January 2012

E-Mail Disclaimers Proliferate, but Some Wonder About Words; Confidential Lunch Order

Email disclaimers, those wordy notices at the end of emails from lawyers, bankers, analysts, consultants, publicists, tax advisers and even government employees, have become ubiquitous—so much so that many recipients, and even senders, are questioning their purpose.

Emails are becoming bogged down with unwanted information. They often now include automatic digital signatures with a sender's contact information or witty sayings, pleas to save trees and not print them, fancy logos and apologies for grammatical errors spawned by using a touch screen. Some lawyers say the disclaimers have value, alerting someone who receives confidential, proprietary, or legally privileged information by accident that they don't have permission to take advantage of it. Others, including lawyers whose email messages are laden with them, say the disclaimers are for the most part unenforceable. They argue that they don't create any kind of a contract between sender and recipient merely because they land in the recipient's inbox.

Smartphones drive record Samsung profit

Samsung Electronics posted a record $4.7 billion quarterly operating profit, driven by booming smartphone sales, and will spend $22 billion this year to boost production of chips and flat screens to pull further ahead of smaller rivals.

The South Korean firm, the world's top technology firm by revenue, is locked in breakneck competition with Apple Inc in the red-hot smartphone market. Apple, overtaken by Samsung in the third quarter, regained its crown as the world's biggest maker of smartphones in the fourth quarter, with record sales of 37.04 million iPhones. Samsung didn't give its own sales volume data, but research firm Strategy Analytics put sales at 36.5 million smartphones in October-December, with 3rd-ranked Nokia on 19.6 million. Smartphones account for around 40 percent of all Samsung's handset shipments.

Google and Facebook make Leveson plea

Google and Facebook urged the UK’s Leveson inquiry into the future of press regulation to preserve the distinction between professional publishers, such as newspapers, and Internet platforms. The two internet companies also warned against heavy-handed regulation that could diminish free speech online, despite the speed with which defamatory material can spread unchecked online. Lord Justice Leveson, the appeal court judge leading the inquiry, was told by Lord Allan, the former Sheffield MP who heads Facebook’s public policy unit in Europe, that the social network had more in common with “gossip in pubs” than newspapers and would be equally hard to regulate.

For Many in Pakistan, a Television Show Goes Too Far

One morning last week, television viewers in Pakistan were treated to a darkly comic sight: a posse of middle-class women roaming through a public park in Karachi, on the hunt for dating couples engaged in “immoral” behavior. This hourlong spectacle, broadcast live on Samaa TV on Jan. 17, set off a furious reaction in parts of Pakistan. Outrage sprang from the Internet and percolated into the national newspapers, where writers slammed Ms. Khan’s tactics as a “witch hunt.” “Vigil-aunties,” read one headline, referring to the South Asian term “aunty” for older, bossy and often judgmental women. Now, the protests are headed to court. Four local nongovernment organizations will file a civil suit against Samaa TV in Pakistan’s Supreme Court, hoping to galvanize the country’s top judges into action.

Lawmakers question Google CEO over privacy changes

Several lawmakers sent a letter to Google chief executive Larry Page, asking if new changes to the company’s privacy policy give users enough control over their data and adequately protect consumers. Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), chairman of the House subcommittee on oversight and investigations, and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), ranking member of the House Commerce Committee, were among the lawmakers who asked Page to explain the search engine giant’s new policy.

“Google’s announcement raises questions about whether consumers can opt-out of the new data sharing system either globally or on a product-by-product basis,” the lawmakers wrote. “We believe that consumers should have the ability to opt-out of data collection when they are not comfortable with a company’s terms of service and that the ability to exercise that choice should be simple and straightforward.” The eight lawmakers who signed onto the letter asked Page to describe all information it collects from users now and how that would change after March 1. They asked Page to detail the security measures that were taken with user data after hackers hit Gmail accounts, including those of some White House staff members, last June. And they were also concerned about privacy protections for teenagers and how Android phone users are affected by the changes. The lawmakers asked Page to respond to their questions by Feb. 16.

Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), co-chair of the Congressional privacy caucus, also signed onto the letter. He said separately in a statement that he will ask the Federal Trade Commission whether the company violated promises made in a settlement with the agency last year. The firm was charged with violating consumer protection laws by spilling the contacts lists of Gmail users to people on its now-defunct social network, Google Buzz.

Google said in a statement that its looks forward to answering questions and “clarifying misconceptions about our privacy policy changes.”

How does Google's new privacy policy compare?

Some politicians, privacy advocates, and pundits have been stirred into a frenzy in the wake of Google's newly announced overarching privacy policy. Critics have expressed everything from concern to outrage, suggesting Google will suddenly begin tracking users' each and every move around the Internet and will use that precious data in frightening and unspeakable ways. The fact of the matter is, Google doesn't appear to be doing anything worse than what companies like Apple, Microsoft, Yahoo, and Facebook have doing for years.

It's just that Google has taken arguably unprecedented pains to alert the public of imminent changes to its privacy policies and has made the new policy approachable enough for the average person to read it. In a nutshell, Google is effectively replacing the 60 or so separate privacy policies the company currently has for its wealth of services. The new policy (along with a blog post and video on the subject from Google) reiterates what you already should have realized: Google collects data about you as you are logged into your Google account and using a Google service (e.g. Search, YouTube, Gmail, Google+). If you were unaware that Google or any other company was collecting data about you used one of their online services, you must be new to the Internet or (with all due respect) oblivious. Nothing's changed here: Google has long collected your data as you've searched and Gmailed, and it has used that data for such things as targeted ads. The type of data the company is collecting is not changing. What's new is that the policy states clearly that the aforementioned data can be shared among the other Google services that you use while logged into your Google account. It's similar to, say, how Facebook shares varying amounts of data about you among its services -- as well as with the third-party apps on the site.

How to choose what you share with Google

Google’s decision to unify 60 of its services under one privacy policy has set off renewed interest in how, exactly, Google account holders have their privacy settings configured. The data integration component of the company’s new policy governs mostly what your Google accounts share with each other, and can’t be configured service by service. But Google users have control over some of what they share with the company itself through their accounts. The search giant offers a couple of options on what information is associated with any given Google account. You can get an overview of all the data Google associates with your account by looking at the “Dashboard” option on your main Google account page. There’s a lot of information on this page, such as Android devices associated with the account, calendar information, contact information, Gmail history and records of activity on Google Music, Google Talk, Google Reader, Google Voice and social connections through Google contacts and chat. You can edit some account preferences through this page, though other information, such as what Android devices are associated with your account, can’t be edited.

Sen. Grassley demands meeting with FCC aide

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has demanded to meet with a senior aide at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to discuss troubled wireless company LightSquared. In a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, Sen Grassley demanded to meet with Paul de Sa, chief of the Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, before he resigns his post next month. Paul de Sa met with LightSquared officials, including billionaire investor Phil Falcone, earlier this month. In a letter to Sen Grassley in October, Chairman Genachowski had said, "I will continue to make staff available to discuss this matter further with you and your staff at your convenience." "Given your pledge on October 28, I was disappointed to learn yesterday that Mr. de Sa was 'not available' to be interviewed by my staff," Sen Grassley wrote. He asked Genachowski to make de Sa available before Jan. 31.

National NFL Numbers Not the Whole Story

As usual, the broadcast of the NFL playoffs on NBC, CBS and Fox over the past month have generated huge national household ratings. The NFC championship game last Sunday between the New York Giants and the San Francisco 49ers pulled a 30.6 Nielsen household rating. But the national numbers are literally only half the story in many cases, according to an analysis by TVB, which encourages advertisers to seek opportunities at the station level. In the home markets of teams in the games, the local household rating was often twice as big or more.

Emergency Access Advisory Committee Report and Recommendations

The Emergency Access Advisory Committee (EAAC) has offered the Federal Communications Commission recommendations to meet the goals of the Twenty-First Century Communication and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA) of 2010 and achieve equal access to 9-1-1 emergency services by individuals with disabilities as part of the migration to the national Internet protocol (IP)-enabled emergency network (NG9-1-1).

Benton

Search