Hasta La Gadget!

Microsoft has quietly announced the end of an era, with the Xbox Avatar Editor going away early next year. “Due to low engagement and our shift in focus towards delivering other player experiences, the Xbox Avatar Editor app will no longer be available starting on January 9, 2025,” the company wrote in its FAQ about the feature.

The latest approach to personalizing avatars launched in 2018. The Xbox Avatar Editor allowed players to customize cartoon versions of themselves with both a free and purchased library of cosmetics. The options gave a lot of room for diversity and personal expression, so that you really could create a clear likeness of yourself, or whatever self you wanted to show to the Xbox community. Microsoft said it will refund players for Xbox Avatar Editor purchases made between November 1, 2023 and the app’s end date.

Microsoft introduced avatars to player accounts back in the Xbox 360 era. These Xbox Original Avatars will not be impacted by the editor app’s departure; they’ll continue to appear for players using those old school images as well as on Xbox 360 hardware.

If you created an avatar that you want to preserve as your profile photo on the Xbox into the future, you can use the Avatar Editor app until the shutdown date to save a picture to your account. The Xbox support forums have a full explainer on how to create or upload your profile photo.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/xbox/microsoft-is-taking-away-the-xbox-avatar-editor-233712034.html?src=rss

Another legal complication may have surfaced in The Onion’s bid to buy the Infowars empire from bankrupt conspiracy media mogul Alex Jones. X filed a limited objection to the transfer of Infowars’ X accounts to the satirical media empire in a federal Bankruptcy Court on Monday.

The objection claims that X Corporation’s terms of service states “the Trustee cannot sell, assign or otherwise transfer such license absent X Corp.’s consent,” according to court records.

X Corporation cites its own Terms of Service (TOS) agreement in its objection. The TOS states accounts cannot be transferred, gifted, sold or assigned to other parties ”without X’s express written consent.”

“Because the X accounts are governed by the TOS, the TOS make clear that X accounts are X Corp.’s ‘exclusive property,” according to X’s court filing.

Jones’ assets including the Infowars website went into a liquidation auction earlier this month to raise money for the nearly $1.5 billion in damages he accrued in civil trials brought by the family members of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Jones was found liable for spreading rumors about the victims’ family members that the Sandy Hook shooting was staged as a false flag attack.

The Onion’s parent company Global Tetrahedron stepped in to purchase the Infowars site after receiving permission from the families to accept a lower bid and forgo a portion of the sale to pay Jones’ other creditors. Onion CEO Ben Collins announced the deal on his Bluesky account as well as the newspaper’s plans to turn Infowars.com into “a very funny, very stupid website.”

US Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez halted the deal calling for an evidentiary hearing to review the auction process. The auction’s trustee Christopher Murray said in court that Global Tetrahedron’s bid was not the highest offered but the sale price included a legal clause citing its deal with the families. The Associated Press reported Monday that Lopez will hear arguments on the trustee’s sale of Infowars to The Onion on December 9 or 17 in order to ensure “a fair and transparent process.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-says-the-onion-cant-have-alex-jones-infowars-accounts-000006993.html?src=rss

Another legal complication may have surfaced in The Onion’s bid to buy the Infowars empire from bankrupt conspiracy media mogul Alex Jones. X filed a limited objection to the transfer of Infowars’ X accounts to the satirical media empire in a federal Bankruptcy Court on Monday.

The objection claims that X Corporation’s terms of service states “the Trustee cannot sell, assign or otherwise transfer such license absent X Corp.’s consent,” according to court records.

X Corporation cites its own Terms of Service (TOS) agreement in its objection. The TOS states accounts cannot be transferred, gifted, sold or assigned to other parties ”without X’s express written consent.”

“Because the X accounts are governed by the TOS, the TOS make clear that X accounts are X Corp.’s ‘exclusive property,” according to X’s court filing.

Jones’ assets including the Infowars website went into a liquidation auction earlier this month to raise money for the nearly $1.5 billion in damages he accrued in civil trials brought by the family members of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Jones was found liable for spreading rumors about the victims’ family members that the Sandy Hook shooting was staged as a false flag attack.

The Onion’s parent company Global Tetrahedron stepped in to purchase the Infowars site after receiving permission from the families to accept a lower bid and forgo a portion of the sale to pay Jones’ other creditors. Onion CEO Ben Collins announced the deal on his Bluesky account as well as the newspaper’s plans to turn Infowars.com into “a very funny, very stupid website.”

US Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez halted the deal calling for an evidentiary hearing to review the auction process. The auction’s trustee Christopher Murray said in court that Global Tetrahedron’s bid was not the highest offered but the sale price included a legal clause citing its deal with the families. The Associated Press reported Monday that Lopez will hear arguments on the trustee’s sale of Infowars to The Onion on December 9 or 17 in order to ensure “a fair and transparent process.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/x-says-the-onion-cant-have-alex-jones-infowars-accounts-000006993.html?src=rss

Japan’s Fair Trade Commission has conducted a raid on Amazon over antitrust concerns. “There is a suspicion that Amazon Japan is forcing sellers to cut prices in an irrational way,” an unnamed source told Reuters.

Amazon Japan received an on-site inspection by the regulator today to explore whether the retailer gives better product placement in search results to sellers who offer lower prices. Additional reporting in The Japan Times suggested that this inquiry is focused on Amazon’s Buy Box program, which puts recommended items more prominently in front of online shoppers. The publication said that in addition to demanding “competitive pricing,” sellers were allegedly required to use Amazon’s in-house services, such as those for logistics and payment collection, to qualify for Buy Box placement.

The Japanese FTC has not released an official statement about the inquiry. Amazon Japan’s comment to Engadget on the situation states, “We are cooperating fully with the authorities.”

Amazon has also been questioned about anti-competitive behavior around the world. Stateside, both the Fair Trade Commission and the Attorney General of Washington DC have raised similar concerns about Amazon’s practices. The company is also expected to face an antitrust investigation in the European Union next year.

Update, November 26, 2024, 6:17PM ET: Updated to add comment from Amazon Japan.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/amazon-japan-hit-with-a-raid-over-antitrust-concerns-191558080.html?src=rss

The US Fair Trade Commission published a paper that found 89 percent of connected devices do not detail how long the item will receive software support. The study examined product websites looking for specifics about how long the company expected to support the device. Within the 11 percent of product sites that shared this information, the review found cases with ambiguous language as well as inconsistencies in where dates were displayed. As a secondary test, the researchers conducted basic Google searches for information about support dates and couldn’t quickly find answers for 67 percent of the devices.

“Consumers stand to lose a lot of money if their smart products stop delivering the features they want,” said Samuel Levine, director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the FTC. “When shopping for smart devices, consumers should ask questions and consider how long their product will last.”

The 89 percent figure sounds like a pretty damning rate, but there is a major caveat to this research. The FTC only looked at 184 products, and they fell across a huge range of categories. The review excluded laptops, personal computers, tablets and automobiles, but any other “connected device” was covered. So while the real percentages are likely hazier than this report suggests, the FTC’s point about considering ongoing product support is still a good one.

It’s becoming more common for smartphone manufacturers to say upfront how long they’ll support the device; for instance, Samsung will keep the S24 line updated for seven years. The wave of right to repair laws that have been passed in a few states, most recently in California, could also point toward longer lifespans for hardware. However, that practice clearly hasn’t spread to all personal and home tech. Today’s paper from the FTC doesn’t advise any action on the topic, but it does highlight a need to set expectations around how and when companies will offer support for their software-driven products.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/home/ftc-warns-that-companies-dont-disclose-how-long-connected-devices-will-be-supported-212432111.html?src=rss