September 2008 - Posts
A digital camera containing secret images and information about terrorism suspects from the British spy service MI6 was accidentally sold on eBay, according to various reports Tuesday from Britain.
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/09/30/terrorcam-sold.html
What is Android?
Google's Android is an operating system for mobile phones, similar to how Windows or Leopard are operating systems for PC and Macintosh computers. Android provides the base on which other software on the phone works. Design of the operating system was originally begun by Andy Rubin, a California-based technology entrepreneur who formed the company Android Inc., which Google bought in 2005. The search-engine company announced in November 2007 that it would enter the mobile phone market through Android.
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/09/23/f-android-faq.html
Starting Tuesday, Canadians will be able to register their phone numbers on a national do-not-call list, but they may find telemarketing calls replaced by junk mail and spam.
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/09/29/call-list.html
Norway's top consumer advocate said Monday he is taking Apple Inc. to the government's market council in a test case seeking to force the American company to open its iTunes music store to digital players other than its own iPod.
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/09/29/itunes.html
People who communicate by e-mail at work may be more likely to lie than those who use pen and paper, two recent studies at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pa., suggest.
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/09/26/email-lies.html
In a short 10 years, Google Inc. has become one of the most valuable companies in the world, and certainly the hottest commodity on the internet. Along the way, the company that started out as a simple search engine provider has expanded into other businesses — news, maps, e-mail, productivity software, as well as many others — and has revolutionized virtually every industry it has touched.
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/09/26/tech-google.html
The European Union's Competition Commission is investigating the proposed search advertising tie-up between Google and Yahoo!.
"In mid-July, we decided to open a preliminary investigation on our own initiative into potential effects of the Google-Yahoo agreement on competition in the European Economic Area (EEA) market," a spokesman for European Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes has told Reuters.
Under the agreement, Google would serve ads onto Yahoo! search results pages in the US and Canada - not the EU. But we all know the pact would affect European advertisers.
Earlier today, the World Association of Newspapers (WAN) - an organization representing 18,000 papers across the globe - called on the EU (as well as the US Department of Justice and the Competition Bureau of Canada) to bury the proposed deal.
"First, many of our European members are active in North America and will be directly harmed by any anti-competitive conduct there," the organization said in a letter to European Competition Director Cecilio Madero.
"Second, we believe the deal will result in reduced incentives for Yahoo to compete against Google even in Europe, as Yahoo reportedly expects to earn hundreds of millions annually under the agreement. Also, because Google and Yahoo together control over 95 per cent of advertisers’ search advertising spending in Europe, the two companies could easily set the conditions for competition in the EU if they chose to do so."
The world was well aware that regulators in the US and Canada were probing the deal, but until news of WAN's letter hit the web, sparking more than a few phone calls to the EU, the European investigation was on the down low. The EU spokesman said the probe had no deadline.
Google and Yahoo! reached their agreement as a means of fending off Steve Ballmer's $44.6bn bid to swallow Jerry Yang and company. But a Goo-Hoo ad pact is surely more dangerous than a full-fledged Mircohoo. Even without a Yahoo! tie-up, Google controls 70 per cent of the North American search advertising market. ®
WASHINGTON - In a possible blow to Yahoo Inc.'s hopes for an advertising partnership with Google Inc., the Justice Department has hired an antitrust litigator to review evidence for what could become a legal challenge to the deal.
The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that the attorney is Sanford Litvack, a former vice chairman at Walt Disney Co. and chief of the Justice Department's antitrust division during the Carter administration.
Litvack is reviewing evidence the department has gathered in what could become an antitrust case focused either on Google itself or on the search advertising partnership it announced with Yahoo in June, the Journal reported. That deal was part of Yahoo's attempt to ward off a takeover attempt by Microsoft Corp.
A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the report.
But Yahoo said in an e-mailed statement, "We have been informed that the Justice Department, as they sometimes do, is seeking advice from an outside consultant, but that we should read nothing into that fact. We remain confident that the deal is lawful."
Blair Levin, a regulatory analyst at Stifel Nicolaus, said in a note to clients that the hiring of an outside lawyer such as Litvack is a "rare" move by the department that likely indicates a legal challenge against a company or transaction.
"The stakes are ... far higher for Yahoo," Levin wrote, because Google has "already succeeded in keeping Yahoo out of the arms of Microsoft."
