Connect with us

Business

Meta Fined Record $1.3 Billion And Ordered To Stop Sending European User Data To US

Published

on

meta

LONDON, England – The European Union smacked Meta with a record $1.3 billion privacy punishment on Monday and ordered it to stop sending customers’ personal information across the Atlantic by October, the latest salvo in a decade-long case started by concerns about US cyber snooping.

The 1.2 billion euro penalty is the largest since the EU’s rigorous data privacy law was enacted five years ago, exceeding Amazon’s 746 million euro charge for data protection infringement in 2021.

Meta, which had earlier warned that services for its European consumers could be cut off, has vowed to appeal and ask courts to halt the judgment immediately.

According to the business, “there is no immediate disruption to Facebook in Europe.” The decision pertains to user data such as names, email and IP addresses, messages, viewing history, geolocation data, and other information used by Meta and other internet behemoths such as Google for targeted online advertising.

“This decision is flawed, unjustified, and sets a dangerous precedent for the countless other companies transferring data between the EU and the U.S.,” said Meta’s president of global affairs, Nick Clegg, and chief legal officer Jennifer Newstead, in a statement.

It’s the latest twist in a legal saga that began in 2013 when Austrian lawyer and privacy activist Max Schrems filed a complaint about Facebook’s handling of his data in the aftermath of former NSA contractor Edward Snowden’s revelations about electronic surveillance by US security agencies. This includes the revelation that Facebook gave agencies access to Europeans’ data.

The issue has highlighted the differences between Europe’s stringent approach to data protection and the more loose framework in the United States, which lacks federal privacy legislation. With a succession of legislation requiring them to police their platforms more closely and protect users’ personal information, the EU has been a global leader in limiting Big Tech’s power.

The EU’s top court threw down the Privacy Shield deal, which covered EU-US data transfers, in 2020, saying it didn’t do enough to shield people from the US government’s electronic probing. The judgment on Monday found that legal stock contracts, another instrument for governing data transfers, were also unconstitutional.

Last year, Brussels and Washington agreed on a revised Privacy Shield that Meta might utilize, but the agreement is awaiting a decision from European officials on whether it effectively safeguards data privacy.

meta

EU authorities have reviewed the pact, and the bloc’s lawmakers this month urged for revisions, claiming that the safeguards are insufficient Meta.

The fine was imposed by Ireland’s Data Protection Commission, which serves as Meta’s principal privacy regulator in the EU’s 27-nation bloc, due to the Silicon Valley tech giant’s European headquarters being in Dublin.

The Irish watchdog said it gave Meta five months to stop sending European user data to the US and six months to bring its data operations into compliance “by ceasing the unlawful processing, including storage, in the US” of personal data transferred in violation of the EU’s privacy rules.

In other words, Meta must remove all that data, which may be a greater concern than the punishment, according to Johnny Ryan, a senior fellow at the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, a nonprofit rights organization focused on digital and data issues.

“This order to delete data is causing Meta a lot of grief,” Ryan explained. “It is very difficult to see how it will be able to comply with that order” if the business is required to scrub data for hundreds of millions of European Union users dating back ten years.

If a new transatlantic privacy agreement takes effect before the deadlines, “our services can continue as they do today without any disruption or impact on users,” according to Meta.

Schrems projected that Meta would have “no real chance” of having the verdict overturned. And according to him, a new privacy treaty may not be the last of Meta’s problems because it is likely to be overturned by the EU’s top court.

“Meta intends to rely on the new agreement for transfers in the future, but this is unlikely to be a long-term solution,” Schrems said. “Unless and until U.S. surveillance laws are changed, Meta will most likely have to keep EU data in the EU.”

meta

Schrems suggested a “federated” social network in which European data is kept in Meta’s European data centers “unless users, for example, chat with a U.S. friend.”

In its most recent earnings report, Meta cautioned that if there is no legal basis for data transfers, it will be compelled to stop supplying its products and services in Europe, “which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.”

If the transfers are eventually halted, the social media business may undergo a costly and difficult overhaul of its processes. According to its website, Meta has a fleet of 21 data centers. However, 17 of them are in the United States. Denmark, Ireland, and Sweden are the other three European countries. Another is located in Singapore.

Other social media behemoths are under scrutiny for their data practices. TikTok has attempted to assuage Western concerns about the Chinese-owned short video-sharing app’s potential cybersecurity hazards by announcing a $1.5 billion proposal to store user data in the United States on Oracle servers.

SOURCE – (AP)

Business

Travellers Pissed at Air Canada Over New Baggage Fees

Published

on

Air Canada, Baggage Fees
Travellers angery over Air Canada imposing new surcharges on low-cost flights

Air Canada’s decision to charge new fees on budget fares has angered travellers and industry experts, who argue the airline unfairly burdens passengers with additional costs.

Travellers, industry insiders, and the federal government have criticized Air Canada for imposing new surcharges on low-cost flights, claiming the airline is unjustly burdening consumers with extra expenses.

Beginning January 3, 2025, the first carry-on bag for passengers using Air Canada’s basic-economy fare within North America will cost $35, and each additional bag will cost $50. Purses, laptop bags, and any small belongings that fit beneath the seat are free.

Additionally, by the end of February, checked baggage taxes on domestic and some international flights will rise to $35 to $42 for the first bag and $50 to $60 for the second.

“That is awful. An airline passenger, Nico Arellano, told CTV News, “The prices are getting pretty intense, and the service isn’t getting any better.” “I have two children — a baby and a toddler — and we have to bring all their essentials and pay extra for that; for families, it’s unacceptable.”

Air Canada checked baggage fee

While premium enhancements like seats with more legroom will still be more expensive, the new policy also adds fees for seat selection and modifications for low-cost passengers.

“At this time, I don’t choose seats. Kinsenge Mbaga, travelling from Ottawa to Fredericton, states, “I would like to travel as economically as possible.” “Baggage, particularly carry-on, is perhaps the fee that irritates me the most.

It is pleasant when they’re not included with the ticket, which should be standard. It should be possible to bring one or two bags, but this isn’t always the case, and occasionally, being at the gate will cost you more.”

The airline’s new restrictions have drawn criticism from Transport Minister Anita Anand, who described them as a “cash grab” that harms Canadians who already face increased travel expenses.

Air Canada, meanwhile, defended its choice, claiming that the levies are required to offset growing labour and operating expenses.

While travellers buying higher-tier fares would continue to enjoy free baggage allowances, the airline noted that comparable tariffs are already in effect with several international carriers.

Critics contend that the surcharges unfairly affect visitors on a tight budget and could result in higher overall prices when compared to slightly higher-tier fares. The changes have angered travellers, especially those who depend on lower-cost fare options.

“Carriers are free to charge whatever they like. It costs $35 now, $60 next week, and $100 next week.

Sign of the Times

Airlines expert John Gradek said, “Nobody is keeping an eye on these things; it’s based on what the market can bear.” “These fees are not yet complete. They can take additional actions to further nickel-and-dime passengers travelling on domestic routes.

As part of its continuous efforts to strengthen air passenger rights in Canada, the federal government has committed to examining how these changes would affect consumers. Travellers are advised to study the tariff information carefully to prevent unforeseen fees.

“It’s a shame that Air Canada has decided to join the likes of Porter and WestJet in charging people for carry-on bags for the lowest fare type and it’s a sign of the times that Air Canada is afraid of losing market shares and wants to basically maximise its revenue by having these cheap airfares with a whole bunch of additional revenues coming in,” Gradek says.

“It’s not a stretch to think that the government, within its regulation, can start to provide oversight and management of the way in which these airlines are putting these fees into the marketplace.”

Meanwhile, on April 2, 2025, Air Canada will begin nonstop flights between Vancouver and Manila. The direct service will operate using a Boeing 787 Dreamliner four times a week.

In a statement, executive vice president for revenue and network planning Mark Galardo stated, “The Philippines is an important market reflecting long-standing family ties between our two countries with growing business connections and tourism opportunities.”

He noted that Air Canada is making travel between North America and the Philippines even more convenient for business and leisure travellers with its vast domestic and trans-border network in Vancouver, built to easily link to the airline’s international flights.

Related News:

Air Canada Works With Thailand to Promote Long-Stay Airfares

 

Continue Reading

Business

Unemployment in Canada Hits 6.8% to an 8 Year High

Published

on

Canada Unemployment
Canada's unemployment rate increased to 6.8% in November, a near eight year high.

The Canadian dollar fell Friday due to a sharp increase in Canada’s unemployment rate, but the greenback recovered overall, putting USD/CAD above 1.4150. The USD/CAD pair has reached its highest daily close in years.

The drop in the number of loonies follows Statistics Canada’s announcement that, under Justin Trudeau’s leadership, the unemployment rate has increased to its highest level since January 2017.

Canada’s economic stagnation and ongoing issues with homelessness and poverty are the main causes of the country’s high unemployment rate. As the wealth gap between the United States and Canada grows, the nation is also experiencing a flight of investment capital across some industries.

