Month: October 2021

Executives at Amazon, including founder Jeff Bezos, may have misled or lied to Congress about the firm’s business practices, top US lawmakers have said.

The members of the House Judiciary Committee said they were considering referring the firm “for criminal investigation”.

It follows an investigation by Reuters that claimed Amazon copied products and rigged its search results in India to boost sales of its own brands .

Amazon strongly denies the allegations.

“Amazon and its executives did not mislead the committee, and we have denied and sought to correct the record on the inaccurate media articles in question,” a spokesperson said.

On Monday, five members of the US House Judiciary Committee wrote to Amazon boss Andy Jassy, who succeeded Mr Bezos in July.

They said “credible reporting” by Reuters and recent articles in other news outlets “directly contradicts the sworn testimony and representations of Amazon’s top executives – including former CEO Jeffrey Bezos”.

Amazon hit with $886m fine for alleged law breach
Amazon charged with abusing EU competition rules
“At best, this reporting confirms that Amazon’s representatives misled the Committee. At worst, it demonstrates that they may have lied to Congress in possible violation of federal criminal law,” the letter states.

Continued investigations
Since 2019, the House Judiciary Committee has been investigating competition in digital markets, including how Amazon uses third party seller data from its platform, and whether the company unfairly favours its own products.

In sworn testimony before the Judiciary Committee’s anti-trust subcommittee last year, Mr Bezos said the firm forbids employees using data on individual sellers to benefit Amazon’s own-brand product lines.

In another hearing in 2019, Nate Sutton, Amazon’s associate general counsel, said the firm never used such data to create its own-branded products or manipulate its search results for private gain.

“The algorithms are optimised to predict what customers want to buy regardless of the seller,” he said.

However, Reuters’ investigation – which was based on thousands of pages of internal Amazon documents leaked to the news agency – contradicted these claims.

The news agency alleged that, in India at least, Amazon had a secret policy of manipulating search results to favour Amazon’s own products, as well as copying other sellers’ goods.

Reuters also claimed that at least two senior company executives were aware of the policy.

The lawmakers’ letter also cites other recent stories in the Markup, the Wall Street Journal and the Capitol Forum about Amazon’s private-brand products and use of seller data.

The lawmakers have given Mr Jassy until 1 November to provide evidence to corroborate the company’s previous testimony and statements.

Their letter also notes that “it is criminally illegal to knowingly and wilfully make statements that are materially false, conceal a material fact, or otherwise provide false documentation in response to a congressional investigation”.

‘Unsubstantiated’
“We strongly encourage you to make use of this opportunity to correct the record… as we consider whether a referral of this matter to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation is appropriate,” the letter states.

In a statement, an Amazon spokesperson called the claims made by Reuters and other media outlets “factually incorrect and unsubstantiated”.

They added: “As we have previously stated, we have an internal policy, which goes beyond that of any other retailer’s policy that we’re aware of, that prohibits the use of individual seller data to develop Amazon private label products.

“We investigate any allegations that this policy may have been violated and take appropriate action.”

Big tech companies including Amazon, Facebook and Alphabet have been under growing scrutiny in Washington, Europe and other parts of the world.

Regulators are concerned they have too much power and are engaging in unfair practices that hurt other businesses.

The lawmakers’ letter was signed by a bipartisan group including Democrats Jerrold Nadler, David Cicilline and Pramila Jayapal, and Republicans Ken Buck and Matt Gaetz.

In India on Monday, a trade group representing thousands of brick-and-mortar retailers has urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to take action against Amazon.

The metaverse is a concept being talked about as the next big thing by tech companies, marketers, and analysts.

It’s attracting attention – and money – from some of of tech’s biggest names, such as Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Epic Games’ Tim Sweeney.

What is the metaverse?
To the outsider, it may look like a souped-up version of Virtual Reality (VR) – but some people think the metaverse could be the future of the internet.

