excited. In Sept. 2015, the company launched Watchable, a curated video service that posts video clips from digital partners like BuzzFeed and Vox, both of whom received substantial financial investments from Comcast.

NBCUniversal is doubling its bet on BuzzFeed by investing another $200 million [Recode]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Liberty Mutual Pays California Counties For Advertising Accident Forgiveness Insurance Where It Isn’t Allowed

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Accident forgiveness in auto insurance is a pretty simple concept: while plans that have the feature cost more, your insurance company can’t hike your premiums after you get in a crash and actually need the insurance. It also happens to be illegal in California, which is why the district attorneys in San Diego, Riverside, and Los Angeles counties filed a consumer protection lawsuit against Liberty Mutual over ads touting the feature, which it settled for $925,000.

The commercials were meant for a nationwide audience, but reached the majority of television viewers in California. They contained a small, fast-moving disclaimer in fine print at the bottom of the screen that was easy to miss.

The insurance company didn’t admit fault, but will pay each of the counties $308,322 in civil penalties for the ads and investigative costs. The insurer also must follow California laws in its future ads, and worked with the counties to change its advertising.

Liberty Mutual to pay $925K in accident forgiveness ad lawsuit [San Diego Union-Tribune]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Police: KFC Worker Pulls Gun On Boss, Returns For Paycheck The Next Day

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

A dispute between an employee of a New Mexico KFC and his boss escalated to the point of pulling out weapons, but that didn’t stop the aggrieved worker from showing up the next day to collect his paycheck.

According to a report from Ruidoso News, a supervisor at the restaurant told a worker he wasn’t pulling his weight. He responded with some choice words, which led to an argument, and the worker chest-bumping his boss. And not in that fun way you might see in a bromantic comedy starring Seth Rogen and Paul Rudd.

The supervisor shoved the worker back, sending him to the ground outside the restaurant. When he got back up, he allegedly had a knife in his hand, according to what the supervisor told police.

The fight continued, with the employee making his way to a car he’d been preparing to leave in with a coworker. He then allegedly pulled out a handgun and waved it at his boss.

The two workers drove off, but when they came back the next day to pick up their paychecks, police officers were there to greet them instead.

The worker who’d allegedly brandished the gun had an outstanding warrant, and if video surveillance support his supervisor’s account of the incident, police planned to charge him with aggravated battery as well.

His fellow worker was arrested on charges of concealing identity and resisting, evading, or obstructing a peace officer, after he failed to give his name and follow officers’ instructions while they were trying to arrest his friend.

Employer-employee dispute at KFC turns extra crispy [Ruidoso News]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Eleventh U.S. Death Linked To Takata Airbags

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

An eleventh person has died in the United States as a result of a shrapnel-shooting Takata airbag, according to federal safety regulators. 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration confirmed Thursday the death of a 50-year-old woman in California last month was linked to a defective Takata airbag in a Honda Civic.

The woman was driving the 2001 Honda Civic on Sept. 30 when it struck another vehicle, making a left turn, head on. The woman was rushed to the hospital, where she died from her injuries, CBS News reports.

NHTSA says the vehicle, which was recalled in 2008 but never fixed according to records, was included in the segment of Honda and Acura cars deemed to be of “substantially higher risk” for explosive, deadly deployments.

The California death makes the tenth in a Honda vehicle in the U.S. Ford is the only other carmaker to have a vehicle involved in a Takata-related death. Earlier this year, the Dec. 22 death of a Georgia man driving a Ford Ranger pickup was linked to airbag shrapnel.

Honda said in a statement to CBS News that its “thoughts and deepest sympathies are with the family of the driver during this difficult time.”

The carmaker reiterated NHTSA’s claim that the vehicle had been on the recall list for years, noting that it had sent the registered owner more than 20 recall notices since 2008. However, because the woman purchased the car in 2015, it was unclear if she had received the notices.

The woman’s family tells CBS News that she was driving to get a flu shot when the crash occurred.

“My mom was a very safe driver. Seat belt was on, always,” the woman’s son said. “She was very loving, charismatic. Always had a smile.”

Faulty Takata airbags take 11th life in U.S., a grandmother: feds [CBS News]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

British American Tobacco Offers $47B For Reynolds American

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

More than a decade after British American Tobacco bought a roughly 42% stake in tobacco biggie R.J. Reynolds American, the London-based company is back for the rest, offering $47 billion to create the world’s largest tobacco company. 

Reynolds, the maker of cigarette brands like Newport and Camel, confirmed on Friday that it had received a non-binding proposal from BAT to purchase approximately 58% of company stock that BAT does not currently own.

The North Carolina-based company says that its board of directors will evaluate the offer and respond accordingly. However, it did not give a timetable for which the discussions would occur.

