Current Events in March 2018

A prospective net neutrality bill in the California state legislature would ban payments for the type of data cap exemptions that carriers like AT&T and Verizon have imposed on its internet customers.

The state’s lawmakers are taking an aggressive stance for the sake of consumers and staring down the Trump administration’s recent rollback of the free and open internet -- one that users have known since 2015 when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruled in favor of net neutrality and the law went into effect.

When the FCC originally created its principles of “network neutrality,” the agency said the move was meant to “preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet” and “to promote the continued development of the Internet."

The FCC’s move at the time piggybacked Congress’ feeling that the internet had educational and informational importance and that it represented “a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity."

Lawmakers also said that net neutrality played “an important role in the economy, as an engine for productivity growth and cost savings."

California has consumers’ backs

The California bill (SB 822) -- introduced by state senator Scott Wiener -- is even more comprehensive than the original protections. Wiener’s proposal “prohibits any practice that hinders or manipulates consumer access to the Internet to favor certain types of content, services, or devices over others.”

In no uncertain terms, Wiener’s bill says it would prevent “blocking or speeding up or slowing down of favored data, paid prioritization, charging services (whether businesses, nonprofits, government agencies, advocacy organizations, etc.) access fees to reach certain consumers, and economic discrimination practices that distort consumer choice.”

“An open Internet is essential to maintaining our democracy, growing our economy, protecting consumers, and preserving critical health, safety, and energy services,” Senator Wiener said in a blog post on Wednesday.

“Late last year, when the FCC made the disastrous decision to repeal net neutrality, I announced I would pursue legislation to protect net neutrality in California,” Wiener said. “Over the last two months, I’ve been working with civil rights and privacy advocates, public policy experts and lawyers, former state and federal commissioners, and business leaders to craft the strongest and most comprehensive set of net neutrality protections in the country.”

Zero-rating and how it affects the internet user

Specifically targeted in the bill is something called “zero-rating,” a method of providing internet access without any costs under certain conditions, such as by only permitting access to certain websites or by subsidizing a company’s internet service with advertising.

For example, an internet provider might choose to “zero-rate” its own services in order to gain a competitive advantage. A case-in-point was what Comcast did with its “Stream TV” on-demand video service. If a customer watched shows via that service, it wasn’t counted towards Comcast’s data caps, but content from competitors like Netflix did.

Other programs like T-Mobile's BingeOn and Music Freedom allowed users to stream unlimited amounts of audio and video from select services, although it slowed down a user’s video connection if they used BingeOn. While there was no built-in ban on zero-rating, the fact that the provider offered a way to opt-out prevented it from violating the no-throttling rule. When a customer opted-out, the audio/video would stream at full quality, but it would count against the user’s data cap.

Zero-rating has been a thorn in the side of Congress, the consumer, and thousands of small ISPs for a while, and it is thought to be one of the sticking points in the Comcast-AT&T merger. In the situation of small ISPs that were bringing broadband to underserved rural areas, the argument was that since those providers didn’t own the content, it lacked the muscle to negotiate fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory access to content.

Senator Wiener’s California-directed proposal comes less than a week after a federal judicial panel decided to give the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) repeal of net neutrality an appeals hearing. 

Last week, Washington became the first state to pass a net neutrality law, one identical in scope to the proposed California law.

iHeartMedia Inc., the parent company of iHeartRadio, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after years of struggling with $20 billion worth of debt.

The radio broadcasting network announced that it has reached an agreement with creditors to restructure more than $10 billion of that figure, essentially cutting its debt load in half.  

Bob Pittman, chairman and CEO, said the agreement is “a significant accomplishment, as it allows us to definitively address the more than $20 billion in debt that has burdened our capital structure.”

“Achieving a capital structure that finally matches our impressive operating business will further enhance iHeartMedia’s position as America’s #1 audio company,” Pittman said in a statement.

Listeners won’t be affected

The bankruptcy proceedings won’t affect iHeartRadio listeners or concert-goers. iHeartMedia “will continue operating the business in the ordinary course as a leading global multi-platform media, entertainment and data company,” the company said.

iHeartMedia has been burdened by debt since 2008 after the leveraged buyout of billboard company Clear Channel Outdoor. The company spent upwards of $1 billion on interest payments last year and has more than $8 billion in debt maturing by the end of 2019.

"The heavy debt burden became unsustainable during the persistent long-term secular decline of the radio broadcasting business," analyst Sharon Bonelli of Fitch Ratings told CNN.

The bankruptcy comes just two months after Cumulus, the second-largest radio company, offloaded $1 billion in debt.

iHeartRadio owns around 850 stations across the country, as well as a streaming service and an outdoor advertising company. It also runs the iHeartRadio Music Awards and other live events. By the end of 2016, the corporation had 14,300 employees.

Tax season means phishing scammers are out in force, trying to steal consumers' identities and cheat them out of their tax refunds.

DomainTools, a threat intelligence firm, has released a survey which suggests that an increasing number of consumers are vulnerable to these threats because they take them too lightly.

The survey found that barely half of consumers pay adequate attention to emails from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and various tax services to determine their authenticity.

About 20 percent of the consumers in the survey said they’ve clicked on a bad link in an email because they thought it came from the IRS. One of a phishing scammer's oldest tricks is to send out emails that claim to be from the tax agency.

Bogus tax prep websites

Because so many taxpayers now use an online software tool to file their taxes, DomainTools found that scammers are creating websites that impersonate real and well-known tax filing sites.

The object is to trick taxpayers into entering all of their tax information -- personal as well as financial -- into the bogus site.

"With the help of PhishEye, we uncovered a number of domains that disguise themselves as TurboTax, further validating that scammers are actively looking to prey on unsuspecting online tax filers this year," the report's authors write.

Check out the URL

To avoid these schemes, the authors say taxpayers should never use a link provided in an email to go to a tax preparer's site. Instead, go to the site directly.

"Take the time to look at the URL used in an email -- purportedly from the IRS or your tax provider -- for any strange affixes, or additions to the domain," the authors advise. "It is important to note that the IRS does not use email to initiate contact with taxpayers to solicit personal information."

Taxpayers who want to file online may have the option of do so at not charge. If you meet eligibility requirements, including an income of $66,000 or less, you can use the IRS Free File option to access TurboTax and other commercial tax preparation software.

You can start the process here by finding out if you are eligible.

• 79 million ads for linking to malware
• 400,000 sites for hosting malicious ads
• 66 million “trick-to-click” ads
• 48 million ads attempting to get users to install unwanted software
• 320,000 website publishers for failing to meet its policies for publishers

One hundred ads removed every second

Combating ad fraud

Ford Motor Company is recalling 1.3 million model year 2014-18 Ford Fusions and Lincoln MKZs.

The vehicles have potentially loose steering wheel bolts that could result in the steering wheel detaching from the steering column, leading to a loss of steering control and increasing the risk of a crash.

The automaker says it is aware of two accidents with one injury that may be related to this condition.

The following vehicles are being recalled:

• Model year 2014-17 Ford Fusions built at the Flat Rock Assembly Plant from August 6, 2013, to February 29, 2016;
• Model year 2014-18 Ford Fusions built at the Hermosillo Assembly Plant from July 25, 2013, to March 5, 2018; and
• Model year 2014-18 Lincoln MKZs built at the Hermosillo Assembly Plant from July 25, 2013, to March 5, 2018

About 1,301,986 of the recalled vehicles are in the U.S. and federalized territories with 62,479 in Canada and 14,172 in Mexico.

What to do

Dealers will replace the steering wheel bolt on the vehicle with a longer bolt with more robust thread engagement and larger nylon patch placed properly for proper torque retention at no cost to customers.

Ford's reference number for this recall is 18S08.

Volkswagen Group of America is recalling 51,352 model year 2009-2014 Volkswagen CCs, model year 2010-2014 Golfs, model year 2010-2011 Eos vehicles, model year 2007-2010 Passat Sedans, and model year 2007-2010 Passat Wagons.

Upon deployment of the driver's front airbag, excessive internal pressure may cause the inflator to explode with metal fragments striking occupants potentially resulting in serious injury or death.

What to do

Volkswagen will notify owners, and dealers will replace the driver's front airbag inflator free of charge.

The recall was expected to begin March 15, 2018.

Owners may contact Volkswagen customer service at 1-800-893-5298. Volkswagen's number for this recall is 69Q9.

Starwest Botanicals is recalling Starwest Botanicals Organic Cardamom Pods Green (Whole).

The product may be contaminated with Salmonella.

No illnesses have been reported to date.

The following product, which is packaged in Mylar 1-lb. bags and bulk packs, is being recalled:

• Starwest Botanicals Organic Cardamom Pods Green (Whole) 1-lb. with UPC 7-6796302528-9. The item# 209735-01 and lot number (75593) can be found on the label affixed to the bag.
• Starwest Botanicals Organic Cardamom Pods Green (Whole) bulk pack with UPC 7-6796302527-2. The item# 209735-00 and lot number (90186-00) can be found on the label affixed to the bulk pack.

The recalled product was sold between January 15, 2018, and March 2, 2018, and was either shipped directly to Starwest Botanicals customers who purchased online from firm’s website or mail order customers, or held for pickup up by the customer at Starwest Botanicals.

What to do

Customers who purchased the recalled product may return it to Starwest Botanicals in Sacramento, Calif., for a full refund.

Consumers with questions may contact Starwest at 1-800-800-4372 Monday through Friday 8:00 am – 4:30 pm (PST).

Amazon of Seattle, Wash., is recalling about 260,000 AmazonBasics portable power banks.

The power bank’s battery can overheat and ignite, posing fire and burn hazards.

The firm has received 53 reports of the power banks overheating in the U.S., including one report of chemical burns due to contact with battery acid and four reports of property damage, including fire and smoke damage.

This recall involves six versions of AmazonBasics’ portable lithium-ion battery chargers/power banks: 16,100 mAh; 10,000 mAh; 5,600 mAh; 2,000 mAh with micro USB cable; 3,000 mAh and 3,000 mAh with USB micro cable.

The rubberized or metallic power banks are black and rectangular, and measure about 3 inches long by 1.4 inch high by 0.9 inch wide.

They were sold with or without a USB charger cable and a carrying pouch.

The AmazonBasics logo is printed on the front of the unit. Product ID number B00LRK8EVO, B00LRK8HJ8, B00LRK8I7O, B00LRK8IV0, B00LRK8JDC or B00ZQ4JQAA is printed on the back of the unit.

The power banks, manufactured in China, were sold at Amazon.com, Amazon Bookstores and Amazon Pop-Up Stores from December 2014, through July 2017, for between $9 and $40.

What to do

Consumers should immediately unplug and stop using the recalled power banks and contact Amazon for instructions on how to return the unit and receive a full refund. All known purchasers are being contacted directly by the firm.

Consumers may contact Amazon toll-free at 855-215-5134 from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (ET) Monday through Saturday or online anytime at https://amazonpowerbank.expertinquiry.com/ to register the product and receive a full refund.

Google is banning all advertisements relating to cryptocurrency, the company recently announced.

Google ads, which run on Google pages and third-party websites, will no longer feature initial coin offerings, wallets, online exchanges, or even trading advice relating to cryptocurrency beginning in June 2018.

In an interview with CNBC, Google’s director of sustainable ads cited “consumer harm” as the reason for banning the ads. "We don't have a crystal ball to know where the future is going to go with cryptocurrencies, but we've seen enough consumer harm or potential for consumer harm that it's an area that we want to approach with extreme caution," he told the station.

While cryptocurrencies have made instant millionaires out of some investors, they are not regulated by financial institutions and have proven to be especially vulnerable to hacking.

“Exchanges” don’t meet standards

Google’s move follows a similar policy implemented by Facebook and a recent warning by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) about cryptocurrencies.

Last week, the SEC said that operators of online trading platforms, or sites where investors can trade cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, were misleading consumers by portraying themselves as “exchanges.” The SEC reminded consumers that it does not regulate such platforms, despite what the term “exchange” might imply.

“Many platforms refer to themselves as ‘exchanges,’ which can give the misimpression to investors that they are regulated or meet the regulatory standards of a national securities exchange,” the SEC said.

“Although some of these platforms claim to use strict standards to pick only high-quality digital assets to trade, the SEC does not review these standards or the digital assets that the platforms select, and the so-called standards should not be equated to the listing standards of national securities exchanges.”

A bubble waiting to burst?

Proponents of cryptocurrencies cite limited regulations, and a decentralized, universal currency as the major appeal of the trade. But financial institutions and banks have repeatedly claimed that online cryptocurrencies are a dangerous investment.

Goldman Sachs, in a report last year, said that Bitcoin is seven times more volatile than gold. More recently, a major investment firm in Europe described Bitcoin as essentially worthless.

Allianz Global Investors, the investment arm of Europe’s largest insurer, published a report last week about the Bitcoin “bubble.”

“... it appears to us that bitcoin mania is a textbook-like bubble – and one that is probably just about to burst,” author Stefan Hofrichter wrote.

A former Equifax executive has been charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with selling nearly $1 million worth of shares before the company announced last year’s massive data breach.

Jun Ying, the former chief information officer of Equifax's U.S. Information Solutions, was allegedly entrusted with non-public information about the company’s breach before the news was disclosed to the public, the SEC said in a statement.

“As alleged in our complaint, Ying used confidential information to conclude that his company had suffered a massive data breach, and he dumped his stock before the news went public,” said Richard R. Best, Director of the SEC’s Atlanta regional office.

“Corporate insiders who learn inside information, including information about material cyber intrusions, cannot betray shareholders for their own financial benefit,” Best said.

Ying avoided more than $117,000 in losses by selling his shares before the stock price plunged after news of the breach was publicly announced. The US Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia is also filing criminal charges against Ying, the SEC said.

Largest breach in history

Nearly 150 million Americans were impacted by Equifax's data breach, making it the largest breach in history.

News of the breach was made public Sept. 7, but authorities say Equifax discovered suspicious activity on its network on July 29.

On Aug. 28, Ying allegedly used his confidential information to sell his shares before the news broke. He exercised all his available stock options and received 6,815 shares of Equifax stock, which he sold for more than $950,000 -- a total gain of more than $480,000, prosecutors said.

A 10-month-old puppy died Monday on a United Airlines flight after a flight attendant allegedly told its owner to store the animal and its carrier in an overhead locker. Passenger Maggie Gremminger said she witnessed a flight attendant instruct the dog’s owner to stow the carrier with the dog inside in an overhead bin.

“The pet owner was very adamant that she did not want to put the pet carrier up above,” Gremminger said.

“She was saying verbally, ‘My dog is in here, no, this is my dog.’ The flight attendant, in response, really just continued to ask her to put it above because it was a hazard where it was, it was a safety emergency, someone could trip.”

Once the dog, Kokito, was found dead, Gremminger said the flight attendant became “frazzled” and insisted she didn’t know there was a dog in the carrier. However, passengers say the flight attendant was aware that the dog was in there because he barked though takeoff.

"We didn't know it was barking a cry for help," Gremminger posted on Twitter. By the time the plane landed almost four hours later, the French bulldog was dead.

“Tragic accident”

United apologized Tuesday for the death of the passenger's dog, calling it a “tragic accident.” A United spokesperson said the death “should never have occurred, as pets should never be placed in the overhead bin."

“We assume full responsibility for this tragedy and express our deepest condolences to the family and are committed to supporting them,” United said in a statement.

The airline said it is refunding the family’s tickets, paying for a necropsy, and “thoroughly investigating what occured to prevent this from ever happening again.”

Highest number of animal deaths of any carrier

According to United's pet policy, animals must be in a carrier and "fit completely under the seat in front of the customer and remain there at all times."

In 2017, 18 animals died and 13 were injured while flying through United’s PetSafe cargo program, according to data from the Department of Transportation. That works out to a rate of 2.24 per 10,000 transported animals.

Last year, two women blamed the airline for the deaths of their dogs in incidents that occured just weeks apart.

A golden retriever named Jacob died just hours after disembarking from a United flight. “His stomach flipped due to the stress of his journey that was 20 hours longer than expected, and suffocated his organs,” Jacob’s owner wrote on Facebook after the incident.

In a separate incident, a pit bull terrier named Sadie arrived deceased to a layover. The airline contended that each of the deaths were caused by “preexisting conditions.”

There are many reasons consumers may need to return a purchased item to a retailer, but what most consumers may not realize is that retailers are keeping track of those returns.

A little-known California firm called The Retail Equation monitors how often consumers return an item and furnishes these reports to national retailers. These retailers may block a consumer from returning items if they decide the consumer is abusing the privilege.

The reports are intended as a defense against fraud. According to The Retail Equation, fraudulent returns cost retailers more than $17 billion a year.

The most common forms of return fraud involve returning stolen merchandise to a retailer to receive cash. To make these schemes profitable, it's necessary for a consumer to make multiple returns.

Wrongly targeted

While the service is meant to catch scammers, sometimes regular consumers are wrongly targeted. The Wall Street Journal reports that a Best Buy customer from California returned cell phone cases on three different occasions, causing him to be targeted in one of The Retail Equation's return reports. The consumer told The Journal he was banned from making returns at Best Buy for a year.

The Retail Equation says it will provide a copy of a consumer's return activity report to those who ask for one. The company explains how to go about receiving a copy here.

The company says its system is designed to "identify the 1 percent of consumers whose behaviors mimic return fraud or abuse." The National Retail Federation (NRF) says fraudulent returns are a significant problem for retailers after every holiday season, when there is a surge in returns.

“While coverage of this issue paints return fraud as one of the less severe retail crimes, the fact of the matter is that returning used or stolen merchandise — or even using false tender to purchase items — is fraud, period,” NRF vice president for loss prevention Rich Mellor said in 2014. “Efforts to combat fraudulent activity are slowly starting to work, but criminals are becoming more savvy and technologically advanced in their methods.”

Return policies vary

Retailers have different return policies. Some are designed to make it easy for customers to return a product that's the wrong size or wrong color. Some make the process a bit more difficult.

Walmart says it accepts returns of most items purchased in a store within 90 days. However, exceptions include computers, most cameras, digital music players, tablets, portable video players, and GPS units. Those must be returned within 15 days of purchase.

Walmart also requires all of the original packaging materials and, "if possible," the receipt.

Target says most unopened items in new condition that are returned within 90 days will receive a refund or exchange. Like Walmart, Target has exceptions that it says will be noted on the receipt.

The company also says merchandise that has been opened, damaged, or does not have a receipt may be denied a refund or exchange.

It's a good idea to get familiar with a store's return policy before making a purchase.

Pilotless

The spring homebuying season is getting underway, and a couple of nasty surprises could await consumers hoping to purchase a home.

Home prices are still going up, mainly because of a shortage of homes for sale, and interest rates are also moving higher. The two factors will combine to create a higher monthly payment.

Home prices are up 10 percent year-over-year, according to real estate marketplace realtor.com listings. At the same time, rates on a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage have increased 28 basis points, raising the payment on a median priced home by $168 a month.

But that's just the average. Realtor.com reports monthly mortgage payments have gone up dramatically in six of the top U.S. markets, where home prices are rising faster than the national average.

The company projects the payment for a median priced home will increase an average of $449 in Seattle, $378 in San Francisco, $363 in Los Angeles, $242 in San Diego, $236 in Minneapolis, and $213 in Atlanta.

"Buyers can expect to see more of their paychecks go to their mortgage payments this year," said Danielle Hale, chief economist for realtor.com. "Tight inventory has limited options for buyers and sent home prices soaring in many markets. Now, home buyers will also have to factor in higher mortgage rates."

Potential changes at Fannie and Freddie

But it could get worse. Zillow reports Congress is considering changes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reduce the risk to taxpayers if the housing market crashes again. These government-sponsored enterprises (GSE), which protect lenders against defaults, have never quite recovered from the 2008 housing market crisis. They've been kept afloat by $150 billion in taxpayer funds.

Zillow's analysis of the proposed changes suggests they could tack on as much as $400 to a monthly mortgage payment, at a time when these payments are getting bigger because of higher rates and rising home prices.

According to Zillow, altering the guarantee from Fannie and Freddie could remove the lid from interest rates. It says a different kind of guarantee could mean shorter loan durations or escalating interest rates.

Shorter loan, higher payment

A shorter loan would increase the size of a monthly payment but would not add to the cost of the loan. In fact, the borrower would pay off the loan faster and pay less interest over the life of the loan.

But not every homeowner has an extra $390 in monthly cash flow -- which would be the difference in payments between a 15-year and 30-year fixed rate mortgage on the median home.

"Some GSE reform proposals could lead to the end of the 30-year mortgage as we know it, which has long been the bedrock for financing homeownership in America," said Zillow's senior economist Aaron Terrazas.

Terrazas says the result would not very pleasant for current homeowners either, since he predicts that would lead to a decline in home prices.

The grocery delivery wars are heating up.

Walmart has fired the latest shot, announcing that it will expand its fledgling grocery delivery service from its current six markets to more than 100 metro areas -- covering 800 stores -- by the end of this year.

