A UK law firm is bringing legal action on behalf of patients it says had their confidential medical records obtained by Google and DeepMind Technologies in breach of data protection laws.

Mishcon de Reya said today it planned a representative action on behalf of Mr Andrew Prismall and the approximately 1.6 million individuals whose data was used as part of a testing programme for medical software developed by the companies.

It told The Register the claim had already been issued in the High Court.

DeepMind, acquired by Google in 2014, worked with the search software giant and Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust under an arrangement formed in 2015.

The law firm said that the tech companies obtained approximately 1.6 million individuals’ confidential medical records without their knowledge or consent.

The Register has contacted Google, DeepMind and the Royal Free Hospital for their comments.

“Given the very positive experience of the NHS that I have always had during my various treatments, I was greatly concerned to find that a tech giant had ended up with my confidential medical records,” lead claimant Prismall said in a statement.

“As a patient having any sort of medical treatment, the last thing you would expect is your private medical records to be in the hands of one of the world’s biggest technology companies.

[…]

In April 2016, it was revealed that the web giant had signed a deal with the Royal Free Hospital in London to build an application called Streams, which can analyse patients’ details and identify those who have acute kidney damage. The app uses a fixed algorithm, developed with the help of doctors, so not technically AI.

The software – developed by DeepMind, Google’s AI subsidiary – was first tested with simulated data. But it was tested again using 1.6 million sets of real NHS medical files provided by the London hospital. However, not every patient was aware that their data was being given to Google to test the Streams software. Streams had been deployed inwards, and thus now handles real people’s details, but during development, it also used live medical records as well as simulated inputs.

Dame Caldicott told the hospital’s medical director, Professor Stephen Powis, that he overstepped the mark, and that there was no consent given by people to have their information used in this way pre-deployment.

[…]

In a data-sharing agreement uncovered by the New Scientist, Google and its DeepMind artificial intelligence wing were granted access to current and historic patient data at three London hospitals run by the Royal Free NHS Trust.

Source: Lawsuit prepped against Google for using Brit patients’ data • The Register

Amazon’s new robot called Astro is designed to track the behavior of everyone in your home to help it perform its surveillance and helper duties, according to leaked internal development documents and video recordings of Astro software development meetings obtained by Motherboard. The system’s person recognition system is heavily flawed, according to two sources who worked on the project.

The documents, which largely use Astro’s internal codename “Vesta” for the device, give extensive insight into the robot’s design, Amazon’s philosophy, how the device tracks customer behavior as well as flow charts of how it determines who a “stranger” is and whether it should take any sort of “investigation activity” against them.

[…]

The meeting document spells out the process in a much blunter way than Amazon’s cutesy marketing suggests.

“Vesta slowly and intelligently patrols the home when unfamiliar person are around, moving from scan point to scan point (the best location and pose in any given space to look around) looking and listening for unusual activity,” one of the files reads. “Vesta moves to a predetermined scan point and pose to scan any given room, looking past and over obstacles in its way. Vesta completes one complete patrol when it completes scanning all the scan point on the floorplan.”

[…]

“Sentry is required to investigate any unrecognized person detected by it or Audio Event in certain set of conditions are met,” one file reads. “Sentry should first try to identify the person if they are not still unrecognized for as long as 30s [seconds]. When the person is identified as unknown or 30s passed, Sentry should start following the person until Sentry Mode is turned off.”

A flow chart presented during the meeting explains exactly what happens when Astro detects a “presence” and how it is designed for “investigating strangers.” If a user has disabled “stranger investigation,” the robot will ignore a stranger. If it’s set to “Sentry mode” or a patrol mode, it will either approach the stranger or follow them, and begin a series of “investigation activities,” which Amazon describes as “a series of actions Sentry takes to investigate audio or presence while recording.” Generally, if Astro begins an investigation, it will follow the stranger, record audio and video of them, and then automatically upload a recording the user can view later.

[…]

Developers who worked on Astro say the versions of the robot they worked on did not work well.

“Astro is terrible and will almost certainly throw itself down a flight of stairs if presented the opportunity. The person detection is unreliable at best, making the in-home security proposition laughable,” a source who worked on the project said. “The device feels fragile for something with an absurd cost. The mast has broken on several devices, locking itself in the extended or retracted position, and there’s no way to ship it to Amazon when that happens.”