In fact, the belief is that it could be to VR what the modern smartphone is to the first clunky mobile phones of the 1980s.

Instead of being on a computer, in the metaverse you might use a headset to enter a virtual world connecting all sorts of digital environments.

Unlike current VR, which is mostly used for gaming, this virtual world could be used for practically anything – work, play, concerts, cinema trips – or just hanging out.

Most people envision that you would have a 3D avatar – a representation of yourself – as you use it.

But because it’s still just an idea, there’s no single agreed definition of the metaverse.

Why is it suddenly a big thing?
Hype about digital worlds and augmented reality pops up every few years, but usually dies away.

However, there is a huge amount of excitement about the metaverse among wealthy investors and big tech firms, and no-one wants to be left behind if it turns out to be the future of the internet.

There’s also a feeling that for the first time, the technology is nearly there, with advancements in VR gaming and connectivity coming close to what might be needed.

Why is Facebook involved?
Facebook has made building the metaverse one of its big priorities.

It’s invested heavily in virtual reality through its Oculus headsets, making them cheaper than rivals – perhaps even at a loss, according to some analysts.

It’s also building VR apps for social hangouts and for the workplace, including ones that interact with the real world.

Despite its history of buying up rivals, Facebook claims the metaverse “won’t be built overnight by a single company” and has promised to collaborate.

It has recently invested $50m (£36.3m) in funding non-profit groups to help “build the metaverse responsibly”.

But it thinks the true metaverse idea will take another 10 to 15 years.

Who else is interested in the metaverse?
Mr Sweeney, the head of Epic Games (which makes Fortnite), has long spoken about his metaverse aspirations.

Online multiplayer games have had shared interactive worlds going back decades. They are not the metaverse, but have some ideas in common.

In recent years Fortnite expanded its product, hosting concerts, brand events, and more inside its own digital world. That impressed many with what was possible – and thrust Mr Sweeney’s vision of the metaverse into the spotlight.

Other games are getting closer to a metaverse idea, too. Roblox, for example, is a platform for thousands of individual games connected to the larger ecosystem.

Meanwhile, Unity, a 3D development platform, is investing in “digital twins” – digital copies of the real world – and the graphics company Nvidia is building its “Omniverse”, which it describes as a platform for connecting 3D virtual worlds.

So is it all about games?
No. Even though there are so many ideas about what the metaverse might be, most visions see social human interaction as the core.

Facebook, for example, has been experimenting with a VR meetings app called Workplace, and a social space called Horizons, both of which use their virtual avatar systems.

Another VR app, VRChat, is entirely focused around hanging out online and chatting – with no goal or purpose other than exploring environments and meeting people.

Other applications may be waiting out there, ready to be discovered.

Mr Sweeney recently told the Washington Post that he envisions a world where a car manufacturer trying to advertise a new model is “going to drop their car into the world in real time and you’ll be able to drive it around”.

Perhaps when you go online shopping, you’ll try on digital clothes first, and then order them to arrive in the real world.

Does the technology exist yet?
VR has come a long way in recent years, with high-end headsets which can trick the human eye into seeing in 3D as the player moves around a virtual world. It has become more mainstream, too – the Oculus Quest 2 VR gaming headset was a popular Christmas gift in 2020.

The explosion of interest in NFTs, which may provide a way to reliably track ownership of digital goods, could point to how a virtual economy would work.

And more advanced digital worlds will need better, more consistent, and more mobile connectivity – something that might be solved with the rollout of 5G.

For now, though, everything is in the early stages. The evolution of the metaverse – if it happens at all – will be fought among tech giants for the next decade, or maybe even longer.

Apple has taken down one of the world’s most popular Quran apps in China, following a request from officials.

Quran Majeed is available across the world on the App Store – and has nearly 150,000 reviews. It is used by millions of Muslims.

The BBC understands that the app was removed for hosting illegal religious texts.

