Starting today, unsolicited telemarking calls are banned in France unless consumers explicitly consent to them. Companies that violate the law can face fines of up to 375,000 euros per call, though existing customers can still be contacted with related offers. Le Monde reports: The government says the law is a response to years of consumer complaints. Authorities estimate that about three-quarters of people in France receive at least one unsolicited sales call every week, and many receive more. In 2024, 11 consumer organizations issued a joint call for a ban, denouncing "relentless harassment of consumers through countless unwanted telemarketing calls to both landlines and mobile phones -- an intrusion that has become a regular part of their daily lives."

Now, "businesses are prohibited from contacting consumers without their prior consent," said Alice Vilcot, chief of staff at the Directorate-General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Prevention of Fraud. "That consent can be withdrawn at any time." [...] Previously in France, people who wanted to avoid marketing calls had to register their number with a government-run service, but consumer groups said some call centers ignored the list. Vilcot noted that an Ireland-based company was fined 6 million euros ($6.9 million) last year for violating France's previous telemarketing rules by calling people on the no-call list.

[ Read more of this story ]( https://mobile.slashdot.org/story/26/08/11/1657250/france-bans-unsolicited-telemarking-calls?utm_source=atom1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed ) at Slashdot.

Paramount CEO David Ellison is threatening to begin moving the studio out of California on October 1 if state Attorney General Rob Bonta refuses to enter settlement talks over the proposed Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery merger. The company would reportedly move its Los Angeles headquarters first and shift most studio jobs out of the state over five years, with Georgia, Texas, and Tennessee under consideration. Variety reports: Ellison's threat to relocate Paramount in retaliation for California's Bonta leading the charge to kill the WBD deal -- a move that would include much of its studio operations, over time -- was first reported by industry newsletter Puck. In response, Bonta called Ellison's planned exit from the state an "attempt to blackmail the state into letting an illegal deal through."

"Paramount has lost the plot as it continues to lose in court," the attorney general wrote in a post on X. "It didn't work the first time -- on the eve of our July lawsuit -- and it won't work this time." Bonta has not publicly said what concessions from Paramount-WBD he would consider acceptable enough to take the lawsuit off the table. But the Democratic attorney general has said any remedies would need to be "structural" (i.e., divestments) rather than "behavioral" (e.g., imposing certain production quotas).

Oct. 1 is when Paramount will begin accruing a "ticking fee" payable to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders of $7 million per day. The trial in the state AGs' lawsuit is scheduled to start March 2, 2027, roughly five months after that, so Paramount would be on the hook to pay around $1.2 billion to WBD shareholders by the time the trial is scheduled to conclude. (Paramount's ticking-fee payments to WBD are not due until the deal closes.) At the Aug. 5 meeting on Paramount's lot, Ellison told his 12-member senior executive team he expects Paramount to prevail in the antitrust case against the states. However, he also said that if Bonta balks at talks, Paramount will start packing up and moving out of the Golden State in less than two months.

[ Read more of this story ]( https://slashdot.org/story/26/08/11/1733246/paramount-considers-leaving-california-amid-antitrust-suit?utm_source=atom1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed ) at Slashdot.

Spotify will begin labeling AI-generated artist identities with "AI Persona" badges and exclude their music from editorial, algorithmic, and personalized recommendations unless users explicitly follow them. The company says the designation applies to whether an artist profile represents a real person, not whether AI was used to make the music, and will allow appeals for mislabeling. TechCrunch reports: While Spotify will allow artists to identify themselves as AI Personas, the company says it won't rely on self-disclosure alone. It will also review artist profiles and identify those where the artist's name and imagery appear to represent photorealistic AI-generated identities. Spotify said it will begin its review with profiles that have met pre-defined audience thresholds to ensure the more listened-to artists are covered first.

Once labeled, the AI Persona badges will appear on the artist's profile in the banner and the About section, in Search, and on track rows across playlists. By default, Spotify won't include AI Personas in its editorial or algorithmic recommendations, nor will it add AI Personas' music to users' personalized recommendations -- unless they happen to follow an AI Persona. Only users can choose to follow an artist, so it's an explicit signal that the user wants to hear more music from that person or group. Spotify wrote in its announcement that, "while we believe all artists have creative choice in determining how they present themselves, Spotify's programming is focused on elevating music from authentic artists building careers in music."

"Although there's a broad spectrum in how artists use AI as a creative tool, the question of whether a profile represents an actual human is one where Spotify can help make a clear determination. This badge is about the artist's public identity, not about how the music was made," the company said.

[ Read more of this story ]( https://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/26/08/11/1741252/spotify-will-label-ai-persona-profiles-exclude-their-music-from-recommendations?utm_source=atom1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed ) at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Wired: As AI models gain advanced capabilities to find vulnerabilities in software, develop ways to exploit them, and even carry out autonomous hacking sprees, researchers offered a sobering new example on Tuesday, disclosing vulnerabilities in the video conferencing platform Zoom that could have been exploited to take over targets' devices. Anyone on a call that involved screen sharing, whether participants or the host, would have been vulnerable to a silent attack that could be carried out with no indication and no interaction from the victim.

Researchers from the digital defense firm A Security say thebugwas discovered in early June using publicly available AI models, and that it took fewer than 20 prompts to uncover the vulnerabilities and create a working attack. Zoom issued a security advisory on Tuesday, including details about fixes the company has already begun rolling out to address the flaws, which affected devices running all operating systems that Zoom supports -- Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, and Android.

The vulnerabilities were specifically in the protocol used to facilitate real-time annotation during screen sharing. The researchers say that their AI bug hunting systems specifically delved into this component because, like human bug hunters, they have been trained that convoluted and obscure functions often contain overlooked vulnerabilities. This is particularly true with proprietary, closed-source software. An established company like Zoom presumably does extensive code review and vetting on all components and functions, but without the benefit of public, open review, esoteric yet complex features like annotation are more likely to contain mistakes. The bugs are now patched, with Zoom issuing both server and client-side fixes—or patches for both Zoom's own servers and the applications that run on customer devices. But the researchers emphasize that it was alarming to contemplate bugs that could have been exploited to take over a target device simply by getting someone onto a Zoom call. "What is interesting for us and what we believe is dangerous is the democratization of these capabilities -- the barrier to entry is dropping rapidly," A Security cofounder Omer Gull told WIRED ahead of the disclosure. "Before it would have taken a team of five people maybe six months with a lot of refining and iteration to find this. Now people can reach the same results with under 20 prompts. And Zoom is an important type of target because people assume trust when using it. They don't see it as a threat."

[ Read more of this story ]( https://it.slashdot.org/story/26/08/11/1951224/a-zoom-screen-sharing-bug-let-anyone-take-over-other-devices-on-a-call?utm_source=atom1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed ) at Slashdot.

Gemini has become Google's fastest-growing product ever, reaching 1 billion monthly active users faster than any of the company's 13 other billion-user services. Ars Technica reports: Gemini has wormed its way into virtually every Google product and service, powering email organization in Gmail, document summary in Drive, and much more. Gemini is also core to Google's flagship search experience, with AI Mode and AI Overviews becoming increasingly hard to avoid. The 1 billion-user metric has nothing to do with any of that, though.

These 1 billion users may also be encountering Gemini in all those places, but that's not the MAU metric. Pichai is talking only about people who are opening the Gemini app or visiting the Gemini web interface to enter a prompt or access Gemini Live. If you used Gemini only once in the past month, you are part of this cohort.

[ Read more of this story ]( https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/08/11/2020246/google-gemini-hits-1-billion-users-in-record-time?utm_source=atom1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed ) at Slashdot.