Legal Radar

Hotels Looking for FCC Advice on Halting Wi-Fi

Are hotels functioning reasonably within the law when they’ve decided to remove unauthorized Wi-Fi access set up on their properties?

A group of hotels including the Marriott International Inc. sent out a petition to the FCC for guidance regarding the issue.

The dilemma is a flashback for certain consumers who think the hotels they’re staying in are forcing people to make use of their Wi-Fi service ---- frequently at a price.

Meanwhile, the communications law prohibit individuals from interfering with any radio communications from any authorized or licensed stations run by the government. Signal jammers are  not allowed by the FCC.

From the perspective of today’s hotels, the law against interference of communications signals should never be applied to Wi-Fi since it doesn’t make use of any licensed spectrum. According to an FCC filing submitted early this year, the hotel industry indicate hotels should be responsible for looking into and dealing with threats to the security of its Wi-Fi network.

Critics say it’s an attempt by hotels to make money by going around the law.

Alstom to Make $772M Settlement on Bribery Charges

French company, Alston SA, recently pleaded guilty and will be ordered to make a $772 million settlement payment with the U.S Justice Department claiming the company bribed government officials to acquire businesses all over the globe.

The penalty will put an end to charges related to a scheme that involved millions of dollars of bribes all over the globe. Countries involved include Saudi Arabia, the Bahamas, Egypt, and Indonesia.

The Justice Department indicated Alstom to have paid over $75 million to secure projects worth $4 billion worldwide. Alstom confessed to its criminal acts

Alstom pleaded a guilty in a two-count criminal information filed in a Connecticut federal court. Alstom’s Swiss branch was also found guilty to criminal charges that involved violating federal bribery laws.

The firm’s U.S. power and grid units ventured into prosecution agreements with the Justice Department and confessed to violating bribery laws.

Portland Seeking to Halt Uber Operations

Early this week, the city of Portland filed a suit against Uber Technologies and asked for the court to halt the firm’s operations within the city. It’s the latest battle for the ride-hailing app as it tries to aggressively expand worldwide.

The suit, which was filed in the Multnomah County District Court, alleges Uber for carrying out illegal operations as an unregulated transport service. Uber insists that they’re not a transport company but a tech platform.

The city’s director of transport demands Uber to utilize appropriate permits. Portland is set to file civil and criminal penalties against the tech firm and its drivers for carrying our operations without legal inspections and permits.

Portland’s mayor said the primary concern of the city is its safety and equality with taxi companies. Uber indicated it’ll finally be making its launch in Portland. The firm has been collaborating with the mayor’s office for over a year regarding its services within the city.

Uber Hoping for Positive News from France, Gets Bad News from Nevada

Uber Technologies, Inc., a vehicle hailing service, is currently waiting a court decision in France that may set the tone for the American company’s increasing regulatory clashes in Europe.

The firm argued that a new law in France involving car-service apps is deemed unconstitutional. A final decision on the legal matter will be made this December 12.

Uber has been accused of breaking a law in France and other countries by making use of unlicensed and unprofessional drivers through its affordable Uberpop service.

Attorneys for Transdev PLC, a transport firm; LeCab, a vehicle hailing cab; traditional taxis; and the government of France, all wanted Uberpop service to be banned as competitor under threat of major fines for not following with the law.

Uber recently halted its operations in Nevada after a judge slapped an injunction that prevented the firm from resuming its operations in the state.

Currently in Nevada, Uber is facing allegations from the Nevada Transportation Authority and Nevada Taxicab Authority for being an unfair competitor since the firm failed to follow the same rules regarding its insurance, driver, and other that transport companies typically do.

Shareholders in Freeport-McMoran Suit Gets Rare Victory

Reports of Freeport-McMoran Inc. closing in on a $100 million-plus settlement to get over shareholder litigation on its oil-and-gas firm purchases back in 2013 is a victory for investors, who have been persistent in challenging the merger.

Freeport is near a deal worth over $130 million, a majority of which will be handed over to its shareholders. The deal, which has yet been finalized, would end claims that the company overpaid when it purchased McMoran Exploration Co. and Plains & Production Co. for a total of $9 billion in 2013.

Shareholders claimed that the deals were made to help out the struggling McMoran, where key executives and board members of Freeport owned shares. Shares of McMoran were in a downward spiral prior to the deal, as the energy firm faced also faced problems at the Gulf of Mexico.

