(Reuters) - The Asian firm trying to stop Apple Inc from using the iPad name has now launched an attack on the consumer electronics giant's home turf, filing a lawsuit in California that accuses the iPhone-maker of employing deception when it bought the "iPad" trademark.
Proview International Holdings Ltd <0334.HK>, a major computer monitor maker that fell on hard times during the economic crisis, is already suing the U.S. company in multiple Chinese jurisdictions and requesting that sales of iPads be suspended across the country.
Last week, it filed a lawsuit in Santa Clara County that brings their legal dispute to Silicon Valley as well. Proview accuses Apple of creating a "special purpose" entity - IP Application Development Ltd, or IPAD - to buy the iPad name from it, concealing Apple's role in the matter.
In its filing, Proview outlined how lawyers for IPAD repeatedly said it would not be competing with the Chinese firm, and refused to say why they needed the trademark.
Those representations were made "with the intent to defraud and induce the plaintiffs to enter into the agreement," Proview said in the filing dated February 17, requesting an unspecified amount of damages.
Apple, which has said Proview is refusing to honor a years-old agreement, did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday.
The battle between a little-known Asian company and the world's most valuable technology corporation dates back to a disagreement over precisely what was covered in a deal for the transfer of the iPad trademark to Apple in 2009.
Authorities in several Chinese cities have already seized iPads, citing the legal dispute.
Proview, which maintains it holds the iPad trademark in China, has been suing Apple in various jurisdictions in the country for trademark infringement, while also using the courts to get retailers in some smaller cities to stop selling the tablet PCs.
China is becoming an increasingly pivotal market for Apple, which sold more than 15 million iPads worldwide in the last quarter alone and is trying to expand its business in the world's No. 2 economy to sustain its rip-roaring pace of growth.
The country is also where the majority of its iPhones and iPads are now assembled, in partnership with Foxconn.
A Shanghai court this week threw out Proview's request to halt iPad sales in the city, averting an embarrassing suspension at its own flagship stores. But the outcome of the broader dispute hinges on a hearing of the higher court in Guangdong, which earlier ruled in Proview's favor.
The next hearing in that case is set for February 29.
(Reporting By Edwin Chan; Editing by Gary Hill)
Source:
http://goo.gl/AX4mr
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Apple's China legal battle over iPad spreads to U.S
REUTERS - The Asian firm trying to stop Apple Inc from using the iPad name in China has launched an attack on the consumer electronics giant's home turf, filing a lawsuit in California that accuses the iPhone-maker of employing deception when it bought the "iPad" trademark.
A unit of Proview International Holdings Ltd, a major computer monitor maker that fell on hard times during the economic crisis, is already suing the U.S. company in multiple Chinese jurisdictions and requesting that sales of iPads be suspended across the country.
Last week, units Proview Electronics Co Ltd and Proview Technology Co filed a lawsuit in Santa Clara County that brings their legal dispute to Silicon Valley.
Proview accuses Apple of creating a "special purpose" entity - IP Application Development Ltd, or IPAD - to buy the iPad name from it, concealing Apple's role in the matter.
In its filing, Proview alleged lawyers for IPAD repeatedly said it would not be competing with the Chinese firm, and refused to say why they needed the trademark.
Those representations were made "with the intent to defraud and induce the plaintiffs to enter into the agreement," Proview said in the filing dated February 17, requesting an unspecified amount of damages.
Apple, which has said Proview is refusing to honor a years-old agreement, did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday.
The battle between a little-known Asian company and the world's most valuable technology corporation dates back to a disagreement over precisely what was covered in a deal for the transfer of the iPad trademark to Apple in 2009.
Authorities in several Chinese cities have already seized iPads, citing the legal dispute.
Proview, which maintains it holds the iPad trademark in China, has been suing Apple in various jurisdictions in the country for trademark infringement, while also using the courts to get retailers in some smaller cities to stop selling the tablet PCs.
China is becoming an increasingly pivotal market for Apple, which sold more than 15 million iPads worldwide in the last quarter alone and is trying to expand its business in the world's No. 2 economy to sustain its rip-roaring pace of growth.
The country is also where the majority of its iPhones and iPads are now assembled, in partnership with Foxconn.
A Shanghai court this week threw out Proview's request to halt iPad sales in the city. But the outcome of the broader dispute hinges on a higher court in Guangdong, which earlier ruled in Proview's favor.
The next hearing in that case is set for February 29.
China's trademark system is a minefield of murky rules and opportunistic "trademark squatters" that even the world's biggest companies and their highly-paid lawyers find hard to navigate.
Legal experts say the onus is on companies looking to do business in China to understand how China's trademark law works, as it differs greatly from that of the United States.
Industry executives have said employing special-purpose entities to acquire trademarks is a frequent tactic in China.
(Reporting By Edwin Chan; Editing by Michael Urquhart)
Source:
http://goo.gl/HzBlN
A unit of Proview International Holdings Ltd, a major computer monitor maker that fell on hard times during the economic crisis, is already suing the U.S. company in multiple Chinese jurisdictions and requesting that sales of iPads be suspended across the country.
Last week, units Proview Electronics Co Ltd and Proview Technology Co filed a lawsuit in Santa Clara County that brings their legal dispute to Silicon Valley.
Proview accuses Apple of creating a "special purpose" entity - IP Application Development Ltd, or IPAD - to buy the iPad name from it, concealing Apple's role in the matter.
In its filing, Proview alleged lawyers for IPAD repeatedly said it would not be competing with the Chinese firm, and refused to say why they needed the trademark.
Those representations were made "with the intent to defraud and induce the plaintiffs to enter into the agreement," Proview said in the filing dated February 17, requesting an unspecified amount of damages.
Apple, which has said Proview is refusing to honor a years-old agreement, did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday.
The battle between a little-known Asian company and the world's most valuable technology corporation dates back to a disagreement over precisely what was covered in a deal for the transfer of the iPad trademark to Apple in 2009.
Authorities in several Chinese cities have already seized iPads, citing the legal dispute.
Proview, which maintains it holds the iPad trademark in China, has been suing Apple in various jurisdictions in the country for trademark infringement, while also using the courts to get retailers in some smaller cities to stop selling the tablet PCs.
China is becoming an increasingly pivotal market for Apple, which sold more than 15 million iPads worldwide in the last quarter alone and is trying to expand its business in the world's No. 2 economy to sustain its rip-roaring pace of growth.
The country is also where the majority of its iPhones and iPads are now assembled, in partnership with Foxconn.
A Shanghai court this week threw out Proview's request to halt iPad sales in the city. But the outcome of the broader dispute hinges on a higher court in Guangdong, which earlier ruled in Proview's favor.
The next hearing in that case is set for February 29.
China's trademark system is a minefield of murky rules and opportunistic "trademark squatters" that even the world's biggest companies and their highly-paid lawyers find hard to navigate.
Legal experts say the onus is on companies looking to do business in China to understand how China's trademark law works, as it differs greatly from that of the United States.
Industry executives have said employing special-purpose entities to acquire trademarks is a frequent tactic in China.
(Reporting By Edwin Chan; Editing by Michael Urquhart)
Source:
http://goo.gl/HzBlN
Samsung says sales of Galaxy S II phones top 20 mln
SEOUL (Reuters) - Samsung Electronics Co Ltd<005930.KS>, which emerged as the world's top smartphone maker last year, said on Thursday that sales of its flagship Galaxy S II topped 20 million handsets since its launch in April last year.
Sales of predecessor Galaxy S, introduced in 2010 and at the heart of bruising global patent disputes with arch-rival Apple Inc , exceeded 22 million, the company said in a statement.
Apple sold 93 million iPhones last year, nearly doubling sales from a year earlier, while Samsung raised smartphone sales nearly fourfold to 95 million, according to research firm IHS iSuppli.
(Reporting by Miyoung Kim; Editing by Chris Lewis)
Source:
http://goo.gl/bz7SJ
Sales of predecessor Galaxy S, introduced in 2010 and at the heart of bruising global patent disputes with arch-rival Apple Inc , exceeded 22 million, the company said in a statement.
Apple sold 93 million iPhones last year, nearly doubling sales from a year earlier, while Samsung raised smartphone sales nearly fourfold to 95 million, according to research firm IHS iSuppli.
(Reporting by Miyoung Kim; Editing by Chris Lewis)
Source:
http://goo.gl/bz7SJ
Facebook's photo guidelines say no to nipples but give nod to gore
London, Feb 23 (ANI): A leaked document has revealed Facebook's secret rule book which includes blocking mild nudity but allowing images of death and disfigurement, as well as racially charged comments.
According to the document, "naked private parts including female nipple bulges and naked butt cracks" are banned, but "male nipples are OK".
The guide also revealed that cartoon nudity is also a no no. Any "obvious" sexual activity understandably can't be uploaded but pictures of "foreplay like kissing and groping are allowed".
"Crushed heads, limbs, etc, are OK as long as no insides are showing," the Sun quoted the guide as saying.
"Deep flesh wounds and excessive blood OK to show," it said,
Facebook, which was created by entrepreneur Mark Zuckerberg and is now worth an estimated 65 billion pounds, is less relaxed about drunken antics.
The document outlaws "images of drunk and unconscious people or sleeping people with things drawn on their faces".
Pixilated nudity and "mothers breast feeding without clothes on" are also banned. This caused uproar from a host of aggrieved "lactivists" who are already angry with the social networking site.
Fed-up mums protested outside the firm's offices around the world recently when the site removed snaps of them breast feeding.
Users can also post images of cannabis on their account so long as they are not selling it.
Other pictures to face the cull include genital areas, described as "blatant depiction of camel toes and moose knuckles", "any photoshopped images of people, whether negative, positive or neutral" and maps of Kurdistan, which is a part of Turkey.
As well as ear wax, other bodily fluids prohibited by Facebook include urine, vomit and pus. However, photos of "snot" are allowed.
The website's 845 million users were previously in the dark over picture regulation. But Facebook's vetting system has been made public after a disgruntled ex-employee leaked the company's Abuse Standards Violations (ASV) document.
The manual was used by outsourcing firm oDesk, whose workers trawl through photos on Facebook then delete them if they go against the ASV.
It is not the first time that Facebook's guidelines have caused controversy.
Last year the site deleted a drawing of a naked woman by art student Steven Assael. This caused a furore in the art world.
Last April the site removed an image of a gay kiss screened on BBC1 soap EastEnders. This prompted accusations of homophobia. (ANI)
Source:
http://goo.gl/8V7ij
According to the document, "naked private parts including female nipple bulges and naked butt cracks" are banned, but "male nipples are OK".
The guide also revealed that cartoon nudity is also a no no. Any "obvious" sexual activity understandably can't be uploaded but pictures of "foreplay like kissing and groping are allowed".
"Crushed heads, limbs, etc, are OK as long as no insides are showing," the Sun quoted the guide as saying.
"Deep flesh wounds and excessive blood OK to show," it said,
Facebook, which was created by entrepreneur Mark Zuckerberg and is now worth an estimated 65 billion pounds, is less relaxed about drunken antics.
The document outlaws "images of drunk and unconscious people or sleeping people with things drawn on their faces".
Pixilated nudity and "mothers breast feeding without clothes on" are also banned. This caused uproar from a host of aggrieved "lactivists" who are already angry with the social networking site.
Fed-up mums protested outside the firm's offices around the world recently when the site removed snaps of them breast feeding.
Users can also post images of cannabis on their account so long as they are not selling it.
Other pictures to face the cull include genital areas, described as "blatant depiction of camel toes and moose knuckles", "any photoshopped images of people, whether negative, positive or neutral" and maps of Kurdistan, which is a part of Turkey.
As well as ear wax, other bodily fluids prohibited by Facebook include urine, vomit and pus. However, photos of "snot" are allowed.
The website's 845 million users were previously in the dark over picture regulation. But Facebook's vetting system has been made public after a disgruntled ex-employee leaked the company's Abuse Standards Violations (ASV) document.
The manual was used by outsourcing firm oDesk, whose workers trawl through photos on Facebook then delete them if they go against the ASV.
It is not the first time that Facebook's guidelines have caused controversy.
Last year the site deleted a drawing of a naked woman by art student Steven Assael. This caused a furore in the art world.
Last April the site removed an image of a gay kiss screened on BBC1 soap EastEnders. This prompted accusations of homophobia. (ANI)
Source:
http://goo.gl/8V7ij
Google's digital glasses to be revealed soon
London, Feb 23(ANI): Google digital glasses, which use augmented reality technology and Android technology, will be out in the market soon.
The glasses reportedly incorporate augmented reality technology into a new Robocop - style vision of the future, superimposing the screen of the glasses with additional contextual information.
Google's glasses are reportedly similar in appearance to the Oakley Thump design, The Telegraph reports.
Even though Google has itself determinedly refused to give any oxygen to rumors of the project, the New York Times reports that the glasses will use the same operating system as Google's mobile phone, and cost about the same as a top smart phone too.
A digital camera and Internet connectivity is combined with location data, so if you point your phone at Big Ben, because the device knows where you are it's comparatively simple to add information to the image on screen.
And while the obvious uses are for, say, historical information, there's space for advertisers and social services to tell you where to, say, meet up with friends for a drink. (ANI)
Source:
http://goo.gl/dpnzQ
The glasses reportedly incorporate augmented reality technology into a new Robocop - style vision of the future, superimposing the screen of the glasses with additional contextual information.
Google's glasses are reportedly similar in appearance to the Oakley Thump design, The Telegraph reports.
Even though Google has itself determinedly refused to give any oxygen to rumors of the project, the New York Times reports that the glasses will use the same operating system as Google's mobile phone, and cost about the same as a top smart phone too.
A digital camera and Internet connectivity is combined with location data, so if you point your phone at Big Ben, because the device knows where you are it's comparatively simple to add information to the image on screen.
And while the obvious uses are for, say, historical information, there's space for advertisers and social services to tell you where to, say, meet up with friends for a drink. (ANI)
Source:
http://goo.gl/dpnzQ
Apple, Google, Amazon, smart phone makers sign privacy accord
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Six of the world's top consumer technology firms have agreed to provide greater privacy disclosures before users download applications in order to protect the personal data of millions of consumers, California's attorney general said on Wednesday.
The agreement binds Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Research In Motion, and Hewlett-Packard -- and developers on their platforms -- to disclose how they use private data before an app may be downloaded, Attorney General Kamala D. Harris said.
"Your personal privacy should not be the cost of using mobile apps, but all too often it is," said Harris.
Currently 22 of the 30 most downloaded apps do not have privacy notices, said Harris. Some downloaded apps also download a consumer's contact book.
Google said in a statement that under the California agreement, Android users will have "even more ways to make informed decisions when it comes to their privacy".
Apple confirmed the agreement but did not elaborate.
Harris was also among U.S. state lawmakers who on Wednesday signed a letter to Google CEO Larry Page to express "serious concerns" over the web giant's recent decision to consolidate its privacy policy.
The policy change would give Google access to user information across its products, such as GMail and Google Plus, without the proper ability for consumers to opt out, said the 36 U.S. attorneys general in their letter.
EU authorities have asked Google to halt the policy change until regulators can investigate the matter.
CAN AND WILL SUE
California's 2004 Online Privacy Protection Act requires privacy disclosures, but Harris said few mobile developers had paid attention to the law in recent years because of confusion over whether it applied to mobile apps.
"Most mobile apps make no effort to inform users about how personal information is used," Harris said at a press conference in San Francisco. "The consumer should be informed of what they are giving up".
The six companies will meet the attorney general in six months to assess compliance among their developers. But Harris acknowledged "there is no clear timeline" to begin enforcement.
The attorney general repeatedly raised the possibility of litigation at some future time under California's unfair competition and false advertising laws if developers continue to publish apps without privacy notices.
"We can sue and we will sue," she said, adding that she hoped the industry would act "in good faith."
There are nearly 600,000 applications for sale in the Apple App Store and 400,000 for sale in Google's Android Market, and consumers have downloaded more than 35 billion, said Harris.
There are also more than 50,000 individual developers who have created the mobile apps currently available for download on the leading platforms, she said.
These figures are expected to grow. She said an estimated 98 billion mobile applications will be downloaded by 2015, and the $6.8 billion market for mobile applications is expected to grow to $25 billion within four years.
(Reporting By Gerry Shih; Editing by Carol Bishopric and Michael Perry)
Source:
http://goo.gl/JIJqI
The agreement binds Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Research In Motion, and Hewlett-Packard -- and developers on their platforms -- to disclose how they use private data before an app may be downloaded, Attorney General Kamala D. Harris said.
"Your personal privacy should not be the cost of using mobile apps, but all too often it is," said Harris.
Currently 22 of the 30 most downloaded apps do not have privacy notices, said Harris. Some downloaded apps also download a consumer's contact book.
Google said in a statement that under the California agreement, Android users will have "even more ways to make informed decisions when it comes to their privacy".
Apple confirmed the agreement but did not elaborate.
Harris was also among U.S. state lawmakers who on Wednesday signed a letter to Google CEO Larry Page to express "serious concerns" over the web giant's recent decision to consolidate its privacy policy.
The policy change would give Google access to user information across its products, such as GMail and Google Plus, without the proper ability for consumers to opt out, said the 36 U.S. attorneys general in their letter.
EU authorities have asked Google to halt the policy change until regulators can investigate the matter.
CAN AND WILL SUE
California's 2004 Online Privacy Protection Act requires privacy disclosures, but Harris said few mobile developers had paid attention to the law in recent years because of confusion over whether it applied to mobile apps.
"Most mobile apps make no effort to inform users about how personal information is used," Harris said at a press conference in San Francisco. "The consumer should be informed of what they are giving up".
The six companies will meet the attorney general in six months to assess compliance among their developers. But Harris acknowledged "there is no clear timeline" to begin enforcement.
The attorney general repeatedly raised the possibility of litigation at some future time under California's unfair competition and false advertising laws if developers continue to publish apps without privacy notices.
"We can sue and we will sue," she said, adding that she hoped the industry would act "in good faith."
There are nearly 600,000 applications for sale in the Apple App Store and 400,000 for sale in Google's Android Market, and consumers have downloaded more than 35 billion, said Harris.
There are also more than 50,000 individual developers who have created the mobile apps currently available for download on the leading platforms, she said.
These figures are expected to grow. She said an estimated 98 billion mobile applications will be downloaded by 2015, and the $6.8 billion market for mobile applications is expected to grow to $25 billion within four years.
(Reporting By Gerry Shih; Editing by Carol Bishopric and Michael Perry)
Source:
http://goo.gl/JIJqI
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Web users make first impressions of website in less than a second
Washington, Feb 19 (ANI): It takes web users less than two-tenths of a second to form a first impression on a website, according to a recent eye-tracking research.
But, according to the research conducted at Missouri University of Science and Technology, it takes a little longer - about 2.6 seconds - for a user's eyes to land on that area of a website that most influences their first impression.
The finding could help web designers understand which elements of a website's design are most important for users.
"We know first impressions are very important. As more people use the Internet to search for information, a user's first impressions of a website can determine whether that user forms a favorable or unfavorable view of that organization," said Dr. Hong Sheng, assistant professor of business and information technology at Missouri S 'n' T.
For their research, Sheng and Sirjana Dahal, who received her graduate degree from Missouri S 'n' T last December, enlisted 20 students to view screenshots, or static images, of the main websites from 25 law schools in the U.S.
Using eye-tracking software and an infrared camera in Missouri S 'n' T's Laboratory for Information Technology Evaluation, the researchers monitored students' eye movements as they scanned the web pages.
The researchers then analyses the eye-tracking data to determine how long it took for the students to focus on specific sections of a page - such as the menu, logo, images and social media icons - before they moved on to another section.
Sheng and Dahal found that their subjects spent about 2.6 seconds scanning a website before focusing on a particular section. They spent an average of 180 milliseconds focusing, or "fixating," on one particular section before moving on.
After each viewing of a website, Sheng and Dahal asked students to rate sites based on aesthetics, visual appeal and other design factors.
"The longer the participants stayed on the page, the more favorable their impressions were. First impressions are important for keeping people on pages," Sheng stated.
The subjects considered sixteen of the 25 websites reviewed in the study favorable, according to Sheng.
Through this research, Sheng and Dahal found that seven sections of the reviewed websites attracted the most interest from users. The participants spent an average of 20 seconds on each website.
These include - the institution's logo, the main navigation menu, the search box, Social networking links to sites such as Facebook and Twitter, the site's main image, the site's written content, and the bottom of a website.
Although use of colour was not part of the eye-tracking study, participants indicated that it did influence their impressions of websites.
"Participants recommended the main colour and background colour be pleasant and attractive, and the contrast of the text colour should be such that it is easier to read," Dahal wrote in her master's thesis.
The use of images was also an important factor in web design, the subjects of the study said. "You must choose your main picture very carefully," Sheng said adding that, "An inappropriate image can lead to an unfavorable response from viewers." (ANI)
Source:
http://goo.gl/S8gpM
But, according to the research conducted at Missouri University of Science and Technology, it takes a little longer - about 2.6 seconds - for a user's eyes to land on that area of a website that most influences their first impression.
The finding could help web designers understand which elements of a website's design are most important for users.
"We know first impressions are very important. As more people use the Internet to search for information, a user's first impressions of a website can determine whether that user forms a favorable or unfavorable view of that organization," said Dr. Hong Sheng, assistant professor of business and information technology at Missouri S 'n' T.
For their research, Sheng and Sirjana Dahal, who received her graduate degree from Missouri S 'n' T last December, enlisted 20 students to view screenshots, or static images, of the main websites from 25 law schools in the U.S.
Using eye-tracking software and an infrared camera in Missouri S 'n' T's Laboratory for Information Technology Evaluation, the researchers monitored students' eye movements as they scanned the web pages.
The researchers then analyses the eye-tracking data to determine how long it took for the students to focus on specific sections of a page - such as the menu, logo, images and social media icons - before they moved on to another section.
Sheng and Dahal found that their subjects spent about 2.6 seconds scanning a website before focusing on a particular section. They spent an average of 180 milliseconds focusing, or "fixating," on one particular section before moving on.
After each viewing of a website, Sheng and Dahal asked students to rate sites based on aesthetics, visual appeal and other design factors.
"The longer the participants stayed on the page, the more favorable their impressions were. First impressions are important for keeping people on pages," Sheng stated.
The subjects considered sixteen of the 25 websites reviewed in the study favorable, according to Sheng.
Through this research, Sheng and Dahal found that seven sections of the reviewed websites attracted the most interest from users. The participants spent an average of 20 seconds on each website.
These include - the institution's logo, the main navigation menu, the search box, Social networking links to sites such as Facebook and Twitter, the site's main image, the site's written content, and the bottom of a website.
Although use of colour was not part of the eye-tracking study, participants indicated that it did influence their impressions of websites.
"Participants recommended the main colour and background colour be pleasant and attractive, and the contrast of the text colour should be such that it is easier to read," Dahal wrote in her master's thesis.
The use of images was also an important factor in web design, the subjects of the study said. "You must choose your main picture very carefully," Sheng said adding that, "An inappropriate image can lead to an unfavorable response from viewers." (ANI)
Source:
http://goo.gl/S8gpM
Q and A - The complex interplay of social media and privacy
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Living in the world of social networking and mobile smartphones means trading away some of your personal information.
But assessing the price of admission to join the super-networked, digital class is not so simple; even experts on the issue admit that they don't have a full picture of the way personal information is collected and used on the Internet. But here are some basic guidelines to keep in mind.
Q. What information do you have to give up to participate in social media?
A. Social networks such as Facebook and Google+ require at a minimum that you provide them with your name, gender and date of birth. Many people provide additional profile information, and the act of using the services - writing comments or uploading photos or "friending" people - creates additional information about you. Most of that information can be kept hidden from the public if you choose, though the companies themselves have access to it.
If you use your Facebook credentials to log-on to other Web sites, or if you use Facebook apps, you might be granting access to parts of your profile that would otherwise be hidden. Quora, for example, a popular online Q&A site, requires that Facebook users provide it access to their photos, their "Likes" and information that their friends share with them. TripAdvisor, by contrast, requires only access to "basic information" including gender and lists of friends.
Social media apps on smartphones, which have access to personal phone call information and physical location, put even more information at play.
On Apple Inc's iPhone, apps must get user permission to access GPS location coordinates, a procedure that will now be applied to address book access as well after companies including Twitter were found to be downloading iPhone address book information. Beyond those two types of data, Apple locks away personal data stored in other applications, such as notepad and calendar apps, according to Michael Sutton, the vice president of security research at email security service ZScaler.
Google Inc's Android smartphone operating system allows third-party apps to tap into a bonanza of personal data, though only if they get permission. In order to download an app from the Android Market, users must click 'OK' on a pop-up list that catalogues the specific types of information that each particular app has access to.
With both mobile and Facebook apps, often the choice is to provide access to a personal information or not use the app at all.
Q. Should I worry about how my information is being used?
A. Personal information is the basic currency of an Internet economy built around marketing and advertising. Hundreds of companies collect personal information about Web users, slice it up, combine it with other information, and then resell it.
Facebook doesn't provide personal information to outside marketers, but other websites, including sites that access Facebook profile data, may have different policies. Last year, a study by Stanford University graduate student found that profile information on an online dating site, including ethnicity, income and drug use frequency, was somehow being tramsitted to a third-party data firm.
The data that third-parties collect is used mainly by advertisers, but there are concerns that these profiles could be used by insurance companies or banks to help them make decisions about who to do business with.
Q. Are there any restrictions on what information companies can collect from Internet users or what they can do with it?
A. In the United States, the federal law requires websites that know they are being visited by children under 13 to post a privacy policy, get parental approval before collecting personal information on children, and allow parents to bar the spread of that information or demand its deletion. The site operators are not allowed to require more information from the children than is "reasonably necessary" for participating in its activities.
For those who are 13 or older, the United States has no overarching restrictions. Websites are free to collect personal information including real names and addresses, credit card numbers, Internet addresses, the type of software installed, and even what other websites people have visited. Sites can keep the information indefinitely and share most of what they get with just about anyone.
Websites are not required to have privacy policies. Companies have most often been tripped up by saying things in their privacy policies - such as promising that data is kept secure - and then not living up to them. That can get them in trouble under the federal laws against unfair and deceptive practices.
Sites that accept payment card information have to follow industry standards for encrypting and protecting that data. Medical records and some financial information, such as that compiled by rating agencies, are subject to stricter rules.
European privacy laws are more stringent and the European Union is moving to establish a universal right to have personal data removed from a company's database-informally known as the "right to be forgotten." That approach is fervently opposed by companies dependent on Internet advertising.
Q. Is there likely to be new privacy legislation in the United States?
A. The year 2011 saw a flurry of activity on Capitol Hill as U.S. lawmakers introduced a handful of do-not-track bills with even the Obama White House calling for a "privacy bill of rights."
Leading the charge on do-not-track legislation are the unlikely pair of Reps. Edward J. Markey, a Massachussetts Democrat, and Joseph Barton, a Republican from Texas, who have jointly led a "Bipartisan Congressional Privacy Caucus."
Still, with half a dozen privacy laws meandering through Congress, most observers expect it could take a long time before any are passed-and not before they are significantly watered down in the legislative process.
Source:
http://goo.gl/HWPyi
But assessing the price of admission to join the super-networked, digital class is not so simple; even experts on the issue admit that they don't have a full picture of the way personal information is collected and used on the Internet. But here are some basic guidelines to keep in mind.
Q. What information do you have to give up to participate in social media?
A. Social networks such as Facebook and Google+ require at a minimum that you provide them with your name, gender and date of birth. Many people provide additional profile information, and the act of using the services - writing comments or uploading photos or "friending" people - creates additional information about you. Most of that information can be kept hidden from the public if you choose, though the companies themselves have access to it.
If you use your Facebook credentials to log-on to other Web sites, or if you use Facebook apps, you might be granting access to parts of your profile that would otherwise be hidden. Quora, for example, a popular online Q&A site, requires that Facebook users provide it access to their photos, their "Likes" and information that their friends share with them. TripAdvisor, by contrast, requires only access to "basic information" including gender and lists of friends.
Social media apps on smartphones, which have access to personal phone call information and physical location, put even more information at play.
On Apple Inc's iPhone, apps must get user permission to access GPS location coordinates, a procedure that will now be applied to address book access as well after companies including Twitter were found to be downloading iPhone address book information. Beyond those two types of data, Apple locks away personal data stored in other applications, such as notepad and calendar apps, according to Michael Sutton, the vice president of security research at email security service ZScaler.
Google Inc's Android smartphone operating system allows third-party apps to tap into a bonanza of personal data, though only if they get permission. In order to download an app from the Android Market, users must click 'OK' on a pop-up list that catalogues the specific types of information that each particular app has access to.
With both mobile and Facebook apps, often the choice is to provide access to a personal information or not use the app at all.
Q. Should I worry about how my information is being used?
A. Personal information is the basic currency of an Internet economy built around marketing and advertising. Hundreds of companies collect personal information about Web users, slice it up, combine it with other information, and then resell it.
Facebook doesn't provide personal information to outside marketers, but other websites, including sites that access Facebook profile data, may have different policies. Last year, a study by Stanford University graduate student found that profile information on an online dating site, including ethnicity, income and drug use frequency, was somehow being tramsitted to a third-party data firm.
The data that third-parties collect is used mainly by advertisers, but there are concerns that these profiles could be used by insurance companies or banks to help them make decisions about who to do business with.
Q. Are there any restrictions on what information companies can collect from Internet users or what they can do with it?
A. In the United States, the federal law requires websites that know they are being visited by children under 13 to post a privacy policy, get parental approval before collecting personal information on children, and allow parents to bar the spread of that information or demand its deletion. The site operators are not allowed to require more information from the children than is "reasonably necessary" for participating in its activities.
For those who are 13 or older, the United States has no overarching restrictions. Websites are free to collect personal information including real names and addresses, credit card numbers, Internet addresses, the type of software installed, and even what other websites people have visited. Sites can keep the information indefinitely and share most of what they get with just about anyone.
Websites are not required to have privacy policies. Companies have most often been tripped up by saying things in their privacy policies - such as promising that data is kept secure - and then not living up to them. That can get them in trouble under the federal laws against unfair and deceptive practices.
Sites that accept payment card information have to follow industry standards for encrypting and protecting that data. Medical records and some financial information, such as that compiled by rating agencies, are subject to stricter rules.
European privacy laws are more stringent and the European Union is moving to establish a universal right to have personal data removed from a company's database-informally known as the "right to be forgotten." That approach is fervently opposed by companies dependent on Internet advertising.
Q. Is there likely to be new privacy legislation in the United States?
A. The year 2011 saw a flurry of activity on Capitol Hill as U.S. lawmakers introduced a handful of do-not-track bills with even the Obama White House calling for a "privacy bill of rights."
Leading the charge on do-not-track legislation are the unlikely pair of Reps. Edward J. Markey, a Massachussetts Democrat, and Joseph Barton, a Republican from Texas, who have jointly led a "Bipartisan Congressional Privacy Caucus."
Still, with half a dozen privacy laws meandering through Congress, most observers expect it could take a long time before any are passed-and not before they are significantly watered down in the legislative process.
Source:
http://goo.gl/HWPyi
Fujitsu to launch mobile devices in EU market - FT
LONDON (Reuters) - Japan's largest IT services vendor Fujitsu <6702.T> plans to launch a wide range of smartphone and tablet devices for the first time in Europe, the Financial Times reported on Monday.
Fujitsu is already a large handset and tablet maker in Japan with about a fifth of the market, but is looking to challenge the dominance of European market leaders such as Apple and Samsung <000830.KS>, the FT said.
The newspaper did not say when Fujitsu would launch the products in Europe's fast-growing and high-margin mobile device market, but said the company is targeting a "double-digit" market share in the next three to five years.
Japanese handset makers have struggled to compete in European markets, in part owing to a focus on technology for the domestic market. But the company's new handsets and tablets use technology it has developed that can be used globally, according to the FT.
"The Japanese market has been in a silo from a technology and design perspective, but Fujitsu is bringing out a global product," Robert Pryke, the company's director for mobile phone business in Europe, was cited as saying in the article.
(Reporting by Stephen Mangan; Editing by Richard Pullin)
Source:
http://goo.gl/qVBnx
Fujitsu is already a large handset and tablet maker in Japan with about a fifth of the market, but is looking to challenge the dominance of European market leaders such as Apple and Samsung <000830.KS>, the FT said.
The newspaper did not say when Fujitsu would launch the products in Europe's fast-growing and high-margin mobile device market, but said the company is targeting a "double-digit" market share in the next three to five years.
Japanese handset makers have struggled to compete in European markets, in part owing to a focus on technology for the domestic market. But the company's new handsets and tablets use technology it has developed that can be used globally, according to the FT.
"The Japanese market has been in a silo from a technology and design perspective, but Fujitsu is bringing out a global product," Robert Pryke, the company's director for mobile phone business in Europe, was cited as saying in the article.
(Reporting by Stephen Mangan; Editing by Richard Pullin)
Source:
http://goo.gl/qVBnx
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)