Corporations as Rights Guarantors?

Interesting discussion all over the web today about the Government’s anti-pornography crusade and related demand for information from Google by the DOJ.

Further, interesting speculation on Search Engine Watch that MSN and Yahoo complied, at least to a limited extent, with the government’s request.

I think Google’s position is commendable. Their non-compliance will only bolster their “good Google” image. Conversely, it’s possible that if people pay attention to this and it turns into a bigger issue, MSN and Yahoo! will suffer in the minds of some consumers — even though it appears they released no “personal” information.

Both Yahoo and MSN are already tainted, in that they have collaborated with the Chinese government’s efforts to repress political speech. This latest incident reinforces the impression that they’d not put up much of a fight with any government when it comes to information they may have about us users, both in the collective and individual sense.

Ironically, maybe eventually interestingly, this could create a competitive dynamic that is helpful. If Google is consistent in its apparent protection of its users, it should consistently gain loyalty from us (that, of course, requires a big and as of yet unproven assumption: that we collectively actually care about our rights). If Yahoo! and MSN continue to suffer by comparison, they may do more. One way to highlight their efforts will be to pick high profile, important fights with various governments to protect their users rights.

Newspapers, and some other media companies, have long done this, both to advance reportorial privileges, but also because they know it’s good marketing. When they fight government subpoenas, they look like they’re fighting for the little guy, against the big bad government. (One could argue that at least that used to be the case, with respect to things like the Pentagon Papers).

In this age of increasingly bold uses of executive power, including admitted wiretapping and monitoring of US citizens conversations without a warrant and in defiance of the law, could corporations like Google, Yahoo!, and MSN end up being a key wall of protection against unwanted and unwarranted attempts to snoop on us? All incented by competition to be the best “protector” of our online rights?

It’s frightening that it could come to this. I’m glad to see corporations act righteously, as Google appears to have done here. But I don’t want to have to rely on the power of market forces and profit incentives to secure our fundamental constitutional rights.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Google Video Loses the Plot

First: I have to caveat everything I write here because I haven’t been able to look at or use Google Video yet. That the service was announced, but not launched, is in and of itself lame.

Second, based on what I’ve been able to learn about Google video, it would seem they have not really done anything useful. Instead, they appear to have picked a strategy that adds to the tower of Babel that is the downloadable video internet marketplace today.

What should they have done? Simple, same video marketplace idea, but without a DRM solution. Give us paid-for content, but in a more-or-less standard wrapper — MPEG4 or the H.264 flavor, that works on the largest variety of devices and that can be burned to DVD without restriction.

I would guess Google will argue that they are doing that (the Charlie Rose example that has been cited), but that they’re also want to offer media companies and producers a choice between that approach or some form of DRM distribution. Indeed, here is their pitch:

Owners also have the choice to offer their content with
or without copy protection – enabling them greater control over its
distribution.

Sure, it sound sensible and logical. But, by giving this choice they’ve made a real mistake, because they have forfeited the market-making impact they could have had, and their opportunity to build a video marketplace that actually provides consumers a decent experience. Most media companies and producers offering paid-for content will choose to have their content copy-protected, and unless I’m missing something, that copy protection probably won’t work with a significant range of devices (and I doubt it will provide for DVD-burning, so sneakernet won’t be an option, either).

So what Google has ended up with is a second-rate (at best) initial content offering and a third-class consumer experience. With a little bravery, they could have focused on a first-rate consumer experience — and a solution without DRM is the only consumer-friendly option for now. Combining first class consumer experience with their market-making traffic would have made Google a real threat. Indeed, with that combination, they would need just one success — one — to get the ball rolling. One example of a video selling 1 million, 2 million, or 3 million copies, and they’d have folks beating down their door. And without a connected device strategy (like Apple), it would be a lot easier to sell that many copies of a video if it could be burned to DVD; or copied to a Tivo; or to an iPod.

PS: my support for a non-DRM solution isn’t borne out of some anti-copyright agenda. It’s just a practical view, outlined here.

Another Google Hunch

Picture_1_1

It was interesting Google inserted their new webclips feature into Gmail. Defaulted on, no asking for permissions. And then, last night, I started seeing advertisements, like the one above. Even more interesting, and so UnGoogly.
I know it’s absurd to raise it as a possibility in light of the latest earnings, the overwhelming presumption of world domination and monster growth. But I keep wondering, as I did a few months ago with the incessant promotion of the toolbar: Is Google worried about not meeting expectations, and are they starting to get more aggressive to drive growth? I get the sense they expect and want to double revenues next year. As we all know, the law of large numbers says that is harder to do that when you get to revenues in the 10 digit realm.
Of course, the last time I wrote something like this was followed by Google reporting mind-blowing earnings growth for their last quarter. But, like I said, the increasingly aggressive behavior seems so UnGoogly that you have to wonder.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.