For its part, BAT — the maker of brands like Lucky Strike and Dunhill — said in a statement that it had not had prior discussions with Reynolds before offering the $47 billion deal.

According to BAT’s offer, $20 billion is being offered in cash, while the remaining $27 billion would be in BAT shares.

The company believes the proposal is a good fit, as it would create “a stronger, truly global tobacco and Next Generation Products (NGP) company.”

The combined group would be the world’s largest listed tobacco and NGP business by net turnover and operating profit with exposure to both cash generative developed and high growth developing markets, BAT said in a statement.

BAT expects the merger to create synergies of around $400 million.

Of course, BAT and Reynolds aren’t exactly strangers, the two companies have been tied together since 2004, when Reynolds bought BAT subsidiary Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corp.

Under the long-standing Governance Agreement between the two companies, the proposed merger must be approved by the independent directors of Reynolds not designated by BAT.

BAT’s merger proposal comes just a year after Reynolds completed its own $27.5 billion acquisition of Lorillard Inc., the company behind Newport cigarettes. As part of that deal, the two companies were required to divest four brands — Salem, Winston, Kool, and Maverick — to Imperial Tobacco Group.


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Voice Actors Go On Strike Against 11 Major Video Game Publishers

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

After failing to come to terms with a coalition of 11 video game companies, including big names like Electronic Arts and Take-Two Interactive Software Inc., thousands of voice-over actors are now officially on strike.

The Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Arts (SAG-AFTRA) had set 12:01 a.m. on Oct. 21 as the start for the strike if the two sides hadn’t come to terms in their dispute over pay, Venture Beat reports.

“A last attempt to reach an agreement with video game employers this week was not successful,” the union said Friday. “Management remains unwilling to agree to fair terms that would bring the interactive contract into the 21st century.”

Actors want part of the revenue from game sales, as well as the industry standard baseline rate of around $825 for a four-hour recording session.

“In this industry, which frequently uses performers and understands the intermittent and unpredictable nature of this type of work, fair compensation includes secondary payments when games hit a certain level of success with consumers, not simply higher upfront wages,” the union said in a statement. “Secondary compensation is what allows professional performers to feed their families in between jobs.”

Actors on strike are expected to picket outside EA on Monday at its Los Angeles studio, the union said Friday.

“We have proposed a fair payment structure that enables the sustainability of a professional performer community,” the union says. “These employers have unreasonably refused that. The time has come to end the freeloader model of compensation, and that is why our members are united behind this cause.”

A spokesman for the companies said that no meetings are yet scheduled between the negotiators.

“We had hoped this would be successful, but union leadership left mediation without providing a counteroffer. We urged union leaders to put the package to a vote of their membership, but union leaders refused,” said Scott J. Witlin of the law firm of Barnes & Thornburg, the chief negotiator for the companies, in a statement.

As for whether or not video game production will be affected by the strike — it’s unclear how many of the nearly 5,000 voice actors who specialize in the industry are participating in the walkout — that seems unlikely, Witlin said.

“Given the long production cycle for a console game, the strike would have to go on for a very long time for it to have an impact,” he noted.


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Trouble With Twitter, Reddit, Or The Rest Of The Internet This Morning? It’s Not Just You.

http://ift.tt/2duZWCY

Users of dozens of popular sites and services — including Spotify, Twitter, Github, Reddit, Airbnb, and others — are grumbling about slow load times, missing content, or sites just plain being down periodically today. The good news is: no, it’s not just you. The bad news is: big chunks of the internet aren’t working because of a deliberate attack.

The core issue is a massive DDoS attack against DNS host Dyn, as TechCrunch first spotted.

A DNS hosting service is one that basically connects a server to a name, and makes it so you can type a website name into your browser and have it resolve into a specific set of hosted content somewhere. So translating this all out of tech and into English, what’s happening is that some party or parties is/are sending massive amounts of coordinated traffic to one particular hosting company — Dyn — in order to overwhelm its ability to function.

As a result, legitimate users connecting to sites managed by Dyn may not be able to access the content they’re looking for, due to the barrage of robotic requests running interference.

The attack particularly seems to be affecting the US East region, and began around 6:00 this morning Eastern time — the hour when East Coast dwellers are first getting up, checking their phones, and heading into work, there to use the internet.

Sites that may be affected include Dyn itself, Twitter, Etsy, Github, SoundCloud, Spotify, the New York Times, all Vox Media sites, and more, according to TechCrunch and Hacker News. Other tech companies like Level 3 and ZenDesk have also been reporting connection issues related to this particular attack.

A look at the homepage of Down Detector right now is a pretty stark visual of how many sites are affected — you can see the spikes everywhere, and look up specific sites you’re trying to reach.

Some of the most-reported outages on Down Detector as of about 9:15.

There’s not much individual users can do about it right now except be patient and try not to spam reload requests too much.


by Kate Cox via Consumerist

Report: AT&T May Be Trying To Buy Time Warner

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

With the acquisition of DirecTV complete and in the rear-view mirror behind it, AT&T is reportedly setting its eye on a new target to go out and buy: venerable media brand Time Warner.

No, not Time Warner Cable — which Charter already bought, anyway. Time Warner, the company that owns HBO, CNN, Cartoon Network, all of Warner Bros., and a whole bunch of other media brands you know.

Bloomberg reports that executives from AT&T and Time Warner have been meeting in “informal talks” during recent weeks to discuss various ways of working together — including a possible merger.

The ever-popular “people familiar with the matter” told Bloomberg that the deliberations are still just private talks, and nothing has yet elevated to the stage of hiring a financial advisor or seeking specific transaction terms.

Still, analysts Bloomberg spoke with basically found branching into content to be an obvious move for AT&T. Basically, the once-Ma-Bell, now-Death-Star would be pulling a Comcast: that cable giant acquired NBCUniversal in a master stroke of vertical integration in 2011, and we’ve all been living with the consequences ever since.

Acquiring a media powerhouse like Time Warner would give AT&T a whole lot of original, high-value content right there under its own roof, which is helpful when it comes to both saving money on, and making large profits from, showing people content.

Time Warner, however, may be more cautious. As Bloomberg points out, it’s been acquired before: remember AOL Time Warner? That 2001 merger — landing exactly when dial-up died and always-on internet, without AOL, began to hit big — is widely considered one of the worst merger ideas in the history of business.

AT&T Discussed Idea of Takeover in Time Warner Meetings [Bloomberg]


by Kate Cox via Consumerist

Consumerist Friday Flickr Finds

http://ift.tt/2duNtzo

Here are five of the best photos that readers added to the Consumerist Flickr Pool in the last week, picked for usability in a Consumerist post or for just plain neatness.

theonlybob111
Karen Chappell
Keoni Cabral
Mike Matney
Janet Ulliott

Want to see your pictures on our site? Our Flickr pool is the place where Consumerist readers upload photos for possible use in future Consumerist posts. Just be a registered Flickr user, go here, and click “Join Group?” up on the top right. Choose your best photos, then click “send to group” on the individual images you want to add to the pool.


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Backpage Executives Seek Dismissal Of Pimping Charges

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Earlier this month, the Attorney General of California took the unusual step of charging the CEO of classifieds site Backpage and two of the company’s major shareholders with pimping and conspiracy to commit pimping. At the time, AG Kamala Harris said that Backpage was “unlawfully designed…to be the world’s top online brothel.” Now the company’s lawyers are seeking dismissal of those charges.

Backpage ostensibly is a free classifieds site for everything from apartments to bass players, but according to the California AG’s investigation, it makes pretty much all of its money from charging sex workers to advertise in its “adult” section.

These include underage providers, according to the allegations. As part of the investigation, the state “hired” escorts through Backpage ads, then interviewed them and didn’t arrest them.

One 16-year-old provider explained that being too young to have a credit card was no impediment to listing herself on the site: she used a prepaid debit card, and the site otherwise had no way to know that she was underage.

Harris is a candidate for the U.S. Senate from California this year, and the lawyers representing Backpage’s investors and CEO claim that the crusade against Backpage is a crusade meant to make her look good to voters.

“Harris will be warmly ensconced in the United States Senate by the time her blatant violations of the First Amendment and federal law are finally adjudicated,” the two investors said in a separate statement. The court date in this case isn’t until after Election Day.

Instead, all three say that the state has no authority to bring such a complaint, and their business is protected by the Communications Decency Act and the First Amendment.

Backpage.com lawyers seek dismissal of charges against CEO, partners [Sacramento Bee]
Backpage.com operators seek to drop pimping charges [Mercury News]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Authorities In Detroit Investigating Hepatitis A Cases Linked To Whole Foods

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Public health authorities in Detroit are raising the food safety alarm: anyone who bought prepared food at the Whole Foods store at 115 Mack Ave in midtown should seek medical attention, since they may have been exposed to Hepatitis A. While details are fuzzy, they know that the span from Oct. 6-10 is when any exposure would have happened.

So far, one employee in the prepared-foods department and one customer who ate food from that department have confirmed cases of the disease. Hepatitis A can be transmitted either by a person in contact with food who has poor hygiene, or by contaminated food.

As far as authorities know, this isn’t liked to recent problems in regional production facilities for Whole Foods, but is limited to the one store in Detroit. However, they’re still looking into how the employee and the customer contracted the disease.

If someone who was exposed to the disease is treated with either the Hepatitis A vaccine or immune globulin within two weeks of exposure, they can avoid illness. People who were exposed should visit their own physician, and the local health department in Detroit is also holding clinics for people who may have been exposed.

While some people with the disease have no symptoms at all, others remain ill with fever, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, jaundice, and joint pain for as long as six months.

Viral Hepatitis – Hepatitis A Information [CDC]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Tesla’s Future Fully Self-Driving Cars Won’t Be Allowed On Uber, Lyft Platforms

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

As you may have heard, Tesla recently announced it would begin making fully autonomous vehicles. But if your enterprising mind immediately began thinking of ways you could make money by using your future self-driving car, say, by providing rides through Uber or Lyft, without actually driving, we’ve got some bad news: the electric carmaker will only allow its vehicles to be used on its own ride-share network. 

ArsTechnica reports that included in Tesla’s website is a section that prohibits owners from using their vehicles for the purpose of collecting revenue — unless it’s through the still-to-be-created Tesla Network.

According to the section “Full Self-Driving Capability,” using your self-driving car to cart around friends and family is okay, but working for Uber and Lyft isn’t.

“Please note also that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride healing for friends and family is fine, but doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year,” the company says.

Of course, the company doesn’t say exactly how it will be able to determine if its newer cars are being used for ride-sharing, or why customers would even want to work in the ride-sharing business.

It should also be noted, ArsTechnica points out, that while Tesla says its future cars will come equipped with all the hardware to be fully autonomous, cars currently on the road aren’t, and thus, seemingly wouldn’t be held to the same prohibitions related to ride-sharing.

Don’t plan on using your autonomous Tesla to earn money with Uber or Lyft [ArsTechnica]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Watkins Lawsuit Over Pepper Tin Sizes Will Go Forward In Federal Court

http://ift.tt/1KqwWcW

If the outside of a food package is the same, especially for a food you don’t buy very often, do you notice? Longtime Consumerist readers might, but most people wouldn’t. Last year, spice giant McCormick quietly shrank down the contents of its boxes of black pepper, but kept using the same size container. Tiny competitor Watkins noticed, and filed a federal lawsuit against McCormick accusing it of false advertising. A judge decided this week that the lawsuit could go forward.

McCormick didn’t see the problem with this difference in its packaging:

See the difference? No? That's why Watkins is suing.

Mark Jacobs, chief executive of Watkins, explained to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that his company was new to the spice market, and noticed that McCormick was dropping its pepper prices while the wholesale price was going up. Wondering how such a thing was possible, that’s when the company noticed that the containers were the same size, but sometimes considerably lighter.

FURTHER READING: Slack Fill: The Grocery Shrink Ray’s Sneakier Twin

In her opinion [PDF], the judge noted that McCormick’s argument that its product packaging isn’t advertising or promotion “defies common sense and law.” Often the label and packaging are the only chance that a company has to communicate to potential customers what their product is about.

A box that’s the same size as a competitor’s product even though it contains two fewer ounces of pepper is a very strong signal.

The Watkins suit has been combined with consumers’ class action suits over the pepper shrinkage, and the whole case will go forward in January.

Pepper partisans can keep fighting about tin sizes, judge says [Minneapolis Star-Tribune]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Lawsuit: Shopper’s Imprisonment In Walgreens Store Led To His Death

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

A Florida woman is suing Walgreens after she says her husband’s unlawful imprisonment in an Orange County store ultimately led to his death.

According to the lawsuit, reported by Courthouse News, the woman’s 69-year-old husband visited the restroom of his local Walgreens, and then headed for the store’s exit. He was approached by employees, the complaint says, who told him to “stop walking and wait for us.”

The widow claims the workers ordered her husband to follow them back to the bathroom, and told him he had to clean it because he “left a mess,” and left feces all over the bathroom.

“Walgreens, with the purpose of imposing a confinement in the restroom facilities of the Premises against [the man’s] will, imprisoned [the man] and forced him to clean the restroom facilities and mop the floor,” the complaint says.

The woman says her husband was a regular Walgreens customer and that store employees were aware of his various physical ailments. The complaint accuses the workers of holding him for 20 minutes, during which time the man was “humiliated, disgraced and injured in his feelings, emotionally and mentally.”

Although the complaint doesn’t specify how or when the man later died, his wife is putting the blame entirely on Walgreens.

“Walgreens’ conduct was intentional and reckless, outrageous … [and] caused [the man] emotional distress, and the emotional distress was severe that resulted in the death of [the man],” the complaint says.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages on claims of false imprisonment, intentional infliction of severe emotional distress, and loss of consortium.

Widow Says Walgreens Imprisoned Her Husband [Courthouse News]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist