The latest news on the economy, jobs market, U.S. trade and housing, including the latest news and analysis on the Federal Reserve and Central Banking.

Americans Are Desperate for Relief. The Rate Cut Is a Glimmer of Hope.

On Wednesday the Union Finance Ministry issued several circulars providing much needed relief to various sectors including the automotive industry data hosting

Finance Ministry Grants GST Relief to Advertising Agencies and Automobile Dealers

Relief

relief

SINGAPORE, November 9, 2024 –MEXC,a leading global cryptocurrency exchange, has pledged a __€100,000 donation __to support relief efforts following the devastating floods that recently struck Valencia, Spain. Heavy rainfall has caused severe flooding across parts of Spain, resulting in widespread damage to communities and infrastructure.To provide assistance to this humanitarian crisis, MEXC has mobilized resources to support affected individuals and contribute to local recovery initiatives Managed by the MEXC Spain Team, the €100,000 donation aims to support immediate relief efforts and provide vital resources to those impacted by the disaster. These funds will assist the Spanish Red Cross in the delivery of essential aid, including food, medical supplies, and emergency shelter, alleviating the suffering of those affected by this disaster. "Our hearts go out to all those impacted. During this challenging time, we are committed to working closely with local partners to understand how we can best support them," said Tracy Jin, VP of MEXC.“We’re honored to stand alongside our users and the community, doing everything we can to provide a safe space where they can find relief and support as they rebuild and work to keep their loved ones safe." Since the onset of the crisis, the MEXC Spain team has collaborated closely with local relief organizations to ensure aid reaches where it is most needed. This initiative reaffirms MEXC’s longstanding commitment to supporting communities in times of need, exemplified by its recent efforts during the 2023 Türkiye earthquake, where MEXC contributed 1 million Turkish Lira to aid emergency responses. Partnering with local organizations, MEXC provided essential support to expedite relief efforts and address urgent needs on the ground. MEXC remains steadfast in its dedication to delivering timely, impactful assistance, strengthening resilience and solidarity in the communities it serves. About MEXC Founded in 2018, __MEXC __is dedicated to being "Your Easiest Way to Crypto." Known for its extensive selection of trending tokens, airdrop opportunities, and low fees, MEXC serves over 30 million users across 170+ countries. With a focus on accessibility and efficiency, our advanced trading platform appeals to both new traders and seasoned investors alike. MEXC provides a seamless, secure, and rewarding gateway to the world of digital assets. This story was distributed as a release by Btcwire under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program. Learn more about the program here SINGAPORE, November 9, 2024 –MEXC,a leading global cryptocurrency exchange, has pledged a __ €100,000 donation __to support relief efforts following the devastating floods that recently struck Valencia, Spain. €100,000 donation Heavy rainfall has caused severe flooding across parts of Spain, resulting in widespread damage to communities and infrastructure.To provide assistance to this humanitarian crisis, MEXC has mobilized resources to support affected individuals and contribute to local recovery initiatives Managed by the MEXC Spain Team , the €100,000 donation aims to support immediate relief efforts and provide vital resources to those impacted by the disaster. These funds will assist the Spanish Red Cross in the delivery of essential aid, including food, medical supplies, and emergency shelter, alleviating the suffering of those affected by this disaster. MEXC Spain Team MEXC Spain Team "Our hearts go out to all those impacted. During this challenging time, we are committed to working closely with local partners to understand how we can best support them," said Tracy Jin, VP of MEXC.“We’re honored to stand alongside our users and the community, doing everything we can to provide a safe space where they can find relief and support as they rebuild and work to keep their loved ones safe." "Our hearts go out to all those impacted. During this challenging time, we are committed to working closely with local partners to understand how we can best support them," said Tracy Jin, VP of MEXC.“We’re honored to stand alongside our users and the community, doing everything we can to provide a safe space where they can find relief and support as they rebuild and work to keep their loved ones safe." Since the onset of the crisis, the MEXC Spain team has collaborated closely with local relief organizations to ensure aid reaches where it is most needed. This initiative reaffirms MEXC’s longstanding commitment to supporting communities in times of need, exemplified by its recent efforts during the 2023 Türkiye earthquake, where MEXC contributed 1 million Turkish Lira to aid emergency responses . Partnering with local organizations, MEXC provided essential support to expedite relief efforts and address urgent needs on the ground. MEXC remains steadfast in its dedication to delivering timely, impactful assistance, strengthening resilience and solidarity in the communities it serves. MEXC Spain team MEXC Spain team MEXC contributed 1 million Turkish Lira to aid emergency responses MEXC contributed 1 million Turkish Lira to aid emergency responses About MEXC Founded in 2018, __ MEXC __is dedicated to being "Your Easiest Way to Crypto." Known for its extensive selection of trending tokens, airdrop opportunities, and low fees, MEXC serves over 30 million users across 170+ countries. MEXC With a focus on accessibility and efficiency, our advanced trading platform appeals to both new traders and seasoned investors alike. MEXC provides a seamless, secure, and rewarding gateway to the world of digital assets. This story was distributed as a release by Btcwire under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program. Learn more about the program here This story was distributed as a release by Btcwire under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program. Learn more about the program here here here

Floods In Spain: Crypto Exchange MEXC Donates €100,000 To Support Local Relief And Resilience

Oorstromings in Spanje: Crypto Exchange MEXC skenk € 100 000 om plaaslike verligting en veerkragtigheid te ondersteun

Oversvømmelser i Spanien: Crypto Exchange MEXC donerer €100.000 for at støtte lokal nødhjælp og modstandskraft

Überschwemmungen in Spanien: Kryptobörse MEXC spendet 100.000 € zur Unterstützung lokaler Hilfsmaßnahmen und Widerstandsfähigkeit

Inundaciones en España: la plataforma de intercambio de criptomonedas MEXC dona 100.000 € para apoyar la ayuda y la resiliencia locales

سیل در اسپانیا: Crypto Exchange MEXC 100,000 یورو برای حمایت از امداد و مقاومت محلی اهدا می کند

Banjir di Spanyol: Bursa Kripto MEXC Donasikan €100.000 untuk Mendukung Pemulihan dan Ketahanan Lokal

スペインの洪水：暗号通貨取引所MEXCが地元の救援と復興支援に10万ユーロを寄付

Mpela Na Espagne: Crypto Exchange MEXC Epesi €100.000 Pona Ko Soutenir Relief Local Et Resilience

Tondra-drano any Espaina: Ny Crypto Exchange MEXC dia manome €100,000 hanohanana ny fanampiana sy ny faharetana eo an-toerana

Inundații în Spania: Crypto Exchange MEXC donează 100.000 EUR pentru a sprijini ajutorul și rezistența locală

Umwuzure Muri Espagne: Crypto Guhana MEXC Yatanze € 100.000 yo Gufasha Inkeragutabara no Kwihangana

Ispaniýadaky suw joşmalary: Kripto alyş-çalyş MEXC ýerli kömek we çydamlylygy goldamak üçin 100,000 funt sterling berdi

As stress increasingly contributes to heart diseases and, consequently, mortality, well-being practices become more important. Massage is one of the most effective ones. However, not everyone across the world has access to it. How to address this gap and lower stress levels? The answer is obvious: create and use technologies. Human Death Factor According to the latest available data from the World Health Organization (WHO), the top two causes of mortality worldwide are stroke and ischemic heart disease. Moreover, the National Centre for Health Statistics of CDS (Centers for Disease and Prevention) which indicates the mortality index in the US confirms states that heart disease is the number one cause of death with about 700,000 cases per year. One of the general reasons for cardiovascular diseases and strokes is stress. The work of Andrew Steptoe and Mika Kivimäki, "Stress and Cardiovascular Disease," among others, confirms that, indicating that chronic stress predicts the occurrence of coronary heart disease (CHD). Moreover, short-term emotional stress can act as a trigger for cardiac events among those with advanced atherosclerosis. Among those at greater risk are people who experience work-related stress. This correlation is shown in the latest research by the Health and Safety Executive. According to this data, 875,000 workers suffered from work-related stress, depression, or anxiety (new or long-standing cases) in 2022 and 2023. Human Life Factor Fortunately, there are techniques to decrease stress levels. Breathing exercises, laughter, helpful thinking, mindfulness, and social activities, as mentioned in the Human Resources Datasheet of the University of Michigan, are among them. Additionally, the WHO recommends maintaining a daily routine, connecting with others, ensuring quality sleep, paying attention to nutrition, and engaging in regular physical exercise. Montana State University provides a more precise explanation of the biological mechanisms behind stress reduction through exercise and other wellness practices. They reduce adrenaline and cortisol, two stress hormones. To maintain cortisol within the norm, scholars advise monitoring caffeine and alcohol as both can increase cortisol. Time management and maintaining work-life balance can also contribute to mental well-being. Body treatments and massages also play a role as anti-stress techniques. This is confirmed in the case study "Physiological Adjustments to Stress Measures Following Massage Therapy: A Review of the Literature" by Albert Moraska and his partners from various health institutions across the US. A study by the Touch Research Institutes at the University of Miami School of Medicine further reveals that massages can reduce cortisol by an average of 31% in a single session. It also improves sleep quality and lowers heart rate and blood pressure, thereby mitigating risks associated with cardiovascular disease. Massage to Masses However, not everyone can access body therapy and massage. Common barriers include a lack of available or efficient massage therapists and their limited working hours. This means that when you need a session after long hours at work, you may have to wait until a suitable hour. Costs also play a role, with one session averaging up to $100. It's not surprising that human performance comes at a high price in today's world. Imagine going to a theater with only one visitor - you. It would be expensive. However, when you're among many, economic dynamics allow services to be more accessible and affordable. Technologies offer a liberating solution. They have already changed numerous industries. Consider the field of education: digital platforms enable students from around the globe to participate in the same programs for much less money than traditional institutions offer. You can now access information from Cambridge in your hometown while having a bath. In the realm of body therapy and massage, we see a similar shift. While tech solutions may not entirely replace massage specialists they can help bridge existing gaps in labor and lower therapy costs in the future. Some solutions transform Tui Na, a form of traditional Chinese medicine bodywork similar to deep tissue massage. They use sensors to pinpoint pressure points and deliver customized massages. Other devices available on the market are designed for home use with various attachments for different massage experiences. The success of robotic solutions is foreseeable, given the widespread use of robotic and AI-driven technologies in healthcare. In 2022, the global artificial intelligence in the healthcare market reached around $15.1 billion, with projections expecting a surge to approximately $187.95 billion by 2030, boasting an impressive growth rate of 37% from 2022 to 2030. North America’s AI in the healthcare market alone reached $6.8 billion in 2022. The market for AI in robotics is expected to grow even faster, with a projected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 27.2% over the next five years. As stress increasingly contributes to heart diseases and, consequently, mortality, well-being practices become more important. Massage is one of the most effective ones. However, not everyone across the world has access to it. How to address this gap and lower stress levels? The answer is obvious: create and use technologies. Human Death Factor Human Death Factor According to the latest available data from the World Health Organization (WHO), the top two causes of mortality worldwide are stroke and ischemic heart disease. Moreover, the National Centre for Health Statistics of CDS (Centers for Disease and Prevention) which indicates the mortality index in the US confirms states that heart disease is the number one cause of death with about 700,000 cases per year. data data confirms confirms One of the general reasons for cardiovascular diseases and strokes is stress. The work of Andrew Steptoe and Mika Kivimäki, "Stress and Cardiovascular Disease," among others, confirms that, indicating that chronic stress predicts the occurrence of coronary heart disease (CHD). Moreover, short-term emotional stress can act as a trigger for cardiac events among those with advanced atherosclerosis. confirms confirms Among those at greater risk are people who experience work-related stress. This correlation is shown in the latest research by the Health and Safety Executive. According to this data, 875,000 workers suffered from work-related stress, depression, or anxiety (new or long-standing cases) in 2022 and 2023. shown shown Human Life Factor Human Life Factor Fortunately, there are techniques to decrease stress levels. Breathing exercises, laughter, helpful thinking, mindfulness, and social activities, as mentioned in the Human Resources Datasheet of the University of Michigan, are among them. Additionally, the WHO recommends maintaining a daily routine, connecting with others, ensuring quality sleep, paying attention to nutrition, and engaging in regular physical exercise. mentioned mentioned Montana State University provides a more precise explanation of the biological mechanisms behind stress reduction through exercise and other wellness practices. They reduce adrenaline and cortisol, two stress hormones. To maintain cortisol within the norm, scholars advise monitoring caffeine and alcohol as both can increase cortisol. Time management and maintaining work-life balance can also contribute to mental well-being. provides provides caffeine caffeine alcohol alcohol Body treatments and massages also play a role as anti-stress techniques. This is confirmed in the case study "Physiological Adjustments to Stress Measures Following Massage Therapy: A Review of the Literature" by Albert Moraska and his partners from various health institutions across the US. A study by the Touch Research Institutes at the University of Miami School of Medicine further reveals that massages can reduce cortisol by an average of 31% in a single session. It also improves sleep quality and lowers heart rate and blood pressure, thereby mitigating risks associated with cardiovascular disease. confirmed confirmed study study improves improves lowers lowers Massage to Masses Massage to Masses However, not everyone can access body therapy and massage. Common barriers include a lack of available or efficient massage therapists and their limited working hours. This means that when you need a session after long hours at work, you may have to wait until a suitable hour. Costs also play a role, with one session averaging up to $100. It's not surprising that human performance comes at a high price in today's world. Imagine going to a theater with only one visitor - you. It would be expensive. However, when you're among many, economic dynamics allow services to be more accessible and affordable. averaging averaging Technologies offer a liberating solution. They have already changed numerous industries. Consider the field of education: digital platforms enable students from around the globe to participate in the same programs for much less money than traditional institutions offer. You can now access information from Cambridge in your hometown while having a bath. In the realm of body therapy and massage, we see a similar shift. While tech solutions may not entirely replace massage specialists they can help bridge existing gaps in labor and lower therapy costs in the future. Some solutions transform Tui Na, a form of traditional Chinese medicine bodywork similar to deep tissue massage. They use sensors to pinpoint pressure points and deliver customized massages. Other devices available on the market are designed for home use with various attachments for different massage experiences. The success of robotic solutions is foreseeable, given the widespread use of robotic and AI-driven technologies in healthcare. In 2022, the global artificial intelligence in the healthcare market reached around $15.1 billion, with projections expecting a surge to approximately $187.95 billion by 2030, boasting an impressive growth rate of 37% from 2022 to 2030. North America’s AI in the healthcare market alone reached $6.8 billion in 2022. The market for AI in robotics is expected to grow even faster, with a projected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 27.2% over the next five years. surge surge projected projected

