News Blog

The largest bank in the United States has officially ignored the second most popular Web browser--until recently.

A tipster for Networkworld.com pointed out recently that Bank of America's Web site did not list the Mozilla Foundation's Firefox as a "supported browser," even though Firefox now commands almost 20 percent of the browser market. The bank's site lists Microsoft's Internet Explorer, Apple's Safari, and Netscape as acceptable browsers.

Netscape? Even AOL, Netscape's former owner, doesn't support Netscape Navigator anymore.

Of course, Firefox, which was released in 2004 and recently set a Guiness record for downloads in a 24-hour period, still works on the BofA Web site--just not officially. The issue apparently came up when a BofA customer contacted the bank about problems he was having accessing the site using Safari. "Please don't tell me to just use Firefox instead," the Networkworld.com reader told BofA customer support.

Not a problem, according to customer support.

"Please note Bank of America does not support Firefox," was customer service's reply.

When posed with the question of why the No.1 bank's Web site did not whole-heartedly embrace the No. 2 browser's 180 million users, a spokeswoman told Networkworld.com that "there is a process that we go through to 'officially support' a browser type and version, which includes in-depth functional and regression testing cycles.

"As the usage of Firefox browsers has increased with our customer base, we will be initiating a full support model for Firefox version 2.x in the very near future," spokeswoman Tara Burke told Networkworld.com.

Think "the very near future" will prove to be very soon? Don't bank on it.

Hans Reiser, the Linux programmer convicted in April of murdering his estranged wife, has led police to what is believed to be her body, authorities told the San Francisco Chronicle on Monday.

The remains were found Monday afternoon buried next to a deer trail in the hills of Oakland, Calif., Reiser's defense attorney, who accompanied his client to the site, told the newspaper. Police said the body has not been identified. A news conference is planned for Tuesday.

In April, following a drama-filled six-month trial, a jury found Reiser, 44, guilty of first-degree murder in the 2006 killing of Nina Reiser, with whom he was undergoing a bitter divorce. Reiser is currently being held without bail pending his sentencing scheduled for Wednesday.

Hans Reiser

(Credit: via Stanford University)

Throughout the trial, Reiser maintained his innocence. Arguing the so-called "geek defense," his attorney maintained that while Reiser may be strange, arrogant, even abnormal, his odd behavior following Nina's disappearance wasn't evidence of murder.

However, Wired reported in June that a deal was in the works in which Reiser would lead authorities to his wife's body in exchange for a reduced sentence. Wired writer David Kravets quotes an anonymous source familiar with the deal who says Reiser's cooperation could reduce his April conviction from first-degree murder to second degree. A second-degree conviction in California carries a mandatory sentence of 15 years to life, Kravets wrote.

Reiser is known to the technology world as the founder of the ReiserFS file system software, which is available for Linux. Nina Reiser, then 31, was last seen alive on September 3, 2006, in Oakland, as she was dropping off the couple's two children for the Labor Day weekend. Despite exhaustive searches by authorities, Nina's body was not found before the trial.

CNET News.com's Michelle Meyers contributed to this report.

Thanks to California's new hands-free phone law, I have been dragged into Bluetooth land. It's not somewhere I really ever saw myself landing. I never really saw a need; I don't use my cell phone as frequently as anyone else I know, and my car tends to sit in the garage undriven for days, sometimes weeks.

With the enforcement of laws beginning in California and Washington last week, Bluetooth earpieces have become the rage--even when people aren't behind the wheel. Sorry in advance if I offend, but this strikes me as a bit odd--maybe not as odd as the Bat Utility Belt look of a decade ago when the "tech savvy" would stock their overstressed belts with pagers, cell phones, and PDAs, but certainly in the same league. So that option wasn't very attractive.

The Dual BTM60 Bluetooth module attaches to several of Dual's in-dash car stereo decks.

(Credit: Dual)

However, about six months ago, I upgraded the stereo in my car to a model that also happened to support Bluetooth cell connections. The stereo I replaced was the factory double-din that came with it when I bought the car 13 years ago. The CD player was skipping like crazy, and my wife was about to give birth to our first child, so this seemed like the right time to spend money on a new stereo for a car I seldom drove and expected to drive even less after the child was born (it's a two-seat convertible).

So I dove into research models, options, and prices. I ended up buying a Dual XHD6425 off Amazon.com for about $100. An installer at Best Buy said he didn't think the deck would fit in my car, but a handy tool at Crutchfield.com told me different (guess who was right).

