The Google Opportunity

By James B. Stewart
February 7, 2006
GOOGLE SHARES FELL to earth last week, singed by earnings that fell short of wildly optimistic expectations and higher-than-expected tax rates.

You knew this day was coming, didn't you? No party goes on forever.

The plunge was swift. Google (GOOG1) shares were trading at $475 just a few weeks ago. After the earnings were announced last week, they dropped in after-hours trading to $379. This week, they dropped below $370. The thundering sound of fast money running for the exits was deafening.

My reaction: Good riddance. The higher Google shares climbed before some kind of correction, the harder they were going to fall. It's a relief to have this out of the way. And here's the silver lining: If Google is the company I think it is, this is almost certainly a buying opportunity for long-term investors.

Let's look briefly at the earnings that caused the havoc. Earnings were $372 million, up 83% from a year ago; revenue was $1.92 billion, up 86%. Margins, already above 60%, improved slightly. In other words, stellar results. "We actually think we had a strong quarter," said Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt, seeming somewhat befuddled by the stock collapse.

All companies should have such problems. But good as they were, these results fell slightly short of Wall Street estimates, because analysts were using the wrong tax rate in their earnings models. The higher tax rate reported by Google accounted for all the shortfall and then some. Lost in the rush to sell was the fact that operating results were actually better than the consensus forecast.

Even so, the case for Google shouldn't be based on one quarter's results. Obviously the broad shift to Internet advertising is continuing to propel Google's earnings and revenues, and the margins suggest Google retains considerable pricing power. But Google isn't going to continue reporting 80-plus annual percentage gains indefinitely. No company does. But some companies have nonetheless done amazingly well over the years, turning their long-term investors who bought a hundred shares in the initial public offering into millionaires in the span of a decade. This is the kind of company I believe Google can be: an Intel (INTC2), Cisco Systems (CSCO3) or Microsoft (MSFT4) for this decade.

Take a look at the early trading patterns of Cisco and Microsoft after their IPOs (Intel's happened too long ago for the data to be available). Both are strikingly similar to Google's. Microsoft went public in March 1986. A year later, it had more than tripled. A year and a half later, it was up 450%. Then in 1987, it plunged along with the rest of the market on Oct. 19, losing more than half its value, a worse correction than Google has experienced thus far. Cisco went public in February 1990. A year later, it was up more than 150%. But then it lost more than a third of its value. Four months later it was up 250%. By comparison, Google was up 250% a year after its IPO, and 450% at its peak a few weeks ago.

These early corrections in Microsoft and Cisco were significant buying opportunities. At today's prices, Microsoft has risen 335 times, and Cisco is up nearly 300 times, from their initial offering prices. Of course there were no doubt companies with similar trading trajectories that ended up going nowhere. But it's only been a year and a half since Google went public. If Google does turn out to be another Cisco, it's still in its infancy, with plenty of gains ahead of it.

I still own my Google shares, and may well add to them. I've vowed to be the kind of investor Google's founders said they wanted at the time of the IPO: patient, supportive of management, not obsessed with quarterly earnings results, and not trading frantically in and out of the stock. In return, my hope is that Google turns into one those few companies that both transforms society and makes its investors wealthy. Opportunities like these don't happen very often.

Links in this article:
1http://www.smartmoney.com/cfscripts/Director.cfm?searchString=GOOG
2http://www.smartmoney.com/cfscripts/Director.cfm?searchString=INTC
3http://www.smartmoney.com/cfscripts/Director.cfm?searchString=CSCO
4http://www.smartmoney.com/cfscripts/Director.cfm?searchString=MSFT

URL for this article:
http://www.smartmoney.com/commonsense/index.cfm?story=20060207

Google Book Search: The Argument

Lessig

So there’s a corrected version of the Google Book Search video here on youTube. Very cool video sharing service, just ripe for CC licenses.

The essence of the argument here builds upon the “market failure” justification for fair use: We recognize fair use where there’s a prominent market failure. Here, the market failure is caused by the insanely inefficient property system copyright law is. Given that, the use Google makes is plainly “fair use.”

Update: This is an updated version that substitutes a photograph. I stupidly used a photo without checking the license. The substituted photo is a beautiful image by fuzzbabble on Flickr. My apologies to the very talented Andrea K. Gingerich.

posted by [ Lessig ] on [ Jan 14 06 at 8:07 PM ] to [ good law ] [ post diffusion: 1 trackback + technorati ]

The Option Strategist Weekly Updater

February 10, 2006

To receive the complete commentary plus reccomendations visit here:

Note: Use the following link to view this week's charts:


The market actually made its high for this year just a few days into the year. If you weren't looking at a chart, you might not believe that, for the bullish media and brokerage barrage has been heavy. But, with this week's $SPX close below 1260, that put the final cap on a series of negative technical developments, and we are therefore officially bearish now.

When $SPX closed below 1260, that made a lower low to go along with a lower high -- establishing a negative, down-trending channel (see Figure 1). While the market did bounce right back after that, the bounce is still within the confines of that down-trending channel. In other works, with the market being more volatile recently, it is possible that we will see these bullish bounces off of support (1260, 1245-1250) and off of the bottom of the channel. However, as long as the channel remains intact, the trend is down.

The equity-only put-call ratios rolled over to well-defined sell signals this week. This is a big part of our strong bearish opinion. While they had toyed with sell signals recently, they did not confirm them. However, this time they have. As you can see from the charts in Figures 2 and 3, there is no doubt that they have turned higher. A rising equity- only put-call ratio is negative for the broad market. Also note that the NYSE/NASD chart has both ratios presently on sell signals as well.

Market breadth has not been great for a couple of months, and the last two weeks fit right into that bearish pattern.

Finally, volatility indices ($VIX and $VXO) are in uptrends that began back in December. Despite some gyrating (the spike peak and subsequent drop in January), the uptrend ploddingly persists (see Figure 4). A rising $VIX is bearish -- at least in this environment -- and so this completes a full complement of negative technical indicators.

Could we be wrong? Of course, but when all the indicators are in agreement like this, we feel comfortable taking a stance (a bearish one, in this case). As we wrote in The Daily Strategist yesterday, if you can't agree with your own indicators, then what good are you/they? Obviously, if these trends -- downward in $SPX and upward in $VIX are violated, that would be our 'stop out' point.

Human head found in woman's luggage

here

Human head found in woman's luggage
A woman faces charges after a US baggage search found a human skull with teeth, hair and skin in her luggage at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, Florida officials have said.

Haitian Myrlene Severe, 30, a permanent US resident, arrived on Thursday afternoon from Cap Haitien, Haiti, aboard a Lynx International Airlines Flight, said US Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Miami.


Customs and Border Protection officials "found a human head with organic matter inside of her checked baggage", ICE Special Agent Erick Hernandez wrote in an affidavit.

Severe told officers "she had obtained the package, which contained the human head, from a male in Haiti for ... use as a part of her Voodoo beliefs. Severe also stated that the purpose of the package was to ward off evil spirits," Hernandez wrote.

"It still had teeth, hair and bits of skin and lots of dirt," Gonzalez said.

The charges filed include that Severe smuggled a human head into the US without proper documentation, as well as failure to declare the head and transporting hazardous material in air commerce.

She faces a maximum of 15 years in prison if convicted on all charges.

Severe remains in custody.

© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2006, All Rights Reserved.


This article: http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=214792006

Last updated: 10-Feb-06 20:34 GMT

Deja voodoo all over again...

Don't Copy This Headline!

BNA

Friday, February 10, 2006
ISSN 1535-1610
News

Anaylsis & Perspective
Don't Copy This Headline!


The authors discuss the potential impact of a pending copyright infringement case that challenges Google's use of newspaper headlines to link to news stories.
Judge Gladys Kessler is poised to make summary judgment rulings in a case that has fleshed out yet another novel copyright issue wrought by the Internet. That case, Agence France-Presse v. Google Inc., D.D.C., No. 05-00546, pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, presents the question of whether newspaper-article headlines are copyrightable. The court's decision on this issue of first impression could have far-reaching effects both for news-aggregators like Google and for your average blogger alike.

In this article, we outline the issues and arguments raised by the parties, and consider some possible outcomes. Following Judge Kessler's ruling on the summary judgment motion, we will analyze the possible consequences of the court's decision.


Background

The case arises in the context of Google's news service, Google News, which is described in papers filed by Google as a tool that helps users "identify and locate Web pages containing news stories and images on a given subject." Google News displays headlines to identify available news stories on a range of topics. To read a particular story, a user clicks on a headline, which whisks the user away from Google's Web site to the Web site where that particular story has been published. The Google News site that displays these headline-links is generated using Google's proprietary "Web crawlers" that search and organize information on the Internet.
Plaintiff Agence France-Presse is a wire service that, according to its court papers, supplies news stories, headlines, photographs, and graphics to, among others, newspapers, Web sites, and news aggregators. The gravamen of AFP's complaint (as it relates specifically to headlines) is that when Google News copies and displays headlines generated and supplied to news outlets by AFP, it is infringing on AFP's copyrights in those headlines.

The copyrightability of those headlines came to a head when Google filed its motion for partial summary judgment, arguing that AFP's headlines are not copyrightable as a matter of law.


Google: Headlines Are Short, Ordinary Titles
That Are Not Entitled to Copyright Protection


Google presses three arguments in support of its assertion that AFP's headlines are not copyrightable. First, Google argues that AFP's headlines are fact-based and too ordinary to merit protection. Second, Google argues that the AFP headlines are too short to merit protection, even if they are witty. Finally, Google argues that the headlines are equivalent to titles of works, which Copyright Office regulations and courts declare uncopyrightable.
Google contextualizes its first argument--that headlines are fact-based and ordinary--by citing to admissions by AFP that its headlines are typically factual, simple, and contain only one idea. AFP also admitted that headlines of AFP articles are typically not "hardened" or "jazzed up." From these admissions, Google argues that headlines of such a nature cannot be copyrighted because copyright law does not protect ordinary factual statements about news or ideas since they lack the requisite creativity to merit protection.

Citing Feist Publications Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340, 18 USPQ2d 1275 (1991), Google first notes that news of the day is typically not copyrightable and is in the public domain. Google then marshals case law holding that ordinary phrases are not entitled to copyright protection. Cast in light of these principles, Google argues, AFP's headlines cannot be copyrightable because they are admittedly nothing more than simple, factual statements about news that is in the public domain.

In pressing its argument that AFP's headlines are too short to merit protection, Google cites to AFP's admission that its headlines are typically short--fewer than ten words. Highlighting the reciprocal relationship between length and the required degree of creativity for copyright protection, Google argues that even if the headlines were not fact-based and ordinary, they would not be copyrightable because they are too short.

Google directs the court's attention to case law in which such phrases as Pepsi's "You Got The Right One, Uh-Huh" and a guidebook entitled "Eat Your Art Out, Chicago" were found to be unprotectable despite their non-factual nature. Measured against this case law, according to Google, even if AFP's headlines were considered highly creative, rather than fact-based at ten words or less, they would be too short to merit copyright protection. Thus, under the circumstances of a case where the headlines are both short and fact-based, they are even less deserving of protection.

Last, Google argues that AFP's news headlines are equivalent to titles, which have no protection under copyright law. Regulations from the Copyright Office and case law are in accord in holding that titles to works are categorically unworthy of copyright protection. Google argues that AFP's headlines are simply titles to its news stories and, therefore, fall within this categorical exclusion. In support of its argument, Google cites several dictionaries that define a headline as the title or caption of a news article.


AFP: Headlines Are the Heart of the News Story, And Must Be Afforded Copyright Protection

AFP meets Google's arguments with four central contentions. AFP first argues that its news headlines are protected as fact-based compilations. Second, AFP counters that headlines are not titles subject to categorical exclusion. Third, AFP argues that when Google copies its headlines, it is copying the most important part of its news stories, which as a whole certainly qualify for copyright protection. Last, AFP appears to appeal to the equities of the case by arguing that Google is copying for free the very material that AFP licenses for a fee to its subscribers.
In arguing that its headlines are protected as fact-based compilations, AFP notes that creating a news-headline is no simple, unskilled task. AFP states that the author must take account of a multitude of facts, distill and interpret them, and determine which facts to emphasize so as to capture the essence of the story in the headline while also enticing a reader to read the full article.

AFP argues that such a process is not a mechanical process but rather one that requires a great deal of creativity, producing a result that is worthy of copyright protection. Moreover, AFP asserts, its headlines often express wit and humor.

By way of example, AFP cites to such headlines as "Robot dog keeps over-eaters on tight leash" and "Poor-fitting bras leave Australian women feeling like boobs" and "Pop goes soda in U.S. schools in victory for health campaign."

AFP also takes issue with Google's characterization of news headlines as titles. First, AFP notes that its search of numerous dictionaries' definitions of title turned up none that included headlines in its definition of title.

AFP further argues that headlines are integral parts of news stories, not titles of them. Expounding on this point, AFP analogizes a headline to the overture of an opera, as opposed to the opera's title. Even though the opera's title may not warrant protection, its overture almost certainly would; so too, then, should the headline of a news story, an overture's analogical equivalent.

Related to this argument is AFP's third point, in which AFP argues that its headlines are imbedded within and an integral part of the news story itself, which as a whole merits copyright protection. Under this characterization, AFP claims that by copying the imbedded headline, Google takes the most important part of the copyrighted news article. Citing Harper & Row Publishers Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539, 225 USPQ 1073 (1985), AFP argues that such copying by Google is not de minimis and is sufficient to be infringing.

