BI’s Article search uses Boolean search capabilities. If you are not familiar with these principles, here are some quick tips.
To search specifically for more than one word, put the search term in quotation marks. For example, “workers compensation”. This will limit your search to that combination of words.
To search for a combination of terms, use quotations and the & symbol. For example, “hurricane” & “loss”.
(Reuters) — A U.S. judge has dismissed a lawsuit accusing Baidu Inc. of defrauding shareholders about its ability to comply with Chinese regulations governing internet content.
In a Wednesday night decision, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh rejected claims in the proposed class action that 12 statements that Baidu made from March 2019 to March 2020 were false and misleading and inflated the Beijing-based company’s share price.
The statements included that the world’s largest search engine other than Alphabet Inc.’s Google LLC had “cleaned up” harmful or questionable content such as material related to drugs, gambling and pornography, giving users more confidence and potentially boosting online traffic and revenue.
Judge Koh, based in San Jose, California, also found no proof of an intent to defraud, after the plaintiff Roger Ikeda argued that senior Baidu executives concealed compliance shortfalls to avoid fines and suspensions from the Chinese government.
Lawyers for Ikeda did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Thursday, nor did Baidu’s lawyers.
The lawsuit was filed last April, shortly after China’s internet regulator Cyberspace Administration of China ordered Baidu to halt the spread of “low-brow content,” prompting Baidu to suspend some channels on its mobile app.
Baidu resumed updating the channels two weeks later.
The proposed shareholder class included holders of Baidu’s American depositary shares from March 16, 2019, to April 7, 2020. Judge Koh dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs can amend their complaint.
The case is Ikeda v. Baidu Inc et al, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.
(Reuters) — Big Tech’s decisions to block some posts and videos while letting other content viewed as inflammatory proliferate have drawn the ire of Republicans and Democrats alike, raising the prospect that a 24-year-old U.S. law that fostered the internet’s explosion will be pared back.