The retailer estimates that will make 40 percent of U.S. households eligible for its grocery delivery service.

Size matters

Greg Foran, CEO of Walmart U.S., says the company is making the leap with the aid of new technology. He says when it comes to ramping up home delivery service, size matters.

“We’re serving our customers in ways that no one else can," Foran said. "Using our size and scale, we’re bringing the best of Walmart to customers across the country.”

Home delivery has emerged as a key marker in grocery competition. When Amazon purchased Whole Foods last year, it announced plans to deliver food items to its Prime members. It has rolled out in four markets -- Austin, Cincinnati, Dallas, and Virginia Beach -- with plans to expand throughout 2018.

Target recently purchased Shipt, a grocery delivery service, and in February it launched same-day deliveries in key markets in Florida. Target plans to add more markets during the spring.

Extra costs

Home delivery for both Amazon and Target require a membership fee. Walmart says its home delivery service will require a $9.95 fee and a $30 minimum order.

To get home delivery, consumers will place orders online at Walmart.com/grocery or use the Walmart Grocery App. Prices, the company says, will be the same as for items found in Walmart stores.

When an order comes in, a personal shopper will take the list and fill a shopping cart with the requested food items, which are then delivered to the customer's door. Walmart says the new delivery service is separate from its current Online Grocery Pickup service, which is now available at 1,200 stores.

Tom Ward, Walmart's vice president for digital operations, notes that 90 percent of consumers live within 10 miles of a Walmart store. As the home delivery service expands, he says more people will be able to save both time and money without leaving home.

Fitbit has expanded its wearable tech product line, jumping into the kid’s exercise tracking game and amping up its run at the smartwatch market.

Fitbit Ace is the company’s new activity tracker designed for kids 8 and older. The unit tracks the same activities that traditional trackers do like steps and sleep, but it comes with a “family account” where parents can monitor activity and control who their kids connect with in the Fitbit app.

The kid-oriented tracker was developed out of a Fitbit research study that found most parents believe their children are less active than they were when growing up. Add to that the concerns about their child’s weight, the foods they eat, and the universal worry over child obesity.

“As childhood obesity rates continue to rise, it’s more important than ever to empower the entire family to embrace a healthy and more active lifestyle,” said James Park, CEO and Co-founder of Fitbit.

“It can be hard to start and stick to good habits, and we know from our community that network effects are key to getting and keeping people motivated. By bringing that experience to families, it can make healthier habits feel more achievable by making it fun and engaging.”

Fitbit Ace is priced at $99.95. It’s available for presale on the company’s website and expected in stores in the next three months.

A smartwatch designed with women in mind

The company’s newest foray into the smartwatch market comes in the form of its smartphone-compatible Fitbit Versa. Fitbit claims that the unit will come with a simpler activity-tracking dashboard and enhancements such as on-screen workouts and on-device music. The company also says it will be the lightest smartwatch available on the market.

Part of the Versa’s appeal is its intuitive personalization that takes cues from the wearer’s activities. Prompts include reminders, celebrations, sleep summaries, and challenges from a user’s social media network.  

One of the comparative advantages Fitbit is banking on for the Versa is its female focal point. The new device is designed to track menstrual cycles and keep tabs on a wearer’s holistic data.

A recent Fitbit study found that there was a profound lack of awareness about women’s health. Eighty percent of the women surveyed did not know how many phases are in a menstrual cycle and more than 70 percent were unable to correctly identify the average length of a cycle.

The smartwatch market continues to grow

The company’s smartwatch launch couldn’t come at a better time for its investors. The worldwide wearables market continues to grow and holds great promise. In the third quarter of 2017 total shipment volume reached 26.3 million units, up 7.3 percent year-over-year, according to the International Data Corporation (IDC).

"The differing trajectories for both smart and basic wearables underscore the ongoing evolution for the wearables market," said Ramon T. Llamas, research manager for IDC’s Wearables team.

"Basic wearables – with devices coming from Fitbit, Xiaomi, and Huawei – helped establish the wearables market. But as tastes and demands have changed towards multi-purpose devices – like smartwatches from Apple, Fossil, and Samsung – vendors find themselves at a crossroads to adjust accordingly to capture growth opportunity and mindshare."

The Fitbit Versa is available for presale today at $199.95, with global retail availability coming in April 2018.

Redbarn Pet Products of Long Beach, Calif., is expanding its earlier recall of dog chews to include all lots of the product.

The products may be contaminated with Salmonella.

No illnesses, injuries or complaints have been reported to date.

The following lots of Redbarn, Chewy Louie, Dentley’s and Good Lovin’ brand products with best by dates ending in BC are being recalled:

The recalled products were sold in pet specialty and grocery retail stores nationwide.

What to do

Customers who purchased the recalled products should discontinue using them and return them to the place of purchase for a full refund.

Consumers with questions may contact the company at 1-800-775-3849, Monday – Friday, 8am – 5pm (PST) or by email at info@redbarninc.com.

ICON, a Texas-based construction technology company, has made a breakthrough in affordable housing by 3D “printing” a single story, 600-800 square foot home in under 24 hours for less than $4,000.

The company demonstrated its innovation in Austin at SXSW’s annual Interactive Festival, constructing their prototype in real time.

ICON’s zero energy, thermally efficient model features a living room, bathroom, bedroom, a study that could double as a second bedroom, and a wraparound porch. The company’s co-founders told The Verge that it will be using the model home as an office to see how its idea shakes out.

These homes aren’t part of the “tiny house” movement and you won’t see suburbs of these 3D houses popping up across America. ICON is focused on creating homes in parts of the world that don’t have the economic wherewithal to house the poverty-stricken.

While the company’s main objective is to help reverse the global housing crisis, it also plans to build community-wide buy-in through the creation of manufacturing jobs that utilize local labor in those impoverished areas.

How these houses are built

The spotlight on this breakthrough falls on ICON’s proprietary 3D printer “Vulcan” that uses a unique mix of concrete that hardens as it is printed. Vulcan’s technology is a perfect match for ICON’s vision as it was designed to work in the worst of circumstances and places where things like potable water and technical assistance are lacking.

“The walls of the printed house are stronger than cinder blocks after a few days of hardening,” said Icon co-founder Evan Loomis, “although the house is ready for human occupation after the home is set up — which entails crew members installing windows, a wooden roof, basic plumbing, and electrical plumbing as the house is printed.”

The plan

For this venture, ICON is collaborating with New Story, a California-based non-profit that describes itself as a “non-profit working to create a world where no human being lives in survival mode.” To date, the company has built more than 1,500 low-cost, high-efficiency homes in developing countries like Bolivia, Haiti, and Mexico.

“New Story has been working to provide safe shelter for the last 3 years. But we knew traditional methods wouldn't make the linear change that's needed to impact the 1 billion people in need,” New Story’s CEO, Brett Hagler, told ConsumerAffairs.

“We set out researching new and unique models to get homes faster & cheaper without sacrificing quality. 3D printing had been our on radar but it wasn't until we got connected to ICON that we felt it would be a feasible possibility.”

Now that the proof of concept has been finished, ICON and New Story will be moving into phase two by taking the idea to El Salvador and printing its first homes there. The companies are targeting the end of 2018 for the first homes to be printed and expect to have the first 3D printed community completed by 2019.

A federal judge has ruled that most of a lawsuit concerning Yahoo’s data breach, which exposed the personal information of all of its 3 billion users, can proceed.

Yahoo’s parent company Verizon Communications made an effort to get the claims tossed out by arguing that it had been the target of “relentless criminal attacks”, and the plaintiffs’ “20/20 hindsight” had not affected its efforts to eliminate “constantly evolving security threats.”

However, Judge Lucy Koh ruled against the argument.

“Plaintiffs’ allegations are sufficient to show that they would have behaved differently had defendants disclosed the security weaknesses of the Yahoo Mail System,” Koh wrote in her decision.

Slow to alert customers

The case centers around accusations that Yahoo took too long to notify users of the breaches. Koh said customers may have “taken measures to protect themselves” against identity theft and fraud had they known about the breaches sooner.

Three major data breaches hit the company between 2013 and 2016, but they were not disclosed until 2016.

Yahoo initially said one billion users were exposed by one hack and 500 million were exposed by another. Later, the company said it believed that all of its three billion users were affected by the data breaches.

By the time the breaches came to light, several customers had data stolen by criminals who  used it to file fraudulent tax returns or credit card charges. Scores of other customers had to freeze their credit and spend money on monitoring and protection services.

Claims made against Yahoo in the lawsuit include negligence and breach of contract.