The settlement, in which a majority will be given in the form of a special corporate insurance, will resolve all allegations.

Groups of Gun Control Pressuring NJ to Carry Out Gun Law

Gun control groups in Washington and New Jersey, are encouraging an NJ court to carry out an odd gun law in the state. This involves banning state sales of handguns that don’t employ some form of smart technology.

Two gun groups --- the NJ chapter of the Million Mom March and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence --- refreshed their arguments in a filing from the previous week, encouraging the NJ Superior Court to enforce such law.

New Jersey has passed a law indicating that once a technology is present to curb gun possession from an unauthorized individual, only such particular handgun may only be sold and purchased within the state.

The state law requires all guns sold in New Jersey to employ a smart technology to restrict their use on certain individuals.

Under such law, the NJ attorney general is obligated to make inquiries every six months to determine whether such firearms are present, and to directly report to the state legislature and the governor.

Court of Appeals Makes Reconsideration of Conflict Minerals Ruling

After striking down a ruling early this year that require publicly traded American companies to reveal as whether or not their products consist of conflict materials from Central Africa, a federal court of appeals may have second thoughts on the decision made.

The SEC’s “conflict minerals” rule imposed obligations for companies in the utilization of gold, tin, tungsten, and tantalum linked to armed conflicts within the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

A panel of judges of the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit earlier this year maintained a majority of the regulation, but made a ruling indicating that the disclosure requirement is in violation of the First Amendment since it forces companies to reveal the “blood on its hands.”

The results was observed to be a huge boost on SEC’s conflict minerals case. Early this week, the court of appeals indicated it would now make a reconsideration of the minerals rule.

The aim of the regulations is to prevent violence by forcing companies to avoid the use of conflict minerals.

Media Firms Battle with FCC on TV Contracts Disclosure

Media firms want the court of federal appeals in Washington to bar the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from forcing their hand in revealing details of TV contracts regarding two pending merger reviews.

A recent request for an emergency stay, which was filed this week, came after the FCC maintained its position for contracts to be accessible for third parties to review Comcast Corp’s acquisition proposal of Time Warner Cable Inc. and a pending purchase of DirectTV by AT&T.

Television owners 21^st Century Fox, Time Warner, Scripps Networks Interactive, Walt Disney, CBS Crop, Viacom Inc., and Univision Communications Inc. have urged the court to vacate the order, escalating the battle regarding the issue.

Media firms argued that the contracts consist of sensitive business information and that such details, if fallen into the wrong hands, could place them at a disadvantage in the market.

In a recent filing, media firms argued the releasing contract details could cause major and substantial harm.

Security Guards Guilty in Iraq Shootout

Just recently, a federal jury found four ex-Blackwater USA security guards to be liable for 14 Iraqis deaths in Baghdad several years back.

The guilty verdict is testing the capability of the U.S. courts to make military companies accountable for their criminal acts.

Nick Slatten was guilty of murder, while Evan Liberty, Paul Slough, and Dustin Heard were guilty of almost every count of voluntary manslaughter and attempting voluntary manslaughter.

The guards opened gunfire against Iraqi civilians, which led to an international outrage and later leading to the Iraqi government to push the military firm out of the country.

The guards have been part of a large number of Blackwater workers offering security for the State Department staff within Iraq. When a bomb exploded a car near an American office under Blackwater security protection, all four responded by opening fire against Iraqis citizens. Attorneys for the guards argued that they were naturally acting in self-defense and said the gunfire were justifiable.

Uber Tech Challenges Court Ruling

Uber Technologies Inc. is fighting a court ruling in France in what seems to be one of the quickest growing services in France, intensifying a legal battle despite the firm’s broad clashes within Europe.

A criminal court in Paris ruled last week that the firm’s new UberPop service, which lets passengers connect with non-professional licensed drivers, is in violation of a previous decision that ban earnings from carpooling services. It demanded the firm to pay a $128,000 penalty.

The decision of the French court is Uber’s recent clash with U.S. and European authorities.

UberPop has been widely controversial since it makes use of drivers without possessing chauffeur or taxi licenses while billing itself to be “ride sharing.”

The firm is fighting over its service legality in a number of countries. Currently in France, Uber has been under threat a number of times.

Last week, the court observed Uber to be deceiving passengers and drivers, and asking the firm to offer a notice to riders and drivers that they’re actually breaking the law via UberPop.