Thursday, 28 February 2013

Tuesday, 12 February 2013

Asymmetric Warfare on the Internet: Google and Microsoft Challenge Amazon in the Cloud

Asymmetric Warfare on the Internet: Google and Microsoft Challenge Amazon in the Cloud: "Amazon is commoditizing the “device” in order to increase sales of its content. Google, for its part, is doing the same thing.  However, it falls back on its own core revenue driver, targeted advertising.  By putting its weight behind open-source operating systems (Android and Chrome), it too is seeking to commoditize the “device” market to increase the revenue it receives from its top-of-the-line ad targeting algorithm.
Although the examples above are short anecdotes, the moral of the story is that to understand the competitive battles in the tech world, one needs to zoom out.  “Cloud computing” is just one component of the ecosystem that is interrelated with other parts of the tech world.  Competition is not siloed and competitors change quickly." 'via Blog this'

Thursday, 7 February 2013

Wonderful endorsements for Regulating Code

Regulating Code | The MIT Press: "“Ian Brown and Christopher Marsden have adopted a clear-eyed, multidisciplinary approach to Internet governance and regulation, which they employ successfully to tackle some of the most challenging public policy issues of the day in their so-called five ‘hard cases.’ By hard-wiring interoperability, transparency, and standards-setting into a coherent framework, they have rescued user rights from potential irrelevancy and paved the way for a more holistic understanding of Internet regulation.”
—Richard Whitt, Global Head of Public Policy and Government Relations, Motorola Mobility LLC
“Regulating Code is the best single resource on the contemporary global landscape of Internet regulation. By examining how both governmental and private measures interact with the Internet’s technical code, Brown and Marsden show how the Internet is disrupting and potentially reformulating the very notion of regulation. A rare book about the Internet that is equally sophisticated in its analysis of law, technology, and political economy.”
—Kevin Werbach, Associate Professor of Legal Studies and Business Ethics, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania" 'via Blog this'

Friday, 1 February 2013

Patent Bully: Steve Jobs’ Unethical Use of Patents

Patent Bully: Steve Jobs’ Unethical Use of Patents: "Although the antitrust case will focus on the agreements not to hire each other’s employees (collusive agreements in restraint of trade — whether the “trade” is in physical products or the supply of labor — are an antitrust no-no punishable by steep fines and, in some cases, even criminal sanction), I think the patent “stick” used in this case is far more telling — and a far bigger deal — than the alleged do-not-poach-our-employees agreements.  (Note: the DOJ already extracted a settlement agreement from Apple, Adobe, Google, Pixar, Intuit and Intel preventing them from enacting a broad array of “no solicitation agreements” with rivals.) I put quotation marks around the word “proposed,” as the offer was extended in much the same manner that a mob boss proposes a protection deal.  “Accept my proposal or I cannot promise that something bad will not happen to you.”" 'via Blog this'