How Technology Can Make Stress-Relief More Accessible in the Near Future

Periwinkle Entertainment, Inc. v. The Walt Disney Company Court Filing retrieved [redacted] is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This part is 11 of 12. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against the Defendant as follows: For monetary damages in an amount to be proven at trial;


For punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial;


That Plaintiff be awarded all pre-judgment interest allowable by law;


That Plaintiff be awarded her attorneys’ fees and costs; and


For such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Dated: July 29, 2021 Los Angeles, CA KASOWITZ BENSON TORRES LLP Continue Reading Here. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.
This court case retrieved [redacted] deadline.com is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Periwinkle Entertainment, Inc. v. The Walt Disney Company Court Filing retrieved [redacted] is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part in this filing here. This part is 11 of 12. Periwinkle Entertainment, Inc. v. The Walt Disney Company Court Filing retrieved [redacted] is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series . You can jump to any part in this filing here . This part is 11 of 12. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against the Defendant as follows: For monetary damages in an amount to be proven at trial; For punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial; That Plaintiff be awarded all pre-judgment interest allowable by law; That Plaintiff be awarded her attorneys’ fees and costs; and For such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. For monetary damages in an amount to be proven at trial; For monetary damages in an amount to be proven at trial; For punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial; For punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial; That Plaintiff be awarded all pre-judgment interest allowable by law; That Plaintiff be awarded all pre-judgment interest allowable by law; That Plaintiff be awarded her attorneys’ fees and costs; and That Plaintiff be awarded her attorneys’ fees and costs; and For such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. For such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Dated: July 29, 2021 Los Angeles, CA KASOWITZ BENSON TORRES LLP KASOWITZ BENSON TORRES LLP Continue Reading Here. Continue Reading Here . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved [redacted] deadline.com is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved [redacted] deadline.com is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. deadline.com

Scarlett Johansson vs Disney: Prayer for Relief

States Seek Relief Against Meta for COPPA Violations

FTC v. Amazon Court Filing, retrieved on Sep 26, 2023, is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 80 of 80. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here X. REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE Plaintiffs request that this Court, as authorized by 15 U.S.C. § 53(b); 15 U.S.C. § 26; Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 35-32(a) and 42-110m; 10 M.R.S.A. § 1104; Maryland Commercial Law Code Ann. § 11-209; Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.777; Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 598A.070 and 598A.160; N.J.S.A. 56:8-8, 56:8-11, 56:8-19, 56:9-6, 56:9-7, 56:9-10(a), and 56:9-12; New York Executive Law § 63(12); Oklahoma Statutes §§ 79-203 and 15-756.1; Oregon Revised Statutes 646.760 and 646.770; Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. § 201-4, Pennsylvania common law antitrust doctrine, and the Commonwealth Attorneys Act, 71 P.S. § 732-204(c); R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-36-10; Wis. Stat. §§ 133.03, 133.16, and 133.17; and its own equitable powers, enter final judgment against Amazon, declaring, ordering, and adjudging: 1. that Amazon’s conduct violates Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a); that Amazon’s conduct violates Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Connecticut Antitrust Act, General Statutes § 35-24 et seq., and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates Section 1102 of the Maine Monopolies and Profiteering Law, 10 M.R.S.A. § 1102; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Maryland Antitrust Act, Maryland Commercial Law Code Ann. § 11-201 et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.771 et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Nevada Unfair Trade Practices Act, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598A.060; that Amazon’s conduct violates N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 to –227, and N.J.S.A. 56:9-1 to – 19; that Amazon’s conduct violates New York Executive Law § 63(12); that Amazon’s conduct violates the Oklahoma Antitrust Reform Act, 79 O.S. §§ 201, et seq., and the Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act, 15 O.S. §§ 751, et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Oregon Antitrust Law, Oregon Revised Statutes 646.705 to 646.836; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. § 201-3, and Pennsylvania common law antitrust doctrine; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Rhode Island Antitrust Act, R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-36-1, et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates Wis. Stat. § 133.03 et seq.; that Amazon is permanently enjoined from engaging in its unlawful conduct; that Amazon is permanently enjoined from engaging in similar or related conduct, or any conduct with the same or similar purpose and effect; any preliminary or permanent equitable relief, including but not limited to structural relief, necessary to redress and prevent recurrence of Amazon’s violations of the law, as alleged herein; 18. any preliminary or permanent equitable relief, including but not limited to structural relief, necessary to restore fair competition and remedy the harm to competition caused by Amazon’s violations of the law; 19. that the Court grant Plaintiff States equitable monetary relief pursuant to all applicable law; 20. that the Court grant Plaintiff States the costs of suit, including all available fees and costs; and 21. that the Court grant any additional relief the Court finds just and proper. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 2:23-cv-01495 retrieved on October 2, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. ftc.gov

Multi-State Coalition Seeks Comprehensive Relief Against Amazon for Antitrust Violations 

SEC v. Binance Court Filing, retrieved on June 5, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 68 of 69. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that the Court order temporary and preliminary injunctive relief, including, but not limited to, asset freezes, a verified accounting, repatriation of assets, expedited discovery, preservation of documents and information, prohibition on the destruction of evidence, the appointment of a receiver, alternative service, and/or any other necessary equitable relief that the Court deems just and proper. Further, the Commission respectfully requests that the Court enter a Final Judgment: I. Permanently enjoining (i) Binance, BAM Trading, and Zhao, and each of their respective agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, from violating, directly or indirectly, Sections 5, 15(a), and 17A(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 78e, 78o(a), and 78q-1(b)]; (ii) Binance and BAM Trading, and each of their respective agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, from violating, directly or indirectly, Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and 77e(c)]; and (iii) BAM Trading and BAM Management, and each of their respective agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, from violating, directly or directly, Section 17(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77q(a)(2) and (3)]. II. Ordering Defendants to disgorge all ill-gotten gains, with prejudgment interest thereon, pursuant to Sections 20(a), 21(d)(3), 21(d)(5), and 21(d)(7) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 78t(a), 78u(d)(3), 78u(d)(5), and 78u(d)(7)]; III. Ordering Defendants to pay civil money penalties pursuant to Section 20(d) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(d)] and Section 21(d)(3) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(3)]; IV. Pursuant to Section 21(d)(5) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(6)] permanently barring Zhao from acting as an officer or director of any issuer whose securities are registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act or which are required to file reports with the Commission pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. V. Permanently enjoining Binance, BAM Trading, and Zhao, pursuant to Section 21(d)(5) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(5)], from directly or indirectly, including, but not limited to, through any entity owned or controlled by BAM Trading, Binance, or Zhao, using means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce to: (i) participate in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security, including any crypto asset security, in an unregistered transaction; (ii) act as an unregistered exchange with respect to any securities, including any crypto asset securities, (iii) act as an unregistered broker or dealer with respect to any securities, including any crypto asset securities, and (iv) act as an unregistered clearing agency with respect to any securities, including any crypto asset securities. VI. Granting any other and further relief this Court may deem just and proper for the benefit of investors. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 1:23-cv-01599 retrieved on September 6, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. docdroid.net

The SEC's Prayer for Relief in Binance Lawsuit

DOE v. Github (original complaint) Court Filing, retrieved on November 3, 2022 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 35 of 37. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here VIII. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF COUNT XII DECLARATORY RELIEF 28 U.S.C. § 2201(a) and Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1060 (Against All Defendants) 240. Plaintiffs and the Class hereby repeat and incorporate by reference each preceding and succeeding paragraph as though fully set forth herein. 241. An actual controversy exists between the Class (including Plaintiffs) and Defendants due to Defendants’ operation of Copilot, which violates Plaintiffs’ and the Class’s rights, including but not limited to their rights under DMCA Section 1202, the Lanham Act, the CCPA, and Cal. Civ. Code §17200 as alleged herein. 242. Plaintiffs are entitled to a judgment declaring that Defendants’ actions are unlawful and, specifically, that Defendants violated DMCA Section 1202, the Lanham Act, the CCPA, and Cal. Civ. Code § 17200. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 3:22-cv-06823-KAW retrieved on September 5, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Storage.Courtlistener

DOE v. GitHub: Plaintiffs Seek Declaratory Relief Against All Defendants

DOE vs. Github (amended complaint) Court Filing (Redacted), June 8, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 30 of 38. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here VIII. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF COUNT 2 BREACH OF CONTRACT—OPEN-SOURCE LICENSE VIOLATIONS Common Law (Against All Defendants) 214. Plaintiffs and the Class hereby repeat and incorporate by reference each preceding and succeeding paragraph as though fully set forth herein. 215. Plaintiffs and the Class offer code under various Licenses, the most common of which are set forth in Appendix A. Use of each of the Licensed Materials is allowed only pursuant to the terms of the applicable Suggested License. 216. Plaintiffs and the Class granted Defendants a license to copy, distribute, and/or create Derivative Works under the Suggested Licenses. Each of the Suggested Licenses requires at least (1) that attribution be given to the owner of the Licensed Materials used, (2) inclusion of a copyright notice for the Licensed Materials used, and (3) inclusion of the terms of the applicable Suggested License. When providing Output, Copilot does not comply with any of these terms. 217. Defendants accepted the terms of Plaintiffs’ and the Class’s Licenses when it used the licensed code to create Copilot and when it incorporated the licensed code into Copilot. They have accepted and continue to accept the applicable Licenses every time Copilot Output’s Plaintiffs’ or the Class’s copyrighted code. As such, contracts have been formed between Defendants on the one hand and Plaintiffs and the Class on the other. 218. Plaintiffs and the Class have performed each of the conditions, covenants, and obligations imposed on them by the terms of the License associated with their Licensed Materials. 219. Plaintiffs and members of the Class hold the copyright in the contents of one or more code repositories that have been hosted on GitHub’s platform. 220. Plaintiffs and the Class have appended one of the Suggested Licenses to each of the Licensed Materials. 221. Plaintiffs and the Class did not know about, authorize, approve, or license the Defendants’ use of the Licensed Materials in the matter at issue in this Complaint before they were used by Defendants. 222. Defendants have substantially and materially breached the applicable Licenses by failing to provide the source code of Copilot nor a written offer to provide the source code upon the request of each licensee. 223. Defendants have substantially and materially breached the applicable Licenses by failing to provide attribution to the creator and/or owner of the Licensed Materials. 224. Defendants have substantially and materially breached the applicable Licenses by failing to include copyright notices when Copilot Outputs copyrighted OS code. 225. Defendants have substantially and materially breached the applicable Licenses by failing to identify the License applicable to the Work and/or including its text when Copilot Outputs code including a portion of a Work. 226. Plaintiffs and the Class have suffered monetary damages as a result of Defendants’ conduct. 227. The conduct of Defendants is causing and, unless enjoined and restrained by this Court, will continue to cause Plaintiffs and the Class great and irreparable injury that cannot fully be compensated or measured in money. 228. As a direct and proximate result of these material breaches by Defendants, Plaintiffs and the Class are entitled to an injunction requiring Defendants to comply with all the terms of any License governing use of code that was used to train Copilot, otherwise incorporated into Copilot, and/or reproduced as Output by Copilot. 229. Plaintiffs and the Class are further entitled to recover from Defendants the damages Plaintiffs and the Class sustained—including consequential damages—for Plaintiffs’ and the Class’s costs in enforcing their contractual rights. Plaintiffs and the Class are also entitled to recover as restitution from Defendants for any unjust enrichment, including gains, profits, and advantages that Defendants have obtained as a result of their breach of contract. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:22-cv-06823-JST retrieved on August 26, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Storage Courtlistener

