Nuno Vieira - NFSI Telecom - IPv6 and Hosting
Nuno Vieira explains the benefits of tunnel brokers even if your own ISP is fully dual stacked. Also, Nuno talks about the status of web hosting ...
business hosting isp telecoms web - Bookshelf
|
|
ISP business monthly newsletter ... Web business in 1995, Adgrafix provides shared and dedicated Web hosting ... Mark Washburn in the newly formed Allegiance Telecom Web hosting division. ... |
|
|
Co-Lo Data Centers Newsletter Net will now conduct business as the Austin-based office of Hosting.com, operating in conjunction with other Allegiance Telecom Web hosting operations. ... |
|
|
Africa telecom ... an ISP dedicated to providing broadband wireless Internet access to ... a business support development company, to provide web hosting services to ... |
|
361 pages |
Managing information technology in small business, challenges and solutions to $80 per month range for smaller Web sites inthe developing countries with which they are familiar. If a developing country ISP does not offer hosting ... |
|
About this book In many countries, small businesses comprise over 95% of the proportion of private businesses and approximately half of the private workforce, with information technology being used in over 90% of these businesses. As a result, governments worldwide are placing increasing importance upon the success of small business enterpreneurs and are providing increased resources to support this emphasis. Managing Information Technology in Small Business: Challanges and Solutions presents research in areas such as IT performance, electronic commerce, Internet adoption, and IT planning methodologies and focuses on how these areas impact small businesses. |
|
|
257 pages |
Emerging telecommunications networks 'In a transit arrangement between ISPs, one ISP pays another in return for the ... Shared web hosting involves the provision of web- hosting services to ... |
|
About this book 'The scope of this Handbook is simply awesome. Every technology (wireline, wireless, satellite, cable . . .), every service (internet, e-commerce, telephony, video . . .), every regulation (FCC, universal service, international settlements . . .), and both management and economic issues (development, pricing, demand, costs, innovation . . .), all written by the leading lights in this field. Every telecommunications scholar and executive should keep a copy within easy reach; it is indispensable.' - Gerald Faulhaber, University of Pennsylvania, US This major new reference work provides a thorough and up-to-date survey and analysis of recent developments in the economics of telecommunications. The Handbooks serve both as a source of reference and technical supplement for the field of telecommunications economics. Volume I reviews the traditional literature to bring readers up to date on the current treatment of telecommunications economics. The coverage includes: demand, supply, costs, market... |
|
On Net Neutrality – A Plea
Recently, McCain introduced a bill for consideration which would effectively block the FCC’s attempts at creating so-called “Network Neutrality” rules which ISPs and Telcos would be required to follow. Now, setting aside for a moment the fact that McCain has received more than double as much money as the next-highest senator to be bankrolled by the Telco/ISP industry , and the comments made by leading nutjob crazy-person and all-around internet expert Glenn Beck, I’d like to first offer an explanation of what’s at stake here for those who don’t really understand the nuts-and-bolts of how the internet works .
I am going to use a very general analogy for how the internet works: a city. Now, the city that is the internet is a very strange city indeed. This city isn’t owned by any single country or government. Just about anyone can come and go as they please. Now, this city has three basic pieces, and they way they blend isn’t that different from how any city works: you have content “Servers,” content “Consumers,” and a transit system. The Servers could be anything from a tent someone just set up for a while to a huge mall, or a towering building, but it is basically somewhere you can get some content . In Internet City, just about anybody can become a Server. Then, there are the Consumers. This is probably where you fit in to Internet City — when you use the internet, you are at home, or at work, or on your phone, but you are mostly-if-not-exclusively retrieving content from these Servers (this includes posting on social media sites, such as Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, et al).
The third part of the city is the transit system, which is your ISP. At the top of the chain are the people who make all the roads, the asphalt, the car you will drive around the internet city, and pretty much everything you will need to get from point A to point ∞. These are the Tier-1 Network Providers (and to some extent the larger Tier-2 providers, but this discussion is beyond the scope of this analogy); they are few, and they are powerful. Of course, they generally don’t personally make every single road; who handles the road from there just depends on where it leads, who is willing to go there, and what services they intend to offer. These are the Tier-2 and Tier3 Networks , and they are probably more familiar to you.
