Stop The Censorship - SOPA = CRAPA!

If you haven't heard of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) - then listen up, people!
It's basically a bill (you can read it for yourself here) that allows any intellectual property holder to shut down any website's online advertising and block credit card payments - all without the need for that whole "due process of law" thingie getting in the way.

It works sort of like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's (DMCA) "takedown notices". You know - the ones where someone can claim copyright on a YouTube video and they pull it?

In this case, if this thing passes (and it looks like it very well might), the people who own the intellectual property only have to file some "specific facts" (yeah, really - that's what it says) to back up their claim that a site stole their property - and the payment and ad networks have five days to cutoff all contact with the accused site.

Well at least they can't take the site down completely... right?

Right!

BUT - they don't have to - because then the US Federal Government will have the right to file an injunction against any site with a hearing with a judge. If it gets the injunction, the US Government has the right to block all US access to said site - at the DNS level!

It also means that search engines have to be careful - because they could get into trouble because they have the duty to prevent the site in question "from being served as a direct hypertext link."

Let's not forget all the ad networks and payment processors that also have a duty to cut the site off.

Oh yeah, and there's one more thing: Internet service providers and payment processors can simply block access to sites based solely on the belief that the site(s) are "dedicated to the theft of US property". Oh, and the ISPs and payment folks can't be sued, either.

Nice.

Listen, I'm no fan of priracy in any form - whether the intellectual property owner is American or not. It is a big problem. It is a legitimate problem. However, censorship legislation is NOT the answer. There are definitely "rogue" sites out there that are making money from what amounts to "stolen [IP] goods". Fine, go after them. Shut them down.

It's bad enough that ICE (Immigration Customs Enforcement) can seize domains at will and have, in fact, wrongly shut down 84,000 subdomains of mooo.com just last year.

One can only imagine the chaos and confusion, incorrect claims of ownership, cost, complexity, and general cluster this bill would cause.



SOURCE

5 Things That Won't Survive 2009

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Cloud Services Can Have Thunder Storms

The latest winner in the battle for the land-grab over consumer digital music goes to... well, NOT Yahoo. Seems that they've decided to throw in the towel when it comes to the DRM (Digital Rights Management) servers they use to make sure that the music you've purchase is legit.

The only problem is - once they do that... ummm... you can't move your music - you know, the stuff you paid for - to any other computer or device.

Um... yeah.

Hey - MORE good news for the shareholders of Yahoo next week! Ol' Carl's dance card is going to be full, that's for sure. I guess when your stock tanks (called it!), Carl Ichan now owns 33% of your board (called it!) along with 12% of your stock - and he says "cut the losses and get out" - I guess you get out.

Now, it's not happening until September - so if you bought music on Yahoo - then hurry the hell up and copy it to every single device known to man. Yahoo is also offering folks the option of either a) getting all the money back they spend on buying all that music (Carl Ichan rolling in grave); or b) DRM-free copies of all the music they bought (the way it should be anyway!).

I can't get that Queen song "Another One Bites The Dust" out of my head. RealNetworks is the venue that Yahoo picked back in April to take over their service - but to me it just confirms that Amazon got it right with DRM-free music that you can actually buy and OWN - versus the "buy it - and own it virtually" concept.

This is one instance where "in the cloud" went horribly wrong.

At least, to be fair, they're trying to take care of their customers. But that leads to a bigger question about "cloud" services - what happens if your particular vendor decides ("for business reasons") to shut down it's data centers or turn off its servers? Not all companies will "take the high road" as Yahoo has with regards to its customers.

It's inevitable that in the future one of these large vendors will just go tits-up and leave their customers (and all of their data) in the lurch. The smart bet is to make damn sure you have a backup (on "paper" if necessary) of all of your important data in a way that you, personally, control.

Or, at the very least, back it up to more than one online, virtual datastore. I think you see my meaning here. As more and more of services go SaaS - and more and more companies and individuals buy into PaaS - you can't just abdicate control of your digital future.

You need to actively manage your digital assets (music as well as email, database data, website pages, etc.) as you would data in an "old fashioned", on-premises data center. Back it up in more than one place, and be ready in case of a natural disaster - or an "economic slowdown" - or some other unforeseen event.

Cloud services are great, don't get me wrong. But we've all seen how the shiny promise of MobileMe, Salesforce, iPhone activation, get us to part with cash and then the absolute backlash and worldwide flogging of those same companies when their .0001% of downtime (inevitably) happens.

As we come to rely on services that are outside our control - we need to realize that sometimes digital sh*t happens - and it's all technology that's based on a text-based rendering engine that didn't even exist 15 years ago.

It will get better and more reliable, but in the mean time - just remember that these services are not like the (hardwired) telephone service, not like an electric utility, and they will go down, merge, un-merge, go broke and in innovate like hell in the wild west that is the digital communication age.

And if you don't like it - dust off your 78's, and buy a pad of paper, a pencil and some stamps.

Microsoft: Let It Go

I just KNEW that Steve Ballmer couldn't just walk away from the Yahoo deal. As I mentioned in a previous entry - I was shocked at the time - and actually proud of Mr. Ballmer for being an adult and just walking away.

I should have known better.

Now it seems that Steve's big idea is to hook Time Warner and News Media into coming up with a partial bid - just for the search part of Yahoo. They basically just want to gut the company and divvy up the bits between themselves.

They know that Carl Ichan is STILL on the war path - and with the shareholder's meeting date less than a month away - I can't figure out if this is just a cruel joke on the part of Microsoft - of if they're actually serious.

The shares of Yahoo were up $3 on the speculation that somehow, maybe, the shareholders might make some money out of this. I bet Mr. Ichan was happy about that!

The deal STILL makes no sense. The PR value of it is gone. Everyone agrees: it was a crazy move to begin with - and Jerry Wang is still insisting (with hookah pipe in hand) - that Yahoo is a viable company that is going to take off (any day now).

Meanwhile - back at the Google Camp - Eric Schmidt must be laughing his ass off. He struck a deal to put Google's ads on Yahoo's site - so even as Yahoo's stock tanked after the original Microsoft deal fell through - Google is making mo' money.

It's still not all smiles and balloons for the Googlehoo alliance - they're getting the strip search treatment from the feds at the moment - but I don't think it's going to amount to anything.

But even if it did - Google will still have made money on the "temporary agreement" they had with Yahoo. I'm sure it's not much - a couple of million bucks - but enough to buy a nice latte for all their engineers who are actually working on stuff they can sell.

Steve (Ballmer) - it's time to let go. Here's a list of the 5 stages of grief - you're making good progress! Only two more stages to go:

1. Denial (check)
   
2. Anger (check)
   
3. Barganing (check)
   
4. Depression
5. Acceptance

The depression thing - I know you're probably saving it all up on the inside - after all, Bill's gone into the jungle, Vista sucks, you just pulled the license plug on the only thing people wanted to buy - XP, now this whole Yahoo thing.

Let it out. Buy some Chunky Monkey, grab an Xbox from the guys next door, steal your neighbor kid's copy of Guitar Hero and let it all out.

Then, come Monday morning, you'll finally be able to accept reality: this deal stinks as much as Vista does.

Yahoo Jumps In Bed With Google

Since Yahoo and Microsoft have now officially (at least in public) said their goodbyes, it seems that the bed isn't even cold when Yahoo gets girlfriend 2.0 - Google.

It turns out that just hours after Yahoo announced that negotiations were "over" - they also announced that they had struck a four year non-exclusive deal with Google to display advertising on their site. Apparently, Yahoo has high hopes for the cash that the deal will generate - citing a figure of $250 million to $450 million in operating cash flow during the first 12 months.

Yahoo also gets to control the search terms queries and the pages on which the ads will appear. The deal also allows for Yahoo to continue to sell their own advertising from its own Panama ad platform as well. That's assuming, of course, that Yahoo doesn't get lazy and just relegate the ad serving to third parties as time goes on. We'll have to wait-and-see for the results of that one.

Also of interesting note is the fact that the deal only applies to the U.S. and Canada - leaving the door open for Yahoo to negotiate the same kind of deal with other players in other countries.

Although both Google and Yahoo say that they don't need a Federal regulatory blessing on this unholy union, they've wisely delayed the rollout for three and a half months while the U.S. Department of Justice reviews the arrangement. (Can you say "CYA"?)

Of course this doesn't mean that Yahoo is out of the woods - not by a long shot.

It's stocked tanked about 10% yesterday - but the move may just stop pissed-off-rich-old-guy Carl Icahn from totally replacing the board during their shareholder meeting on August 1st. It was actually a good move by Jerry - making Yahoo even more of an odious takeover target for Microsoft, since Icahn's plan was to appeal to shareholders that he could resurrect the Microsoft takeover deal.

It seems that with their hopes for a yummy payout dashes - some key executives are also jumping ship. Among the latest jumpers are Jeff Weiner, executive vice president of Yahoo’s network division;
Usama Fayyad, chief data officer and EVP of research and strategic data solutions; and veteran developer Jeremy Zawodny who has been with Yahoo since 1999 and helped to spearhead important projects like the Yahoo Developer Network.

This is on top of the earlier resignations/firings of Bradley Horowitz, head of Yahoo’s advanced technology division; Salim Ismail, head of Yahoo Brickhouse; and Jeff Bonforte, VP of social search.

So class, let's sum this up: Yahoo is outsourcing their ads to Google (and probably others); key folks are leaving in droves; Carl Icahn (multi-billionaire - and your largest individual stock holder) is pissed off; you're having your board meeting where your directors could get replaced in 6 weeks; your stocked tanked 10% in a single day; AND you've finally decided that portals don't matter - it's all about search - but two guys in a garage have cleaned your clock... whaddaya' do?

Jerry - it's Miller time! You're gonna' need it...

YHOO Fallout

Well, I hate to say I told you so - but I told you so. In late-morning trading this morning, Yahoo shares shed $4.69, or 16.4 percent, to $23.98, below Friday's close of $28.67. If anyone is doing the math - that means that Yahoo's market value tanked roughly $14 BILLION below the Microsoft offer of even this past Friday.

$14 BILLION. Nice job, Jerry!

I don't know whether or not the shares will completely tank (right away) back to the $19.18 level they were before the Microsoft offer - but it's clear: Jerry has only a little while before Wall Street is going to give him a serious thrashing if things don't improve in a significant way.

On the other hand - if you're not as cynical as me - you would see this as a great time to buy Yahoo (if you believe they can and will turn it around).

Let's see - whose shares went UP this morning... hmmmm... oh, I don't know... maybe Microsoft and Google? Yep. Both up 2% - not spectacular, but still, it's a little bump.

Microsoft shares rose nearly 2 percent, or 57 cents, to $29.81 (as opposed to a 10% drop when they made the bid at $29.24 ). Shares in Google went up nearly 2 percent as well (up $11.15 to $592.44).

Looks like both Steve Ballmer and Sergey Brin can each by a small South Pacific Island today - courtesy of a greedy Jerry Wang. Thanks, Jerry!

Microsoft: Yahoo Can Bite Us!

Well, it looks like Microsoft told Yahoo adieu today - officially pulling its $44 billion off the table. I mean its $49 billion offer off the table.

Yep - ol' Steve Ballmer & Co. added another $5 billion to the pot - and Jerry Yang declined - with his hand outstretched. Seems that Jerry, who obviously doesn't believe a billion is a billion in this day and age - wanted ANOTHER $4 billion.

In a letter from Ballmer to Yang, he states that Microsoft also won't be looking at its option for a hostile takeover, stating that Yahoo! likely "would take steps that would make [it] undesirable as an acquisition."

Really? You think?

So it's over. There will be no Microhoo. Boo hoo (for Yahoo!).

Like I mentioned in a previous post - sit by your computers as the markets open on Monday and sell Yahoo short! That stock is going to tank like no body's business.

While you're there - pick up some Microsoft - their stock is going to go up.

And Jerry - for goodness sake - LAWYER THE HELL UP! Everyone and their dog is going to take a crack at you from your own shareholders, to the DOJ for that "crazy little partnership" with Google, to Microsoft (dunno what yet, but guaranteed - it'll be something).

To Microsoft: I wouldn't have bet you would have walked away from this deal. But, hey, Steve - glad you took a man pill and did. It would have truly been one of the biggest mistakes in the history of the company. And how would that have looked now that Bill has only a couple of months left?

Microsoft + Yahoo: Deal or No Deal?

Today is the deadline for Yahoo to accept the $44.6 billion buy out offer from Microsoft... so I bet they have Howie in the in wings ready to ask that fated question: "Deal? Or no deal?"

It's looking more and more like "No deal." Good old Jerry from Yahoo is determined to open 5 more cases in hopes the Microsoft banker will up the offer.

Well, it looks like the banker will not only not raise the offer - but will take their dollies and go home. "As we said recently to the board, unless there's progress by this weekend, we will reconsider our alternatives," said Chris Liddell, Microsoft's chief financial officer, in a conference call yesterday to discuss the company's financial results.

Hmmm.... that's pretty toned-down from the big bully "proxy fight" words from Steve Ballmer only a couple of weeks ago.

It seems that Microsoft thought that with a pretty big number they could get this deal through quickly. Yahoo's stock price before the offer was in the shitter - and I think Microsoft gambled that the shareholders would apply pressure to Jerry & Company to accept it and move on.

We all know how that turned out. Yahoo has cranked up it's "we're not dead yet" PR machine into an absolute frenzy - announcing new platforms, offering to open up their search engine to developers, announced "great" financial results (well, they were the same as last year - but they made a good investment that gave a one-time payout of $400 million), etc.

On the flip side, Microsoft's stock was hammered when they announced the deal - so if they do decide to walk away - one can only assume that it will be "rewarded" by a bump in their own stock price - and a billion dollars worth of publicity.

But the results for Yahoo if Microsoft walks away will be disastrous - regardless of what their PR says. The company was clearly in decline over the last few years, and now that they have formed an advertising alliance with Google (someone Microsoft hates more than anyone - including open source) - Microsoft could just get plain nasty.

For example, what if Microsoft walks away? They eat a little crow - but their stock goes higher on the news, so other than a few million spent in lawyers, PR and plane fare, they're no worse for ware. But - what if they decided they were a little miffed?

They could just call up their buddies at the antitrust department of the Department of Justice and file a lawsuit against Yahoo and Google to get them to stop their partnership.

Either way - Microsoft comes out smelling like a rose. Not so for Yahoo.

Yahoo can still do a couple of things:

1. Accept Microsoft's offer
2. Continue to work alone - with its "great" offerings
3. Accept a bid from someone else (if anyone was dumb enough to offer one)
4. Continue to work in partnership with Google (and pray they don't get an antitrust lawsuit)
5. Ask Microsoft to extend the bid deadline
   

I'm betting #2. Jerry thinks his company doesn't suck - and I think they will try to remain independent. If that's the case - you better sit by your computer Monday morning and sell Yahoo's stock short - because it's going to tank.

Oh, and if Microsoft does walk away - Jerry better get lawyered up - because not only WILL Microsoft go after the Google deal on antitrust issues - but Yahoo's own shareholders will start suing the hell out him too.

BrowserPlus - Yet Another Thingie

Yahoo released its numbers yesterday which, if you don't count the $401 million they got from a one-time investment, are about the same as last year. Old Jerry is still touting the "we're still relevant" and "we're worth more than that mean old Microsoft says we are" lines... but in the meantime, it also appears as though they've actually been working on some new stuff.

Enter BrowserPlus.

Now, the Yahoo site is a little bit "light" on information - um... as is the rest of the Internet. Apparently there was a rumor a few years ago that a "Google Gears Killer" was in the works - and then it was announced that the project was dropped.

Apparently not.

According to Skylar Woodward, one of the dev team guys,- the BrowserPlus will be (is) a "software and software distribution framework that allows device developers (desktop, mobile, etc.) to seamlessly bridge the browser programming environment (DHTML, JS) to any component they can dream up (VoIP, image manipulation, data caching, etc.)."

Ummm... ok.

Doesn't sound anything like Google Gears to me. Google defines Gears as "an open-source project that enables more powerful Web applications, by adding new features to your Web browser." Oh yeah, and it allows programmers to create stuff that will work in a disconnected way.

BrowswerPlus describes itself: "Yahoo! BrowserPlus™ is software that lets you do more inside your web browser. BrowserPlus makes it easy to install and use web plug ins for a richer experience on the internet."

Ummm... ok. So it's really yet another proprietary plug-in running browser plug-in that will run widgets. Only on Yahoo! sites (for now).

*sigh*

I guess it was a cool idea 3 years ago when they started on it - but does the world really need another widget plug-in thingie from Microsoft Yahoo?

Yahoo Going AwOL?

Yahoo and Time Warner are said to be "closing in" on a deal that would merge Yahoo with AOL.

AOL! Really, I'm not making this up.

The word is that Yahoo would get some cash from Time Warner as well as a 20 percent stake in the combined company (minus the crappy dial-up business - it's worth an estimated $10 billion).

But wait! There's more!

At the same time ol' Jerry is reported to be in talks with... wait for it... Google. Apparently Yahoo finally got the idea that maybe - just maybe - Google was better at handling the search advertising - so they are looking to outsource it to the multi-colored-logo 800 pound gorilla.

But wait! There's still MORE!

The New York Times reported that Microsoft and Rupert Murdoch's News Corp are in negotiations on making a joint bid for Yahoo. That merger would join Yahoo, Microsoft Corp's MSN and News Corp's MySpace, the paper said.

Wow.

Of course talking about doing a deal and doing a deal are two different things - but jeez! So... I guess Jerry Wang really, really, really, REALLY doesn't want to dance with Steve Ballmer!

Yaw Who?

Today Microsoft gave Yahoo an ultimatum with regard to their offer...

Ooooooh.... who couldn't see this one coming a mile away? I mean, it's so atypical for Microsoft... NOT.

When you have a "friendly" suitor that uses this kind of language when they're in "friendly mode" - just imagine what fun it will be when they're pissed off:

Steve Ballmer: "If we have not concluded an agreement within the next three weeks, we will be compelled to take our case directly to your shareholders, including the initiation of a proxy contest to elect an alternative slate of directors for the Yahoo board."

Nice.

Now for the threat (also from Steve Ballmer): "If we are forced to take an offer directly to your shareholders, that action will have an undesirable impact on the value of your company from our perspective, which will be reflected in the terms of our proposal."

Also nice and friendly.

Not to be undone, Jerry Wang, CEO of Yahoo responded in a strongly worded press release:

Jerry Wang: "We regret to say that your letter mischaracterizes the nature of our discussions with you. We have had constructive conversations together regarding a variety of topics, including integration and regulatory issues. Your comment that we have refused to enter into negotiations to conclude an agreement are particularly curious given we have already rejected your initial proposal, nominally $31 per share at the time, for substantially undervaluing Yahoo! and your suggestions in your letter and the media that you are considering lowering the value of your proposal. Moreover, Steve, you personally attended two of these meetings and could have advanced discussions in any way you saw fit."

My take is Jerry saying: "Nuh-uh! It's not fair. But if you give us more money, we will like you."

Ummmm... no disrespect to Mr. Wang - but in general, what Microsoft wants, Microsoft gets. It'll be interesting to see what happens - but my guess is that if a proxy battle doesn't give it to Microsoft, either they will up the offer or just proceed to crush them into a fine powder in the marketplace.

Micro Boo-Hoo

"Well, isn't that special?" was a catch phrase of Dana Carvey's Church Lady character on SNL (about 100 years ago).

I think that would be an appropriate response for Yahoo in the wake of Microsoft's patented if-we-can't-buy-you-we'll-just-rip-your-arms-off approach to acquisitions.

A proxy fight? Really? Wow - no one saw that coming.

It's sort of funny, really. It reminds me of that scene in Monty Python's Holy Grail where there is a guy with a cart of human bodies roaming through the plague-stricken countryside shouting "bring out your dead, bring out your dead." A man comes out with an old man over his shoulder and negotiates a price with the vendor, when the old man says "but I'm not dead, yet." The guy carrying him says to the vendor "ah, but he's nearly dead" while the old man cries "I'm feeling better" as the cart moves down the lane.

Maybe Steve Ballmer saw the movie...

Microhoo!

Yeah, so Microsoft has search engine envy. Google must be going up its ass sideways the way Netscape did with that whole "browser thing" back in the 90's. Not only is Google way younger, it's got 58% as big of a market cap, it gets way better press (mostly), it has a bunch of free online products that - gasp - people use, and most of all - it makes money by serving web pages with ads.

What? No CD's? No tech support? No rushing out consumer boxes and multi-million dollar consumer advertising?

Hmmm.... daddy like.

So - the first thing is - let's build it ourself. We all know how much MSN sucks - so that didn't work out so well.

Plan #2 - who can we buy?

Let's see.... Google? No, that would take all the income Bill Gates makes in 18 months... hmmmm... hmmmm.. hey, I know! Let's buy the other company that was totally blind-sided and pissed off by Google getting all the attention - Yahoo!.

But is that really the reason? Does Microsoft really have "ad envy" on that scale? I don't think so.

I think it's all about SaaS (Software As A Service). Yahoo! is a multi-national company, it's market cap is (only) $40 billion - and they really know how to build and deliver web pages. Plus, they already own Zimbra a spiffy AJAX-y email app - maybe we can just buy it and get into this here "saas" game... before someone else (eg Google) eats our online services lunch like Netscape almost did with the browser.

Spiffy idea, guys!

Meanwhile both Google and Yahoo! are going on the offensive defense. Google has already filed a motion with Federal Regulators noting any objection "...should this deal happen." and the founders of Yahoo! are urging all the nervous (perhaps to be "assimilated") employees that it's all "business as usual."

How will it all shake out? Who knows. The important thing - is that the 800 pound gorilla has been awakened - and it's also betting the future on SaaS.

CH-CH-CH Changes

Editor's NOTE: This is a moldie oldie that I pulled from a text dump archive. None of the links will work anymore (or 99% won't) - but the names and companies have NOT changed.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

Internet stocks (especially Yahoo), have changed - they've gone through the roof!

Apple's profitability has changed - they actually have a profit (at least on paper).

At FileMaker Inc, a few people (some who are close friends) have resgined or been moved to Apple.

The proliferation of FileMaker Plug-Ins continues to grow (Troi's Plug-Ins are AWESOME, and so are the new ones from Waves In Motion).

New browsers are brewing from Netscape and even the people we love to hate, Microsoft.

Why even this very site has gone through some dramatic changes in the past month.

I'm all for change. Change can be great. But change can also suck - BIG TIME. Sometimes change is a good thing (like the internet stocks, Apple's profitability, the changes on this site, and the proliferation of new FMP Plug-Ins). An example of when it sucks - who the hell needs yet ANOTHER browser version that is totally incompatible? And for what? So that each browser developer can force people to choose either their browser or the competition's. Each browser developer is also forcing webmasters to choose to support one browser ("Optimized for IE" or "Optimized for Navigator") over another - while completely ignoring the scores of folks who still use the AOL 3.0 browser (which, itself, is incompatible with EVERYTHING).

The bad news is that you can't control change. The good news is that you control how much these changing events affect you. I use Netscape Navigator 3.0. Yep, that's right, 3.0. Why? It WORKS. It hardly crashes. It supports JavaScript fairly well. It is friendly with 99.9% of all sites. It handles QuickTime 3.0, ShockWave, and RealPlayer flawlessly.

Sure, we have the "latest and greatest" versions of all the browsers on our server (NT 4.0 - who knew?) - but I like what I like, and I like 3.0.

The newer versions CRASH like hell, and give nice, ANNOYING "features" that no one in their right mind needs. I mean, come on, how many sites use DTML? When was the last time you just HAD to go to the latest VRML site? Unless you're in a corporate setting with LOTS of co-horts in far-flung places - do you REALLY need "whiteboard" capabilities in a BROWSER? I'm not a big fan of the Windows 95 User interface - but are you telling me you think it's a GOOD idea to have people use a BROWSER for the interface on a desktop computer?

Nah... all this stuff is pure B.S. It's designed to force you, the weary daily surfer to choose one browser over another. Why? Money. Once they give you the "free fix", they're betting that you'll "protect your investment" in browsers by PAYING for an upgrade down the road. As for me, personally, I'll keep using NN 3.0 until I can't browse my favorite sites anymore. At that point, I'll switch to my cell phone which will browse in TEXT ONLY mode...