The Chinese government has not responded to the BBC’s request for comment.

The deletion of the app was first noticed by Apple Censorship – a website that monitors apps on Apple’s App Store globally.

In a statement from the app’s maker, PDMS, the company said: “According to Apple, our app Quran Majeed has been removed from the China App store because it includes content that requires additional documentation from Chinese authorities”.

“We are trying to get in touch with the Cyberspace Administration of China and relevant Chinese authorities to get this issue resolved”.

The company said it had close to one million users in China.

The Chinese Communist Party officially recognises Islam as a religion in the country.

However, China has been accused of human rights violations, and even genocide, against the mostly Muslim Uyghur ethnic group in Xinjiang.

Earlier this year the BBC reported that Uyghur imams had been targeted in China’s Xinjiang crackdown.

Apple declined to comment, but directed the BBC to its Human Rights Policy, which states: “We’re required to comply with local laws, and at times there are complex issues about which we may disagree with governments.”

However, it is not clear what rules the app has broken in China. Quran Majeed says it is “trusted by over 35 million Muslims globally”.

Last month, both Apple and Google removed a tactical voting app devised by jailed Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

Russian authorities had threatened to fine the two companies if they refused to drop the app, which told users who could unseat ruling party candidates.

China is one of Apple’s biggest markets, and the company’s supply chain is heavily reliant on Chinese manufacturing.

Apple chief executive Tim Cook has been accused of hypocrisy from politicians in the US for speaking out about American politics, but staying quiet about China.

Mr Cook criticised Donald Trump’s ban of seven Muslim-majority countries in 2017.

However, he is also accused of complying with the Chinese government over censorship – and not publicly criticising it for its treatment of Muslim minorities.

The New York Times reported earlier this year that Apple takes down apps in China if deemed off limits by the Chinese government. Topics that apps cannot discuss include Tiananmen Square, the Chinese spiritual movement Falun Gong, the Dalai Lama, and independence for Tibet and Taiwan.

Benjamin Ismail, project director at Apple Censorship, said: “Currently Apple is being turned into the censorship bureau of Beijing.

“They need to do the right thing, and then face whatever the reaction is of the Chinese government.”

Another popular religious app, Olive Tree’s Bible app, was also taken down this week in China. The company told the BBC they had removed the app themselves.

“Olive Tree Bible Software was informed during the App Store review process that we are required to provide a permit demonstrating our authorization to distribute an app with book or magazine content in mainland China,” said a spokesperson.

“Since we did not have the permit and needed to get our app update approved and out to customers, we removed our Bible app from China’s App Store.”

On Friday, The Mac Observer reported that Audible, the Amazon owned audiobook and podcast service, removed its app from the Apple store in mainland China last month “due to permit requirements.”

On Thursday, Microsoft said it was shutting down its social network, LinkedIn, in China, saying having to comply with the Chinese state had become increasingly challenging.

The decision was made after the career-networking site faced questions for blocking the profiles of some journalists.

Microsoft is shutting down its social network, LinkedIn, in China, saying having to comply with the Chinese state has become increasingly challenging.

It comes after the career-networking site faced questions for blocking the profiles of some journalists.

LinkedIn will launch a jobs-only version of the site, called InJobs, later this year.

But this will not include a social feed or the ability to share or post articles.

LinkedIn senior vice-president Mohak Shroff blogged: “We’re facing a significantly more challenging operating environment and greater compliance requirements in China.”

And the firm said in a statement: “While we are going to sunset the localised version of LinkedIn in China later this year, we will continue to have a strong presence in China to drive our new strategy and are excited to launch the new InJobs app later this year.”

‘Gross appeasement’
LinkedIn had been the only major Western social-media platform operating in China.

When it launched there, in 2014, it had agreed to adhere to the requirements of the Chinese government in order to operate there, but also promised to be transparent about how it conducted business in the country and said it disagreed with government censorship.

