December 2011

Is Google Really Getting Rich Off Piracy?

The “Google is in bed with the pirates” theory is hardly new and is often aired by publishers and copyright lawyers. It has bubbled up again in the last two weeks as a debate rages in Washington over the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). So how much money Google is making from the hundreds of “rogue” websites worldwide that flog everything from fake NFL jerseys to pirated versions of Hollywood blockbusters?

For those unfamiliar with Google’s business model, the company makes nearly all of its money in one of two ways. The first is by using auctions to sell keywords like “flowers” or “personal injury lawyer” to companies whose ads appear when a user searches those terms. The other way the company makes money is through its AdSense program which helps website owners place ads on their site. In return, Google gets a cut of the ad revenue. This means Google could (in theory) make money by selling keywords like “football” to companies that want to advertise that they have counterfeit Cowboys jerseys for sale. In fact, earlier this year, the company paid a huge fine for letting Canadian pharmacies buy keywords to advertise drugs without a prescription. But the pharmacy episode appears to be a one-off blunder. There is no evidence that Google has a habit of selling keywords to shady partners. A Google spokesperson said by email that the company has strict policies to ban inappropriate ads and companies that try to buy them.

Online piracy laws must preserve Web freedom

[Commentary] The Stop Online Piracy Act would force social media platforms to pro-actively monitor and censor users to prevent them from posting words or images that might violate copyright. Website operators who fail to do so could be blacklisted and prosecuted.

The bill and its Senate counterpart, the Protect IP Act, would empower the attorney general to block allegedly infringing websites based anywhere on Earth. The drafters of both bills do not mean to stifle online dissent and activism. Their goal is to protect intellectual property, especially from piracy by websites overseas. The problem is that the bills' legal and technical solutions are very similar to mechanisms that authoritarian regimes use to censor and spy on their citizens. Our organization, Global Voices Online, is an international network for citizen media. We support the protection of intellectual property; many members of our community earn all or part of their living by creating copyrighted work. We worry, though, that the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act will inflict broad unintended damage on digital activists living under repressive regimes as well as restrict speech freedoms at home.

Cox To Sell Wireless Licenses To Verizon Wireless For $315 Million

Call it Verizon’s “quad play.” Cox Communications has joined three of its cable peers in the Verizon Wireless camp, announcing that it has struck an agreement to sell to the wireless carrier its 20-MHz Advanced Wireless Services spectrum licenses covering 28 million people in the U.S. for $315 million.

In addition, Cox and Verizon Wireless will also become agents to sell each other's residential and commercial products and services through their respective sales channels. Over time, Cox may have the option to sell Verizon Wireless' services on a wholesale basis. Cox noted that the agreement with Verizon Wireless does not include Cox's 700 MHz spectrum licenses, the company's existing Cox Wireless customer accounts -- which will be phased out by March 2012 -- or any other assets. As part of the deal, Cox expects to enter into arrangements with the Philadelphia-based "innovation technology joint venture" to be formed by Verizon Wireless, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Bright House, aimed at developing ways to better integrate wireline and wireless products and services.

With Siri TV, Apple Will Dismantle the TV Networks

[Commentary] Steve Jobs died without fully transforming television, but the day before he passed away, Apple unveiled Siri, its natural language interface. Though it’s currently only embedded in the new iPhone 4S, Siri could eventually change the face of the TV industry.

Siri’s greatest impact won’t ultimately be on users, or on device manufacturers (though they certainly risk losing market share to Apple). It will be on the TV industry’s content creators and packagers. Why? Because a voice-controlled television interface will fundamentally disrupt the six-decade-old legacy structure of networks, channels and programs. And that’s a legacy that — until now, at least — has been carried forward from analog to digital. If the Internet can be generalized to have one effect across every industry that moves online, that effect would be disaggregation. Choices go from finite to infinite. Navigation goes from sequential to random access. And audiences choose content by the item far more than by the collection. We’ve gone from the packaged and channelized to the unbound and itemized. Autonomous albums are fragmented into songs; series into clips; and magazines and newspapers into articles and individual photos. As much as we may think that has already happened with video, it is nothing compared to the great leveling that will occur in the voice-controlled living room.

[Elowitz is Co-founder and CEO of Wetpaint]

GOP debates, both interesting and important, score in TV ratings

The Republican primary debates have turned into one of the fall television season’s surprise hits.

A record 7.6 million people tuned in Dec 10, barely three weeks before the first caucus in Iowa. The five most popular debates in recent weeks have attracted an average of 5.6 million viewers, a figure that would rank them as the most popular series on cable after pro-football games, and just behind middle-ranked sitcoms such as “Parks and Recreation” on the broadcast networks. Surely, viewers of all political persuasions are drawn by the consequential nature of the discussion — taxes, the economic crisis, stances on foreign policy — and by a desire to learn who might be best qualified to challenge for the presidency next fall. But this year’s debate-a-thon, which will surely surpass the record of 21 held by Republicans during the 2007-08 cycle, has some bonus features as well. “There’s hype, there’s drama, there’s uncertainty,” said Mitchell McKinney, a communications professor at the University of Missouri who specializes in political debates. “The debates have become like a reality show, like the next version of ‘Survivor.’ ”

AT&T, T-Mobile deal: Judge to delay California probe indefinitely

Citing uncertainty about the fate of AT&T's $39-billion deal to take over T-Mobile, a California administrative law judge has indefinitely postponed proceedings in a 6-month-old state investigation of the deal.

A California Public Utilities Commission administrative law judge, Jessica Hecht, said she was eliminating an upcoming deadline in the case "in recognition of recent developments related to the underlying merger proposal." "I will continue to monitor developments related to the proposed merger," she wrote, and "will issue a new schedule for these comments or other activities in the future, if appropriate." The delay came after the CPUC received requests earlier this week from AT&T and T-Mobile to put a hold on the proceedings, she wrote.

House cybersecurity bill would establish federal overseer

Members of the House Homeland Security Committee introduced a cybersecurity bill that would establish a quasi-governmental entity to oversee information-sharing with the private sector.

Like the other cybersecurity bills offered by the House GOP, the Promoting and Enhancing Cybersecurity and Information Sharing Effectiveness (PrECISE Act) encourages private firms to share information on cyber threats but stops short of mandating new security standards for sectors deemed critical to national security. The bill would clearly delineate the cybersecurity functions of the Department of Homeland Security by requiring DHS to evaluate cybersecurity risks for critical infrastructure firms and determine the best way to mitigate them. By authorizing DHS to oversee civilian cybersecurity, the legislation aligns with proposals from both the Senate and the White House, but it is unclear how much authority DHS would have to enforce its security standards. Democrats have argued DHS needs some enforcement authority to ensure firms beef up their network protections.
Sponsors include Committee Chairman Pete King (R-NY), Reps Michael McCaul (R-TX), Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Candice Miller (R-MI), Tim Walberg (R-MI), Billy Long (R-MO), Tom Marino (R-PA) and Bob Turner (R-NY) of the Homeland Security Committee, as well as Reps Steve Stivers (R-OH) and Jim Langevin (D-RI).

LightSquared hires major K Street lobbying firm

LightSquared added Patton Boggs to its ever-growing list of lobbying firms, according to Senate documents. The registration is backdated to be effective since Nov. 1. Patton Boggs is lobbying on “legislation potentially affecting the launch of a nationwide, wholesale-only wireless broadband network.” Specifically, the firm is focusing on the National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 and the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Acts of 2012, documents show.

Gingrich moves away from electronic health records

Newt Gingrich appears to be moving away from his past support for electronic health records now that he's the GOP presidential front-runner. Conservatives have criticized Gingrich's lobbying in favor of federal spending to promote widespread adoption of the technology by doctors. The technology has sparked concerns about patient privacy and government intrusion.

DeMint, Scalise Propose Sweeping Away Retransmission Regime, Ownership Regulations

Rep Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Sen Jim DeMint (R-SC) have introduced the Next Generation Television Marketplace Act in both the House and Senate. The sweeping and unlikely-to-pass legislation would throw out the retransmission regime and local ownership rules. That deregulatory chain saw is aimed at clearing out "decades-old" regulations they argue represent the government inappropriately picking winners and losers.

Specifically the bill would:

  • Repeal those provisions of the Communications Act that mandate the carriage and purchase of certain broadcast signals by cable operators, satellite providers, and their customers.
  • Repeal the Communications Act's "retransmission consent" provisions and the Copyright Act's "compulsory license" provisions, thereby allowing negotiations for the carriage of broadcast stations to take place in the same deregulated environment as negotiations for carriage of non-broadcast channels such as Discovery, Food Network, and AMC.
  • Repeal ownership limitations imposed on local media operators, allowing businesses to evolve and adapt to today's dynamic communications market.