You are here
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2013-11-12 13:26
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2013-11-01 18:16
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2013-10-17 19:07
5 BIG Implications from Court Signals on Net Neutrality – A Special Report -- Part 34 FCC Open Internet Order SeriesSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2013-09-13 12:54
Economic rationality, competition, and broadband pricing freedom are the big winners, and common carrier-like net neutrality was the big loser, if the Appeals Court panel decides Verizon v. FCC as expected.
Monday’s intense tag-team grilling of the FCC’s lawyer by Judges Tatel and Silberman left most observers thinking the Court will decide it is illegal for the FCC to impose common-carrier-like regulation on broadband providers -- regardless of what else they decide.
Google protesteth Larry Ellison too much that Google does not steal… Part 15 Google Disrespect for Property SeriesSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2013-08-28 11:59
Yet again, Google has violated the first rule of holes; when in a hole, stop digging.
Google is unwisely keeping the story alive that Oracle CEO Larry Ellison said this to Charlie Rose on air: [Google] “took our stuff and … that was wrong. This really bothers me. I don’t see how [Larry Page] thinks you can just copy someone else’s stuff.”
In a Google+ post to his followers, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt responded: “We typically try to avoid getting dragged into public battles with other companies. But I’ve gotten a lot of questions about Larry Ellison’s claims that Google “took [Oracle’s] stuff”. It’s simply untrue -- and that’s not just my opinion, but the judgment of a U.S. District Court.”
Does Google really want to engage in a broader public conversation about the truth and facts of Google’s serial disrespect for the property of others?
The Evidence Google Violated DOJ's Criminal Non-Prosecution Agreement -- Part 27 Google Unaccountability seriesSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2013-08-08 11:24
Please click -- here for the powerpoint presentation: "The public evidence Google violated the DOJ-Google criminal non-prosecution agreement."
In August of 2011, Google admitted criminal liability for knowingly advertising for rogue pharmacies dispensing drugs without a prescription for seven years despite repeated Government warnings to stop doing so.
To settle this criminal matter in advance of a Grand Jury proceeding, Google agreed in the DOJ-Google Criminal Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA ) to disgorge $500m in ill-gotten revenues and to obey a two-year remediation requirement designed to deter more Google criminal activity.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2013-07-23 12:31
Google-YouTube’s Internet Video Distribution Dominance -- Part XII of Googleopoly Research Series
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2013-07-08 11:38
Google is the spy tool of choice, the one stop-shop for spying, and the spymaster’s dream.
Google Chairman Eric Schmidt’s famously quipped: “if you have something you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it.” Given recent spying revelations, what Mr. Schmidt apparently means is: “if you don’t want to be spied upon, don’t use Google’s products and services.”
Why is that true? Let’s examine the top ten reasons.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Sun, 2013-06-16 22:33
Google Inc. has a rap sheet longer than any Googler’s arm. See it here. It shows:
This evidence shows Google to be the worst corporate scofflaw in modern American history.
It is timely and relevant given that America’s Attorneys General are meeting in Boston June 18th to discuss Google’s alleged aiding and abetting of criminal activity broadly. Google CEO Larry Page and General Counsel Kent Walker have been invited to the closed meeting to discuss the matter.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2013-06-10 19:18
Google is the only company with a mission to organize the world’s public and private information, and it is also unique in having developed more ways, to monitor more people’s behavior, more intimately than any entity ever.
Please see this one page graphic summary to get a big picture view of the almost unimaginable scale and scope of the intimate private information that Google routinely records and analyzes.
Since all other companies have much more narrow and focused businesses and missions than Google’s unbounded ambitions, they represent a fraction or slice of the whole public and private data pie that Google collects, stores, and analyzes.
Other than Google, only an Orwellian “Big Brother” state would aspire to collect and store indefinitely all private, intimate information on everyone online like Google is doing.
We know information is power.
The problem with Google becoming Big Brother Inc., is that if a state were to combine its state powers with Google’s unique information monopoly, unaccountability, and surveillance powers, it creates huge natural temptations for corruption and abuse in the absence of meaningful competition, strong checks and balances, and real public accountability.