Author: David Kravets

A recent study concludes what everybody already knows: nobody reads the lengthy terms of service and privacy policies that bombard Internet users every day. Nobody understands them. They're too long, and they often don't make sense.

A study out this month made the point all too clear. Most of the 543 university students involved in the analysis didn't bother to read the terms of service before signing up for a fake social networking site called "NameDrop" that the students believed was real. Those who did glossed over important clauses. The terms of service required them to give up their first born, and if they don't yet have one, they get until 2050 to do so. The privacy policy said that their data would be given to the NSA and employers. Of the few participants who read those clauses, they signed up for the service anyway.

"This brings us to the biggest lie on the Internet, which anecdotally, is known as 'I agree to these terms and conditions,'" the study found.

Republican lawmakers grilled Attorney General Loretta Lynch on Tuesday over why she chose not to prosecute Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for sending classified data through her private e-mail server when she was secretary of state.

But the Obama appointee refused to answer, saying it would be "inappropriate" to respond to lawmakers' repeated questions.

"While I understand that this investigation has generated significant public interest, as attorney general, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further on the underlying facts of the investigation or the legal basis for the team’s recommendation,” Lynch told the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice.

A poll out Monday concludes that a majority of Americans disapprove of the FBI's decision not to recommend charges against Hillary Clinton, the Democratic presumptive nominee for president who has been embroiled in a scandal involving her treatment of classified e-mail when she was Secretary of State.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted by Langer Research Associates found that 56 percent of those surveyed said they "disapprove" of FBI Director James Comey's decision last week. Attorney General Loretta Lynch backed the recommendation. Thirty five percent answered that they "approve" of the decision. About 9 percent of respondents said they had "no opinion" on the issue.

The poll was conducted July 6-7 of a random sample of 519 adults on landlines and mobile phones. It has a margin of error rating of plus or minus 5 percentage points.

Just weeks ago, Led Zeppelin defeated a Los Angeles federal copyright infringement lawsuit claiming the opening to the 1971 classic "Stairway to Heaven" was a rip-off of the 1968 instrumental song "Taurus." The suit was brought in 2014 by the estate of Randy Wolfe, who wrote the song for his band Spirit. Wolfe (aka Randy California) died in 1997.

Now nearly three weeks after the verdict, Zeppelin's lawyers are seeking almost $800,000 in costs and legal fees for their troubles. In American law, it's usually up to each side of a lawsuit to pay their own legal fees and court costs. But that's not always true when it comes to copyright law. And the Supreme Court on June 16 provided nuanced guidance to lower courts in determining whether the prevailing party in a copyright lawsuit should be awarded attorney fees. That ruling is likely to make it easier for winners in copyright cases to collect fees from the losing side.

In the "Stairway to Heaven" case, the lawyers said (PDF) in court documents that the suit should not have been brought in the first place. Zeppelin's lawyers claim the suit amounted to "nearly half-century-old claims that neither Randy Wolfe nor the owner of the allegedly-infringed copyright ever bothered to assert." Zep's attorney, Peter Anderson, added that the Wolfe trust "tried to tar 'Stairway to Heaven' and its authors, Jimmy Page and Robert Plant."

UPDATE: This post was updated after trading ended to reflect closing prices.

ORIGINAL Story:
Shares of companies producing firearms, body cams, and stun guns jumped significantly Friday in the wake of the murders of five Dallas law enforcement officers. The officers were killed during a Thursday night protest of police-officer involved shootings of civilians.

Shares of gunmakers often spike in the aftermath of high-profile shootings for several reasons, including the public's desire to enhance personal security and to beat possible gun-control measures that are always discussed in a tragedy's wake. Stocks in that sector spiked after the Orlando, Florida shootings last month. On the body cam front, financials in that sector also rocket after major police events as the market suspects more police departments will deploy the technology.

Gov. Mark Dayton of Minnesota on Thursday asked the Department of Justice to investigate the killing of a black motorist shot by a white police officer. Philando Castile's dying moments were live-streamed on Facebook, and the incident prompted a comment from President Barack Obama.

