Author: Cyrus Farivar

SACRAMENTO, Calif.—Attorney Thomas Johnson came ready to defend a novel legal theory in court. Earlier this year his client had abandoned a Samsung Galaxy phone at a burglary crime scene, which allowed authorities to find the device, call 911 from the lock screen, and acquire the phone's actual number. Law enforcement soon determined the phone’s owner, Matthew Muller, and arrested him days later.

But while executing that arrest, authorities found materials related to a separate kidnapping case reported earlier in the year. Muller eventually pleaded guilty to the burglary, but he denied any role in the kidnapping. And according to his attorney Johnson, this whole thing should have been avoided. When law enforcement grabbed the Samsung Galaxy and acted on that fateful day, the attorney believes they engaged in an unconstitutional search against his client.

However, a federal judge disagreed with Johnson on Thursday. "I don't think this is a very difficult issue," US District Judge Troy L. Nunley told the court after hearing oral arguments from the defense lawyer and from government prosecutors. Judge Nunley denied Johnson's attempt to suppress evidence that stemmed from Muller’s arrest and his attempt to seek an evidentiary hearing.

On Thursday morning, a federal judge in Sacramento will evaluate a novel legal theory recently raised by the defense lawyer representing an admitted California burglar and suspected kidnapper.

The lawyer, Thomas Johnson, claims that cops shouldn’t have been able to pick up his client's Samsung Galaxy left at the scene of a burglary, where they then used it to call 911, determined the carrier, and eventually tracked down the suspect.

After a quick investigation of the March 2015 burglary in Dublin, California, about 35 miles east of San Francisco, Alameda County Sheriff's deputies zeroed in on a man named Matthew Muller. Over a few days, various law enforcement agencies executed a warrant at the South Lake Tahoe house where suspect Muller was believed to be staying. There, Muller was quickly arrested, and officials also found materials that matched a separate kidnapping case in Vallejo, California that had been reported earlier in the year.

On Tuesday, Amazon began announcing settlement payments to customers who bought e-books between April 2010 and May 2012. (Some less-literate Ars staffers, like Nate Anderson, got as little as $1, while others, like yours truly, got more than $48.)

The funds are coming from Apple as part of an antitrust lawsuit that was settled earlier this year.

“You don't have to do anything to claim your credit, we have already added it to your Amazon account," reads the e-mail. "We will automatically apply your available credit to your purchase of qualifying items through Amazon, an Amazon device or an Amazon app.”

On Tuesday, the Federal Aviation Administration unveiled its long-anticipated rules for commercial use of small consumer drones. The rules call for a new "remote pilot certificate," a blanket ban on night flights, and a requirement that all flights remain below 400 feet or within 400 feet of a structure.

Under the new operational rules, which take effect in August 2016, drone pilots must be at least 16 years old or be supervised by an adult with a remote pilot certificate. The pilot must also maintain "visual line of sight" with the drone at all times, among other requirements. (Personal, or hobbyist, use rules remain unchanged.)

"This is a huge day for the industry!" Lisa Ellman, a drone lawyer with Hogan Lovells, told Ars. "Long term, this is going to be seen as a watershed moment—the flood gates will now be opened and drone use will be broadly authorized for commercial industry, so we can take advantage of all of their safety and efficiency benefits."

An angry group of former customers has sued a collapsed Bitcoin mining company, GAW Miners, in a proposed class-action lawsuit. The group alleges that it was duped by the company and its founders.

This is the second civil suit filed against the company within the last six months—it was sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission in December 2015 over similar accusations of fraud. The SEC alleged $19 million worth of fraudulent deals. (That SEC case was put on hold for six months, starting in April 2016, according to court records.)

In early 2014, GAW Miners was first introduced to the Bitcoin public by re-selling mining rigs. Later, the company shifted to cloud-based mining (Hashlets), and in early 2015, it introduced its own altcoin, dubbed "Paycoin." GAW also tried its hand at its own cloud-based wallet service (Paybase) and its own online discussion board (HashTalk).

The lawyers who successfully got "Happy Birthday" put into the public domain and then sued two months ago over "We Shall Overcome" have a new target: Woody Guthrie’s "This Land."

Randall Newman and his colleagues have filed a proposed class-action lawsuit against The Richmond Organization (TRO) and Ludlow Music, the two entities that also claim to own the copyright for "We Shall Overcome."

The new suit is filed on behalf of a Brooklyn, New York-based band, Satorii, which obtained a license (at $45.40 for the privilege) to record a version that they sell as a download. However, the band has recorded another version with a different melody, and the musicians are concerned that they'll be sued over it.

Nearly five months after convicted Silk Road druglord Ross Ulbricht filed his opening brief in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, the government finally responded with its own brief late Friday evening. The government included over 200 pages of exhibits from the trial.

The 186-page reply rebuts, point-for-point, defense attorney Joshua Dratel’s claims that

• his client wasn’t the primary operator of the notorious underground website,
• that Ulbricht’s defense was hampered by two corrupt federal agents,
• that Dratel was not adequately able to cross-examine government witnesses, and
• that two witnesses were unable to testify on Ulbricht’s behalf, denying him constitutional rights, among other arguments.

After a lengthy recap of the entire case, United States Attorney Preet Bharara opened his arguments with a notable flaw in Ulbricht’s logic:

OAKLAND, Calif.—Legal experts say that it will be an uphill battle for the plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit this week against Twitter, Facebook and Google. That suit, filed here on behalf of the family of a terrorism victim, argues that the companies should not be a vehicle for terrorist propaganda and that the companies should be held liable for the consequences of publication of such material.

On Tuesday, the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, a woman killed in terrorist attacks in Paris in November 2015, sued the three tech giants in federal court for unspecified damages. In a 39-page civil complaint, the family’s attorneys argue that the defendants provide "material support to ISIS"—as the companies make money off of ads that run against this propaganda, and therefore are in violation of a civil provision of an anti-terrorism law.

However, according to several lawyers and law professors that Ars spoke with, the trio of companies in Gonzalez v. Twitter will likely argue that they are not liable under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. (The companies have not yet formally responded to the case in court.)

A new lawsuit filed by an American woman alleges that she was subjected to an unconstitutional search by border agents and then an extensive cavity search by a male doctor acting on their orders.

The civil complaint, which was filed last week in federal court in Tucson and seeks unspecified damages, targets the government, Customs and Border Protection, the CBP agent, and the doctor who searched her, among others.

The court filing describes 18-year-old Ashley Cervantes’ harrowing experience over the course of seven hours in October 2014. She had just returned from Nogales, Sonora (Mexico) back into Nogales, Arizona—she had come back from eating breakfast at one of her favorite spots.

A Las Vegas man known as the "Spam King" was sentenced Monday to 2.5 years in federal prison. He pleaded guilty last year to one count of fraud.

The federal judge in San Jose, California also ordered Sanford Wallace to pay over $310,000 in restitution.

Prosecutors wrote that by his own admission, Wallace executed "a scheme from approximately November 2008 through March 2009 to send spam messages to Facebook users that compromised approximately 500,000 legitimate Facebook accounts, and resulted in over 27 million spam messages being sent through Facebook’s servers."