Showing posts with label Reuters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reuters. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

IPHONE AND IPAD USERS SUE APPLE OVER PRIVACY ISSUES

Reuters December 29, 2010

BANGALORE (Reuters) - A group of iPhone and iPad users have sued Apple Inc alleging that certain applications (apps) were passing personal user information to third-party advertisers without consent, a court filing showed.

In the lawsuit seeking class action, filed in a federal court in California, the complainants sought a ban on passing of user information without consent and monetary compensation, according to the case document posted on scribd.com.

Along with Apple, maker of popular apps such as Textplus4, Paper Toss, Weather Channel, Dictionary.com, Talking Tom Cat and Pumpkin Maker were also named co-defendants in the lawsuit.

"None of the defendants adequately informed plaintiffs of their practices, and none of the defendants obtained plaintiffs' consent to do so," the suit filed on December 23 said.

The Unique Device ID that Apple assigns to its devices has become an attractive feature for third-party advertisers looking for a means of reliably tracking mobile device users' online activities, the lawsuit said.

In April, Apple amended its developer agreement to ban apps from sending data to third parties except for information directly necessary for the functionality of the apps.

However, the lawsuit alleged that Apple has taken no steps to actually implement its changed developer agreement or enforce it in any meaningful way due to criticism from advertising networks.

Last month, Facebook said some of its applications violated the social networking company's policies against sharing user information and had promised to fix the problem.

On December 16, the U.S. Commerce Department's Internet Policy Task Force said in a report that the department should have its own privacy office and develop voluntary, enforceable codes of conduct for data companies and advertisers that track people on the Internet.

The case is in re: Freeman et al v. Apple Inc et al, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose division, No. 5:10-cv-05881-HRL.

(Reporting by Supantha Mukherjee in Bangalore; Editing by Gopakumar Warrier)

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

LOOK OUT, YOUR MEDICINE IS WATCHING YOU

Mon, Nov 8 2010

By Ben Hirschler

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Novartis AG plans to seek regulatory approval within 18 months for a pioneering tablet containing an embedded microchip, bringing the concept of "smart-pill" technology a step closer.

The initial program will use one of the Swiss firm's established drugs taken by transplant patients to avoid organ rejection. But Trevor Mundel, global head of development, believes the concept can be applied to many other pills.

"We are taking forward this transplant drug with a chip and we hope within the next 18 months to have something that we will be able to submit to the regulators, at least in Europe," Mundel told the Reuters Health Summit in New York.

"I see the promise as going much beyond that," he added.

Novartis agreed in January to spend $24 million to secure access to chip-in-a-pill technology developed by privately owned Proteus Biomedical of Redwood City, California, putting it ahead of rivals.

The biotech start-up's ingestible chips are activated by stomach acid and send information to a small patch worn on the patient's skin, which can transmit data to a smartphone or send it over the Internet to a doctor.

Mundel said the initial project was focused on ensuring that patients took drugs at the right time and got the dose they needed -- a key issue for people after kidney and other transplant operations, when treatment frequently needs adjustment.

Longer-term, he hopes to expand the "smart pill" concept to other types of medicine and use the wealth of biometric information the Proteus chip can collect, from heart rate and temperature to body movement, to check that drugs are working properly.

Because the tiny chips are added to existing drugs, Novartis does not expect to have to conduct full-scale clinical trials to prove the new products work. Instead, it aims to do so-called bioequivalence tests to show they are the same as the original.

A bigger issue may be what checks should be put in place to protect patients' personal medical data as it is transmitted from inside their bodies by wireless and Bluetooth.

"The regulators all like the concept and have been very encouraging. But ... they want to understand how we are going to solve the data privacy issues," Mundel said.

A technology that ensures a patient takes his or her medicine and checks that it is working properly should deliver better outcomes and justify a higher price tag.

(Reporting by Ben Hirschler. Editing by Robert MacMillan)

© Thomson Reuters 2010. All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the world.

Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, use the Reprints tool at the top of any article or visit: www.reutersreprints.com.