Federal Conservatives claimed, “Justin Trudeau has devastated Canada’s economy,” in a news statement on Friday. “Canada’s labour force grew by 137,800, which is more than double the gains in jobs,”

Since April 2023, Canada’s unemployment rate has risen by 1.7%.

“Worse still, this report showed that only 12% of new jobs were created in the private sector,” the Conservatives argued.

This is a direct effect of Trudeau’s relentless taxation and bureaucratic red tape, which have attacked private companies and industries. Because of Trudeau’s failing policies, Canada has lost more than $500 billion in foreign investment.

According to Conservatives, despite a 600,000 rise in the working population, Canada only added 329,000 jobs in the past year.

The third quarter GDP slowed significantly to 1% annualized, while Canada’s GDP per capita has been declining for six consecutive quarters, according to another Statistics Canada data released last week.

However, a Scotiabank economist has cautioned about Canada’s delayed government budget update. The Liberal government’s silence means Canadians may not receive a national update until after Christmas.

Rebekah Young, an economist at the Bank of Nova Scotia, said in a note on Wednesday that there are even speculations “swirling” that there won’t be a fiscal update. “It’s not clear when — or even if — it will come before the holidays, but the writing is mostly on the wall,” Young said.

She stated, ” More spending is clearly in the offing ” regarding the Liberals’ recently announced GST vacation and $250 rebate checks for working Canadians.

The House of Commons approved the GST component of that $6.3 billion economic stimulus package on November 28.

She stated, “the balance and then some is expected to keep Canadians from the polls a bit longer.”

The Liberals are financing the stimulus package to maintain the support of the New Democratic Party and prevent a vote of no-confidence.

As evidence of the government’s economic restraint, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland promised in the 2024 budget that government expenditures would not exceed a $40.1 billion deficit in 2023–2024.

But the Parliamentary Budget Officer recently cautioned that the government has probably overreached itself.

Related News:

Beef Prices in Canada Reach Record Highs

As Trudeau Gaslights About a Great Economy, Canadians See the Truth

Continue Reading

Business

TikTok Ban Upheld By US Federal Appeals Court

Published

on

TikTok Ban USA
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied TikTok’s petition to overturn the law

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has upheld a lower court’s ban on TikTok, forcing it to cut ties with its Chinese parent business, ByteDance or face suspension.

TikTok and ByteDance, the second plaintiff in the complaint, are now expected to appeal to the US Supreme Court, but it is uncertain whether the court would hear the case.

“The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting an individual’s right to free expression, and we expect them to do so on this critical constitutional issue,” TikTok spokesperson Michael Hughes told AP.

“Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people,”

Hughes stated. Unless stopped, he claimed, the act “will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.”

Trump TikTok Ban

Though the issue is in court, President-elect Donald Trump would likely hand the two firms a lifeline. Trump attempted a TikTok ban during his first term but stated during the presidential campaign that he is now opposed.

President Joe Biden signed the measure in April, capping a years-long saga in Washington over the short-form video-sharing app. Due to its ties to China, the government views it as a national security danger.

“Today’s decision is an important step in blocking the Chinese government from weaponising TikTok to collect sensitive information about millions of Americans, to covertly manipulate the content delivered to American audiences, and to undermine our national security,” Merrick Garland, the attorney general, said in a statement.

On Friday, a federal appeals court panel upheld a statute that might result in a TikTok ban in the United States within a few months. Here’s what you should know.

The United States has expressed worry that TikTok is gathering huge amounts of user data, particularly sensitive information about watching patterns, which may fall into the hands of the Chinese government through pressure.

Officials have also cautioned that the proprietary algorithm that drives what users view on the app is susceptible to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to alter information on the platform in difficult-to-detect ways. The European Union raised similar concerns on Friday as it probed intelligence, suggesting Russia may have abused the platform to influence Romania’s elections.

TikTok, which sued the government over the law in May, has long disputed that Beijing could use it to spy on or control Americans.

TikTok’s counsel has correctly stated that the US has not given proof demonstrating that the business gave over user data to the Chinese government or changed material for Beijing’s benefit in the US.

They have also contended that the statute is based on future threats, which the Department of Justice has emphasized, citing unnamed actions the two businesses allegedly took in the past in response to Chinese government demands.

Related News:

WhatsApp Now Features a Mention  Tool for Status Updates and Stories

FBI Warns iPhone and Android Users to Stop Texting

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending