theckhd - Slashdot User

Submission + - Private database of student info open to Google

Submitted by deeceent on Wednesday March 07, 2007 @12:07PM

Submission + - RIAA going after Internet Radio

Submitted by scopius on Wednesday March 07, 2007 @11:26AM

Submission + - Google Stealing From Small Business

Submitted by on Wednesday February 28, 2007 @01:08PM

Submission + - Canada Rejects Anti-Terror Laws

Submitted by

Coryoth

on Wednesday February 28, 2007 @01:04PM

Submission + - Sony Expects to Solve PS3 Shortages by May

Submitted by Themer on Wednesday February 28, 2007 @01:02PM

Themer writes: SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) — Sony Corp. is on track to ship 2 million PlayStation 3s to North American stores by the end of March, and expects shortages of the video game console to have completely eased by May, a top executive said on Tuesday. ADVERTISEMENT "April or May is when we feel like we're going to catch up to demand and have product fully in stock across North America and stay there," said Jack Tretton, chief executive of Sony Computer Entertainment America. Asked about widespread reports on video game Web sites that stacks of unsold PlayStation 3s are a common sight in many electronics shops, Tretton told Reuters in an interview that the console was still out of stock in some areas three months after its November launch. "It's a testament to the fact that we've been able to manufacture and ship units on a greater pace than any previous console," Tretton said. "Our goal is to fill shelves across the United States. Our goal is not to have empty shelves, it's to have full shelves. If we have empty shelves, that's one less consumer who could have bought a PlayStation 3," Tretton said. Sony's PlayStation 3 is the cornerstone of the consumer electronics giant's strategy to dominate home entertainment. The PlayStation 3 — which costs $500 or $600 depending on features — has a hard drive to store game data and music, and can play DVDs using Sony's Blu-Ray high-definition technology. But the machine faces stiff competition from Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT.O: Quote, Profile , Research) Xbox 360, which launched a year earlier and has an extensive system for online play, and Nintendo Co. Ltd.'s (7974.OS: Quote, NEWS , Research) Wii, which features a unique motion-sensitive controller. Consumers and analysts have praised the PlayStation 3's graphical prowess and potential, but they have also raised concerns about its high price, a weak line-up of current games and what has been perceived as arrogance on Sony's part about the desirability of its flagship product. "The PS3's biggest opponent right now is itself. It's really just competing against its own PR," said Jeremy Dunham, PlayStation editor at entertainment Web site IGN. "The PS3's problem right now is there have been a lot of broken promises. It has a lot of things to overcome, but the brand name, the franchises and good exclusives ... all should generate interest," Dunham said. Tretton, who helped Sony launch the original PlayStation in North America in 1995, said Sony was on track to ship 2 million PlayStation 3s to retailers by the end of March. "We're in pretty good shape to do that. The early returns are quite favorable," Tretton said. In January, Sony sold 244,000 PlayStation 3s, compared to 294,000 for the Xbox 360 and 436,000 for the Wii. The company has said its target is to ship 6 million PS3s worldwide by the end of March. Shares in Sony fell 5.8 percent in Japan, hit by a surge in the yen and a sell-off in global markets. http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2099138 ,00.asp

Submission + - CafePress using scare tactics and bullying...

Submitted by

Mike Sobczyk

on Wednesday February 28, 2007 @12:59PM

Mike Sobczyk writes: "... to remove competition on the internet (Google AdWords). They are sending out frivolous cease and desist orders to those who try to advertise in their market(s) to scare competition away. Shirtaday.com is a newly founded local Austin company that has started advertising through Google's AdWords to gain awareness for its site (www.shirtaday.com). ShirtaDay.com sells custom t-shirts, with a different design everyday. They have employed an innovative pricing twist in that the more shirts that are sold, the more that everyone saves. A refund is issued at the end of the day to all those who have purchased a shirt. As more shirts are purchased, the refund amount grows, and the price in the end to the customer decreases. Additionally, shirtaday.com welcomes individuals to submit their designs for use on t-shirts. If an individual's design is chosen, they receive 1/3 of the profits from that day's sales. Lastly, shirtaday.com is also setup for easy and effective fundraisers for organizations of all types. As part of ShirtaDay.com's advertising campaign they have chosen the keywords "cafepress", "cafe press", and "cafepress.com" as target words. When a user types in these words, amopng many others, ShirtaDay.com's ad will be displayed (assuming their bid amount is sufficient, budget is adequate, etc.) ShirtaDay.com's ads make no reference to being cafepress.com, affiliated with cafepress.com, or even similar to cafepress.com. Cafepress.com is not mentioned anywhere on the site or within the ads. Such advertising is perfectly legal and acceptable. Companies are allowed to target any such keywords they choose, as long as they are not infringing on trademarks by representing to be another company. ShirtaDay.com's website is not similar to cafepress.com, the concept is not the same, the layout is not resembling to cafepress.com, and it makes no attempt to be like cafepress.com. For example, search for Microsoft, or Oracle. Many ads pop up which are not in fact Microsoft, or Microsoft authorized. There are many such instances. If Microsoft could sue these companies they most likely would, but there are no grounds for such suits, as they are not breaking any laws. Cafepress.com's cease and desist, which was sent to us, was merely a scare tactic. There is also legal precedent to support this in the following two cases: J.G. Wentworth S.S.C. Ltd. v. Settlement Funding LLC d/b/a Peachtree Settlement Funding, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 06-0597, January 4, 2007. Wells Fargo & Co. v. WhenU.com, Inc., 293 F. Supp. 2d 734, 757 (E.D. Mich. 2003). In both cases the court dismissed the suits, pointing out, among other things, that: "At no point are potential consumers `taken by a search engine' to defendant's website due to defendant's use of plaintiff's marks in meta tags. Rather, as in the present case, a link to defendant's website appears on the search results page as one of many choices for the potential consumer to investigate. As stated above, the links to defendant's website always appear as independent and distinct links on the search result pages regardless of whether they are generated through Google's AdWords program or search of the keyword meta tags of defendant's website. Further, plaintiff does not allege that defendant's advertisements and links incorporate plaintiff's marks in any way discernible to Internet users and potential customers." and furthermore: "Due to the separate and distinct nature of the links created on any of the search results pages in question, potential consumers have no opportunity to confuse defendant's services, goods, advertisements, links or websites for those of plaintiff." The court added that: "Likelihood of confusion exists where `consumers viewing the mark would probably assume that the product or service it represents is associated with the course of a different product or service identified by a similar mark." This is not the case with ShirtaDay.com as we use no simliar marks in our ads. In conclusion, in the case referenced, the court "granted defendant's motion to dismiss since defendant carried the burden of establishing that "no reasonable factfinder could find a likelihood of confusion on any set of facts that plaintiff could prove." The Court reasoned that even if "defendant did in fact use plaintiff's marks through Google's AdWords program or in the keyword meta tags for its website-as a matter of law defendant's actions do not result in any actionable likelihood of confusion under the Lanham Act." http://www.lawpublish.com/sample/ACS611A6.PDF Please help us raise awareness of this issue and of the tactics of the larger online websites. Their actions are almost monopolistic and violate freedoms of speech. If this has happened to us, we can only assume it has happened to many others. Thank You, Mike Sobczyk, ShirtaDay.com Founder This is also in our blog, at http://shirtaday.com/wordpress/?p=18"