The partnership between the two companies would allow Google to sell some of the ads displayed alongside search results on Yahoo's website. Yahoo and Google have insisted the deal would benefit consumers and advertisers, but they have delayed it until early October to give the Justice Department time to review it.
"We are confident that the arrangement is beneficial to competition, but we are not going to discuss the details of the regulatory process," Google spokesman Adam Kovacevich said in a statement.
Microsoft has strongly opposed the deal in testimony before Congress. A Microsoft spokesman declined to comment.
On Sunday, a group of major advertisers said they had written the Justice Department in opposition to the deal, arguing it would give Google and Yahoo control of 90 per cent of the online search advertising market. The group includes Coca-Cola Co., Procter & Gamble Co., and General Motors Corp.
In a possible blow to Yahoo Inc.'s hopes for an advertising partnership with Google Inc., the U.S. Justice Department has hired an antitrust litigator to review evidence for what could become a legal challenge to the deal.
The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that the attorney is Sanford Litvack, a former vice chairman at Walt Disney Co. and chief of the Justice Department's antitrust division during the Carter administration.
Litvack is reviewing evidence the department has gathered in what could become an antitrust case focused either on Google itself or on the search advertising partnership it announced with Yahoo in June, the Journal reported. That deal was part of Yahoo's attempt to ward off a takeover attempt by Microsoft Corp.
A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the report.
But Yahoo said in an e-mailed statement, "We have been informed that the Justice Department, as they sometimes do, is seeking advice from an outside consultant, but that we should read nothing into that fact. We remain confident that the deal is lawful."
Blair Levin, a regulatory analyst at Stifel Nicolaus, said in a note to clients that the hiring of an outside lawyer such as Litvack is a "rare" move by the department that likely indicates a legal challenge against a company or transaction.
"The stakes are … far higher for Yahoo," Levin wrote, because Google has "already succeeded in keeping Yahoo out of the arms of Microsoft."
The partnership between the two companies would allow Google to sell some of the ads displayed alongside search results on Yahoo's website. Yahoo and Google have insisted the deal would benefit consumers and advertisers, but they have delayed it until early October to give the Justice Department time to review it.
"We are confident that the arrangement is beneficial to competition, but we are not going to discuss the details of the regulatory process," Google spokesman Adam Kovacevich said in a statement.
Microsoft has strongly opposed the deal in testimony before Congress. A Microsoft spokesman declined to comment.
On Sunday, a group of major advertisers said they had written the Justice Department in opposition to the deal, arguing it would give Google and Yahoo control of 90 per cent of the online search advertising market. The group includes Coca-Cola Co., Procter & Gamble Co., and General Motors Corp.
Push Me F*ck You
Most users are fighting back against attempts to remove content critical of the Church of Scientology (CoS) from YouTube.
American Rights Counsel LLC, apparently acting on behalf of the Church of Scientology, sent 4,000 DMCA takedown notices to YouTube late last week, the Electronic Frontier Foundation reports. The notices allege copyright infringement over clips critical of the Church of Scientology.
YouTube is legally obliged to respond to such notices regardless of their merits, and as a result numerous videos were pulled. These included the BBC documentary Scientology and Me and clips posted by anti-Scientology collective Anonymous. Many accounts were suspended over the weekend as a result of the action.
Critics of Scientology have responded with DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) counter-notices, leading to the restoration of many of the affected videos and suspended channels. Some speculate that at least part of the reason for the pro-Scientology legal offensive is an attempt to uncover the real identity of critics of the church.
DMCA complaints have been deployed as weapons by the Church of Scientology in the past. In June, the Church used similar complaints of copyright infringement to force the suspension of a YouTube channel run by anti-Scientology activist Mark Bunker. Bunker's XenuTV account was again targeted in the latest legal offensive against critics of the church, the EFF notes.
Reg reader Peter notes a possible significance in the timing of the latest legal squabble between the church and its critics. An anti-Scientology congress took place in Hamburg, Germany over the weekend, and protests by Anonymous against the Church of Scientology's treatment of children and involvement in schools are due to take place next Saturday (13 September), he notes. ®
Hella lotta Gmail
Google has hooked up with Liberty Global and HSBC Principle Investments to start funding a satellite network aimed at connecting the three billion people who still can't get access to the internet, at least those living near the equator.
