Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Google and Facebook Sued for Mobile Patent Infringement

Winksite mobile social network company claims that the company owns the intellectual property for enabling users to join social networks from their mobile phones through a patent awarded in October 2009.Winksite claims Google and Facebook had to have known about the patent, the patent application approved in 2004. However,Facebook has a patent for its news feed technology, and Google for location-based, but that doesn’t make the two companies immune to other patent challengers. Google and Facebook are being sued by Winksite over mobile social networking technology.Plaintiff believes that both the social networking and search giant were aware of the patent and they are legally responsible for damages.Winksite is seeking cash damages and an injunction against use of the technology.Both Google and Facebook said they are reviewing the complaint. I think Winksite is looking to get rich, and the company knows Google and Facebook have a lot of money. However, it is not easy to prove that these two giant corporations made this kind of mistake( patent infringement).


http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-10/google-facebook-sued-over-patent-for-phone-social-networking.html"><>>

Saturday, June 5, 2010

Does the Internet Make You Smarter?



Digital media have made creating and disseminating text, sound, and images cheap, easy and global. We are living through a similar explosion of publishing capability today, where digital media link over a billion people into the same network.We actually spent a lot more time watching "Diff'rent Strokes" than reading Proust, prior to the Internet.We are now witnessing the rapid stress of older institutions accompanied by the slow and fitful development of cultural alternatives. Just as required education was a response to print, using the Internet well will require new cultural institutions as well, not just new technologies.There is no easy way to get through a media revolution of this magnitude; the task before us now is to experiment with new ways of using a medium that is social, ubiquitous and cheap, a medium that changes the landscape by distributing freedom of the press and freedom of assembly as widely as freedom of speech.I agree that the internet is a tool and resource for finding information.


> '>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704025304575284973472694334.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEADNewsCollection">>

Friday, May 28, 2010

Togetherville Social Network for Kids

Many parents concern about how their kids behave with each other online, and if they are interacting with strangers. Togetherville is a safe website for kids between 6- 10 years old. Kids can communicate online with other kids, using canned responses and parental participation. Togetherville restricts certain online activities, but the website does not make a child feel too restrained. For example, there aren't any places on the site where a child can enter free-form text. Instead, kids choose from several pre-set quips, including sayings that they or other kids submitted for approval. The quips can range from questions kids ask one another ("Who saw 'Avatar'?") to "I (heart) my family." And rather than directly sending friend requests to other kids, children first send a request to their parents, who give their consent and send the invitation to make the connection.I like this social network for my son because it is safe and the website has pre-set quips.

One drawback for this social network is; if an adult is not Facebook friends with another child's parent, the two children can't become friends on Togetherville.com. This is a big drawback for this website because I do not have Facebook account, and I do not have any plan to open one which means my son has to wait until Togetherville change their policy.

http://online.wsj.com/video/rex-on-techs-bragging-rights-among-rivals/5C787F7A-2BE0-4E7F-8C4A-673838C6F3B6.html?mod=WSJ_Tech_videomodule_5

Monday, May 24, 2010

Dalai Lama Tweets

Dalai Lama the spiritual leader has joined the social networking site such as Twitter after he met the founder of the Twitter. He does not use the Twitter for personal messages, but he uses it to post information from his official website. It is amazing that he has 140,000 followers just after two weeks of joining the social networking site. This called POWER.

However, last Friday he used the Twitter to have a direct conversation with people of China, and he also answered some question regarding to the fate of Tibet. In his messages, he criticized the Chinese Policy toward Tibet; and he welcomed the people of China to visit Tibet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/world/asia/22briefs-CHINA.html?ref=internet

Thursday, May 20, 2010

More Countries Question Google on Privacy

Representatives in Spain, France and the Czech Republic announced investigation on Google’s collection of data from wireless networks in their countries. They said Google violated local privacy laws, and they began to gather evidence against Google. United Kingdom and Ireland did not investigate about this issue, but the British Information Commissioner’s office asked Google to destroy the data collected in their country.

Google admitted it had unintentionally collected 600 gigabytes of data described as snippets of Web sites and e-mail messages from unsecured Wi-Fi networks around the world. The company said it was wrong to collect and store information form Wi-Fi networks while gathering data for the Street View layer of images in Google Maps.
I do not understand why google collect 600 gigabytes of data from many countries around the world.

www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/technology/21streetview.html?hpw

Sunday, May 16, 2010

New York Times Ready to Charge Online Readers

New York Times Chairman Arthur Sulzberger Jr. appears close to announcing that the paper will begin charging for access to its website, according to people familiar with internal deliberations. After a year of sometimes fraught debate inside the paper, the choice for some time has been between a Wall Street Journal-type pay wall and the metered system adopted by the Financial Times, in which readers can sample a certain number of free articles before being asked to subscribe. The Times seems to have settled on the metered system.

One personal friend of Sulzberger said a final decision could come within days, and a senior newsroom source agreed, adding that the plan could be announced in a matter of weeks. (Apple's tablet computer is rumored to launch on January 27, and sources speculate that Sulzberger will strike a content partnership for the new device, which could dovetail with the paid strategy.) It will likely be months before the Times actually begins to charge for content, perhaps sometime this spring. Executive Editor Bill Keller declined to comment. Times spokesperson Diane McNulty said: "We'll announce a decision when we believe that we have crafted the best possible business approach. No details till then."

The Times has considered three types of pay strategies. One option was a more traditional pay wall along the lines of The Wall Street Journal, in which some parts of the site are free and some subscription-only. For example, editors and business-side executives discussed a premium version of Andrew Ross Sorkin's DealBook section. Another option was the metered system. The third choice, an NPR-style membership model, was abandoned last fall, two sources explained. The thinking was that it would be too expensive and cumbersome to maintain because subscribers would have to receive privileges (think WNYC tote bags and travel mugs, access to Times events and seminars).

The Times has also decided against partnering with Journalism Online, the start-up run by Steve Brill and former Journal publisher L. Gordon Crovitz. It has rejected entreaties by News Corp. chief digital officer Jon Miller, who is leading Rupert Murdoch’s efforts to get rival publishers onboard to demand more favorable terms from Google and other web aggregators. This fall, Miller met with Times digital chief Martin Nisenholtz, but nothing came of the talks.

The decision to go paid is monumental for the Times, and culminates a yearlong debate that grew contentious, people close to the talks say. In favor of a paid model were Keller and managing editor Jill Abramson. Nisenholtz and former deputy managing editor Jon Landman, who was until recently in charge of nytimes.com, advocated for a free site.

The argument for remaining free was based on the belief that nytimes.com is growing into an English-language global newspaper of record, with a vast audience — 20 million unique readers — that, Nisenholtz and others believed, would prove lucrative as web advertising matured. (The nytimes.com homepage, for example, has sold out on numerous occasions in the past year.) As other papers failed to survive the massive migration to the web, the Times would be the last man standing and emerge with even more readers. Going paid would capture more circulation revenue, but risk losing significant traffic and with it ad dollars. At an investor conference this fall, Nisenholtz alluded to this tension: "At the end of the day, if we don't get this right, a lot of money falls out of the system."

But with the painful declines in advertising brought on by last year's financial crisis, the argument pushed by Keller and others — that online advertising might never grow big enough to sustain the paper's high-cost, ambitious journalism — gained more weight. The view was that the Times needed to make the leap to some form of paid content and it needed to do it now. The trick would be to build a source of real revenue through online subscriptions while still being able to sell significant online advertising. The appeal of the metered model is that it charges high-volume readers while allowing casual browsers to sample articles for free, thus preserving some of the Times' online reach.

Landman disputes the notion of competing factions. "The idea of two camps is just wrong. There's many shades to this,” he told me. Inside the newsroom, the protracted talks have frustrated staffers who want clarity on where the paper is headed. “It’s a real problem,” one staffer explained. “It’s embarrassing and reflects badly on the Times that they can’t make a decision. They’re fighting among themselves.”

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/01/new_york_times_set_to_mimic_ws.html

Thursday, May 13, 2010

What is Social Marketing?

Social marketing is similar to commercial marketing; the main focus is the consumer’s want and need rather than only selling their products. The planning process takes this consumer focus into account by addressing the elements of the marketing mix. Consumers make decisions based on product, price, placement and promotion.

Product

The social marketing "product" is not necessarily a physical offering. A continuum of products exists, ranging from tangible, physical products (e.g., condoms), to services (e.g., medical exams), practices (e.g., breastfeeding, ORT or eating a heart-healthy diet) and finally, more intangible ideas (e.g., environmental protection). In order to have a viable product, people must first perceive that they have a genuine problem, and that the product offering is a good solution for that problem. The role of research here is to discover the consumers' perceptions of the problem and the product, and to determine how important they feel it is to take action against the problem.

Price

"Price" refers to what the consumer must do in order to obtain the social marketing product. This cost may be monetary, or it may instead require the consumer to give up intangibles, such as time or effort, or to risk embarrassment and disapproval. If the costs outweigh the benefits for an individual, the perceived value of the offering will be low and it will be unlikely to be adopted. However, if the benefits are perceived as greater than their costs, chances of trial and adoption of the product is much greater.

In setting the price, particularly for a physical product, such as contraceptives, there are many issues to consider. If the product is priced too low, or provided free of charge, the consumer may perceive it as being low in quality. On the other hand, if the price is too high, some will not be able to afford it. Social marketers must balance these considerations, and often end up charging at least a nominal fee to increase perceptions of quality and to confer a sense of "dignity" to the transaction. These perceptions of costs and benefits can be determined through research, and used in positioning the product.

Place

"Place" describes the way that the product reaches the consumer. For a tangible product, this refers to the distribution system--including the warehouse, trucks, sales force, retail outlets where it is sold, or places where it is given out for free. For an intangible product, place is less clear-cut, but refers to decisions about the channels through which consumers are reached with information or training. This may include doctors' offices, shopping malls, mass media vehicles or in-home demonstrations. Another element of place is deciding how to ensure accessibility of the offering and quality of the service delivery. By determining the activities and habits of the target audience, as well as their experience and satisfaction with the existing delivery system, researchers can pinpoint the most ideal means of distribution for the offering.


Promotion

Finally, the last "P" is promotion. Because of its visibility, this element is often mistakenly thought of as comprising the whole of social marketing. However, as can be seen by the previous discussion, it is only one piece. Promotion consists of the integrated use of advertising, public relations, promotions, media advocacy, personal selling and entertainment vehicles. The focus is on creating and sustaining demand for the product. Public service announcements or paid ads are one way, but there are other methods such as coupons, media events, editorials, "Tupperware"-style parties or in-store displays. Research is crucial to determine the most effective and efficient vehicles to reach the target audience and increase demand. The primary research findings themselves can also be used to gain publicity for the program at media events and in news stories.


http://www.social-marketing.com/whatis.html