Now, how fast you can get somewhere depends on three things: What kind of car you bought (your specific internet package), what kind of road the journey takes (the quality of ALL the connections from you to your destination, and back), and how far you have to go. If you have a mac-daddy broadband connection, and you are accessing a major site (major news networks, etc), you’ll spend most of your time on the metaphorical highway, and should get your data rather quickly, and the inverse is true as well. Any further delving into how this works is also beyond the scope of this analogy, but you get the idea.
So what is Net(work) Neutrality? The idea is that no matter from where or whom traffic comes, ISPs may not give preferential treatment to it. As fast as the hardware will carry it must it go. Groups and people who support this include small ISPs, who don’t want their customers to get abused by the larger and higher-tier internet providers, as well as Tim Berners-Lee, a man whom you may not have heard of but whom you are in contact with right now, as he practically invented the “World Wide Web” we have come to know. Opposing this is the idea that an ISP should be allowed to decide to give (at their own, private, and in this writer’s opinion, dubious, whim) preferential treatment to some data, at the expense of other data. On the relatively mild side of the spectrum, they could choose to allocate their network resources in such a way that, for example, their particular VoIP service . This is mild, and arguably benign in the grand scheme of things, and not what the issue is about. Given total freedom of how data flows, they could route traffic in such a way that their own VoIP service takes precedence over their competitor’s VoIP service — they could even extort a fee to avoid this sort of “traffic shaping” — all without the consumer being able to defend against this action. The customer would then be nearly forced to use that company’s VoIP service, or any service it chose, in order to get any semblance of quality.
A real-world example would be like allowing the government to create a lane of traffic in which only USPS vehicles could travel, and then forcing UPS and FedEx to use 1-lane dirt roads instead of the highways, since they are a competing service. Or, in the analogy of Internet City, it would be like the powers-that-be on the roads checking to see where you are going (in Internet City, you have to announce where you’re going or you can’t get there), and then forcing you to use smaller, slower roads, or yield to indefinite amounts of other traffic, based on whether or not you were going to one of their in-house holdings. Nightmarish.
Some of the points brought up against Net Neutrality are, quite frankly, absolutely ludicrous. As someone posted on the PC World forums:
“What this article completely fails to state (talk about one-sided reporting!) is that Google has devoted far more money to lobbying for regulation of the Internet than the telcos have to defending itself against it. Google has given hundreds of millions of dollars to slimy DC “astroturf” groups — that is, groups that pretend to be acting in the “public interest” but in fact do what their contributors tell them to do — which are lobbying for “network neutrality” legislation and regulation. And if you look at the details of all of these regulations — which start with high-minded language that talks about “freedom” and “openness” — all of them would tie the hands of ISPs and of Google’s competitors, while giving Google free rein to do whatever it wants, including to serve as an Internet gatekeeper. The regulations would also raise the price of Internet service, lower the quality of that service, and reduce consumers’ competitive choices by putting small providers out of business. Remember: corporations don’t act out of the goodness of their hearts. Monopolist Google wouldn’t be doing this if it weren’t seeking to maximize its profits at the expense of consumers. So, remember: “network neutrality” isn’t neutral. It is Google’s corporate agenda, and it strongly favors Google.”Wow, that is a lot of Big Brother Meets Google conspiracy theorizing (Ballmer, is that you?)! Aside from that, the points this person raises are thus:
It will raise the price of internet service. How, exactly? One of the possibilities is that, after some time (maybe a few years) of ISPs shaping traffic however they please, they will offer a new “unshaped” plan for only $20.00 more per month, thereby allowing them to charge you more for the same service you’re getting at the time this article was written. However, if we are given true Net Neutrality, there is no reason for the price to go up (other than inflation, which doesn’t count). After all, if nothing changes, then there’s no new way to sell us back what we’re already getting. It would lower the quality of internet service. Again, how? If you think that internet service means that all you do all day is browse your ISPs website and use their video service, their email service, their phone service, and so on, then maybe it would “lower” the quality from the standpoint that it would not be “increasing” the quality, which as previously mentioned would be at the expense of everyone else. Quality won’t degrade because we didn’t decide to let the ISPs tell us what is more valuable. To re-iterate the point, Net Neutrality basically means nothing changes. It will reduce consumers’ competitive choices by putting small providers out of business. No, just no. Small ISPs in Canada came out strongly in favor of Net Neutrality before such legislation was passed anyway. The larger wholesale (Tier-2) internet providers were shaping bandwidth to the point that it affected large numbers of users of the smaller Tier-3 providers, and the small providers resisted, but at the end of the day they are buying internet (albeit in larger increments than you or I) from the Tier-1 providers, and they are the ones against Net Neutrality. Funny how the exact people who are against neutrality are feeding you the exact opposite of truth about what will happen to the “competition.” And, to round out this bullet point, Tier-1 providers who are going to bat on this one (AT&T, Cogent, et al) just don’t care what the little guys are doing: they have the pipes in the middle, and everyone else needs them.Of course, these are just the arguments on Net Neutrality that actually have something to do with the subject at hand! Then there are the downright lies spread by, among others, Glenn Beck, such as:
Net Neutrality will bring the Fairness Doctrine to the internet, resulting in government censorship/control of the content on the internet. It is extremely important to remember that, above all, the Internet does not exist solely in America. The internet is no longer any more an American thing than it is a Russian thing or any other location-based thing. The internet is vast, it is (from the point of view of the average user) limitless, and no one country owns it. America could try to censor the content located in America. America might even try to create treaties with other nations to control what is hosted in their countries. However, all this will do is open up a market for “regulation-free” hosts, in countries who wouldn’t sign any such treaty (maybe a nice time to wire-up some third-world African nations?), or something else like it. Let me, again, put this in the simplest terms possible: NO SINGLE COUNTRY CAN CONTROL THE CONTENT OF THE INTERNET. IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, NO COMBINATION OF COUNTRIES CAN CONTROL THE CONTENT OF THE INTERNET .The internet is not just one person, one company, or one country. And to think, I said all of that without even mentioning that NET NEUTRALITY DOES NOT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM REFERENCE OR ATTEMPT TO INSTITUTE ANY SORT OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE. This argument would be laughable if it weren’t given so much credence by lying morons like Glenn Beck who, like McCain (from whom I respectfully withhold the indictment of “lying moron”), really don’t know the first thing about the technology they are so passionately speaking about, and the credence it will be given by the people that listen to and trust them. This issue is a . The government will be stepping in as a watchdog of the internet. No, the government would simply be stepping in to maintain the status quo so that Tier-1 providers don’t start exploiting their customers in unfair ways. Everybody, whether Servers or Consumers, pays for the “pipes in the middle” that is the transit system — why does the transit system then get to start deciding at what speed or priority I get to receive the content I’ve payed them good money to get? This issue is a misunderstanding. Net Neutrality is a ploy by left-wing liberals to socialize internet access. I don’t even have a diatribe for this one, I’ll just rest on saying that no, it’s not in the bill, it’s not on the table, no. Prominent liberals, such as “Van” Jones , have spoken about how we should be giving broadband access, for free, to everyone, like they do in some other countries, but this is a separate goal from the standpoints of the technology, the FCC, and the implementation, as well as the bill that is on the table. These views are not encompassed by Net Neutrality, but are in fact a . Revolution! Marxism! Destroying Capitalism! Rabble rabble! It is important to remember that you can hire someone to kill someone else, but this is considered an unfair, immoral, and reprehensible business practice and thus it is forbidden. Regulations on how you can do