[…]

Another source who worked on the project mentioned privacy and navigation as chief concerns. “As for my personal opinions on the device, it’s a disaster that’s not ready for release,” they said. “They break themselves and will almost certainly fall down stairs in real world users’ homes. In addition it’s also (in my opinion) a privacy nightmare that is an indictment of our society and how we trade privacy for convenience with devices like Vesta.”

The source also corroborated that Astro’s facial recognition abilities perform poorly, which is concerning for a device designed mainly to follow people around and determine if they’re a stranger or not.

[…]

“The goal is to make Vesta an ‘intelligent robot,’ and allow some simple but magical interactions with people,” the social robotics document states. To do this, Astro needs to fully map a user’s home, creating a heat map of “choke points” and highly trafficked areas where the robot is likely to get stuck or “places where it will easily get hit by humans” such as hallways, doorways, and the kitchen.

A map of a user’s home, with “choke points” in red

Astro is supposed to learn over time, meaning that it must track what humans are doing, where they are going, and where they are likely to congregate.

[…]

 

Source: Leaked Documents Show How Amazon’s Astro Robot Tracks Everything You Do

On the 32nd anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protests, internet users noticed Microsoft’s Bing search engine was producing some interesting results. Or, rather, it wasn’t producing expected search results for some possibly interesting reasons.

Users searching for the most iconic image of the protests — that of the unidentified person known only as “Tank Man” — were coming up empty. It appeared that Microsoft’s search engine was blocking results for an image that often serves as shorthand for rebellion against the Chinese government.

As was reported by several web users, followed by several news outlets, the apparent blocking of search results could be observed in both the United States and the United Kingdom, leaving users with the impression the Chinese government had pressured Microsoft to moderate search results for “tank man” in hopes of reducing any remembrance of the Tiananmen Square Massacre, which resulted in the deaths of 2,500-3,500 protesters.

The apparent censorship was blamed on Microsoft’s close relationship with the Chinese government, which allowed its search engine to be accessed by Chinese residents in exchange for complying with government censorship requests.

This led to Microsoft being criticized by prominent politicians for apparently allowing the Chinese government to dictate what users around the world could access in relation to the Tiananmen Square protests.

[…]

Shortly after the apparent censorship of the iconic “Tank Man” image was reported, Microsoft claimed the very timely removal of relevant search results was the byproduct of “accidental human error.”

However, the company refused to offer any additional explanation. And, while searching the term “Tank Man” produced search results in Bing, it did not generate the expected results.

Image via The Verge

Several hours after the first “fix,” things returned to normal, with “Tank Man” searches bringing up the actual Tank Man, rather than just tanks or tanks with men near or on the tanks.

Image via Twitter user Steven F

More clarification and comment was sought, but Microsoft apparently had nothing more to say about this “human error” and its conspicuous timing. Nor did it offer any details on whether or not this “human error” originated with its Beijing team. It also didn’t explain why the first fix resulted in images very few people would associate with the term “Tank Man.”

Source: Content Moderation Case Study: Bing Search Results Erases Images Of ‘Tank Man’ On Anniversary Of Tiananmen Square Crackdown (2021) | Techdirt

In an audit it published yesterday [PDF] the agency called out Xiaomi’s Mi 10T 5G phone handset firmware for being able to censor terms such as “Free Tibet”, “Long live Taiwan independence” or “democracy movement”.

Defence Deputy Minister Margiris Abukevicius told reporters at the audit’s release: “Our recommendation is to not buy new Chinese phones, and to get rid of those already purchased as fast as reasonably possible.”

Although the censorship setting was disabled for phones sold into the manufacturer’s “European region”, the Lithuanian NCSC said (page 22):

It has been established that during the initialisation of the system applications factory-installed on a Xiaomi Mi 10T device, these applications contact a server in Singapore at the address globalapi.ad.xiaomi.com (IP address 47.241.69.153) and download the JSON file MiAdBlacklistConfig, and save this file in the metadata catalogues of the applications.

That file contained a list of more than 400 terms, including “free Tibet”, “89 Democracy Movement” (a reference to Tiananmen Square) and “long live Taiwan’s independence”.

The local security agency’s 32-page report, titled “Assessment of cybersecurity of mobile devices supporting 5G technology sold in Lithuania”, focused on devices from Xiaomi, Huawei and OnePlus.

“It is believed that this functionality allows a Xiaomi device to perform an analysis of the target multimedia content entering the phone; to search for keywords based on the MiAdBlacklist list received from the server,” said the Lithuanian report.

“Once the device determines that the content contains certain keywords, the device performs filtering of this content and the user cannot see it. The principle of data analysis allows analysis not only of words written in letters; the list that is regularly downloaded from the server can be formed in any language.”

The agency said the censorship could be remotely re-enabled at any time by Xiaomi.

Source: Lithuania tells citizens to throw Xiaomi mobiles away • The Register

Australia’s Federal Police force on Sunday announced it intends to start using new powers designed to help combat criminal use of encryption by taking over the accounts of some social media users, then deleting or modifying content they’ve posted.

The law also requires sysadmins to help those account takeovers.

The force (AFP) stated its intentions in light of the late August passage of the Surveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and Disrupt) Bill 2021, which was first mooted in December 2020. While the Bill was subject to consultation, few suggestions were incorporated and in August the Bill sped through Australia’s Parliament after two days of superficial debate with many suggested amendments ignored.

As detailed in its explanatory memorandum, the Bill was aimed squarely at helping investigators to act against users of encrypted services.

[..]

Yes, dear reader, if granted those warrants mean the AFP and ACIC can take over an account and delete or modify content created by the accountholder. And if they can’t do that themselves, sysadmins are required to assist.

[…]

Another scenario of concern is “forum shopping” whereby investigators could be denied access to use of one law by a judge, so turn to another judge and try a different law that delivers essentially the same outcome.

The AFP seems not to be bothered by the debate: its announcements stated it will “be relentless in using the law and its powers to remove child sex abuse material and unlawful content from the dark web and other forums”

Source: Australia gave police power to compel sysadmins into assisting account takeovers – so they plan to use it • The Register

Well as soon as you hear kiddie porn you know it’s going to be used for much much more than against kiddie porn. Who can argue against kiddie porn, right?

Singapore’s Home Team Science and Technology Agency (HTX) roving robot has hit the streets of Toa Payoh Central as part of a trial to support public officers in enhancing public health and safety.

The robot, named Xavier, was jointly developed by HTX and the Agency for Science, Technology and Research. It is fitted with sensors for autonomous navigation, a 360-degree video feed to the command and control centre, real-time sensing and analysis, and an interactive dashboard where public officers can receive real-time information from and be able to monitor and control multiple robots simultaneously.

[…]

Over a three-week trial period, Xavier will detect “undesirable social behaviours” including smoking in prohibited areas, illegal hawking, improperly parked bicycles, congregation of more than five people in line with existing social distancing measures, and motorised active mobility devices and motorcycles on footpaths.

If one of those behaviours are detected, Xavier will trigger real-time alerts to the command and control centre, and display appropriate messages to educate the public and deter such behaviours.

[…]

Source: Singapore sends Xavier the robot to help police keep streets safe under three-week trial | ZDNet

On the eve of the iPhone 13 launch, we’ve finally been handed a ruling in the lawsuit filed by Epic Games last year. Epic Games, the developer of Fortnite, sued Apple last year over claims the company was violating U.S. antitrust law by prohibiting developers from implementing alternative in-app purchase methods. Today, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rogers issued her ruling in the Epic Games v. Apple lawsuit, handing app developers a major win in the fight for app payment freedom.

As part of her ruling, Judge Gonzalez-Rogers issued a permanent injunction against Apple that orders the company to lift its restrictions on iOS apps and App Store pages providing buttons, external links, and other “calls to action” that direct consumers to other purchasing mechanisms. The injunction essentially orders Apple to abandon its anti-steering policy, which prohibited app developers from informing users of alternative purchasing methods.

[…]

Apple wins on all but one important claim

Last year, Epic Games intentionally circumvented Apple’s App Store policy by introducing direct payments for in-app purchases in Fortnite. Immediately after, Apple pulled Fortnite from the App Store and suspended Epic’s developer account, citing a violation of the App Store guidelines regarding in-app payments. When Epic sued Apple in response, they sought to have the latter reinstate their developer account so they could re-release Fortnite on iOS. Apple argued that Fortnite and Epic’s developer account should not be restored as Epic intentionally breached the contract between the two companies (a contract that, of course, Epic argues is illegal.)

However, Judge Gonzalez-Rogers today ruled in favor of Apple on its counterclaim of breach of contract. “Apple’s termination of the DPLA and the related agreements between Epic Games and Apple was valid, lawful, and enforceable,” said the Judge in her ruling. Because of this, it’s unlikely Apple will ever reinstate Fortnite or Epic’s developer account, because they were found to be correct in suspending them in the first place. The Judge also ordered Epic to pay 30% the revenue the company collected from Fortnite on iOS through Epic Direct Payment since it was implemented.

The Court also ruled that Epic Games “failed in its burden to demonstrate Apple is an illegal monopolist” in the narrowly-defined “digital mobile gaming transactions” market rather than both parties’ definition of the relevant market. The market in question is a $100 billion industry, and while Apple “enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins,” Epic failed to prove to the Court that Apple’s behavior violated antitrust law. “Success is not illegal,” said Judge Gonzalez-Rogers in her ruling.

Source: Apple wins some and loses some in big Epic Games lawsuit

First the judge says it was wrong to force developers to pay exclusively through Apple, then says there were other options and Apple isn’t a monopoly and then says but you have to pay Apple a 30% cut of what you made through your other payment channel. What was this judge smoking?

Runelite HD is a mod (made by one person, 117) that takes Old School RuneScape and gives it an HD makeover.

As far back as 2018, Jagex were issuing legal threats against mods like this, claiming they were copyright infringement. However, those appeared to have blown over as Jagex gave their blessing to the original Runelite.

Yet earlier this week, just hours before the improved Runelite HD was due for an official release, 117 was contacted by Jagex, demanding that work stop and that the release be cancelled. This time, however, it’s not down to copyright claims, but because Jagex says they’re making their own HD upgrade.

[…]

While that sounds somewhat fair at first, there’s a huge problem. Runelite HD doesn’t actually seem to break any of Jagex’s modding guidelines, and the company says that new guidelines that spell out the fact Runelite HD does actually break its guidelines are being released next week.

Understandably, fans think this is incredibly shady, and have begun staging an in-game protest:

Mod creator 117 says they attempted to compromise with Jagex, even offering to remove their mod once the company had finished and released their own efforts, but, “they declined outright,” seemingly spelling the end for a project that had consumed, “approximately over 2000 hours of work over two years.”

Source: Jagex Blocks Release Of Popular Runescape Mod Runelite HD

Way to go, another company like GTA’s take two interactive, pissing off their player base.

The European Union’s top court has flipped the bird to German mobile network operators Telekom Deutschland and Vodafone, ruling in two separate judgements that their practice of exempting certain services from data caps violated the bloc’s net neutrality rules.

“Zero rating” is when service providers offer customers plans that exempt certain data-consuming services (be it Spotify, Netflix, gaming, or whatever) from contributing towards data caps. Very often, those services are commercial partners of the provider, or even part of the same massive media conglomerate, allowing the provider to exert pressure on customers to use their data in a way that profits them further. This has the convenient benefit of making it easier for providers to keep ridiculous fees for data overages in place while punishing competing services that customers might use more if the zero-rating scheme wasn’t in place. No one wins, except for the telecom racket.

Net neutrality is the principle that telecom providers should treat all data flowing over their networks equally, not prioritizing one service over the other for commercial gain. As Fortune reported, the version of net neutrality rules passed in the European Union in 2015 was at the time weaker than Barack Obama-era rules in the U.S., as they didn’t explicitly ban zero rating. That’s no longer the case, as Donald Trump appointees at the Federal Communications Commission nuked the U.S.’s net neutrality rules in 2017, and a series of subsequent regulatory decisions and court rulings in the EU narrowed the scope of zero-rating practices there.

In 2016, EU regulators found that zero rating would be allowed so long as the zero-rated services were also slowed down when a customer ran up against a data cap, according to Fortune. In 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirmed that interpretation and found it was illegal to block or slow down data after a user hit their cap on the basis that a particular service wasn’t part of a zero-rating deal. Still, carriers in the EU have continued to offer zero-rating plans, relying on perceived loopholes in the law.

The CJEU ruled on two separate cases involving Telekom and Vodafone on Thursday, which according to Reuters were brought by Germany’s Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) regulatory agency and VZBV consumer association respectively. At issue in the Telekom case was its “StreamOn” service, which exempts streaming services that work with the company from counting towards data caps—and throttles all video streaming, regardless of whether it’s from one of the StreamOn partners, when the cap is hit. The Vodafone case involved its practice of counting zero-rated services or mobile hotspot traffic towards data cap—advertising those plans with names like “Music Pass” or “Video Pass,” according to Engadget—when a customer leaves Germany to travel somewhere else in the EU.

Both of the companies’ plans violated net neutrality principles, the CJEU found, in a completely unambiguous decision titled “‘Zero tariff options are contrary to the regulation on open internet access.“ Fortune wrote that BNetzA has already concluded that the court’s decision means that Telekom will likely not be able to continue StreamOn in its “current form.”

“By today’s judgments, the Court of Justice notes that a ‘zero tariff’ option, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, draws a distinction within Internet traffic, on the basis of commercial considerations, by not counting towards the basic package traffic to partner applications,” the CJEU told media outlets in a statement. “Such a commercial practice is contrary to the general obligation of equal treatment of traffic, without discrimination or interference, as required by the regulation on open Internet access.”

The court added, “Since those limitations on bandwidth, tethering or on use when roaming apply only on account of the activation of the ‘zero tariff’ option, which is contrary to the regulation on open Internet access, they are also incompatible with EU law.”

Source: EU Bolsters Net Neutrality With Ruling Against Zero Rating

Lenovo has come under fire for the Tips application on its tablets, which has been likened to indelible adware that forces folks to view ads.

One customer took to the manufacturer’s support forum late last month to say they were somewhat miffed to see an ad suddenly appear on screen to join Amazon Music on their Android-powered Lenovo Tab P11. The advertisement was generated as a push notification by the bundled Tips app.

“There is no option to dismiss,” the fondleslab fondler sighed. “You have to click to find out more. Further, these notifications cannot be disabled, nor can the Lenovo ‘Tips’ app be disabled.”

They went on to say: “This is not a tip. This is a push that is advertising a paid service. I loathe this sort of thing.”

Another chipped in: “I have a Lenovo Tab that also has this bloatware virus installed. There’s no way to disable the adverts (they call the ads tips, they’re not, they’re adverts for Amazon music etc.) This is ridiculous, Lenovo, I didn’t spend £170 on a tablet to be pumped with ads. Will not buy another Lenovo product.”

[…]

Source: Lenovo pops up tips on its tablets. And by tips, Lenovo means: Unacceptable ads • The Register

Even if you don’t live in Texas, you’ve likely heard about the state’s draconian abortion restrictions that officially went into effect on Wednesday. The so-called “Heartbeat Bill,” aka Senate Bill 8, makes it fully illegal for anyone—friends, family, doctors—across Texas to help women access an abortion in the state after their sixth week of pregnancy.

You might have also seen the digital tipline that’s been set up to snitch on anyone violating the new law. The site was launched about a month ago by Texas Right To Life, a well-funded player in the world of anti-abortion politics.

“Any Texan can bring a lawsuit against an abortionist or someone aiding and abetting an abortion after six weeks,” the website reads. “If these individuals are proved to be violating the law, they have to pay a fine of at least $10,000.” It’s worth noting here that because “aiding and abetting” is such a vague term, others have used the impending law to not only justify going after the doctors or clinicians performing these medical procedures but anyone who helps women get an abortion in any way. This includes driving a friend to the clinic, or lending someone money so they can get an abortion they can’t afford on their own.

As you might expect with a tipline like this, people didn’t waste any time flooding the line with the vilest stuff you can think of: fake claims, furry porn, pictures of Shrek, you name it.

Related Stories

Joe Rogan Says He Tested Positive For Covid-19, Claims He’s Taking Ivermectin

The FTC Has Banned a Stalkerware Firm and Its CEO, Signaling a Crackdown on the Industry

Oh No, It’s Happening Again

Unfortunately, overloading the site with pictures of everyone’s favorite ogre wasn’t enough to knock it from the web, nor were the multiple denial-of-service attacks that slammed the site on the eve before the bill was set to go into action. But there is another route people can take: pleading with the site’s hosting provider. In this case, the registrar is GoDaddy—a company that’s historically known for being kind of terrible all around, but also one with a slew of rules for what its sites can be used for. In the company’s terms of service for users, GoDaddy mandates that its site owners cannot use a GoDaddy-hosted site to:

collect or harvest (or permit anyone else to collect or harvest) any User Content (as defined below) or any non-public or personally identifiable information about another User or any other person or entity without their express prior written consent.

The ToS also states that GoDaddy’s customers cannot use its platform in a manner that “violates the privacy or publicity rights of another User or any other person or entity, or breaches any duty of confidentiality that you owe to another User or any other person or entity.” In either case, a site solely set up to out people who try to help someone attain a sensitive, stigmatized medical procedure probably fall under this domain.

GoDaddy has its own specific tipline set up for users to reach when they see a site falling afoul of the company’s privacy rules: privacy@godaddy.com. People can also file out an abuse report with the platform, and let GoDaddy know that they’ve come across “content that displays personal information.” While the examples that GoDaddy gives in the form are sites listing people’s social security or credit card numbers, the Texas tipline is a pretty clear privacy violation of a different sort.

Aside from violating the privacy of god knows how many women, along with their friends, family, and doctors, the site also apparently violates the privacy of people submitting tips. A Gizmodo analysis of the webpage for submitting tips found that when these memos are “anonymously” submitted, the site covertly harvests the IP address of whoever submits the tip via a hidden field.

[…]

Source: Anti-Abortion Site Violates GoDaddy’s Rules

The Australian government has been moving towards a surveillance state for some years already. Now they are putting the nail in the coffin with an unprecedented surveillance bill that allows the police to hack your device, collect or delete your data, and take over your social media accounts; without sufficient safeguards to prevent abuse of these new powers.

This month the Australian government has passed a sweeping surveillance bill, worse than any similar legislation in any other five eye country.

The Surveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and Disrupt) Bill 2020 gives the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) three new powers for dealing with online crime:

1. Data disruption warrant: gives the police the ability to “disrupt data” by modifying, copying, adding, or deleting it.
2. Network activity warrant: allows the police to collect intelligence from devices or networks that are used, or likely to be used, by those subject to the warrant
3. Account takeover warrant: allows the police to take control of an online account (e.g. social media) for the purposes of gathering information for an investigation.

The two Australian law enforcement bodies AFP and ACIC will soon have the power to modify, add, copy, or delete your data should you become a suspect in the investigation of a serious crime.

What makes this legislation even worse is that there is no judicial oversight. A data disruption or network activity warrant could be issued by a member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, a judge’s warrant is not needed.

Australian companies obliged to comply

When presented with such warrant from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Australian companies, system administrators etc. must comply, and actively help the police to modify, add, copy, or delete the data of a person under investigation. Refusing to comply could have one end up in jail for up to ten years, according to the new bill.

[…]

Politicians justify the need for the bill by stating that it is intended to fight child exploitation (CSAM) and terrorism. However, the bill itself enables law enforcement to investigate any “serious Commonwealth offence” or “serious State offence that has a federal aspect”.

Source: Australia: Unprecedented surveillance bill rushed through parliament in 24 hours.

As soon as it says a law is against Child Porn you know it’s going to be used for a whole load of other things that wouldn’t stand up to public inspection. But who can be against anti-Child Porn stuff, right?

Slashdot has confirmed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware that after 18 years of legal maneuvering, SCO’s bankruptcy case (first filed in 2007) is now “awaiting discharge.”

Long-time Slashdot reader rkhalloran says they know the reason: Papers filed 26 Aug by IBM & SCOXQ in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware for a proposed settlement, Case 07-11337-BLS Doc 1501:

By the Settlement Agreement, the Trustee has reached a settlement with IBM that resolves all of the remaining claims at issue in the Utah Litigation (defined below). The Settlement Agreement is the culmination of extensive arm’s length negotiation between the Trustee and IBM.

Under the Settlement Agreement, the Parties have agreed to resolve all disputes between them for a payment to the Trustee, on behalf of the Estates, of $14,250,000. For the reasons set forth more fully below, the Trustee submits the Settlement Agreement and the settlement with IBM are in the best interests of the Estates and creditors, are well within the range of reasonableness, and should be approved.
The proposed order would include “the release of the Estates’ claims against IBM and vice versa” (according to this PDF attributed to SCO Group and IBM uploaded to scribd.com). And one of the reasons given for the proposed settlement? “The probability of the ultimate success of the Trustee’s claims against IBM is uncertain,” according to an IBM/SCO document on Scribd.com titled Trustee’s motion: For example, succeeding on the unfair competition claims will require proving to a jury that events occurring many years ago constituted unfair competition and caused SCO harm. Even if SCO were to succeed in that effort, the amount of damages it would recover is uncertain and could be significantly less than provided by the Settlement Agreement. Such could be the case should a jury find that (1) the amount of damage SCO sustained as a result of IBM’s conduct is less than SCO has alleged, (2) SCO’s damages are limited by a $5 million damage limitation provision in the Project Monterey agreement, or (3) some or all of IBM’s Counterclaims, alleging millions of dollars in damages related to IBM’s Linux activities and alleged interference by SCO, are meritorious.

Although the Trustee believes the Estates would ultimately prevail on claims against IBM, a not insignificant risk remains that IBM could succeed with its defenses and/or Counterclaims
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware told Slashdot that the first meeting of the creditors will be held on September 22nd, 2021.

Source: After 18 Years, SCO’s IBM Litigation May Be Settled for $14.5 Million – Slashdot