Recently, LinkedIn blacklisted several journalist accounts, including those of Melissa Chan and Greg Bruno, from its China-based website.

Mr Bruno, who has written a book documenting China’s treatment of Tibetan refugees, told Verdict he was not surprised the Chinese Communist Party did not like it but was “dismayed that an American tech company is caving into the demands of a foreign government”.

US senator Rick Scott called the move a “gross appeasement and an act of submission to Communist China”, in a letter to LinkedIn chief executive Ryan Roslansky and Microsoft boss Satya Nadella.

2px presentational grey line
China’s internet roams further adrift
Zhaoyin Feng, BBC News, Washington

It’s hard to pinpoint whether LinkedIn’s move was driven by the pressure from China, or that from the US. It could be both, as the Chinese government has been tightening its grip over the internet, and meanwhile, LinkedIn has drawn growing criticism in America for bowing to Beijing’s censorship rules.

LinkedIn launched its Chinese version in 2014, hoping to tap into the country’s huge market.

Seven years on, it has struggled against local competitors and run into regulatory problems. In March, LinkedIn was reportedly punished by the Chinese regulator for failing to censor political content, resulting in a suspension of new user registration for 30 days. Other than controversy over censorships, the platform has been used by Chinese intelligence agencies as a recruitment tool.

In a letter to the platform’s users in China today, President of LinkedIn China Lu Jian pledges that the site will continue to “connect global business opportunities”.

But LinkedIn’s shutdown in China shows an opposite trend. The country’s heavily controlled internet has drifted further away from the rest of the world, and it’s increasingly challenging for global business operating in China to bridge the deep divide.

Apple’s shares dropped on Tuesday following reports it could slash its iPhone 13 production targets due to the ongoing global computer chip shortage.

The electronic giant had expected to make 90 million iPhones in the last quarter of 2021, reported Bloomberg.

However, Apple was now having to tell its partners that the total will be lower by as many as 10 million units, sources told the business magazine.

Apple shares fell 1.2% in after-hours trading on the news.

Semiconductor manufacturers Broadcom and Texas Instruments were also down 1%, as sources said they were struggling to deliver enough chips to Apple in time.

The BBC has approached Apple, Broadcom and Texas Instruments for comment.

In September, Apple launched four new iPhone 13 models: iPhone 13, iPhone 13 mini, iPhone 13 Pro and iPhone 13 Pro Max. Pre-orders started on 17 September and started shipping on 24 September.

Widespread chip shortage
Millions of products across multiple industries today rely on computer chips to run and semiconductor makers’ plants are currently working flat-out to meet demand.

Smartphone makers like Apple – some of the biggest chip purchasers in the world – have been severely impacted, but also other sectors like the car industry and the makers of video game consoles.

In July, Apple chief executive Tim Cook warned investors that the semiconductor shortage could affect sales of the iPhone and the iPad.

Investment firm Wedbush estimates that Apple will be running a shortage of more than five million iPhone 13 units for the holiday season, if consumer demand continues to keep pace with the number of iPhones being shipped for the rest of this year.

However, Wedbush analysts Daniel Ives and John Katsingris stressed that the chip shortage was a “not a worry” as they expected the smartphones to be available in the early part of 2022.

“Taking a step back, 5 million to 10 million units moving out of the December quarter into the March quarter due to well-understood supply chain issues is not a worry for us and ultimately speaks to a stronger demand trajectory than Wall Street had been anticipating,” they said.

“We view today’s news as nothing more than a speed bump on a multi-year supercycle iPhone 12/13 that continues to play out.”

Their views are shared by several other analysts, who have forecast that the new iPhone 13 models will have a strong sales year as consumers look to upgrade devices for 5G networks.

Apple’s shares dropped on Tuesday following reports it could slash its iPhone 13 production targets due to the ongoing global computer chip shortage.

The electronic giant had expected to make 90 million iPhones in the last quarter of 2021, reported Bloomberg.