DOE vs. GitHub: What Were the Claims for Relief?

DOE vs. Github (amended complaint) Court Filing (Redacted), June 8, 2023, is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 29 of 38. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here VIII. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF COUNT 1 VIOLATION OF THE DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT 17 U.S.C. §§ 1201–1205 (Direct, Vicarious, and Contributory) (Against All Defendants) 183. Plaintiffs and the Class hereby repeat and incorporate by reference each preceding and succeeding paragraph as though fully set forth herein. 184. As described herein, Defendants have intentionally removed or altered CMI from Plaintiffs’ code in violation of Section 1202(b)(1) of the DMCA. 185. As described herein, Defendants have distributed copies of Plaintiffs’ code knowing that CMI has been removed or altered while knowing or having reasonable grounds to know that it will induce, enable, facilitate, or conceal infringement in violation of Section 1202(b)(3) of the DMCA. 186. Plaintiffs and members of the Class own the copyrights to Licensed Materials used to train Codex and Copilot. Copilot was trained on millions—possibly billions—of lines of code publicly available on GitHub. Copilot runs on Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform exclusively and Microsoft had input in the creation of Copilot. Microsoft is aware that Copilot ignores License Terms and that it was trained almost exclusively on Licensed Materials. 187. Plaintiffs and members of the Class included the following Copyright Management Information (as defined in Section 1202(c) of the DMCA) (“CMI”) in the Licensed Materials: a. copyright notices; b. the title and other information identifying the Licensed Materials; c. the name of, and other identifying information about, the authors of the Licensed Materials; d. the name of, and other identifying information about, the copyright owners of the Licensed Materials; e. terms and conditions for use of the Licensed Materials, specifically the Suggested Licenses; and f. identifying numbers or symbols referring to CMI or links to CMI. 188. Defendants did not contact Plaintiffs and the Class to obtain authority to remove or alter CMI from the Licensed Materials within the meaning of the DMCA. 189. Defendants knew that they did not contact Plaintiffs and the Class to obtain authority to remove or alter CMI from the Licensed Materials within the meaning of the DMCA. 190. As part of the scheme, Defendants did not attempt to contact Plaintiffs to obtain authority to remove or alter CMI from the Licensed Materials within the meaning of the DMCA. In fact, Defendants’ removal of CMI made it difficult or impossible to contact Plaintiffs and the Class to obtain authority to remove or alter CMI from the Licensed Materials within the meaning of the DMCA. Rather, Defendants removed or altered CMI from open-source code that is owned by Plaintiffs and the Class after the code was uploaded to a GitHub repository by incorporating it into Copilot with its CMI removed. 191. Without the authority of Plaintiffs and the Class, Defendants intentionally removed or altered CMI from the Licensed Materials after they were uploaded to one or more GitHub repositories. 192. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs nor the Class to train any machine learning, AI, or other pseudo-intelligent computer program, algorithm, or other functional prediction engine using the Licensed Materials. 193. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs nor the Class to incorporate the Licensed Materials into Copilot. 194. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs nor the Class to create Derivative Works[34] based upon the Licensed Materials. 195. Defendants had access to but were not licensed by Plaintiffs nor the Class to distribute the Licensed Materials as they do through Copilot. 196. Without the authority of Plaintiffs and the Class, Defendants distributed CMI knowing that the CMI had been removed or altered without authority of the copyright owner or the law with respect to the Licensed Materials. 197. Defendants distributed copies of the Licensed Materials knowing and intending that CMI had been removed or altered without authority of the copyright owner or the law, with respect to the Licensed Materials. 198. Defendants removed or altered CMI from the Licensed Materials knowing and intending that it would induce, enable, facilitate, or conceal infringement of copyright. 199. Without the CMI associated with the Licensed Materials, Copilot users are induced or enabled to copy the Licensed Materials. Because CMI has been removed, Copilot users do not know whether Output is owned by someone else and subject to restrictions on use. Without the CMI, copyright infringement is facilitated or concealed, because Plaintiffs and the Class are prevented from knowing or learning that the Output is based upon one or more of the Licensed Materials. Use of the Licensed Materials is not infringement when the terms of the applicable Suggested License are followed. Had the CMI not been removed, Copilot users would be aware of the Licenses and their obligations under them. The terms of the applicable Suggested License would have allowed those users to use the Licensed Materials without infringement. By withholding and concealing license information and other CMI, Defendants prevented Copilot users from making non-infringing use of the Licensed Materials. This contradicts the express wishes of Plaintiffs and the Class, which are set forth explicitly in the Suggested Licenses under which the Licensed Materials are offered. 200. Defendants removed or altered CMI from Licensed Materials owned by Plaintiffs and the Class while possessing reasonable grounds to know that it would induce, enable, facilitate, and/or conceal infringement of copyright in violation of Sections 1202(b)(1) and 1202(b)(3) of the DMCA. 201. By omitting, altering and/or concealing CMI from Copilot’s Output, Defendants have reasonable grounds to know that innocent infringers are induced or enabled to copy the Licensed Materials, because CMI has been removed. Without the CMI, Defendants have reasonable grounds to know copyright infringement is facilitated or concealed, because Plaintiffs and the Class have the difficult or impossible task of proving the Licensed Materials belong to them. 202. The profits attributable to Defendants’ violation of the DMCA include the revenue from: Copilot subscription fees, sales of or subscriptions to Defendants’ Copilot-related products and/or services that are used to run Copilot, hosting Copilot on Azure, and any other of Defendants’ products that contain copies of the Licensed Materials without all the original CMI. The Licensed Materials add nearly all value to the Copilot product because the purpose of Copilot is to provide code and the source of that code is the Licensed Materials. Without the Licensed Materials, Copilot would not be functional. 