business with respect to, quite frankly, not just plain crapping all over the environment, the public, and your own consumers, are commonplace in our legal system; you really, really wouldn’t want to live in a world where companies could do whatever they wanted any time as long as it turned a buck. And as for all the talks of people somehow magically using Net Neutrality for revolutionary and/or Marxist goals? These are, you guessed it, . The government will be controlling content. No, see argument 1. The internet won’t work as well, things will load slowly, etc. The reason given here is/was that there won’t be enough competition and so on. Again, Network Neutrality advocates the status quo — that is, just because you have the traffic before you sell it doesn’t mean you can decide how it’s used once you’ve sold it to me. This is an . Net Neutrality does not help innovate business. You’re right, it doesn’t. It protects the little guy from having big businesses “innovate” more money out of his wallet. Next. The government will take over the internet. Again, see argument 1 — the American government can no more regulate the internet than it can nail Jell-O to a tree. The long and the short of it is that, even if the government suddenly decided it wanted to own all hosting services (remember, content is DISTINCT from transport), anyone can set up a server on any computer connected to the internet, and suddenly they are content providers. The internet is a vast, untamed, wild environment. THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT CONTROL IT .Mark Lloyd said something very important that bears quoting:
“Unfortunately, the powerful cable and telecom industry doesn’t value the Internet for its public interest benefits. Instead, these companies too often believe that to safeguard their profits … they must control what content you see and how you get it. Their plans could have dire consequences for those whose voices are often marginalized by our nation’s media system.” -Mark Lloyd, Federal Communications Commission.Beck’s guest then attacked him, specifically saying “they turn things inside out,” then going on to imply that Lloyd wanted to use Net Neutrality as a means to Government Control and a re-introduction of the fairness doctrine, and that he would use this new government brand internet to give voices to the “marginalized people” a la the fairness doctrine. He not only completely misconstrued (I’d say misunderstood except I believe that he is an evil little man) the quote but, in fact, turned it as inside out as he claimed the Net Neutrality proponents are doing.
Net Neutrality, though technically regulation, is very mild and serves only to prevent the ISPs and Telecoms from regulating how the traffic you pay for gets shaped; it provides no slippery slope nor sets any precedent for the government to control the internet. Supporting Net Neutrality (and opposing Sen. McCain’s bill) is supporting the status quo, and supporting the rights of the consumer. The government cannot, and will not, control the content of the internet; not only is not that even on the table here, it is fundamentally impossible, and outside the scope of even the FCC. Before you overreact, learn what’s actually going on. Please.
P.S., for another well-thought-ought viewpoint on net neutrality, check out this post on Brad Ideas . He believes that we don’t need to codify Net Neutrality into law, but I think he would also support the not coding into law of the exact opposite. I disagree with him, and think that we should make it law, if only because this is the second time that opposition has arisen loudly in government, but his opinion is worth reading nonetheless.
Additional Link: http://www.ethioplanet.com/news/2009/10/25/google-verizon-join-forces-to-support-net-neutrality/
Political Nonsense Follows: I want to keep this seperate from the main article, for two reasons: one, even though this blog is full of my opinions, I still want to keep it more technical than political, and two, because I have not yet sworn in this blog. I intend to break both of these conventions now. First, fuck you “… if Barack Obama were somehow able to cure hunger in the world, the Republicans would blame him for overpopulation. … if Barack Obama could somehow bring about world peace, they’d blame him for destroying the defense industry. … if Barack Obama has a BLT sandwich tomorrow for lunch, they will try to ban bacon.” -Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL), 08 October 2009
Unfortunately, it’s now an issue of “Us Or Them,” and the Republicans, a party which I now characterize as the “Fuck You Got Mine” party, cannot yield to reason now that B. Hussein Obama is for it, and Sen. John McCain, American Hero-Patriot, Capt (USN, Ret.) is against it. Which is a shame, but what more could I expect?
p2pnet World Headlines - June 17, 2009
P2pnet World Headlines - June 17, 2009
// June 17th, 2009 // p2p
Mark-up on text messages 4,900 per cent: Expert Montreal Gazette The mark-up on some text messages is 4,900 per cent, according to a Canadian computer scientist who testified before U.S. senators on Tuesday. The consumer mark-up on some text messages is an estimated 4,900 per cent, according to a leading Canadian computer scientist who testified before U.S. senators on Tuesday. Srinivasan Keshav, Canada Research Chair in tetherless computing at the University of Waterloo, told lawmakers probing text messaging rates and the state of competition in the wireless telecommunications industry that the maximum cost of a single text message “very unlikely” exceeds 0.3 cents. In Canada, the large cellphone companies charge pay-per-use texters 15 cents to send a text message and, beginning next month, Rogers will join Bell and Telus with an additional charge of 15 cents to receive a text message… [Comment: A Must Read. Also see surfer's SMS Rip-off .] Cellphone users to get extra protection under new Quebec legislation Montreal Gazette Consumers stuck in three-year contracts with their cellphone providers can expect relief from unilateral changes, such as sudden increases in their text messaging charges, and less burdensome exit penalties under Bill 60, presented in the Quebec National Assembly Tuesday. [Comment: Additional coverage here: Consumer protection bill restricts automatic renewal of contracts and limits penalties against consumers http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/quebec-cracking-down-on-cell-carriers/article1184775/ . And stay tuned for a p2pnet special on this.] Verizon and AT&T deny collusion on texting prices Reuters U.S. wireless carriers Verizon Communications and AT&T took issue with assertions that they colluded in setting prices for text messages, saying on Tuesday that prices for most customers had fallen and the market was competitive. Bell, Rogers, Telus to launch mobile payment service CBC Canada’s three main wireless carriers are planning to launch a mobile payment service on Monday, one that will allow their customers to send, request and receive money via their mobile phones. [Comment: This will create billions of dollars in transaction fees, and definately something worth exploiting by some Russian kids ;). These Telcom's better have a no hassle money replacement policy in place.] B.C. family finds ‘explicit’ videos on new Bell Canada cellphone Nanaimo Daily News A Victoria couple were shocked to discover sexually explicit videos on what they thought was a new cellphone. “It’s pornography. There’s no question about it,” said Wade Greenwood about the “very explicit” content he found. On May 30, he found several photographs of strangers on the phone and called Bell. He was told that a previous owner had likely put the pictures on the phone, which is normally cleared of content if returned. Then on Monday evening, he found a pair of one-minute explicit videos. The phone’s history indicates they were downloaded on April 23, before he bought it. Before these phones are restocked, the company’s policy is to check for and remove any kind of stored content, she said. “In this case, it appears our process broke down, We are investigating to determine exactly what went wrong and to ensure it doesn’t happen again.” [Comment: A similar incident has also been found by a person who bought a "new" Bell Mobile here: http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1377 "*There are text messages on the phone from the previous user. The conversation thread talks about loving each other and hurry home", Plus more. Makes me wonder how many personal and private messages and intimate pictures are leaked from Bell on these USED phones that Bell is selling to people as NEW!] US Senate poised to investigate carrier handset monopoly TG Daily The US Senate is reportedly preparing to investigate a number of exclusive relationships between carriers and handset manufacturers. Four legislators - including former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry - recently informed the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) of their intention to hold a hearing that will help determine if “exclusivity agreements” effectively limit a consumer’s choice of handsets. Italy’s antitrust pressures T.Italia over access Reuters Italy’s antitrust regulator said competition was key in fixed-line telecoms, even if that meant a costly separation of the network, prompting Telecom Italia to say it has already taken steps to open up its grid. The Italian competition authority has suggested a part sale of Telecom Italia’s network, but the country’s former monopoly and largest operator, which relies on the grid for the bulk of its earnings, has repeatedly ruled out such a move. Manitoba Tel urges looser telecom ownership rules CanWest Ownership restrictions that prevent foreign players from buying or holding majority stakes in Canadian telecom companies are stifling competition and should be changed, the chief executive of Manitoba Telecom Services said on Tuesday… Canada’s telecom landscape is currently dominated by three main players: BCE Inc, Telus Corp and Rogers Communications. Canadians have long complained that service fees for mobile phones and other telecom services are too high because the market is ruled by the Big Three. Nortel CEO ordered to explain bonus payments Ottawa Citizen The chief executive officer of Nortel Networks Corp., has been summoned to appear before a House of Commons committee Thursday to explain how he and other senior managers qualified for millions of dollars in bonus payments as pensioners and employees were having their benefits cut or delayed while the company restructures under bankruptcy protection. [Comment: Its "Market Forces"] Britain proposes landline tax to boost broadband access CBC The British government has proposed levying an $11 annual tax on telephone landlines in order to extend fast broadband access to the whole country. The proposal is included in a report, authored by British Communications Minister Lord Stephen Carter of Barnes, that outlines Britain’s digital future. [Per the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8102756.stm : The report also includes a pledge to curb unlawful file sharing by giving regulator Ofcom new powers to identify persistent pirates. The main points outlined in the report include: • a three-year plan to boost digital participation • universal access to broadband by 2012 • fund to invest in next generation broadband • digital radio upgrade by 2015 • liberalisation of 3G spectrum • legal and regulatory attack on digital piracy • support for public service content partnerships • changed role for Channel 4 • consultation on how to fund local, national and regional news • £130m of BBC licence fee to pay for ITV regional news] Committee grills FCC nominee Variety The Senate Commerce Committee put President Obama’s nominee to head the FCC, Julius Genachowski, on notice in his confirmation hearing Tuesday that it plans to keep an eagle eye on the agency after what Sen. Jay Rockefeller described as years of policymaking that “shortchanged consumers and the public interest.” The 90-minute hearing was mostly a lovefest for Genachowski, a close friend of Obama’s and a former FCC staffer… “Let me be very clear about the challenge before you,” Rockefeller told Genachowski. “Fix this agency, or we will fix it for you. Prove to us that the FCC is not battered beyond repair.” Lord Steyn, a former Law lord, is calling for the government to abandon its national ID card scheme because it is an unacceptable invasion of privacy and will not help to solve the various problems they keep claiming it will solve. He outlines the different claims made by the government in favour of ID cards. First we were told they would fight terrorism, then we were told they would help protect our identities - which al Qaeda terrorists were trying to steal. Finally the focus has been shifted to foreigners - non-EU citizens will be the first group required to carry the cards. US gov asked Twitter to stay up for Iran protests The Register On Monday, Twitter delayed a scheduled upgrade so that its micro-blogging service would not be down during daylight hours in Iran, where Tweets have fueled protests against the disputed presidential election. And according to press reports, the delay was requested by the US State Department… A State Department spokesman told the news service that the Department had been in touch with Twitter throughout the weekend, but did not specifically say that a downtime delay was discussed. US urges Vietnam to free lawyer BBC The US government has said it was “deeply concerned” by the arrest in Vietnam of activist lawyer Le Cong Dinh and has called for his release. The Paris-based group, Reporters Without Borders, also called for his immediate release, noting his work in defending bloggers and activists. Mr Dinh was arrested on 13 June on charges of “distributing propaganda against the state”. Officials said he was arrested over his defence of pro-democracy activists. They also said he was arrested over his use of the internet to express his views. Official release of “Keykeriki” open source wireless keyboard sniffer Security Focus Hi everyone, i just like to announce officially the release of our wireless keyboard sniffer Keykeriki. An addition to the official press release; Website: http://www.remote-exploit.org/Keykeriki.html , Video with some demonstration available on website as well. The first lot of pre-fab PCBs will arrive until the end of this week…. Dreamlab Technologies and remote-exploit.org develop the first open 27Mhz wireless keyboard sniffer. It sniffs and records the signal of wireless keyboards and demonstrates their security risk level. And it can be used to demonstrate hacking-attacks for educational purpose. Cyberwar guide for Iran elections BoingBoing Yishay sez, “The road to hell is paved with the best intentions (including mine). Learn how to actually help the protesters and not the gov’t in Iran.” The purpose of this guide is to help you participate constructively in the Iranian election protests through Twitter….” Ahmadinijad sucks at Photoshop BoingBoing [No words. The story is all in the pictures.] Japan Makes Private Copying Illegal TechDirt A new copyright law has been passed that specifically says that private, non-commercial copying is infringing (via Cybeardjm). This really isn’t all that surprising, given that Japan has also been pushed on copyright extension and a recent court ruling found that uploading your own content for personal storage could be infringement. Still, it’s yet another victory for entertainment industry lobbyists who will do anything possible to pass laws to protect old business models. Vegas paper gets subpoena to ID online commenters CTV A Las Vegas newspaper says it has been served a federal grand jury subpoena seeking information about readers who posted comments on the paper’s website. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported Tuesday that its editor, Thomas Mitchell, plans to fight the request, which the newspaper received after reporting on a federal tax fraud case against business owner Robert Kahre. EFF Busts Bogus Internet Subdomain Patent EFF Patent Busting Project Wins Another Victory for Developers and Innovators. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has announced that it will revoke an illegitimate patent on Internet subdomains as a result of the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s (EFF) Patent Busting Project campaign. U.S. Patent No. 6,687,746, now held by Hoshiko, LLC, claimed to cover the method of automatically assigning Internet subdomains, like “action.eff.org” for the parent domain “eff.org.” Previous patent owner Ideaflood used this bogus patent to demand payment from website hosting companies offering personalized domains, such as LiveJournal, a social networking site where each of its three million users may have their own subdomain. W3C launches appeal to scupper Apple patent The Register All your updates are belong to Cupertino - The W3C, custodians of web standards, have launched an appeal for prior art to contest an Apple patent that appears to cover any kind of automated updating procedure, including the Widget standard on which the group is working. The patent, filed in 1995 and awarded in 1998, and which Apple revealed to the W3C in March, covers an application contacting a central server to see if a new version is available, and downloading the replacement if it is. As such it would appear to cover most of the automated updating systems commonly in use today, though the W3C is most concerned with the impact it’s going to have on the forthcoming widget standards. Microsoft sues family over alleged click fraud The Register Canadian crackdown a first - Microsoft has filed its first-ever lawsuit over click fraud, seeking $750,000 in damages from a Canada-based trio who allegedly orchestrated a massive online scam via its pay-per-click search ads. [Additional: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/06/16/bc-microsoft-cliick-fraud-lawsuit-vancouver.html ] Branson backs down on piracy The Inquirer Virgin on three strikes law - RICHARD BRANSON’S news of a deal he cut with Universal Music that would allow legal downloads from his Virgin ISP outfit was lacking the details of another accommodation he also made with Universal on so-called ‘piracy’. Beardie promised that if the music industry identified a filesharer then Virgin will stuff up the user’s Internet connection by turning it on and off for a bit… The move appears to be a legal challenge waiting to happen. The EU has opposed doing anything to filesharers unless there is a court order. Text-message fees recommended for antitrust scrutiny LA Times The chairman of a Senate panel on antitrust issues on Tuesday called on the Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department to scrutinize competitiveness in the cellphone industry, pointing to a 100% increase in some text messaging charges by four companies that control most of the market. CSIRO pursues WiFi royalties Australian IT Australia’s top science agency has started the second major phase of its program to recoup hundreds of millions of dollars worth of royalty payments from its patented and ubiquitous WiFi technology. Having won its long-running legal battle against 13 major electronic equipment manufacturers including Microsoft, Dell, Intel and Hewlett-Packard in US courts in April, the CSIRO has started moving against what it believes to be the remainder of the electronics industry. ISP Dragged to Court for Refusing to Block The Pirate Bay Torrent Freak After several victories in Danish courts, the entertainment industry is now trying to get The Pirate Bay blocked in Norway. The country’s largest Internet provider ‘Telenor’ is now being dragged to court by IFPI, after it refused an earlier request to disable customer access to the world’s most prominent tracker. [Additional: http://www.macworld.co.uk/digitallifestyle/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=26330 and http://www.pcworld.com/article/166814/battle_against_file_sharing_starts_in_norway.html ] - . More June, 2009 - - | | rss feed: http://-/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://-/index-wml.php -? -
web hosting Directory
Business hosting isp telecoms web, Business hosting isp ...
Business hosting isp telecoms web, Business hosting isp telecoms web, Macromedia ... Business hosting isp telecoms web, Business hosting isp telecoms web ...
business hosting isp telecoms web
We track over 30 million domains such as ebay.com, amazon.com, business hosting isp telecoms web and others. © 2009 Keywordspy.com All Rights Reserved. ...
Mac Telecoms | Business opportunity isp website design and ...
Macduff Trading Enterprise (Registration number –2008/052277/23) is an already established corporative which 4.3 Website Design and Hosting Services MACDUFF TRADING ...