This little unit does things I wish my $300 Onkyo TX-SR605 home receiver did: in addition to playing MP3 and WMA CDs, it also receives HD Radio signals, has an auxiliary input for your MP3 player, and a USB input for flash memory drives. It also has a connector wire at the back of the unit that will plug into Dual's BTM60, a Bluetooth module that transmits voice signals to your cell phone. The audio from the person you are speaking with is broadcast over the car speakers.

Since Dual already sold a module specifically designed for my deck, the choice was an easy one. New modules that used to retail for $99 can be found on eBay for less than $25 if you are patient. Mine was delivered Saturday, and like a kid on Christmas morning, I had it up and running in less than an hour.

The Dual BTM60 includes a 3-meter cord that attaches to the back of several Dual car stereos--the XHD-6425, in this case. The two wires plug in to each other, with the guidance of two arrows.

(Credit: Steven Musil/CNET News.com)

Installation could not have been easier--it's practically plug and play. The module itself is about the size of two wine corks and attaches to the visor like your garage door opener (that location is actually much closer to your mouth than anywhere you could place it on your dashboard), and the connection to back of the deck just snaps into place with the guidance of arrows on the ends of each wire.

The most time-consuming part was hiding the wire between those two points. It wouldn't easily pinch against the windshield, so off came the weather stripping and convertible top anchor to allow access to the driver-side A-pillar cover. After threading and squeezing the wire behind the pillar cover, tying up the wire slack under the dashboard, and replacing the weather stripping and convertible top anchor, it was time for the easiest part of installation: pairing the cell phone to the stereo deck.

Hiding the module's connection to the in-dash deck inside the A-pillar was the most time-consuming part of the installation. After the wire is safely tucked away, the weather stripping slides back into place.

(Credit: Steven Musil/CNET News.com)

The phone and module did most of the work for me--I just had to hit a few buttons when prompted.

And it worked from the get go, syncing up my cell phone as soon as I turned the key and delivering audio quality that sounded as good as the cell phone, at least in the comfort of my garage. But how about on the road, with the top down? Just as good, although you may have to adjust the speaker volume on the dash deck to hear your calls better.

When a call comes into your cell, it rings across your car stereo. You simply push the button on the module to pick up the call. You can also use the in-dash deck to place the call, although I think it will be some time before I master that skill.

I saw plenty of people driving around town this holiday weekend with cell phones plastered to the side of their face, so I am not sure how well obeyed the new hands-free law is going to be. After all, the fine if you get caught is only $20, but it can be 10 times that with other court costs factored in. That's more than my entire stereo upgrade.

So there you have it: Bluetooth functionality without the odd factor--unless you consider that you are talking to your visor and allowing the other drivers stopped at traffic signals to listen in on your phone conversations.

Hmmmm...

Google scored a legal victory in keeping its search source code secret from Viacom, but YouTube users were not so fortunate with their privacy.

A federal judge ruled on Wednesday (PDF) that the search giant doesn't have to turn over the code to Viacom, which filed a $1 billion copyright infringement lawsuit against Google in 2007.

In granting Google's motion for a protective order, U.S. District Judge Louis L. Stanton in Manhattan agreed with Google's characterization of the source code as a trade secret that can't be disclosed without risking the loss of business.

"YouTube and Google should not be made to place this vital asset in hazard merely to allay speculation," the judge said. "A plausible showing that YouTube and Google's denials are false, and that the search function can and has been used to discriminate in favor of infringing content, should be required before disclosure of so valuable and vulnerable an asset is compelled."

The judge also denied Viacom's motion for Google to produce source code for its Video Identification Tool, which helps copyright notify Google of copyright infringement.

However, the judge granted a Viacom motion that records of every video watched by YouTube users, including their login names and IP addresses, be turned over to the entertainment giant.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation called the ruling a threat to YouTube users' privacy.

"The court's order grants Viacom's request and erroneously ignores the protections of the federal Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), and threatens to expose deeply private information about what videos are watched by YouTube users," the EFF said in a statement.

At stake in the legal battle is a key part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the 1998 law that shields Web site owners from copyright infringement involving material published by users. The "safe harbor" provision in the law can protect against infringement claims as long as copyrighted material is removed upon notification.

After the suit, YouTube launched an antipiracy tool that checks uploaded videos against the original content in an effort to flag piracy.

Movie-rental chain Blockbuster announced Tuesday that it has withdrawn its $1 billion bid for consumer electronics chain Circuit City.

Chief Executive James Keyes blamed "market conditions" for the demise of the proposed deal, valued at one time at more than $1.3 billion.

"Based on market conditions and the completion of our initial due diligence process, we have determined that it is not in the best interest of Blockbuster's shareholders to proceed with an acquisition of Circuit City," Keyes said in a statement. "We continue to believe in the strategic merits of a consumer retail proposition that would bring media content and electronic devices together under one brand. We will pursue this strategy through our Blockbuster stores as a way to diversify the business and better serve the entertainment retail segment."

Blockbuster shares jumped nearly 12 percent, while Circuit City fell 14 percent in after-hours trading following the announcement.

Blockbuster made its offer for Circuit City in February but it was only made public in April.

A combination of the two companies would have added up to an $18 billion business, according to Blockbuster's calculations. Both companies have struggled in the past year--Circuit City posted a $200 million loss near the end of 2007, and Blockbuster has been fending off Netflix's success in online video rentals, as well as the growing threat of digital movie downloads.

Updated at 7:40 a.m. PDT Wednesday with comments from a former Department of Justice antitrust attorney, and a Department of Justice spokeswoman.

The U.S. Department of Justice plans to gather information from third parties in a probe of the advertising deal struck last month between Google and Yahoo, according to sources familiar with these types of investigations.

Within the next week, the Justice Department is expected to issue civil investigative demands (CIDs) that seek documents from the third parties, said one source, noting the information requested could range from a general request on the competitive landscape to very specific requests involving Yahoo and Google.

Third parties that are expected to receive the CIDs include competitors, customers such as major advertisers, and potential partners, the source added.

Representatives for Yahoo and Google did not immediately return requests for comment. But the Justice Department made a brief statement.

"We're looking at the proposed transaction. We're conducting a civil investigation," spokeswoman Gina Talamona said, declining to offer details about the process or how long it would take.

Yahoo announced the nonexclusive partnership in June under which rival Google would supply it with some search ads, a move that could increase Yahoo search revenue but that also gives Google even more power in the market. Yahoo expects the 10-year deal to raise revenue by $800 million in its first year and to provide an extra $250 million to $450 million in incremental operating cash flow.

The partnership idea came to light during Microsoft's attempt to acquire Yahoo, which put more pressure on the Internet company to improve its financial results.

Faced with that financial challenge and a desire to push the Google ad deal through, Yahoo proposed to regulators that it subject the search advertising deal to a review process similar to one used for major mergers under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, said a source familiar with Yahoo.

Under the proposal, which was made to regulators when Microsoft still had a buyout offer on the table for Yahoo, the Internet search pioneer said it would give the Justice Department three and half months to review the deal before it implements the search advertising partnership.

After Microsoft's offer to acquire all of Yahoo was withdrawn, Yahoo could not tell the Justice Department it would not honor its earlier proposal, said the source familiar with the Internet company. The Justice Department and Yahoo later signed a memorandum of understanding that would give regulators time to review documents and interview executives and board members.

"This has been a formal investigation since day one, given its high-profile. There was never the option to have an informal investigation done," said the source, noting a formal investigation entails the Justice Department staff receiving the blessing from a superior like the assistant attorney general in the antitrust division. "And it would be negligent not to issue CIDs to third parties, when conducting a formal investigation."

Only general document requests made so far
The Justice Department has made very general document requests of Yahoo, noted the source. Such requests range from the paperwork and correspondence of executives and board members that address how a transaction or agreement would affect competition to documents on the search market and competitors. And while the document requests are currently general in nature, Yahoo will likely see more specific type of requests in the next 30 to 40 days, added the source.

To date, the Justice Department has not yet interviewed Yahoo executives or board members, but such requests are expected to be made between now and the first week in August, the source noted.

If the Yahoo-Google investigation moves at a pace similar to that of other antitrust cases, the Justice Department may get down to specific issues it wants to address within four to five weeks after Labor Day.

"When the DOJ says, 'We have concerns about...,' it usually means the field has been narrowed," said the source.

One former Justice Department antitrust attorney said the regulators will likely focus on one of two issues, or both--whether Yahoo will have an incentive not to compete as hard as it previously did against Google and whether there is a coordination of competition.

In an effort to dispel antitrust concerns surrounding the deal, Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang went to Capitol Hill in June and met with Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), who chairs the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee.

Kohl had previously expressed concerns that the deal between two technology search rivals could affect competition and have ramifications for advertisers and consumers. He said at the time that the antitrust subcommittee would investigate the competitive and privacy implications of the deal.

A congressional investigation, however, is separate from a Justice Department investigation.

In this particular case, which is not a merger of two companies, the Justice Department can't force Yahoo and Google to comply with its wishes in order to receive clearance on the deal. Instead, the regulators can either file a lawsuit before, during, or after Yahoo and Google begin their search advertising partnership.

In April, a limited two-week search ad deal was declared a success by Google and Yahoo, but even the limited partnership raised antitrust hackles at Microsoft. Microsoft brought up antitrust concerns when the search ad test began, saying the move would reinforce Google's dominance in the search ad business.

Google countered that search ads are only a narrow part of the online ad market and that Yahoo is the strongest company when it comes to the graphical "display" ads.

Google's share of the U.S. search market reached 68.29 percent in May, according to Hitwise's most recent numbers. Yahoo's share of the market declined to 19.95 percent from 20.28 percent at the same time.

The Washington Post first reported news of the CIDs on its Web site Tuesday evening, citing sources close to the inquiry.

CNET News.com's Dawn Kawamoto and Stephen Shankland contributed to this report.

Adobe Systems is helping Google and Yahoo to uncover Web content that was previously "invisible" to Web searches.

Both companies have been given optimized Adobe Flash Player technology to help them better index dynamic Web content and rich Internet applications that include the Flash file format, or Shockwave Flash, Adobe said in a statement. Search engines already index static text and links within Shockwave Flash files, but rich Internet applications and dynamic Web content are elusive to search engines because of their changing states, Adobe noted.

Adobe's technology means that millions of pre-existing RIAs that use Flash technology, including content that loads at runtime, are immediately searchable without alteration by companies or developers, Adobe said. Google has already added the optimized Flash Player to its search engine, while Yahoo plans to add the technology to a future update of Yahoo Search.

"Designers and Web developers have long been frustrated that search engines couldn't better access the information within their content created with Flash technology. It's great to see Adobe and the search engines working directly together to improve the situation," Danny Sullivan, editor in chief of SearchEngineLand.com, said in a statement. "The changes should help unlock information that's previously been 'invisible' and will likely result in a better experience for searchers."

Google is part of a group of tech heavyweights going on the offensive against the threat of patent-infringement lawsuits, The Wall Street Journal reported on its Web site Sunday evening.

The group, which calls itself the Allied Security Trust, plans to buy up key intellectual property before it is obtained by parties that might use it against them, the newspaper reported. Joining Google in the group are Verizon Communications, Cisco Systems, Ericsson, and Hewlett-Packard, among others.

Each company will pay about $250,000 to join and then put about $5 million into escrow for future patent purchases, the newspaper reported, citing people familiar with the matter

The organization is the latest tactic for a tech industry that says it is under attack from "patent trolls" seeking to buy intellectual property to extract royalties from companies that rely on that technology. The Coalition for Patent Fairness, a lobbying group that represents tech companies, reports the number of patent-related lawsuits rose to nearly 2,500 through October of last year from 921 in 1990, the newspaper reported.

A sweeping patent law rewrite backed by seemingly every prominent hardware and software maker was part of that effort, but it stalled in the Senate last month. The so-called Patent Reform Act of 2007 would have curbed the ability of patent holders to obtain what the companies consider disproportionate damage awards, spurring the rise of so-called patent trolls who exist only to extort large payments out of deep-pocketed companies. Microsoft, Google, Cisco, Adobe Systems, Apple, Intel, Symantec, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, eBay, Oracle, and Red Hat were among the high-profile signatories that signed on in support of the bill.

The Motion Picture Association of America has helped convict an administrator for EliteTorrents.org, a peer-to-peer site, of felony copyright infringement and conspiracy, the U.S. Justice Department announced Friday.

Daniel Dove, 26, of Clintwood, Va., was the first criminal conviction after jury trial for peer-to-peer copyright infringement and the eighth overall resulting from a federal crackdown called Operation D-Elite that targeted administrators and people who provided content that was distributed through the BitTorrents hub.

The case began in 2005, when federal agents raided and shut down the popular Web site that had distributed copyrighted music and movies, including Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. At that time, Homeland Security agents from several divisions served search warrants on 10 people around the country suspected of being involved with the Elite Torrents site, and took over the group's main server.

According to prosecutors, EliteTorrents attracted more than 125,000 members and assisted in the illegal distribution of about 700 movies, which were downloaded more than 1.1 million times. According to the Justice Department, Dove led a group of "uploaders" that supplied pirated content to the group, as well as recruiting members with ultra-fast broadband connections to become uploaders. Prosecutors also said Dove operated a high-speed server himself.

The MPAA "provided substantial assistance" to the investigation, the Justice Department said in a statement.

Dove faces up to 10 years in prison when he is sentenced in September, the Justice Department said.

Scott McCausland, who used to be an administrator of the EliteTorrents server before the raid, pleaded guilty in 2006 to two copyright-related charges over the uploading of Star Wars: Episode III to the Internet. As a result, he was sentenced to five months in jail and five months' home confinement.

McCausland--a Linux user--reported in 2007 that the terms of his sentence meant he would have to install Windows if he wanted to use a computer during his probation.