203. On information and belief, Defendants could have trained Copilot to include attribution, copyright notices, and license terms when it provides Output covered by a License. 204. Defendants did not request or obtain permission from Plaintiffs and the Class to use the Licensed Materials for Defendants’ Copilot product. 205. Defendants use of the Licensed Materials does not follow the requirements of the Suggested Licenses associated with the Licensed Materials. In particular, Copilot fails to provide attribution for the creator nor the owner of the Work. Copilot fails to include the required copyright notice included in the License. Copilot fails to include the applicable Suggested License’s text. 206. Defendants are sophisticated with respect to intellectual property matters related to open-source code. Microsoft in particular has extensive experience granting licenses, obtaining licenses, and enforcing license terms. Its most recent Annual Report states: We are a leader among technology companies in pursuing patents and currently have a portfolio of over 69,000 U.S. and international patents issued and over 19,000 pending worldwide. While we employ much of our internally-developed intellectual property exclusively in our products and services, we also engage in outbound licensing of specific patented technologies that are incorporated into licensees’ products. From time to time, we enter into broader cross-license agreements with other technology companies covering entire groups of patents. We may also purchase or license technology that we incorporate into our products and services. At times, we make select intellectual property broadly available at no or low cost to achieve a strategic objective, such as promoting industry standards, advancing interoperability, supporting societal and/or environmental efforts, or attracting and enabling our external development community. We protect our intellectual property investments in a variety of ways. We work actively in the U.S. and internationally to ensure the enforcement of copyright, trademark, trade secret, and other protections that apply to our software and hardware products, services, business plans, and branding. Our increasing engagement with open source software will also cause us to license our intellectual property rights broadly in certain situations. Microsoft Corporation Annual Report, Form 10-K at 27 ( July 28, 2022) (emphasis added).[35] 207. GitHub, which offers the Copilot product jointly with OpenAI, also has extensive experience with the DMCA. GitHub knows or reasonably should know that the Licensed Materials it hosts are subject to copyright. It provides the language of the Suggested Licenses to users, all of which include copyright notices. Its 2022 Transparency Report—January to June[36] states: “Copyright-related takedowns (which we often refer to as DMCA takedowns) are particularly relevant to GitHub because so much of our users’ content is software code and can be eligible for copyright protection.”[37] In the first six months of 2022, GitHub processed 1220 DMCA takedown requests. Its DMCA Takedown Policy[38] notes “GitHub probably never would have existed without the DMCA.” 208. GitHub also knows or reasonably should know the portions of the DMCA giving rise to Plaintiffs’ claim. In its 2021 Transparency Report, “Before removing content based on alleged circumvention of copyright controls (under Section 1201 of the US DMCA or similar laws in other countries), we carefully review both the legal and technical claims, and we sponsor a Developer Defense Fund to provide developers with meaningful access to legal resources.”[39] 209. GitHub is aware that Copilot’s removal of CMI is illegal. For example, it states that “publishing or sharing tools that enable circumvention are not [permitted]”[40] and “Distributing tools that enable circumvention is prohibited, even if their use by developers falls under the exemption [for security research].”[41] GitHub has also frequently published articles discussing the DMCA, its application, and the Copyright Office’s guidance on its scope and exceptions.[42] 210. Unless Defendants are enjoined from violating the DMCA, Plaintiffs and the Class will suffer great and irreparable harm by depriving them of the right to identify and control the reproduction and/or distribution of their copyrighted works, to have the terms of their opensource licenses followed, and to pursue copyright-infringement remedies. Defendants will not be damaged if they are required to comply with the DMCA. Plaintiffs and the Class are therefore entitled to an injunction barring Defendants from violating the DMCA and impounding any device or product that is in the custody or control of Defendants and that the court has reasonable cause to believe was involved in a violation of the DMCA. 211. Plaintiffs and the Class are further entitled to recover from Defendants the actual or statutory damages Plaintiffs and the Class sustained pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 1203(c) and for Plaintiffs’ and the Class’s costs and attorneys’ fees in enforcing the Licenses. Plaintiffs and the Class are also entitled to recover as restitution from Defendants for any unjust enrichment, including gains, profits, and advantages that Defendants have obtained as a result of their breach of the Licenses. 212. Defendants conspired together and acted jointly and in concert pursuant to their scheme to commit the acts that violated the DMCA alleged herein. 213. Defendants induced Copilot users to unknowingly violate the DMCA by withholding attribution, licensing, and other information as described herein Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:22-cv-06823-JST retrieved on August 26, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Storage Courtlistener

