fcc-westky.org

“The revisions more appropriately reflect the nature of Twitter and convey key issues such as ownership,” Twitter co-founder Biz Stone wrote in a company blog. “For example, your tweets belong to you, not to Twitter.”

Twitter posted changes to its terms of service Thursday, assuring users that they own their tweets while leaving “the door open for advertising” opportunities.

Certainly the ownership message is designed to avoid the user backlash created by a revision to Facebook’s terms of use that some interpreted to mean that Facebook claimed ownership of user profile data and photos.

The prominence of the advertising revision seems to suggest that the microblogging start-up is warming up to an advertising-based model, a dramatic change from comments Stone made in May.

“There are a few reasons why we’re not pursuing advertising–one is it’s just not quite as interesting to us,” Stone said at the Reuters Technology Summit.

Advertising–In the Terms, we leave the door open for advertising. We’d like to keep our options open as we’ve said before.

APIs–The apps that have grown around the Twitter platform are flourishing and adding value to the ecosystem. You authorize us to make content available via our APIs. We’re also working on guidelines for use of the API.

Ownership–Twitter is allowed to “use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute” your tweets because that’s what we do. However, they are your tweets and they belong to you.

Spam–Abusive behavior and spam are also outlined in these terms according to the rules we’ve been operating under for some time.

In announcing the new terms of service, Stone also addressed the topics of abusive behavior and spam. These are four highlights Stone called out:

Nokia follows other financial companies trying to tap into the mobile market. For example, USAA bank recently revamped its iPhone app to let customers deposit checks through their phones. Sprint’s MyMoneyManager allows consumers to bank and pay bills through their mobile phones.

Nokia Money will team up with Obopay, a mobile-payment provider that lets its customers pay for items via their mobile phones. Nokia invested heavily in Obopay earlier this year.

The new service is set for its first demo at Nokia World in Germany next week. A gradual rollout of Nokia Money to selected markets will take off early next year.

“Rural consumers will particularly benefit from money transfers and, for urban consumers used to online services, we are enabling services such as payment of utility bills, purchase of train and movie tickets, top-ups, all through their mobile phones,” said Teppo Paavola, Nokia VP and head of corporate business development.

The new service may find a special niche in the U.S., which has lagged behind countries such as Japan in the ability to pay for items on the fly through a cell phone.

Nokia said the service is designed to operate with different networks and financial institutions. On the consumer’s end, it can also work with any cell phone, not just Nokia models.

The popularity of mobile banking has naturally raised concerns over security and privacy. But some experts questioned feel the technology is safe and secure, at least for the time being.

Mobile phone maker Nokia on Wednesday announced the launch of a financial service called Nokia Money, designed to let consumers pay bills and merchants and send money to friends and family using their cell phones.

“In many countries, mobile phone ownership significantly exceeds bank account usage, suggesting that many mobile phone users have very limited or no access to basic financial services,” said Mary McDowell, Nokia’s chief development officer.

Nokia believes the service will help people in the U.S. and in emerging markets who are not served by banks or other traditional financial outlets.

Given that Microsoft and Google have been fighting behind the scenes in Washington all year as scrutiny of Google ramps up, you might think Google had decided turnabout was fair play. Google declined to comment on the circumstances that have led to the Justice Department’s review, other than to say in a statement “there has traditionally been a lot of competition online, and our experience is that competition brings about great things for users. We’re interested to learn more about the deal.”

Both companies have long expected the U.S. Department of Justice to scrutinize the deal to install Microsoft as the exclusive search provider for Yahoo’s Web pages, which would also see Yahoo end its time as a search company. Microsoft and Yahoo confirmed Friday that the Justice Department has asked the two companies for more information about their deal, which is a step beyond taking a mere interest in the proceedings.

The long road toward Microsoft and Yahoo’s search deal could be set to get a little longer, or fall off a cliff.

After years of a largely hands-off approach toward intervening in mergers, the Justice Department is likely to increase its scrutiny of merger activity, said Donald Russell, a partner with Robbins Russell in Washington. The poor state of the economy has decreased merger activity, but things are starting to pick up and the Justice Department under President Obama could begin to assert itself more strongly than it did under the Bush administration.

In some ways, it’s almost a reflexive action. When there are three major companies in a market, and two of them decide to join forces, that almost automatically provokes a review, said Matthew Cantor, an antitrust lawyer with Constantine Cannon in New York.

“This deal is going to eliminate a competitor in search in a market that has high barriers to entry and only has three players,” Cantor said. He compared it to the reaction that would have arisen in the 1960s if two of the three major television networks had decided to merge amid a far-smaller media landscape.

In this case, the Justice Department is likely looking at two different aspects of the deal. On one hand, regulators are expected to probe whether advertisers will be harmed by the loss of an outlet for their ad dollars, as well as whether Google has less incentive to compete for searchers now that there’s only two fish in the pond.

Cantor thinks the Justice Department will force Microsoft and Yahoo to put Yahoo’s search technology assets up for auction to let the deal go through. That would allow a third major player to enter the business, although that new entrant would still have the burden of attracting searchers: Yahoo has said that an overwhelming majority of the people using Yahoo search are already doing so from a Yahoo Web page, the combination of which are among the most visited pages on the Internet.

However, that might not be as appealing to Microsoft and would at least throw the deal into question. The company has spent millions on the development and launch of Bing, but it likely is interested in retaining certain aspects of Yahoo’s search technology, not to mention some of its engineers.

But the deal–years in the making–could have arrived at a time when the DOJ is more interested mergers and acquisitions than under past administrations.

For the duration of its existence until now, the offline experience on Gmail.com from your iPhone or Android phone has been a unidirectional activity: you could compose outgoing mail, but not view it before it sent.

No longer. Introduced on Thursday, Outbox is a new Gmail.com feature for Android and iPhone users. It provides mobile Web users a way to view the queue of outgoing messages that Google will ship out once the cell phone gets back into a coverage zone.

Since Outbox is a limited read-only feature, you won’t be able to edit the e-mail, or even tap it to read the entire body. However, it does provide an at-a-glance confirmation that an e-mail is still waiting to be sent.

Gmail.com for mobile is accessed from the browser on iPhones running 2.2.1 of the operating system or above, and on Android phones. It’s available in U.S. English.

(Credit:
Google)

Make use of the Outbox when in offline mode.

We tested Outbox by opening Gmail from the browser and then switching the phone to airplane mode. When you create a message and send it, you still receive Google’s confirmation message that the e-mail “sent.” But arrow back to the Gmail menu and you’ll now see a label for Outbox that appears below the Chats label. Tap it to view the subject line, time stamp, and first line of the e-mail you have waiting for delivery.

You may note the very sparse use of words, the delicate musical choices, even the sly wit.

For myself, I tend to notice the rather excessive scrubbing that seems to have been eked out upon far too many of the actors.

So I have embedded three of the films for you to decide just how far up your frigid cool scale Windows 7 has risen.

And what’s the best way of encouraging people to not feel ashamed? Why, you try to make your product cool.

You see, the enemy’s tactics are, as Microsoft has learned sometimes to its cost, very cool indeed.

Microsoft is, however, taking no chances. It has released nine new ads designed for you to not be ashamed of being seen in public using the new operating system.

No, wait, that wasn’t the quote I was searching for. It’s this one: “Women hold up half the sky.”

No, no, it can’t be that one. It’s definitely this one: “Despise the enemy strategically, but take him seriously tactically.”

There are those who believe Windows 7 doesn’t need selling.

As long as reviewers continue to suggest that it is a fine, fine thing, then people will gravitate towards it as they buy their (much cheaper than Mac) PCs.

Still, as Mao Tse-Tung was always fond of whispering to those closest to him in intimate situations: “A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery.”

Casting is a very difficult art, and especially in the “Your PC. Your Life” film, I wonder if the man who sings about waiting for his spaceship to fly (and what can that possibly mean?) doesn’t look a little too polished to be a truly raw exemplar of cool.

It is not cool to ever tell people you are cool. You must be it. You must sound it. And you must look it.

(Credit:
Microsoft)

The difference became most obvious when I took a couple songs–Radiohead’s “How to Disappear Completely” and Mr. Bungle’s NSFW funk-bizarro song “Squeeze Me Macaroni”–and listened to them back to back on each player. On the Zune HD, the acoustic guitar in the Radiohead song sounded clinky and thin, and the percussion in the Bungle song was unbearably high-pitched. On the iPod Touch, the guitar sounded like guitar and the percussion was complementary rather than overwhelming.

The Zune HD sounded very crisp and clean, with clear separation in the bass, but the midrange–guitar, vocals–didn’t seem full or loud enough. When I turned it up to try and get a fuller sound, the treble became overwhelming.

The iPod Touch excels as a portable multifunction computer, with tens of thousands of available applications, and it’s the only choice for Mac users. The Zune HD has superior music-discovery features, particularly when used with a Zune Pass subscription. Plus, it has an HD Radio and a sophisticated desktop PC client that makes iTunes look stale.

iPod Touch

I find it hard to evaluate an MP3 player until I’ve lived with it for a little while. Specifications, demos, and even quick hands-on tests don’t tell you the most important thing: how does it sound? Can you listen to it for an hour? A week? The rest of your life?

A few hours later, I tried a similar test through the relatively cheap headphones that come with the Zune HD. Here, the Zune fared a bit better–it sounded louder, so I didn’t need to turn it up so much that the over-boosted treble hurt my ears–but there simply wasn’t as much audio information coming through, especially at the low end.

Your lesson? Don’t just read the specs and look at the interface before you buy an MP3 player. Spend some serious time listening to it, at volume.

But what about the actual sound? To try them out, I ran them into the audio input jack in my car, which is how I most often listen to portable music. I turned each device up to just below maximum volume (I’ve heard my iPhone distort at its max), and made sure the EQ settings were completely flat.

Zune HD

On a straight specifications basis, each of them has clear advantages.

(Credit:
CNET)

The iPod Touch was noticeably louder at the same volume setting on the car stereo. The trebly parts–cymbals, high-hat, the squeak of a saxophone reed–were still distinct, but the bass sounded rounder and warmer, and the midrange (the most important spectrum when choosing audio gear) shone through. It made me realize how much sound was missing when I listened to the Zune HD.

Hearing is subjective–apparently younger listeners are beginning to prefer the “sizzle” of highly compressed MP3s, and one listener’s “crisp” is another’s “harsh.” And I’m an analog fan, with far more records than CDs in my home collection. But to me, the Zune HD sounded pretty good, while the new iPod Touch is the best-sounding MP3 player I’ve ever heard, comparing favorably with a decent CD player.

On Tuesday, I spent a few hours with the 32GB versions of Microsoft’s new Zune HD and Apple’s latest-generation iPod Touch. To me, these are the top-of-the-line competitors in the MP3 player market–if you’re a serious music listener with nearly $300 to spend, these are your two choices.

On industrial design, I think they’re about even–a commendable feat for Microsoft given how far behind the previous Zunes were. On user interface, the iPod Touch may be more intuitive at first, but the Zune HD is way cooler–I love the way artist images and words scroll across the background as you play a song–and gives you far more customization over the music-playing experience. (I’m amazed that the iPod Touch still doesn’t have an easy way to add songs to a now-playing queue, for instance.)

Microsoft, in turn, owes a growing debt to open source, and is increasingly getting involved with open source, most recently releasing an open-source software development kit for Bing to help developers write Mac OS X and Cocoa Touch (iPhone) applications. Linux is pushing Microsoft to innovate again in the server and mobile markets, while a host of open-source applications, databases, and middleware challenge it on the Web, “desktop,” and mobile.

Not that these two companies are alone in their curious symbiosis. For example, where would open source be without Microsoft? After all, it is Microsoft that helped to create a standardized hardware platform (Intel) for both “desktops” and servers, which paved the way for Linux, but it is also Microsoft that consistently sets the bar, at least on the “desktop,” that open-source projects strive to meet and exceed.

PC users…have long benefited hugely from the existence of Macs. Microsoft and PC manufacturers have cribbed so many of Apple’s good ideas that it’s tough to imagine what Windows machines would look like today if the Mac had never existed.

Strange world, technology. On the ground, there are ideological skirmishes between rival camps of customers. In the boardroom, plots are hatched to ridicule the competition.

But in reality, Microsoft needs Apple needs open source needs Google needs….You get the picture.

Of course, Microsoft also propped up Apple’s waning fortunes back in 1997 with a $150 million investment and, more importantly, a commitment to build Mac versions of Office and Internet Explorer. Without Microsoft’s software on Apple’s machines, they arguably would have been much less palatable to the general public.

Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.

For all the rancor between opposing technology camps–Microsoft vs. the open-source community, Apple vs. Microsoft, etc.–there’s a lot more symbiosis going on than meets the eye. In fact, it’s hard to imagine Apple without Microsoft, open source without Microsoft, and so on, as Harry McCracken suggests in MacWorld (not online at time of writing).

Open source, whether in Mozilla’s (Firefox) hands or Google’s (Chrome), is also challenging Apple and Microsoft to innovate again in browser technology, which, in turn, Apple is enabling, at least, in Google’s case, through its own open-source WebKit technology.

For years, however, that debt went largely unpaid. The PC platform finally started giving back in 2006, when the first Intel-based Macs shipped and the Mac essentially became a PC–and a really good one at that. Intel’s mammoth investments in chips are sustainable only because its processors end up in most of the world’s Windows PCs. Mac users reap the same technological windfall even though it’s the Windows majority that provides the economies of scale.

The Pixorial editor is not fancy, but it's good for creating archives of family videos.

The family video site Pixorial opens up to the public Wednesday. It solves two problems most people will probably relate to. First, it’s a nice little video editor for piecing together clips from digital cameras and the like. Second, if you send Pixorial your old analog media (VHS tapes, Super 8 film, other formats), the company will convert them to digital so you can edit them into new films.

I gave the editor a quick run-through. It appears basic but functional and more importantly easy enough to use by anyone who’s able to put old VHS tapes in the Pixorial mailing box. Users can also invite friends and family to collaborate on edits. There are no length limits on videos.

See also: MotionBox and iMemories. People with only digital movie files might find happiness with Windows Movie Maker or Apple’s iMovie.

(Credit:
Screenshot by Rafe Needleman/CNET)

Once your film is edited, you can then press it to DVD ($9.99) or just view it online in smallish window. If you want to download the full, high-resolution video, that’s $1.99

Mostly, I like the business. No freebies here and that’s appropriate. People will pay for a simple, reliable way to edit and preserve their old videos and movies.

You can upload and store video for free, but you only get 10GB of space and 60 days of storage. Pro accounts, for $24.99 a year, get unlimited uploads and archival storage. The company makes additional money selling DVDs. It also charges for the digitization of media–about $7 per hour, CEO Andres Espineira told me.

If you participate in the settlement, you’ve also authorized Google to use your book for non-display purposes that include internal testing and bibliographic information unless you specifically request otherwise when you claim your payout.

If your book is out-of-print, it’s a little trickier. As a result of the settlement Google has to offer you the opportunity to decide how, or if, you’d like that book displayed in Google Books, as well as whether you want to claim compensation for Google’s digitization of your works as a member of the class.

Google has scanned over 10 million books since 2004 in participation with libraries and publishers in hopes of creating a unique digital library and storefront, and if its pending settlement with books rights holders is approved next month at a hearing, Google will be able to make a far greater portion of those works available through its search engine. Friday is the deadline for authors to decide if they want to participate in the settlement.

You’re also entitled to 63 percent of both the revenue that Google makes from the sale of your book through Google Books, as well as 63 percent of the ad revenue linked to that book. That revenue can be claimed at any time, and will be held by the Books Rights Registry set up as part of the settlement to distribute payments to authors until it is claimed.

(Credit:
Screenshot by Tom Krazit/CNET)

If they don't opt out of Google's settlement with book publishers and authors by Friday, authors will have to make decisions about how to display their content in Google Book Search.

Why does Google have a copy of my book?
Google entered into book-scanning projects with several publishers and universities around 2003 with the goal of transforming dusty old books into searchable sources of data. Google believed it was within its rights under fair-use laws to scan books that were out-of-print but still protected by copyright law so as long as it only presented a snippet of each book within Google Search. In cases where Google has cut deals with publishers, it’s allowed to show a much broader portion of the book if the rights holder gives consent.

Why should I keep my book in Google Books?
The project has the potential to dramatically reinvent the concept of what it means to be a book. Books that are searchable and that can link to one another could pay enormous dividends for researchers, who will get access to the catalog of books as part of the settlement.

How do I know if I’m affected by this settlement?
If you’ve written a book since 1923 that was published in the U.S., you’re probably eligible if you hold the copyright license (some “for-hire” authors cede this to publishers, such as with multi-author technical manuals and the like). Check with your publisher to be sure, but note the settlement only covers books published on or before January 5, 2009.

Is Google the only place that’s going to offer this kind of service?
No one really knows, but nobody else is scanning books on this scale, and few are believed to have the financial resources to attempt such a project.

I don’t want anything to do with this settlement. How do I tell Google?
If you wish to completely opt out of the settlement, you have to let Google know by Friday here. Opting out of the settlement allows you to sue Google for digitizing your out-of-print book. You can also ask Google to avoid scanning your book if it already hasn’t (at least until April 5, 2011) as well as remove any instances of your book from Google Book Search.

What if I don’t want Google to display my entire book?
You have several choices under the settlement regarding how Google is allowed to display your book. You can ask Google to display the whole thing and charge for online access to the book, ask Google to display just a preview copy with links to bookstores where it can be found, have just a few snippets included, or exclude your books entirely from Google Book Search.

It could also mean a little bit of money in your pocket and extend the life of an older book that is gathering dust on a library shelf.

What do I get if I participate in the settlement?
If you fill out a claim form at the Web site set up to administer the settlement, you’ll get $60 per work that Google has already digitized as well as options as to how that work will be displayed in Google Book Search. Claims for the cash payments must be submitted by January 5, 2010.

What happens if the settlement is rejected?
Who knows. Judge Denny Chin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York will review all the filings in support or objection to the settlement following Friday’s deadline, and oversee a final hearing in October to determine the fate of the settlement. The Justice Department is also reviewing the settlement for possible “anticompetitive practices.”

Google’s rights under the settlement are nonexclusive, in that anyone can negotiate for scanning and display rights with the nonprofit Books Rights Registry. But no one has stepped forward as of yet, and there’s only a handful of tech companies with the cash resources and business models (Microsoft? Yahoo? Apple? Amazon?) that would allow them to consider such a project: Microsoft has scaled back its book-scanning efforts in recent years.

The Authors Guild and Association of American Publishers disagreed with Google’s interpretation of copyright laws, and filed a class-action lawsuit in 2005. The parties settled in October with an agreement that could give Google the right to display books it has already scanned in a variety of ways depending on the status of the book and the wishes of rights holders.

If your book is still in print, Google has had to ask you or your publisher for explicit permission to scan and display your book. Several publishers have cut deals with Google to display and distribute books. Check with your publisher to see if you’re a member of the Partner Program and how your work is displayed.

Authors, however, have a few choices to make as they ponder Friday’s deadline. Here’s a sampling of what they need to know:

I can’t believe anybody would pay money for that old book I wrote, but why not? How do I sign up?
You can claim your books here. You must claim the books by January 5, 2010 if you want the $60 per book, but you’ll be automatically included in the settlement class unless you opt out by Friday.

The issues surrounding Google’s Book Search settlement are among the most complex surrounding the company this year: what do authors need to know about their rights and responsibilities?

Books that do not get claimed by their rights holders will have 20 percent of their pages displayed as a preview.

Do I get to set the price for my book?
You have two choices: you can set your own price or allow Google to set the price using one of its famous algorithms to figure out where your book will make the most revenue.

It seems pretty obvious that if the settlement is thrown out, rights holders won’t be bound by the terms of the settlement. What seems likeliest is that the Authors Guild and other groups will renegotiate a settlement on different terms, but the issue could conceivably wind up back in court, delaying the project indefinitely while Google continues to scan books.

The settlement has drawn attention and criticism from groups such as library ethicists and academics for the way it concentrates control of this potentially wondrous public good in the hands of a for-profit company. The Department of Justice is also taking a look at the settlement, which has the potential to throw a large roadblock ahead of the project.

Nokia N97 Mini

Nokia X6

Even though Nokia is the No. 1 smartphone maker worldwide, it’s losing market share to players such as Apple with the iPhone and Research In Motion with its BlackBerry. Nokia is particularly challenged in the U.S., where it is virtually non-existent and lacks key carrier relationships for its hottest devices.

The handset maker also announced two new music phones: the X6 and the X3. The X6, which has a touch screen and 32GB of built-in memory, will be Nokia’s new flagship music phone. The company expects to ship the new phone in the fourth quarter for a list price of 450 euros, or $639. As with the N97, users will also get the Comes With Music service bundled into the phone.

Unfortunately, the new phones announced at the Nokia World are unlikely to slow its slide in the high end of the market. While the devices mark improvements for Nokia’s overall product line, they are not revolutionary with respect to other products that they will compete with on the worldwide market.

(Credit:
Nokia )

Nokia, the world’s largest maker of cell phones, on Wednesday announced new phones loaded with more music features and better integration with Facebook, as well as pricing for its upcoming Netbook.

But even though Nokia estimates that the global online market will reach 100 billion euros by 2010, the company must continue to feed its core device business with new phones. There’s no question that Nokia is still the leader in the overall cell phone market. It has done especially well providing low-cost devices to the developing world, but it has been challenged to keep up with innovations in the smartphone category.

Still, Nokia is not giving up. The phone maker announced last month a relationship with Microsoft to develop a version of Microsoft’s Office software for Nokia handsets. And last week, it also announced its N900 smartphone, its first Linux-based phone, which is expected to compete more directly with the iPhone and a flood of Google Android phones due to hit the market later this year and early next year.

(Credit:
Nokia )

Nokia is the world’s leading cell phone maker with close to 40 percent worldwide market share. Recently it has been trying to diversify its business by offering its cell phone users online services, such as music downloads, games, and maps. The company created its Ovi service platform as a repository for all of these functions and hopes that one day all Nokia phone customers will use their Ovi accounts to access and manage their music, video, and photos.

The company announced the new phones and services at its Nokia World Conference in Stuttgart, Germany.

Tops on the list of new phones is the N97 Mini, a slightly smaller version of Nokia’s existing flagship N97 smartphone. This new, smaller N97 has a shorter battery life than the earlier device and also less memory (8GB compared to 32GB), and a smaller touch-screen display. The device is expected to ship in October. Its list price at 450 euros, or about $639, is not much less than that of the full-fledged N97, which initially went on sale in the U.S. for $700.

The new N97 Mini also will have Nokia’s Comes With Music service integrated. This service increases the cost of the device, but provides users with a free download music service. And the device will be the first Nokia phone to have tighter integration with the popular social networking site Facebook. Nokia has struck a deal with Facebook to let users update their location and status directly to the Web site through a Nokia Ovi account.

What makes Nokia’s Netbook different from others in the category is that the device will have GPS embedded to provide access to Nokia’s Ovi Maps software and service.

Nokia plans to offer the Facebook integration on other phones as well.

In yet another attempt to diversify, Nokia also plans to offer more sophisticated hardware, in the form of a mini-laptop or Netbook–last week it announced the new device, dubbed the Nokia Booklet 3G (watch a video here). At the event in Germany on Wednesday it announced that it will ship the mini laptop in the fourth quarter with a list price tag of 575 euros, or about $817.