O3b, standing for the "Other 3 Billion", has raised $60m from Google, Liberty and HSBC. However, they'll need ten times that to fulfill the ambition of 16 satellites offering gigabitspeeds to service providers in central Africa and the Middle East, without the latency usually incurred in space-based internet access.
The initial phase will be half that number, and is scheduled to be operational by the end of 2010. Latency is reduced by putting the satellites in a low-earth orbit, less than a twentieth of a second away at light speed as opposed to the half second needed to reach geostationary orbit.
That does make for more complicated antennae, as they can't be pointed towards the satellite, but it makes the internet a great deal more usable. The satellites will be orbiting on the equator, which is why O3b only needs eight of them (strictly speaking, they only need five) and coverage will be limited to within 45 degrees - but much of the unconnected demographic lives around there anyway.
O3b plans to sell connectivity to local providers, who can then connect locals over 3G, WiMAX or even copper cables, using the O3b satellite connection as backhaul.
The companies already involved have reserved the right to provide the rest of the funding, according to the FT, though other backers may be brought in later.
Internet access over satellite has a poor record - the speed of deployment has often seen ground-based alternatives surpass orbiting connection speeds, and only geostationary services have had any commercial success at all. O3b isn't planning to cover the world, which simplifies things hugely, and its aggressive deployment schedule and targeted demographic means their service is unlikely to be supplanted by anything ground-based - so it just remains to be seen if the disconnected three billion really want high-speed data. ®
Copyright reform must have seemed an unlikely hot-button issue in the winter of 2007 — that is, until 50 protesters arrived at Industry Minister Jim Prentice's constituency office in Calgary in December.
They were there to voice their complaints about the government's plans to introduce a bill that would, among other changes, allow copyright holders to place digital locks on content, thus preventing copies from being made.
The small protest got a huge boost when, in a matter of days, 20,000 people joined a group protesting the rumoured legislation on the popular social networking website Facebook.
In part because of the opposition, the introduction of the legislation, Bill C-61, was delayed until June.
The group, which now has more than 90,000 members, was the brainchild of University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist, an outspoken critic of both the substance of the bill and what he says is the government's lack of public consultation on the issue.
After 7,000 new members joined the group within days of the government's introduction of the bill, Geist said it was the beginning of a new wave of political activism on the internet.
"What we've seen over the past 24 hours has been nothing short of remarkable," he said. "Literally tens of thousands of Canadians are speaking out with an element of shock that the government would introduce this legislation in the manner that it has."
Protest spawns imitators
Geist's group stands as one of the most successful examples of "Facebook activism" — tapping into the ready-made structure of online social networks to make joining a group as quick as a click of a button.
Its success has spawned imitators in the last year aimed squarely at the telecommunications industry.
The federal New Democratic Party, for example, seized on public discontent over changes to text messaging fees at Bell and Telus to start their own online petition. Their Facebook group protesting the changes has since attracted more than 37,000 members.
And a petition on a website called ruinediphone.com protesting Rogers Communications' data rates for Apple's iPhone attracted 56,000 people in just two weeks and, along with other protests, was able to influence Rogers to come out with new rates.
The success of these petitions in attracting and bringing together large groups of people brings up a larger question: how much weight should government, businesses and other Canadians give a protest that's as easy to join as a click of a button?
Telecommunications analyst Mark Goldberg thinks the relative ease of adding a name to a protest group or petition undermines the credibility of these groups.
"In the old days, businesses used to operate on the assumption that if they got one angry letter from a customer, it meant there were 10 more people out there who likely felt the same way," said Goldberg, who also writes a blog called Telecom Trends.
"But with an online poll, you have no idea how many people it represents. Does an online vote represent 10 people, or does it even represent half a person?"
Potential for abuse
The question came up eight years ago in an altogether different manner after then-Canadian Alliance leader Stockwell Day proposed tying federal referendums to petitions that could attract the support of three per cent of voting Canadians.
Comedian Rick Mercer, then a host of CBC's This Hour Has 22 Minutes, deftly ridiculed the proposal when he announced an online petition to change Day's name to "Doris." That petition attracted more than one million people and garnered international attention.
This Hour Has 22 Minutes' poll had little quality control to determine whether people were who they said they were, but that was ultimately the point: tying anything to a petition, particularly one done online, was asking for abuse of the system.
In theory, attaching a petition to a social network like Facebook mitigates this problem, since while it would be relatively simple to create a fake alias using a web mail account, it is more time-consuming to create and fill a fake Facebook account. While there have been numerous reports of fake Facebook accounts, the general consensus is that the social network provides a more reliable structure to judge whether an online petition represents real protest.