Friday, November 5, 2010

U.N. urged to freeze climate geo-engineering projects

Thu Oct 21, 2010 Reuters
* Cloud whitening, solar reflectors, ocean seeding studied

* Environmentalists say such schemes are unproven, risky

* Advocates say projects could help fight global warming

By Chisa Fujioka

NAGOYA, Japan, Oct 21 (Reuters) - The United Nations should
impose a moratorium on "geo-engineering" projects such as
artificial volcanoes and vast cloud-seeding schemes to fight
climate change, green groups say, fearing they could harm
nature and mankind.
The risks were too great because the impacts of manipulating
nature on a vast scale were not fully known, the groups said at
a major U.N. meeting in Japan aimed at combatting increasing
losses of plant and animal species.

Envoys from nearly 200 countries are gathered in Nagoya,
Japan, to agree targets to fight the destruction of forests,
rivers and coral reefs that provide resources and services
central to livelihoods and economies.

A major cause for the rapid losses in nature is climate
change, the United Nations says, raising the urgency for the
world to do whatever it can to curb global warming and prevent
extreme droughts, floods and rising sea levels.

Some countries regard geo-engineering projects costing
billions of dollars as a way to control climate change by
cutting the amount of sunlight hitting the earth or soaking up
excess greenhouse gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide.

"It's absolutely inappropriate for a handful of governments
in industrialised countries to make a decision to try
geo-engineering without the approval of all the world's
support," Pat Mooney, from Canada-headquartered advocacy
organisation ETC Group, told Reuters on the sidelines of the
Oct. 18-29 meeting.

"They shouldn't proceed with real-life, in-the-environment
experimentation or the deployment of any geo-engineering until
there is a consensus in the United Nations that this is okay."

<^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Take-a-look on biodiversity: [ID:nSGE68T06H] Factbox on main issues at Nagoya talks [ID:nTOE69D07L] Factbox on TEEB report on valuing nature [ID:nSGE69J0D5] UN plan to protect animals, plants by 2020 [ID:nLDE68F0JL] Graphic on ocean fertilisation link.reuters.com/cam39p ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>

Some conservation groups say geo-engineering is a way for
some governments and companies to get out of taking steps to
slash planet-warming emissions.

The U.N. climate panel says a review of geo-engineering
will be part of its next major report in 2013.

SOLAR REFLECTORS

Some of the geo-engineering schemes proposed include:

-- Ocean fertilisation. Large areas are sprinkled with iron
or other nutrients to artificially spur growth of
phytoplankton, which soak up carbon dioxide. But this could
trigger harmful algal blooms, soak up nutrients and kill fish
and other animals.

-- Spray seawater into the atmosphere to increase the
reflectivity and condensation of clouds so they bounce more
sunlight back into space.

-- Placing trillions of tiny solar reflectors out in space
to cut the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth.

-- Artificial volcanoes. Tiny sulphate particles or other
materials are released into the stratosphere to reflect
sunlight, simulating the effect of a major volcanic eruption.

-- Carbon capture and storage. Supported by a number of
governments and involves capturing CO2 from power stations,
refineries and natural gas wells and pumping it deep
underground.

Mooney said the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD) should expand its de-facto moratorium on ocean
fertilisation agreed in 2008 to all geo-engineering, although
the proposal was resisted by some countries, including Canada,
earlier this year.

Canada said in Nagoya that it would work with the CBD.

"Canada was simply concerned about the lack of clarity on
definitions including what activities are included in
'geo-engineering'," Cynthia Wright, head of the delegation,
said in an email response.

"Canada shares concerns of the international community
about potential negative impacts of geo-engineering on
biodiversity and is willing to work with other CBD Parties to
avoid these impacts," she said.

Environmentalists said geo-engineering went against the
spirit of the Nagoya talks, which aims to set new targets for
2020 to protect nature, such as setting up more land and marine
protected areas, cutting pollution and managing fishing.

"We are certainly in favour of more (geo-engineering)
research, as in all fields, but not any implementation for the
time being because it's too dangerous. We don't know what the
effects can be," said Francois Simard of conservation group
IUCN.

"Improving nature conservation is what we should do in
order to fight climate change, not trying to change nature."
(Reporting by Chisa Fujioka; Editing by David Fogarty)