ftc

Last week, Google launched Buzz, a status update tool that has elements of Twitter, Facebook, and FriendFeed. Google launched it inside the Gmail app, giving it an instant installed base of millions of people. More importantly, Google gave Buzz access to your Gmail contacts.

When the app first launched, it's fair to say that the Buzz app was a little too eager to use and share the details of users' personal networks. Furthermore, privacy controls for Buzz were spread over multiple configuration screens. Some necessary controls, like the off switch, were just flat-out missing.

To Google's credit, within days, the company corrected the major privacy failings of Buzz. More than once, in fact: Google tweaks Buzz privacy settings Google changes Buzz privacy settings--again

But the question remains: what was Google thinking? How did this giant search company, with more lawyers than most Web companies have engineers, get itself into a situation that required it to revise the product almost immediately after it launched? And what does the Buzz experience say about social networks and privacy on the larger scale?

That's what we're going to discuss today, and we have two great guests to do it. First, we have a taped interview with Mike Yang, senior product counsel for Google. I taped this interview earlier. Then I have a discussion with Jared Kaprove, a fellow at EPIC, The Electronic Privacy Information Center.

Show notes and talking points… Read more

Two changes in one week at Google Buzz weren't enough to satisfy the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

The privacy group filed a complaint on Tuesday with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, seeking constraints on Google's new social-networking service.

"This complaint concerns an attempt by Google, Inc., the provider of a widely used e-mail service, to convert the private, personal information of Gmail subscribers into public information for the company's social network service Google Buzz," the complaint (PDF) reads. "This change in business practices and service terms violated user privacy expectations, diminished user privacy, … Read more

The Federal Trade Commission needs to do a better study of Intel and chip the market before it pulls the trigger with a veritable scattershot of last-minute accusations.

In addition to the FTC's litany of charges against Intel relating to the chipmaker's alleged anticompetitive behavior in the central processing unit, or CPU, market for PCs, the FTC document also refers to "Intel's unfair methods of competition...and future competition in the relevant GPU (market)." GPUs, or graphics processing units, and CPUs comprise the two main processors in all PCs.

A more thoughtful, studied, and contemporaneous analysis by the FTC would reveal that future personal computing markets are not so much about graphics chips--which is the basis of its new found emphasis on Nvidia as the object of Intel bullying and misbehavior--but about small mobile devices. And here Intel faces a raft of competition and is at least a year behind its rivals.

And that includes Nvidia, whose tiny Tegra processor is already in the Microsoft Zune HD and the Samsung M1 and whose next-generation Tegra 2 chip will be in dozens more handheld devices and smartphones. Intel's current offerings in this space? Zero.

Nvidia's Tegra processor is based on the same ARM design that other competitors use such as Qualcomm, Texas Instruments, Samsung, Apple, and Freescale Semiconductor use. And which Nvidia's CEO Jen-Hsun Huang said is expected to account for half of Nvidia's business in a few years.

Unbelievably, the only reference to ARM in the FTC complaint is: "Another example of a non-x86 microprocessor architecture is ARM. ARM is used primarily in handheld devices and mobile phones." One sentence in a 20-plus page document seems oddly dismissive, as though ARM was practically irrelevant to future chip market competitive dynamics as relates to Intel. Especially when you look at it in the context that that FTC is referring to the world's most popular consumer chip architecture--that is, ARM.

How large is this exploding market today? The ARM processor market totaled well over 2 billion units shipped in 2008. The "x86" PC chip market, where Intel and Advanced Micro Devices compete, a fraction of this--a few hundred million.

"The growing market is...a whole swath of interconnected devices and Intel doesn't have much a presence there," said the CEO of ARM Warren East in an interview I had with him recently in Los Angeles. And he accurately asserted that ARM can either match or exceed Intel in market clout and spending because it works, to some extent, in concert with the manufacturers--like TI, Nvidia, Samsung--that collectively have a massive revenue stream to tap into for marketing and research and development. "Well, actually there's about $25 billion of ARM semiconductor revenue coming in through the front door. So, it isn't Intel versus ARM, it's Intel versus everybody else," he said.

And if there is any truth to the Google Netbook rumors,… Read more

Privacy advocates opposed to new privacy regulations at Facebook are attempting to get the attention of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, according to a complaint filed Thursday on behalf of the Electronic Privacy Information Center and several allied groups.

"These changes violate user expectations, diminish user privacy, and contradict Facebook's own representations," the complaint says of Facebook's new regulations, which push more content public, and make even more data available to third-party applications and advertisers. EPIC's goal is to force Facebook to restore the old settings and add additional controls for members.

"We'… Read more

Editors' note: This is a guest column. See Larry Downes' bio below.

Wednesday's announcement that the Federal Trade Commission had filed a complaint against chipmaker Intel came as quite a surprise.

Not because of the allegations themselves, which focus on illegal tactics the company allegedly uses to maintain its dominance in the market for PC and server CPUs. Nearly all of them have already been cited in regulatory actions in the United States and abroad.

Earlier this year, the European Union fined Intel nearly $1.5 billion for conduct similar to that alleged in the FTC complaint (an appeal … Read more

The FTC wants Intel to grow up and start acting like a responsible company.

At least that's the goal behind the agency's lawsuit against the chipmaker. Filed on Wednesday, the FTC's suit charges Intel with a host of offenses, including using threats and rewards to convince PC makers not to buy chips from the competition, altering its compiler to weaken the performance of rival chips like those made by AMD, and preserving its CPU monopoly by stifling the market for GPUs (graphics processing units) made by Nvidia and other manufacturers.

On Wednesday, the FTC held a press … Read more

Nvidia CEO Jen Hsun Huang issued an internal memo today to employees, calling the legal action by the Federal Trade Commission on Wednesday an event that could potentially "transform the computer industry."

The memo follows:

Hi everyone,

The U.S. government announced today that it has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel. This is an action the industry needs and one that consumers deserve. And it's one that can completely transform the computer industry.

The facts are clear. The FTC has charged that Intel has used its monopoly illegally to stifle innovation, to keep prices for their … Read more

The Federal Trade Commission's complaint against Intel for alleged anticompetitive practices has a new twist: graphics chips.

To date, the antitrust actions of regulators worldwide toward Intel have focused on sale practices for central processing units, or CPUs, a market over which the company has fought heavily with Advanced Micro Devices. On Wednesday, however, the FTC spelled out a litany of allegations about Intel's alleged anticompetitive behavior in the market for graphics-processing units, or GPUs, in which Nvidia is a major player.

Nvidia is the world's leading supplier of "discrete," or standalone, graphics chips but takes a distant second place in overall market share to Intel, which supplies "integrated" graphics built into the chipsets that accompany all of its processors. Mercury Research estimates the total market for graphics chips, including integrated graphics, at almost $10 billion in 2009.

Why graphics, and why now? "It would be really hard to sell the public on expending resources to take Intel through administrative proceedings when it had already paid over a billion dollars to AMD," said Joshua D. Wright, a professor at George Mason University School of Law and a scholar in residence at the Federal Trade Commission until 2008.

"[The FTC] needed to be seen as doing something new," Wright said.

"[Nvidia] becomes the remaining star witness, now that AMD has left the field," said Roger Kay, principal at Endpoint Technologies. "And the FTC's focus, which begins to look toward the future, has to take into account how graphics will fit in as computer technology develops," Kay said.

Intel General Counsel Doug Melamed asserted in a statement that the FTC complaint "is based largely on claims that the FTC added at the last minute and has not investigated," referring to the GPU allegations. And Melamed added in a conference call that some of these GPU allegations were made as recently as December 8.

One of the areas the FTC case zeroes in on is the burgeoning competition for chipsets in Netbooks--small, inexpensive laptops that are typically priced around $350. Netbooks are powered by Intel's Atom processor--and integrated graphics silicon built into the chipset. In this market, Nvidia also sells its Ion chipset, which competes with Intel's integrated graphics product. … Read more

So the European Union and Microsoft have finally settled their differences and will begin the browser ballot with no less than 12 browsers to choose from. Is this a good thing? Also, Intel is now under the gun from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission. What did it do this time? Listen to find out. And Cherrypal is selling a $99 laptop it bills as slow and sufficient. Nice.

FTC formally charges Intel with anti-competitive behavior http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704541004574599791659334798.html?mod=googlenews_wsj … Read more