ICANN filed a motion to dismiss domain name registry Donuts' lawsuit against the organization over the auction of the .web generic top-level domain. Donuts' Ruby Glen subsidiary sued in July in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles. The registry filed an amended complaint in August seeking damages of $22.5 million -- plus interest (see 1608090036). Donuts claims ICANN intentionally failed to adequately investigate what the company believed ahead of the .web auction to be possible changes in the ownership or control of rival bidder Nu Dot Co (see 1607250051 and 1607270027). Nu Dot Co won the .web auction, then Verisign said it funded the purchase with the understanding that control of .web would pass to the .com domain registry (see 1608010008). ICANN claimed in Wednesday's motion to dismiss (in Pacer) that Donuts failed to “set forth a plausible ground” for its claims. Donuts' claims are barred by its “agreement to pursue its claims in ICANN's accountability mechanisms” via the anti-lawsuit covenant placed in all gTLD applications, ICANN said. Donuts also failed to join Nu Dot Co in the suit, “which serves as an independent basis for dismissal,” ICANN said. Donuts sought limited discovery Wednesday from Nu Dot Co and Verisign seeking information that will allow Donuts to facilitate “the full and transparent investigation that is a critical component of any legitimate gTLD delegation process.” Limited discovery also will help resolve questions about Nu Dot Co's “eligibility to participate in the .WEB string contention” and provide Donuts with “information necessary to support a motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin any assignment of rights in the .WEB gTLD until the resolution of this matter,” Donuts said in its motion (in Pacer).

Nearly three dozen civil society, Islamic, library, privacy and watchdog groups want Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to shed light on the alleged government order forcing Yahoo to scan hundreds of millions of customer emails. Last week, the company asked Clapper to provide clarity on the matter (see 1610190061). The coalition letter, which signatory Electronic Frontier Foundation linked to in a blog post Tuesday, said they "believe such a massive scan ... particularly if it involves the scanning of email content, could violate [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act], the Fourth Amendment, and international human rights law, and has grave implications for privacy." The groups want Clapper to disclose how DNI justified the surveillance, release the FISA court opinion, disclose whether email content was scanned, provide what types of selectors or search terms are allowed under the authority it used and disclose the total number of times, and when, such an order has been issued to a provider. Other signatories include Access Now, the American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International, Center for Democracy and Technology, Free Press, New America's Open Technology Institute, R Street Institute and TechFreedom. DNI didn't comment on the coalition letter.

A multistakeholder meeting to promote collaboration on vulnerability research disclosure between security researchers and software and system developers and owners will be held Nov. 7, said NTIA in a Monday news release. The noon-4 p.m. meeting will be at the American Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Ave. NW. The agency held a similar multistakeholder process last week on security upgrades for IoT devices in Austin, Texas (see 1610190051).

Federal prosecutors used a 2014 memo to determine when to open an investigation or charge an individual under the anti-hacking Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), said DOJ, releasing the document in a Tuesday blog post. The department said prosecutors must consider several factors "to ensure that charges are brought only in cases that serve a substantial federal interest." Among the factors listed are: sensitivity of an affected computer system or information and the likelihood and extent of damage to a system or unauthorized access of the data; degree of damage to a system or access to data regarding national security, critical infrastructure, public health and safety, market integrity, international relations or other economic and national interests; how it may relate to a larger crime or threat to national security; impact of a crime on victims and others; and whether a defendant knowingly violated restrictions or altered computer data. Justice said prosecutors must consult the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, among others, before bringing CFAA charges. Civil liberties groups are lobbying Congress to revise the 30-year-old statute because they allege government prosecutors are overcriminalizing routine behaviors (see 1609130012). CFAA was invoked in a recent lawsuit by Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif., in a congressional race against Democratic challenger Ro Khanna (see 1610110003).

The “core requirements” at Imax of launching a “location-based” virtual-reality experience for consumers “line up nicely” with its “core skill sets,” CEO Richard Gelfond said on a Thursday earnings call. The Imax brand is “synonymous with immersive experiences,” Gelfond said. Since announcing its VR strategy (see 1608310001), Imax has met with “strong interest for partnership content deals and many other opportunities,” he said. “Unlike many other VR offerings out there, which are targeting the at-home experience, we’re focused on the location-based offering, which has the ability to provide a broader array of high quality, more immersive content experiences with a social element out of the home.” The company’s plan remains firm to open its first “pilot” Imax VR Centers in Los Angeles and the U.K. this year, he said. Imax then will “test the concept and, assuming this concept works, embark on a more aggressive rollout schedule,” he said. Each center will use several VR “pods” that will allow “multiple people to engage in the experience,” and enjoy it with friends, he said. Though “I don't want to get too far ahead of ourselves, we continue to be very excited about this initiative,” he said. “I look forward to sharing more about our business after we get our pilot sites up and running. I want to underline the word pilot. This is a test. We are not investing a lot of money at this time in the initiative. We are doing a test. If the test works, we will go forward.”

The FTC was asked to investigate and take action against Google, Disney's Maker Studios, Comcast's DreamWorks-owned AwesomenessTV and two other digital studio companies engaged in "influencer" marketing directed at children, which several advocacy groups said is an unfair and deceptive practice. The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, Center for Digital Democracy, Georgetown University's Institute for Public Representation (IPR) and Public Citizen, in a complaint filed Friday, are urging the commission to also provide clear guidance. With influencer marketing, the complaint said, companies promote brands and products through "people whose implicit or tacit endorsement of a product is designed to influence viewers and followers to want that product." Traditional and digital marketing tactics -- including bots, branded content, data driven programmatic targeting, native advertising, product placement, social media and vlogging -- are used, it said. Such ads take advantage of children, who don't understand or process that companies are using social media and YouTube celebrities to sell products, the groups said in a news release. IPR Director Laura Moy said such ads "cause children to want unhealthy and costly products." The complaint said Google "actively encourages, solicits, and promotes" such advertising on YouTube through popular channels like EvanTubeHD (see 1609120037), Baby Ariel, Meghan McCarthy, the Eh Bee Family and Bratayley. The complaint said multichannel networks like Disney's and DreamWorks' studios, Collab Creators and Wild Brain create and distribute such videos. A Google spokeswoman said in an email that "creators should be transparent with their audiences if their content includes paid promotion of any kind. As our long-standing policy makes clear, anyone uploading videos to YouTube has a legal obligation to disclose to YouTube and their viewers if a video contains paid promotion. Any videos that have disclosed paid product placement or endorsements are restricted from the YouTube Kids app." Neither the FTC nor the other companies commented.

Only 25 percent of organizations have sufficient cybersecurity personnel to detect and respond effectively to a cyberattack, said cybersecurity firm Tripwire Thursday. Dimensional Research did a survey for Tripwire in August of more than 500 IT security professionals. Sixty-six percent said their organizations faced increased security risks because of their lack of sufficient cybersecurity experts. Seventy-two percent said they faced challenges in hiring skilled cybersecurity staff, and 50 percent said their organizations don’t have an effective program to recruit and train skilled experts. Cybersecurity “is a growth industry for employees, and supply is falling far short of demand,” said Tripwire Director-IT Security and Risk Strategy Tim Erlin in a news release. “Smart organizations need to establish effective programs for educating and developing employee skills around information protection."

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump refused again to say the Russian government masterminded the hacking of servers at the Democratic National Committee and other Democratic Party-affiliated organizations, during Wednesday's debate. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security jointly confirmed earlier this month that the Russia government was behind “the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations.” Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton asked Trump Wednesday to “admit and condemn that the Russians are doing this and make it clear that he will not have the help of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin in this election.” Clinton later said 17 U.S. intelligence agencies “concluded that these [cyberattacks] come from the highest levels of the Kremlin and are designed to influence our election, and I find it deeply disturbing.” Trump said Clinton “has no idea whether it was Russia, China or anybody else” behind the hacks. “Our country has no idea,” Trump said. “Yeah, I doubt it.” Trump suggested during the Sept. 26 debate (see 1609270056) that “lots of other people” could be behind the hacks, including China or “someone sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.” Trump said during the Oct. 9 debate that Democrats were attributing the hacks to Russia because “they are trying to tarnish me with Russia.”

DOJ’s Antitrust Division and the FTC referenced several recent federal cases against tech firms for entering into “no poach” agreements with competitors, in guidance sent Thursday to human resource professionals aimed at protecting workers against anticompetitive conduct. The advice is meant to educate HR professionals and others on how antitrust laws apply to businesses’ employment practices, the antitrust agencies said. “HR professionals need to understand that these violations can lead to severe consequences, including criminal prosecution,” said DOJ Antitrust head Renata Hesse in a news release: The "guidance provides HR professionals with information to prevent violations and report potentially unlawful activity, furthering the Justice Department’s commitment to protect workers from harmful conduct that stifles competition.” The agencies cited three tech sector-centric cases, saying agreements among employers not to recruit certain employees or not to compete on terms of compensation are illegal. They include a 2010 case against Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit and Pixar, a 2011 case against Lucasfilm and a 2014 case against eBay and Intuit. “In all three cases, the competitors agreed not to cold call each other’s employees,” DOJ and the FTC said: “In two cases, at least one company also agreed to limit its hiring of employees who currently worked at a competitor. All three cases ended in consent judgments” against the tech companies.

The FTC awarded the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York’s Complex Frauds and Cybercrime Unit the commission’s Criminal Liaison Unit’s Prosecuting Attorney’s Award, recognizing prosecutors who “demonstrate an exceptional commitment to consumer protection in partnership with the FTC.” The Cybercrime Unit has a longstanding partnership with the FTC and prosecuted “dozens of individuals for their participation in mobile cramming, fake and abusive debt collection, and deceptive payday lending schemes,” the agency said in a Wednesday news release.