DOE vs. GitHub: Taking a Look at the Claims for Relief

DOE vs. Github (amended complaint) Court Filing (Redacted), June 8, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 7 of 38. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here VI. CLASS ALLEGATIONS A. Class Definitions 38. Plaintiffs bring this action for damages and injunctive relief on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated as a class action pursuant to Rules 23(a), 23(b)(2), and 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on behalf of the following Classes: “Injunctive Relief Class” under Rule 23(b)(2): All persons or entities domiciled in the United States that, (1) owned an interest in at least one US copyright in any work; (2) offered that work under one of GitHub’s Suggested Licenses[4] ; and (3) stored Licensed Materials in any public GitHub repositories at any time between January 1, 2015 and the present (the “Class Period”). “Damages Class” under Rule 23(b)(3): All persons or entities domiciled in the United States that, (1) owned an interest in at least one US copyright in any work; (2) offered that work under one of GitHub’s Suggested Licenses; and (3) stored Licensed Materials in any public GitHub repositories at any time during the Class Period. These “Class Definitions” specifically exclude the following person or entities: a. Any of the Defendants named herein; b. Any of the Defendants’ co-conspirators; c. Any of Defendants’ parent companies, subsidiaries, and affiliates; d. Any of Defendants’ officers, directors, management, employees, subsidiaries, affiliates, or agents; e. All governmental entities; and f. The judges and chambers staff in this case, as well as any members of their immediate families. [4] When a GitHub user creates a new repository, they have the option of selecting one of thirteen licenses from a dropdown menu to apply to the contents of that repository. (They can also apply a different license later, or no license.) The Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal and the Unlicense donate the covered work to the public domain and/or otherwise waive all copyrights and related rights. Because they do not contain the necessary provisions nor do they even allow the owner to make copyright claims in most circumstances, they are not included in the Class Definition. We refer to the remaining eleven options as the “Suggested Licenses,” which are: (1) Apache License 2.0 (“Apache 2.0”); (2) GNU General Public License version 3 (“GPL-3.0”); (3) MIT License (“MIT”); (4) The 2-Clause BSD License (“BSD 2”); (5) The 3-Clause BSD License (“BSD 3”); (6) Boost Software License (“BSL-1.0”); (7) Eclipse Public License 2.0 (“EPL-2.0”); (8) GNU Affero General Public License version 3 (“AGPL-3.0”); (9) GNU General Public License version 2 (“GPL-2.0”); (10) GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 (“LGPL-2.1”); and (11) Mozilla Public License 2.0 (“MPL-2.0”). These Suggested Licenses each contain at least three common requirements for use of the Licensed Materials in a derivative work or copy: attribution to the owner of the Licensed Materials (“Attribution”), inclusion of a copyright notice (“Copyright Notice”), and inclusion of the applicable Suggested License’s text (“License Terms”). Continue Reading Here. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:22-cv-06823-JST retrieved on August 26, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Storage Courtlistener

Stories, News & Mentions about RELIEF

Relief’s Stories on HackerNoon

Relief's News & Mentions