Dayton said he wanted an "immediate independent federal investigation into this matter." The governor suggested that racism was to blame for the killing of Castile, a 32-year-old school cafeteria manager, who was shot at least four times by a police officer after being pulled over for a broken taillight in Falcon Heights.

"Would this have happened if those passengers, the driver and the passengers, were white?," Dayton told a news conference Thursday. "I don’t think it would have. So I’m forced to confront, and I think all of us in Minnesota are forced to confront, that this kind of racism exists."

Bartender John Olson and owner Dan Lilly of Pinky's Pizza Parlor show us the latest in keg technology from Walnut Creek, Calif. I'm the moderator sporting the Oakland Raiders sweatshirt. RAIDERS! (video link)

We at Ars are always on the lookout for new technology. So when I learned (belatedly) that Heineken USA had introduced a new beer-dispensing technology called "Brewlock,” I jumped at the chance to review it. After all, only a grizzled reporter with massive experience in the genre could handle a story like the Brewlock. This was a job for a writer who feels just as comfortable drinking alone as he does imbibing with strangers at the local watering hole.

At Ars we're often under deadlines to churn out reviews quickly. But in this case of the Brewlock, I assigned myself no deadline (you can do that when you’re the senior editor). Instead, I spent the better part of six months testing and comparing Heineken's new technology. Because that's what real journalists do. We push the envelope. Whether I pushed too far here and over the years might be better understood by my larger-than-normal bar tabs, breakups, mishaps, and run-ins with law enforcement.

Massachusetts' top court ruled Friday that a teenager may stand trial on involuntary manslaughter charges in connection to text messages she sent urging her friend to commit suicide.

In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court said a local grand jury had enough probable cause to indict Michelle Carter in connection to the 2014 suicide of Carter Roy III, who was found dead about 50 miles south of Boston in a Fairhaven parking lot. The girl was 17 at the time of Roy's suicide, and she is accused of sending Roy several texts, including one saying "get back in" the day the 18-year-old teen took his own life via carbon monoxide fumes inside his truck.

The defendant's lawyers maintained that her texts were constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment. The court, however, did not create a bright line rule on where free speech ends and criminality begins. Instead, the court ruled that a physical act of violence is not necessary to sustain involuntary manslaughter charges and that each case is "entirely fact specific."

In May, we told you of a lawsuit involving a California cop who looked ready to fire his handgun at a man who was filming the Rohnert Park police officer. Last year's standoff happened right outside the resident's house. Claiming civil rights violations, the alleged victim sued (PDF) the officer and police department that is located about an hour north of San Francisco.

The police department and officer, David Rodriguez, have now responded to the lawsuit. They essentially say it was resident Don McComas' fault from the get go and that McComas' own actions outside his house prompted the officer to draw his weapon on the Rohnert Park man.

"And for a third, separate and affirmative defense, these answering defendants allege that the sole proximate cause of the injuries and damages, if any, claimed by plaintiff was the negligence and fault of the plaintiff...," they responded in court documents. (PDF)

Jim Brown, an NFL legend who played for the Cleveland Browns, scored big Monday despite his retirement from the gridiron in 1965. That's because Electronic Arts, the maker of one of the world's most popular video game series—Madden NFL—has given up its lengthy court battle with the former eight-time Pro Bowl player. The publisher is giving Brown $600,000 to settle a lawsuit that accuses EA of misappropriating his likeness.

Brown said he expected his case to set precedent for other players involved in similar litigation against EA concerning the right of publicity. The legal claim was first recognized in 1953 in a federal appeals court case about professional baseball cards. The claim is most often invoked by celebrities and professional athletes. For the most part, the right of publicity gives people an economic right to their names and likenesses so that they can profit from the commercial value of their identities.

“I took a stand for all athletes and laid a framework for future plaintiffs with my great legal team. Hopefully, this is a step forward in getting companies like Electronic Arts to recognize the value that athletes have in selling their products," Brown said in a statement.