However, Apple was now having to tell its partners that the total will be lower by as many as 10 million units, sources told the business magazine.

Apple shares fell 1.2% in after-hours trading on the news.

Apple iPhone 13 brings portrait mode for video
Why is there a chip shortage?
Semiconductor manufacturers Broadcom and Texas Instruments were also down 1%, as sources said they were struggling to deliver enough chips to Apple in time.

The BBC has approached Apple, Broadcom and Texas Instruments for comment.

In September, Apple launched four new iPhone 13 models: iPhone 13, iPhone 13 mini, iPhone 13 Pro and iPhone 13 Pro Max. Pre-orders started on 17 September and started shipping on 24 September.

Widespread chip shortage
Millions of products across multiple industries today rely on computer chips to run and semiconductor makers’ plants are currently working flat-out to meet demand.

Smartphone makers like Apple – some of the biggest chip purchasers in the world – have been severely impacted, but also other sectors like the car industry and the makers of video game consoles.

In July, Apple chief executive Tim Cook warned investors that the semiconductor shortage could affect sales of the iPhone and the iPad.

Investment firm Wedbush estimates that Apple will be running a shortage of more than five million iPhone 13 units for the holiday season, if consumer demand continues to keep pace with the number of iPhones being shipped for the rest of this year.

However, Wedbush analysts Daniel Ives and John Katsingris stressed that the chip shortage was a “not a worry” as they expected the smartphones to be available in the early part of 2022.

“Taking a step back, 5 million to 10 million units moving out of the December quarter into the March quarter due to well-understood supply chain issues is not a worry for us and ultimately speaks to a stronger demand trajectory than Wall Street had been anticipating,” they said.

“We view today’s news as nothing more than a speed bump on a multi-year supercycle iPhone 12/13 that continues to play out.”

Their views are shared by several other analysts, who have forecast that the new iPhone 13 models will have a strong sales year as consumers look to upgrade devices for 5G networks.

Last week’s testimony from Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen was devastating.

The documents she took from the company were carefully and methodically explained – a window into the inner workings of Facebook. It was a stunning moment of theatre – her testimony reverberating around the world.

But last week could be significant for the future of whistleblowing in Silicon Valley for another reason.

On Thursday night Gavin Newsom, California’s governor, signed into law the Silenced No More Act.

Sweeping changes
The legislation has been pushed by Ifeoma Ozoma – a whistleblower who used to work at Pinterest.

She came forward with accusations of racism against the company in June last year – allegations on which Pinterest told the BBC it did not wish to comment.

In doing so, she realised that the law was strangely skewed.

It is no secret that Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) can be used in the US to silence employees. It was something that came up time and time again during the #MeToo revelations.

Legislators in California responded by bringing in a law that protected whistleblowers in sexual harassment cases.

But Ms Ozoma realised that the law didn’t protect other forms of alleged discrimination – like racism. Since then she’s been fighting to change the law.

And on Thursday, she did just that.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
View original tweet on Twitter
“The act allows anyone in California, regardless of the language in an NDA… to speak about their experiences with discrimination, harassment, or any other unlawful conduct,” Ms Ozoma says.

That is a big change to state law in California. Overnight, legal agreements that look to prevent employees coming forward have been severely restricted.

“It’s wonderful,” she tells me.

‘The CIA playbook’
Silicon Valley has traditionally been a terrible place for whistleblowers.

Last month I spoke to Cori Crider, from Foxglove, a group that helps whistleblowers come forward.

She said something that shocked me.

“I spent more than a decade working in national security and I very often feel like Silicon Valley types play from the playbook of the CIA on this stuff,” she said.

Being a whistleblower anywhere is difficult. But when it comes to tech, it can be particularly so.

“Think of the surveillance capabilities that these companies have… you have to assume that they have access to every single thing that you’re doing,” Ms Ozoma says.

Silicon Valley is a paranoid place – and with good reason. Intellectual property and proprietary technology is where much of the value of a company comes from. You don’t want your employees running off to another company with your trade secrets.

Tech companies, though, have been accused of secrecy mission creep – using tightly worded agreements to stop employees from raising legitimate concerns.

Is another storm brewing in Silicon Valley?
Sexual harassment claims ‘should not be silenced’
Cher Scarlett is a software engineer at Apple. Last month she made a complaint against the company to the US National Labor Relations Board.

She alleges that the company suppressed attempts by workers to organise.

In her filings, she alleges that Apple repeatedly blocked employee efforts to survey and discuss pay – something on which the tech giant has not commented.

Ms Scarlett was uncertain whether she could raise her concerns publicly, or of the legal implications in the documents she signed when she started the job.

“You know, for anybody who’s not a lawyer, it’s scary… I don’t have the expertise to understand the legal jargon,” she says.

“It’s very, very heavy, and you end up with a lot of scrutiny, and hostility.”

The public eye
Timnit Gebru says she was fired from Google in December last year. She has accused the company of institutional racism and supressing research.

Google has apologised for the circumstances under which she left the company.

Ms Gebru says that taking on a corporation with unlimited resources is frightening.

“The cost, it’s no joke,” she says. “Lawyers cost a lot and you don’t even know if it’s worth it.”

And then there’s the publicity. When Ms Gebru made the claims, she was was suddenly catapulted into the international limelight. Her phone rang off the hook.

“I didn’t have any time to process any of it, emotionally, no time at all. I was just constantly on the phone, to [other] employees and talking to the press.

“I knew it was very important for my story to come out before Google’s,” she says.

Being a whistleblower can be daunting, and it helps to have financial backing.

Elizabeth Holmes is currently standing trial in San Jose for fraud.

The company she founded and ran, Theranos, claimed to be able to diagnose hundreds of diseases through a few drops of blood.

It couldn’t.

Tyler Shultz, who worked at the company, was crucial in exposing the scandal. He was brave and courageous. But he is also the grandson of former Secretary of State George Shultz, and could afford lawyers when Ms Holmes tried to intimidate him with threatening letters.

Ms Haugen’s testimony may be inspiring to many, but the international scrutiny she received – the blunt pushback from Facebook – may intimidate others.

And then there’s the age old problem that whistleblowers have – the fear that if they speak out they’ll become unemployable.

“I think a lot of people are worried that they’re not going to be able to find another job after they come forward,” Ms Scarlett says.

This all helps to explain why the media gets so excited by people like Ms Haugen. She isn’t the first, but it is rare when people come forward.

“It’s a deeply personal decision that is based on people’s personal situations, and their circumstances,” Ms Ozoma says.

She has written a handbook for whistleblowers to help them understand how the process might pan out, what to expect and how to prepare.

She hopes it will assist employees who are thinking about taking the plunge.

Yet despite the change in the law in California, Ms Ozoma still believes the system is stacked against coming forward. And until that changes, scenes like last week’s senate hearing will be the exception.

Google says it will stop ads running on climate change-denying YouTube videos and other content, and prohibit ads promoting these claims.

The company says it is responding to concerns from advertisers.

The ban will cover ads for – and the monetization of – content that contradicts the “scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change”.

It will be enforced by “automated tools and human review”.

The policy will apply to content “referring to climate change as a hoax or a scam, claims denying that long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to climate change”.

Misinformation money
The changes mean YouTube creators will be stopped from earning advertising revenue from content which denies climate change.

A 2020 report by Avaaz – a US not-for-profit organisation which promotes activism on issues such as climate change – accused YouTube of “incentivizing this climate misinformation content via its monetization program”.

Fadi Quran, who runs Avaaz’s disinformation project, told the BBC it “could turn the tide on the climate denial economy”.

“With three weeks left for the critical Glasgow summit, and climate misinformation on the rise to undermine it, other social media platforms must quickly follow Google’s leadership.”

This move from Google marks a first step in trying to disincentivize those looking to profit from denying and downplaying the very real threat of climate change, on social media.

Creating emotive content that’s wrong about climate change attracts views, likes, and therefore money through advertising. This new policy aims to put an end to that last part – on Google platforms at least.

But critics are calling for social media sites to tackle climate change disinformation in the same way – and with the same seriousness – as falsehoods about the pandemic.

That would include introducing labels for false information – and demoting videos and content which mislead about climate change from the sites’ algorithms – so that they aren’t suggested to users.

The human cost of anti-vaccine and coronavirus conspiracies appears to be in part what eventually inspired the social media sites to act.

The human cost of climate change has become clear over recent months – and the question remains: will social media sites act decisively and quickly enough to combat harmful lies that could hinder efforts to save the planet?

2px presentational grey line
Greenpeace’s Silvia Pastorelli welcomed the announcement, but told the BBC it was “nowhere near enough to stop the overwhelming amount of climate disinformation, greenwashing and outright climate denial on big tech’s platforms”.

Stopping the monetization of content does not remove it or reduce its prominence. But Google says it does both, and strives to provide authoritative information, even when people search for climate-related conspiracies.

The announcement by Google’s advertising team follows a blog post on Wednesday by Google Chief Executive Sundar Pichai, in which he announced a range of measures to help tackle climate change including:

In the US, Google Maps will display the most fuel-efficient route if it isn’t already the fastest one.
Adding carbon emissions information to Google Flights, including emissions per seat.
A new feature for Nest thermostats, helping users maximise clean energy use.

Phone-maker Samsung has apologised for a software update sent to UK customers stating Russian government-mandated apps had been downloaded.

It blamed a technical error for the incorrect wording and said no Russian apps had been installed.

A new law in Russia that demands smartphones offer software from the country came into effect in April.

One expert said that Samsung had not fully explained what went wrong and that customers would be concerned.

Andrew Edmans bought a second-hand Samsung Galaxy Z Fold2 phone from Amazon Marketplace three weeks ago, and ran an official Samsung update.

After the installation had completed, he noticed the wording which read: “As part of the implementation of the requirements of the decree of the government of the Russian Federation No 1867 of 18/11/2020, the download of mandatory applications has been added. Some of these apps will only be installed if the device is reset to factory settings.”

Concerned, he contacted Samsung who promised a reply within 48 hours.

He got nothing and called again four days later.

“Finally a tech remote-accessed my phone and confirmed the update, and stated he’d never seen it before and referred me to customer solutions.”

This was escalated to head office and Mr Edmans was eventually told it was “a notification error”.

Samsung told the BBC: “We can confirm that the wording of the message was incorrect and shared with a limited number of UK customers due to a technical error.

“The upgrade received was UK-specific and no third-party apps from Russian have been installed on devices, or have access to the device itself

“We sincerely apologise for any inconvenience caused by this.”

Mr Edmans said that he was “disappointed” with the way Samsung had handled the issue.

“All I know is, as of this morning, my Samsung Fold 2 device still states it has a Russian Federation update on it,” he said.

“I suffer from bipolar and anxiety disorders and this concern over security on my phone has only compounded those issues.”

Russian restrictions

Prof Alan Woodward, a computer security expert at University of Surrey, said that it was hard to understand what technical error could have caused such a message to be sent by mistake.

But, he added, it offered an insight into how Samsung was dealing with the Russian law.

“The good thing about this warning – assuming it is meant for you – is that Samsung is being transparent by giving you links to the Russian Federation decree that mandates such software.”

But privacy expert Pat Walshe said he thought the issue had been badly handled by Samsung.

“I do not believe that Samsung handled this matter appropriately, or considered the anxiety and distress this caused Mr Edmans, and the fact that he could not trust the install.

“How many customers received the notice? How did the error occur? How can individuals be confident that erroneous software was not installed on their device?”

Russia has tightened its rules on the internet in recent years, including requiring search engines to delete some results and calling on messaging services to share encryption keys. ISPs are required to install network equipment that can filter content.

It has also tested an unplugged version of the internet, which would give the Kremlin the ability to switch off connections to the worldwide web if it felt the country was under threat.

The law requiring smartphones, computers and smart televisions sold in the country to have Russian alternatives to their normal software installed became effective in April 2021.

It was designed to help Russian software firms promote their smartphones, although some have raised concerns that the Russian-made software could be used to spy on users.

Samsung agreed to pre-install these apps but rival Apple did not – instead it offers users the option to install the Russian alternatives, which is not compulsory.

Initially it had refused to comply at all but, after pressure from Moscow, agreed to that compromise.

British broadcaster Sky is launching a TV that streams content via the internet, removing the need for a satellite dish.

The company describes Sky Glass as a “no-fuss” streaming TV.

One expert said it would put the broadcaster in direct competition with TV makers such as Samsung and Sony.

Another said while ditching the “outdated satellite dish” was long overdue, it was “an expensive way to watch TV”.

Sky Glass eliminates the need for an external box – and with built-in Dolby Atmos, there is no need for a sound bar either.

Other specs include:

three versions – 43in, 55in and 65in
a single wire and just one plug
4K ultra-high-definition quantum-dot screen
10-bit high dynamic range to support Dolby Vision HDR
voice-activated interface
available in five colours
“Sky Glass is the streaming TV with Sky inside, providing the total integration of hardware, software and content,” group chief executive Dana Strong said.

“We believe this is the smartest TV available.”

Although it will require a Sky subscription, content from BBC iPlayer, Amazon, Netflix, Disney+, ITV Hub and All4 will also be available.

Sky has not yet named the hardware partner who will make the device.

It has also not explained how exactly it plans to stream its content over the web, without delays or buffering.

If someone wishes to cancel their Sky subscription after purchasing the TV, they will still be able to use the TV but will lose some of the more advanced features, such as voice control and playlists.

‘Extremely lucrative’
While the move to deliver content over the internet rather than via satellite would bring “its own challenges”, Sky’s decision made a lot of business sense, independent technology analyst Paolo Pescatore said.

“By not having a satellite dish, you lower costs and increase margins,” he said.

“Providing your own TV set and persuading people to sign up for a subscription, that is extremely lucrative for Sky.”

In future, Sky may offer discounts on the TV with its broadband offerings too, he said.

Sky already offers TV via broadband in Italy, and Germany, via its Sky Q set-top box.

This bolder move into hardware would also put it in direct competition with TV-makers such as Samsung and Sony, who bundle Sky content with their devices, Mr Pescatore said, and hasten “the demise of the set-top box”.

The TV can either be paid for as part of an existing subscription or bought outright.

Users who already have a £26 Sky Ultimate TV subscription will pay £13 extra per month for the smallest TV. The 55in screen will be £17 and the 65in £21.

Buying the smallest version of the TV upfront will cost £649 and will need an additional subscription to Sky. The larger versions will be £849 and £1,049 respectively.

Magic dust
That made it “an expensive way to watch TV,” Ernest Doku, of Uswitch, said.

But he added the market was due a shake-up.

“It’s about time that Sky sprinkled some magic dust over the outdated satellite dish,” Mr Doku said.

“This all-in-one solution finally does away with the set-top box and dish, which historically have put off many potential customers.”

Sky also claimed the Glass would be the world’s first carbon-neutral TV.

Mr Doku said details about how it would achieve that “were thin on the ground” but added: “Encouraging consumers to get rid of working televisions in order to get Sky’s version could generate a lot of unnecessary electronic waste.”

The TV is available from 18 October in the UK, and in other markets next year.