Finally, AFP notes that it licenses to its subscribers for a fee the same stand-alone headlines that Google News copies. That copying, AFP argues, threatens the financial incentive for wire services such as AFP to provide such a service. AFP asks rhetorically why any wire service would go to the expense of creating headlines and a network for their distribution if the wire service knows that its headlines are not protected and may be duplicated and used in a similar fashion by any competitor.


A Decision With Consequence

Judge Kessler heard oral arguments from the parties on Jan. 11, and the court anticipates ruling on Google's motion prior to the next status conference in the case set for March 21. The stark alternatives facing the court--either headlines are copyrightable or they are not--come with practical implications. A holding that news headlines are capable of exhibiting the creativity and originality necessary to merit copyright protection comes with both positives and negatives. Similarly, a categorical exclusion of news headlines from copyright protection would come with its own set of benefits and burdens.
Should the court conclude that headlines exhibiting the requisite amount of creativity and originality are copyrightable, one can imagine certain benefits that would flow from such a decision. First, such a result would likely foster the production of witty, entertaining, or otherwise interesting and engaging headlines in newspapers and other periodicals. Such a result also seems to appeal to an ordinary sense of fairness and to the equities of the case. Why, after all, should Google News be able to unabashedly copy AFP's headlines, which undeniably took time and effort to craft, and profit from doing it? Something does seem unfair about that.

On the other hand, such a ruling from the court could spread considerable concern throughout the so-called blogosphere that has arisen in recent years. Many bloggers routinely use headlines to link to news articles.

One could imagine that the threat of infringement litigation for such linkage would substantially chill that activity or at least lead to the inconvenience of having to independently compose a description of the article being linked to. As stated by Howard J. Bashman, author of the Web log How Appealing: "It is more difficult and time-consuming to have to describe articles rather than providing a headline with a link, so it is also likely that if headline linking becomes impractical, the end result at my Web log would be that fewer articles would be mentioned."

Finally, such a ruling would prevent services like Google News from automatically linking to news stories through what is an easy and efficient manner. If such news aggregators still chose to link via headlines, they would be forced to make a headline-by-headline call on the headline's copyrightability and risk litigation on any close call and damages if they were wrong.

Under such a scenario, none but the most dry and boring headlines would likely find their way onto Google News or similar services. Those services could probably strike a licensing deal with the authors of the headlines, but given the large number of news outlets searched and linked to, such an effort would likely be costly and time-consuming.

A decision from the court that news headlines are categorically uncopyrightable would of course be a bright-line rule that would eliminate these concerns. Such a rule, however, would not be without its costs. As noted above, it could disincentivize creativity and originality in crafting headlines. It would also be subject to the same criticism as the categorical rule against copyright protection for titles--overbreadth. Precluding copyright protection for all headlines might very well deprive creative and original expression of protection simply because of its location at the top of a news article.

Should the court settle on a rule denying copyright protection to headlines, one would expect such a ruling to be expressly limited to the factual, news-story context, leaving for another day the question of whether fictional headlines that poke fun and parody (such as those found in the popular newspaper spoof, The Onion, which currently displays headlines like "Black Box Records Last 90 Minutes of Hot-Air Balloon Crash" and "President Creates Cabinet-Level Position to Coordinate Scandals") merit at least the possibility of protection. Undoubtedly, however the court rules, its decision will receive due scrutiny as the first to decide an interesting and important copyright question with possibly far-reaching consequences. The decision will be of interest to both scholars and practitioners alike, with commentary, analysis, and debate likely to ensue.

Stay tuned.

Martin J. Bishop and Thomas K. Anderson are attorneys with Foley & Lardner, Chicago.


By Martin J. Bishop and Thomas K. Anderson


___________________________________
Contact customer relations at: customercare@bna.com or 1-800-372-1033
ISSN 1535-1610
Copyright © 2006, The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Copyright FAQs | Internet Privacy Policy | BNA Accessibility Statement | License

Reproduction or redistribution, in whole or in part, and in any form,
without express written permission, is prohibited except as permitted by the BNA Copyright Policy,
http://www.bna.com/corp/index.html#V

Gunning For Google

Forbes

On My Mind
Gunning For Google
Dennis Kneale, 02.03.06, 11:00 AM ET


LONDON - The Google guys must be wondering what the hell hit them. For a year or two now, Sergey Brin and Larry Page have been hailed by Wall Street and the press, adored by fiendishly avid users and devoted investors, and all but worshipped by Silicon Valley colleagues and advertisers.

Now comes the backlash: Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) as spineless hypocrite willing to sell out a billion users yearning to breathe free behind the Great Firewall of China; Google as violator of copyrights, reviled by book publishers and newspapers that accuse it of pirating their precious prose; Google as flawed financial manipulator, unable to manage its tax rates to avoid a mild earnings disappointment and a jarring market reaction.

Newsflash: Google is on the side of right in most of this Sturm und Drang. This onslaught isn’t really about the issues at hand. It is driven by fear, envy and greed, and it is an inevitable part of the life cycle in Silicon Valley. Upstarts climb up from nothing to the applause of all, and then--just when you start believing your own planted PR--the best ones must be taken down. Admiration turns into wariness and jealousy, and what first struck everyone as perky and plucky now seems potent and threatening. High-tech heroes, once renowned for their boldness, suddenly are resented as arrogant and imperious (by perception or reality; in the Valley they are one and same).

Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer of Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) endured this in the late 1990s. Tom Siebel and Siebel Systems went through it in the aftermath of the tech crash of 2000; so did Larry Ellison of Oracle (nasdaq: ORCL - news - people ). See also Carly Fiorina of Hewlett-Packard (nyse: HPQ - news - people ).

And now it is Google’s turn.

The gloating is palpable, some of it from people who had celebrated Google’s startling rise. When the China flap broke last week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland--the company will follow Chinese law and restrict search phrases that could yield entries on dissent and suppression--it got more play than the news that the Palestinians had elected Hamas militants intent on destroying Israel (business trumps geopolitics, even at WEF). Bill Gates was ready for comment, reportedly teasing Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt about the company motto (“Don’t be evil”) and later holding forth sagely on the matter.

Now the bloggers are on the company’s case. “I wonder if they’ve banned ‘spineless,’ hypocritical’ and ‘cowards,’ ” said one wag quoted in the Financial Times. Another diatribe, posted on the blogspot.com site that Google itself owns, lamented “that giant sucking sound” of “Google’s soul getting sucked out to make room for cash.”

Please stop the madness. Users will find a way dodge the search restrictions. No company is above the laws of the country where it wants to compete, and shareholders will fare better by having Google stay in the booming market and wait for it to loosen up. Eventually China will.

The World Association of Newspapers, meanwhile, accuses the Google guys of building their business “on the back of kleptomania,” demanding recompense. (Even though many publications throw up their content online free of charge anyway.) Book publishers have questioned Google’s plan to put online 15 million titles in ten years, including the entire contents of the libraries at Stanford University and the University of Michigan.

And the stock market went haywire when Google’s per-share net came in 22 cents below the $1.76 that analysts had expected. For want of two dimes, each share lost up to $56 in trading that day. Never mind that sales rose 86% and earnings, even better, doubled. On Thursday, The Independent in London had Google’s one-day loss in market value on page one in a headline six inches high: $13,000,000,000, puckishly putting the digits in blue, red, yellow, then green to mock the Google logo.

Google was headed for a fall, if only because, damn it, we’re all so jealous. It went public at $85 in August 2004. At over $400 lately, it has created four billionaires, and according to the company, one in five of its employees are now multimillionaires. (The investor relations chief, who has got to be younger than I am, is said to have recently retired.) Sergey Brin and Larry Page, each now barely into their 30s, founded Google in 1999 after landing a $100,000 check at lunch from Sun Microsystems (nasdaq: SUNW - news - people ) co-founder Andrew Bechtolsheim. Now Brin and Page are worth $16 billion apiece. Isn’t that reason enough to hate them?

Worse: In sharp contrast to the storied nerdiness of Bill Gates 20 years ago, these guys are close to cool. They wear black, travel in attractive company and work the room. They were on prominent display at myriad Davos parties. “Ooh, he just took off his sweater!” an admiring young woman at the Forbes party said when Sergey shucked his jumper to reveal sculpted biceps framed by a tight, black T-shirt. (Sorry, Sergey; too rich a moment to go unmentioned.)

But Google aggravates the matter with its own pretensions. It wraps itself in the pious pursuit of truth and access and free-flowing information. It applies a famously difficult intelligence test that requires recruits to know arcane things they will never use on the job. At the Google party in Davos, the flow of expensive vintage wines stopped at 11:15 P.M. so a few hundred people could sit in a sweltering museum room to hear Brin and a venture capitalist do an onstage interview with Shimon Peres, the former Israeli prime minister--all of it off the record, of course. As they chatted, an Israeli cartoonist in a corduroy suit entertained the audience by using squeaky, fat felt-tip markers to draw cruel caricatures of the men onstage. Even a couple of Googlers cringed.

A bigger driver of this backlash, though, may be fear. