Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In 2017, a lawsuit alleged Tesla made materially false and misleading statements regarding its preparedness to produce Model 3 cars. [23] The U.S. Department of Justice also began an investigation in 2018 into whether Tesla misled investors and misstated production figures about the Model 3. [24] The lawsuit was dismissed in Tesla's favor in ...
Criticism of Google includes concern for tax avoidance, misuse and manipulation of search results, its use of others' intellectual property, concerns that its compilation of data may violate people's privacy and collaboration with the US military on Google Earth to spy on users, [1] censorship of search results and content, its cooperation with the Israeli military on Project Nimbus targeting ...
A judge struck down Eberhard's claim that he was one of only two company founders. [67] Tesla said in a statement that the ruling is "consistent with Tesla's belief in a team of founders, including the company's current CEO and Product Architect Elon Musk, and Chief Technology Officer JB Straubel, who were both fundamental to the creation of ...
The Ripoff Report home page also says: "Complaints Reviews Scams Lawsuits Frauds Reported, File your review. Consumers educating consumers", which allows a reasonable inference that the Ripoff Report encourages negative content. Moreover, Ripoff Report's webmaster affirmed that positive posts about a company are not allowed in the website.
Gonzalez v. Google LLC, 598 U.S. 617 (2023), was a case at the Supreme Court of the United States which dealt with the question of whether or not recommender systems are covered by liability exemptions under section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934, which was established by section 509 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, for Internet service providers (ISPs) in dealing with terrorism ...
The scammer may claim that this is a unique ID used to identify the user's computer, before reading out the identifier to "verify" that they are a legitimate support company with information on the victim's computer, or claim that the CLSID listed is actually a "Computer Licence Security ID" that must be renewed. [33] [34] [35]
United States v. Google Inc., No. 3:12-cv-04177 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2012), is a case in which the United States District Court for the Northern District of California approved a stipulated order for a permanent injunction and a $22.5 million civil penalty judgment, the largest civil penalty the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has ever won in history. [1]
United States v. Google LLC is an ongoing federal antitrust case brought by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) against Google LLC on January 24, 2023. [2] The suit accuses Google of illegally monopolizing the advertising technology (adtech) market in violation of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.