"If you have 50,000 Facebook members, you probably have close to 50,000 frustrated people," said Goldberg. "While I'd be cautious of reading too much into it, it does suggest for a government or a company that they have a public relations issue."
Goldberg also questions just how effective Geist's protest and the NDP text messaging protest really have been. In the case of the copyright bill, the federal government did eventually introduce the legislation and the Conservatives are expected to follow through if they win the Oct. 14 federal election. In the case of the text messaging fees, the government decided against interfering with Bell and Telus, despite the NDP protest.
"These petitions have been popularized, but I'm not sure they've been legitimized," Goldberg said. "They may have made their sponsors feel good about themselves, but I'm not sure they've led to many changes."
Geist says his petition has had an impact, however, in that government officials are now aware that there is tangible group of people opposing copyright reform.
"They are obviously aware of both the group and the advocacy that has arisen from it. I am not sure if they track the postings on the group, but surely the response that the group has helped foster has captured their attention," he wrote to CBC News in an e-mail.
Petitions lead to further activism
Interestingly, it was a flawed petition that has been most influential: the ruinediphone.com petition was undermined because it initially allowed people outside of Canada to add their names to the list, yet it remained instrumental in getting the message of dissatisfaction to Rogers.
Ryerson University communications professor Greg Elmer said an online petition alone is not particularly influential, but it can be an effective jumping-off point to further activism.
"What really impressed me about that group was how quickly it split off into local chapters and into further activism," said Elmer. "People didn't want to just press a button, they wanted to get together and strategize."
Geist himself thinks petitions are less important than the local activity and individual actions that follow.
"While a petition can be an effective method of demonstrating interest in an issue, I believe that the internet allows us to go far beyond the petition," he wrote.
Likewise the ruinediphone.com site became a focal point for frustration with the cellphone industry in general even after Rogers lowered its rates, according to Graham Fair, a 31-year-old from Vancouver who became the spokesman for the site when its founder wished to remain anonymous.
Elmer said he sensed a similar shift in approach among activists when he attended the Personal Democracy Forum in New York City in June.
"There's a real move away from the symbolic act, the 'click here' or 'post comment here' style of activism. What we're seeing now is a call for a greater commitment."
It's that commitment to further activism that gives these online petitions their real teeth, said Elmer.
"There's still a huge divide between the real world and the virtual world," he said. "But when you look at the copyright protest, it wasn't just names on a list, it was people showing up in Prentice's office. I think that really cemented that these were real people and this was a real issue."
Geist said online and offline activism play off each other and spawn a more far-reaching kind of protest. For that reason, he expects these kinds of protests to grow in popularity.
"This is the tip of the iceberg," he wrote. "I think we will see far more online activism and all organizations — both business and government — working to respond to the online activity."
In its continuing quest to digitize all of the world's information, Google Inc. is looking to incorporate back issues of newspapers — in some cases going back hundreds of years — into its web search results.
The company announced Monday its News Archive Partner Program, which will create searchable scans of pages from participating newspapers.
The pages are complete originals, with the same photos, headlines and advertisements.
Newspapers that have joined the initiative include the Quebec Chronicle-Telegraph in Quebec City, which has been publishing for 244 years, making it the oldest paper in North America. Florida's St. Petersburg Times and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette have also joined.
"Around the globe, we estimate that there are billions of news pages containing every story ever written. And it's our goal to help readers find all of them, from the smallest local weekly paper up to the largest national daily," wrote Google product manager Punit Soni on the company's official blog.
"The problem is that most of these newspapers are not available online. We want to change that."
Under the archive partner program, Google scans the microfilm supplied by newspapers or by microfilm aggregators such as ProQuest and Heritage. The newspaper pages are then published online, where they turn up in Google searches and are viewable without charge.
Google and the respective newspaper generate revenue from ads that are attached to the pages, most of which goes back to the newspaper partner, a spokesperson for the search company said.
A search for "Americans walk on moon," for example, links to a front-page scan of the July 21, 1969, issue of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. As with typical Google searches, several context-sensitive ad links display on the side of the article.
The move to offer free, ad-supported newspaper archives will compete with papers that have set up pay-per-view systems, such as the New York Times and the Globe and Mail. Both newspapers charge visitors to view archived articles.
European lawmakers plan to take the unusual step of pressing antitrust regulators next month to look at privacy concerns raised by Google Inc.'s intended takeover of online ad tracker DoubleClick.
The $3.1-billion US deal has spurred rivals and consumer advocates to complain about the control they say it would give Google, the world's most popular search engine, over internet advertising and personal information.
Both the European Commission and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission are scrutinizing the sale, with the U.S. looking mainly at privacy and EU officials focusing on how the deal could affect the internet ad market. They plan to complete their inquiry by April 2.
Sophie in 't Veld, a Dutch Liberal Member of the European Parliament, said European politicians would ask their regulators to take privacy into account and would hold a January hearing on it, echoing a U.S. Senate event held in September.
"It's drawing attention to the fact that our reality is changing," in 't Veld told the Associated Press. "There are lots of companies collecting personal data; we volunteer our personal data to get services."
The EU assembly's civil liberties committee will ask EU and U.S. regulators, European data privacy officials, consumer groups and internet companies — Google, DoubleClick and others — to speak at a hearing on either Jan. 21 or Jan. 31.
Search ads a lucrative business
DoubleClick helps its customers place and track online advertising, including search ads. And Google — more than its nearest search competitors Yahoo Inc. and Microsoft Corp. — has made an extremely lucrative business of placing ads on web pages that specific kinds of consumers are likely to use, generating money for less-visited sites.
Some advertisers worry the deal would allow Google to dominate the internet.
In 't Veld said it was essential that Europe and the United States start talking about what happens to the information that people pour into the internet. She said privacy is becoming a matter of civil liberties as governments fighting terrorism ask companies to hand over travel and financial information.
"Ultimately we will have to arrive on common standards," she said.
"The committee is not discussing the merits or details of the merger," she added. "That's not our business — that's the task of the Commission."
Last month, the Commission launched an in-depth probe into the Google-DoubleClick deal, saying they needed more time to look at how combining "the leading providers" of online advertising space and services and ad-serving technology could reduce competition and ultimately harm consumers.
In addition to worrying about data privacy, consumer groups are concerned about the deal's effect on media that increasingly rely on internet advertising for revenue.
Google has insisted that combining it with DoubleClick would help expand the internet ad market, which expanded about 25 per cent in 2007.
Carpet-bombing fix looks threadbare
Google has belatedly released details of a security update to its newly released Chrome browser, days after it actually pushed out the patch.
The update was published on Friday and users of Chrome were automatically updated, but details of the vulnerabilities fixed and performance tweaks only emerged on Monday, via a mailing list posting and a new Google Chrome blog.
Mark Larson, a Google Chrome program manager, writes that Google Chrome Beta version 0.2.149.29 addresses two critical vulnerabilities, a small number of lesser flaws and a variety of performance tweaks.
The first of the two critical bug fixes addresses a buffer overflow bug in handling long filenames, while the second deals with a vulnerability in handling link targets. Both the flaws create a means for hackers to inject hostile code into vulnerable systems, hence their critical rating. The release also fixes a lesser browser crashing bug involved in parsing URLs ending with ":%".
Google has also responded to its exposure to the infamous Safari carpet-bombing flaw by ensuring that desktop is not the default directory for downloads. "This mitigates the risk of malicious cluttering of the desktop with unwanted downloads, which can lead to executing unwanted files," it explains.
Hmm. This is, at best, only a partial workaround, and Google would do far better to address the underlying flaw.
The update also includes a number of performance and stability tweaks including a JavaScript problem involving Facebook, flaws in search suggestions on various sites, and a performance issue involving the Safe Browsing mode.
More details on the update can be found in a posting on the Google Chrome blog here. ®
A group representing big-spending American advertisers said Sunday it sent a letter to the U.S. Justice Department asserting an online ad partnership between Yahoo Inc. and Google Inc. will stifle competition and likely raise prices.
The Association of National Advertisers said on its website the letter to Thomas Barnett — assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department's antitrust division — came after a "comprehensive, independent analysis" and meetings with Google and Yahoo executives.
The ANA did not disclose the text of the letter but said it states its concern "a Google-Yahoo partnership will control 90 per cent of search advertising inventory and... will likely diminish competition, increase concentration of market power, limit choices currently available and potentially raise prices to advertisers for high quality, affordable search advertising."
The ANA said it represents 400 companies — including Apple Inc., The Coca-Cola Co., Exxon Mobil Corp., Procter & Gamble Co. and General Motors Corp. — with 9,000 brands.
The Justice Department and several state attorneys general are examining the partnership between Yahoo and Google, which would allow Google to sell some of the ads displayed alongside search results on Yahoo's website. Yahoo and Google have insisted the deal would benefit consumers and advertisers.
U.S. legislators, as well as consumer and civic groups, have also voiced concern about the deal.
Yahoo embraced the partnership with its rival as an alternative to a $47.5-billion US acquisition offer from Microsoft Corp.
NEW YORK - No soup for Microsoft?
The software giant's new ad starring Jerry Seinfeld has drawn largely negative reviews online, after premiering Thursday night during NBC's broadcast of the National Football League's season kickoff game.
The ad was the start of a highly anticipated US$300 million advertising campaign that Microsoft is launching in attempt to rebuff Apple's popular TV commercials, which have portrayed Microsoft and PCs as uncool.
In the commercial - which can be found at Microsoft.com and on video sharing sites - Seinfeld is walking through a mall when he spots Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates at a "Shoe Circus" store.
The comedian then helps Gates pick out a new pair of shoes while the jokes come quick - showering with clothes on, Gates being a "10," platinum credit cards for a fictional shoe store.
It's a zany ad that packs a lot of quirkiness into 90 seconds. With no direct mention of Microsoft or its operating system, Vista, the commercial concludes with the slogan: "The future, delicious."
The ad was created by Crispin Porter & Bogusky - a firm with a reputation for oddness. Many technology and advertising blogs have turned to Seinfeld's trademark comedy description - "nothing" - to describe the ad.
"Huh?" wrote Abbey Klaassen for Ad Age. "You could be forgiven for not knowing what the heck Microsoft's new TV ad . . . was about."
Dan Frommer, writing for the Silicon Alley Insider, pronounced the ad "not funny" and added that the mall shoe store setting "is not going to help Microsoft look any cooler."
For the blog Techcrunch.com, Michael Arrington noted that the "tech and geek crowd is a little underwhelmed" by the ad, which he said is "a far cry from the brilliant Microsoft v. Mac ads."
Brad Brooks, vice-president of Windows consumer product marketing, said in a video posted on the Windows press Web site, that the ad is a "teaser" meant to "engage customers in a conversation . . . to get the conversation going again about what Windows means in people's everyday lives."
Even if the reaction was mostly negative, Microsoft's ad has clearly succeeded in getting people talking.
SAN FRANCISCO - Yahoo Inc.'s stock sank to its lowest level in nearly five years Thursday, magnifying the challenge facing the Internet company as its management tries to justify their rebuff of Microsoft Corp.'s US$47.5-billion takeover bid.
Shares plunged $1.01, or 5.4 per cent to close at $17.75 - a price unseen since October 2003.
The downturn left Yahoo's market value nearly $13 billion below what shareholders would received if the Sunnyvale-based company had accepted Microsoft's takeover offer of $33 per share in May. Microsoft sweetened the offer after Yahoo repeatedly rejected an initial bid of $31 per share made in January.
Yahoo's demands for more money eventually drove Microsoft away, angering many shareholders now worried that the company won't be able to push the stock price back above $30 any time soon.
If Yahoo shares remain in a funk, some analysts believe the company's board will be under increasing pressure to replace co-founder Jerry Yang as chief executive.
Yang, who also sits on the board, has already pledged to increase Yahoo's net revenue by at least 25 per cent in each of the next two years - a goal that has been greeted with widespread skepticism. Yahoo's net revenue rose 11 per cent to $2.7 billion during the first half of this year.
SAN FRANCISCO - Yahoo Inc.'s stock sank to its lowest level in nearly five years Thursday, magnifying the challenge facing the Internet company as its management tries to justify their rebuff of Microsoft Corp.'s US$47.5-billion takeover bid.
Shares plunged $1.01, or 5.4 per cent to close at $17.75 - a price unseen since October 2003.
The downturn left Yahoo's market value nearly $13 billion below what shareholders would received if the Sunnyvale-based company had accepted Microsoft's takeover offer of $33 per share in May. Microsoft sweetened the offer after Yahoo repeatedly rejected an initial bid of $31 per share made in January.
Yahoo's demands for more money eventually drove Microsoft away, angering many shareholders now worried that the company won't be able to push the stock price back above $30 any time soon.
If Yahoo shares remain in a funk, some analysts believe the company's board will be under increasing pressure to replace co-founder Jerry Yang as chief executive.
Yang, who also sits on the board, has already pledged to increase Yahoo's net revenue by at least 25 per cent in each of the next two years - a goal that has been greeted with widespread skepticism. Yahoo's net revenue rose 11 per cent to $2.7 billion during the first half of this year.
Two former CEOs, Frank Biondi Jr. and John Chapple, joined Yahoo's board last month as part of a settlement with disgruntled shareholder Carl Icahn, who wanted the company to be sold to Microsoft. Icahn also recently joined Yahoo's 11-member board.
An unusually large number of shareholders already expressed their dissatisfaction with Yang and Yahoo chairman Roy Bostock. In a vote taken at Yahoo's annual meeting last month, nearly 34 per cent of the shareholders opposed Yang's re-election while nearly 40 per cent wanted Bostock bounced from the board.
Yahoo is hoping for a major lift from rival Google Inc., which plans to start selling ads alongside some of Yahoo's search results in October. Yahoo estimates Google's superior technology will boost its annual revenue by $800 million.
But that alliance could still be challenged by U.S. antitrust regulators, who are examining whether the partnership would diminish competition in the online advertising market. Combined, Google and Yahoo sell more than 80 per cent of the search advertising in the United States.
While promising to help Yahoo, Google also could hurt its rival with a new web browser called Chrome. The free browser, released Tuesday, is designed to encourage web surfers to use Google's Internet-leading search engine even more - an objective that might siphon traffic away from Yahoo.
'We will comply without complying'
But the meatpuppetting cable outfit says it will comply with the order while its appeal plays out in federal court. Under the order (PDF), Comcast has until September 19 to completely disclose its discriminatory network management practices and show how it intends to stop these practices by year's end.
"Although we are seeking review and reversal of the Commission’s network management order in federal court, we intend to comply fully with the requirements established in that order, which essentially codify the voluntary commitments that we have already announced, and to continue to act in accord with the Commission’s Internet Policy Statement," reads a canned statement from Comcast executive vp David Cohen.
"Thus, we intend to make the required filings and disclosures, and we will follow through on our longstanding commitment to transition to protocol-agnostic network congestion management practices by the end of this year."
In early August, after a 3-2 split decision, the FCC's five commissioners told the world Comcast had violated the so-called Internet Policy Statement, a 2005 document that seeks to protect the rights of America's net users. But Comcast has said that the statement "does not create legally binding obligations."
Comcast's filing with the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia does not detail its complaint with the FCC. But David Cohen gives a hint. "We filed this appeal in order to protect our legal rights and to challenge the basis on which the Commission found that Comcast violated federal policy in the absence of pre-existing legally enforceable standards or rules," his statement continues.
"We continue to recognize that the Commission has jurisdiction over Internet service providers and may regulate them in appropriate circumstances and in accordance with appropriate procedures. However, we are compelled to appeal because we strongly believe that, in this particular case, the Commission's action was legally inappropriate and its findings were not justified by the record."
Why is Comcast appealing if it intends to comply with the order? Well, there's compliance and then there's compliance. Comcast may disclose every detail behind its BitTorrent-busting to the FCC, but you can bet that certain details will be shared under protective order - so that no one else can see them.
"Although Comcast will make the required filing and disclosures, you can expect them to do it under an agreement sealing at least part of the information as proprietary until the case is resolved by the court of appeals," says Jonathan Kramer, a telecoms attorney with the Los Angeles-based Kramer Telecom Law Firm. "That way, they can both comply with the order and protect their rights until those rights are adjudicated."
You see, Comcast is appealing in an effort to keep the particulars of its BitTorrenting busting confidential. The ISP is also facing multiple class action lawsuits that accuse it of "deceiving and misleading" with its P2P throttling - which it kept secret for at least ten months. Perhaps more. And if Comcast is forced to reveal the details publicly, it gives such suits all the ammunition they need.
Comcast tells us it's still mulling the particulars of its disclosure to the FCC. But the company indicated that certain information may be kept confidential. "We're still in the process of gathering the information and we don't know yet how much of it will be public," says company spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice. "The FCC has asked that the information be made public, but if there is information that we consider proprietary, we might request that it not be made public." ®
More Posts
Next page »