_{BROUGHT TO YOU BY}

Welcome to The Fineprint, where we spotlight the small stuff that makes a big difference.

True or false… it is illegal to drive with the inside light of your car switched on.
_{You can find the answer at the end!}

Now let’s take a look at the most interesting legal developments that took place over the past 7 days, including:

• Prince Harry gets in trouble for deleting Signal messages and joins an ongoing debate over the legality of disappearing messages.

• Californian parents go to war with baby bottle companies over toxicity concerns.

• Viral shopping app Temu is sued over malware allegations.

But first…

How do 500,000+ working professionals (like yourself) stay up to date with all of the latest AI tools and updates? They read AI Tool Report’s free daily newsletter!

Use the link below to subscribe with a single click and learn how to save time and earn more with AI in under 5 minutes.

DISCLOSURE

Prince Harry’s Deleted Messages Raise Eyebrows in Court

Why we’re paying attention - Could your next Snapchat land you in contempt of court? If you look beyond the tabloid fodder of Prince Harry’s legal troubles, a critical debate unfolds that affects both the business world and private citizens alike. This case highlights the growing tension between privacy-enhancing technologies, like auto-delete features on messaging apps, and legal obligations to preserve evidence.

Prince Harry has aroused a judge’s suspicion with his ongoing lawsuit against News Group Newspapers (NGN). The judge found out that two years’ worth of messages between Harry and his biographer, JR Moehringer, had mysteriously disappeared. These messages were sent via the messaging app Signal, which probably had its auto-delete feature switched on.

But here’s the pickle: when Harry filed this lawsuit, he had a duty to preserve evidence, and to not delete anything potentially relevant. NGN is now claiming that Harry has breached this duty by letting his Signal messages vanish into thin air. But Harry’s defense? He says those messages had nothing to do with the case, so he hasn’t done anything wrong.

To clear things up, the judge has ordered Harry to submit a written witness statement explaining why these messages disappeared.

PRIVACY VS PRESERVATION

This case shines a light on the ongoing legal debate over auto-deleted or “disappearing” messages. Recently, Amazon executives also faced scrutiny for using Signal’s auto-delete feature.

The FTC argued that Amazon might have used this feature to hide relevant messages related to one of their antitrust lawsuits.

So could sending a Snapchat during a legal battle land you in trouble?

OPEN QUESTIONS…

• Obligations in Lawsuits: Do companies and individuals have to turn off auto-delete on all messaging apps when involved in a lawsuit? Or is it just a matter of not using auto-delete for discussions relevant to the case?

• Proving Relevance: How can you prove deleted messages were relevant or irrelevant if they’re already gone? One hypothetical scenario is where someone does delete relevant messages but another record of those messages still exists—like screenshots or messages on other platforms referencing the deleted content. This might be why the judge has ordered a more extensive search of Harry’s computer, emails, and other documents! If it’s possible to prove that any deleted messages were relevant then the deleter would be in trouble.

THE MESSAGE IS CLEAR  

Auto-delete is a great feature for privacy and security-minded users, but its relationship to disclosure responsibilities during lawsuits is becoming increasingly scrutinized.

Anyone embroiled in legal disputes should be mindful of the risk and responsibilities.

SNIPPETS

Uber and Lyft settled a years-long lawsuit with the state of Massachusetts last week. The companies agreed to pay a combined $175 million for classifying their drivers as independent contractors rather than employees. Moving forward, Uber and Lyft have agreed to a $32.50 minimum wage for Massachusetts drivers along with paid sick leave and healthcare benefits. The companies also agreed to abandon their support for ‘Proposition 22,’ an initiative that pushes for app-based drivers to be treated as independent contractors.

Ding, ding, round two! Meta’s legal department were thrown back into the ring with a disgruntled software engineer on Thursday after a U.S. appeals court revived a lawsuit against the company. Purushothaman Rajaram filed his suit after Meta refused to hire him and alleges that the company has rejected thousands of U.S. citizens like him in favor of cheaper foreign candidates. Apple was faced with similar allegations last year and ended up settling for $25 million despite denying any wrongdoing. Will Meta choose to have their day in court? Or will they settle like their fruity counterpart?

Californian parents lawyered up against Philips North America and Handi-Craft Company after learning that baby bottles sold by the company leach harmful microplastics. According to scientific studies cited in the class action lawsuits, plastic baby bottles leach huge amounts of microplastics into the liquids they contain when heated up. Studies have also found that these microplastics are harmful for human health. Parents argue that the BPA-free labels on packaging lulled them into a false sense of safety—because while the bottles may be BPA-free, they leach plenty of other toxic plastics.

The National Football League (NFL) faced a significant legal setback on June 27 over its Sunday Ticket package. The package allows football fans to watch out-of-market games that wouldn’t normally be shown in their local area—essentially like a VPN for football games. However, because the NFL licenses the games to a single provider (DirecTV), Los Angeles jurors decided that the NFL unfairly limited viewer choices and artificially inflated the Sunday Ticket price ($349 per year). As a result, the league is now expected to pay a substantial $4.7 billion in compensation.

A seven year old lawsuit between Under Armour and its shareholders was finally settled on the 22nd of June. The suit, originally filed in 2017, claimed that CEO Kevin Plank provided misleading information about the company's financial health. They were right to suspect this, as the SEC later proved that Plank manipulated Under Armour’s 2015 revenue by shifting earnings from quarter to quarter to mask the brand’s declining demand. Under Armour agreed to settle the lawsuit for $434 million to avoid further prosecution. Key takeaway? Cook the books, and you will end up getting burned.

Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin has filed a lawsuit against Chinese retailer Temu, accusing them of employing deceptive tactics against consumers. Griffin’s lawsuit cites forensic investigators who have labeled Temu as "the most dangerous malware/spyware package currently in widespread circulation." The app can supposedly gain access to a user’s whole phone without permission. Both Apple and Google have previously banned Temu and its sister app Pinduoduo over privacy and malware concerns. But some believe the governor is just looking out for the Temu competitor that is headquartered in his home state, Walmart.

Save the date: September 16 2024! TikTok and its creators will challenge the US Government in the Court of Appeal over the controversial U.S. law that forces the company to divest from its Chinese parent company or face a ban. This hearing gives TikTok and a group of its creators their chance to argue why the bill should be thrown out. TikTok is keen to take the case to the Supreme Court as it has full power to abolish the bill, and the appeals process is a necessary step to get there, regardless of the outcome.

MEME

Was this email forwarded to you by someone awesome? You can sign up here.

The answer to today’s “did you know” is…

False. It is not advised to drive with the light on because it can impair vision but is not, in fact, illegal.

Remember: always read the Fineprint!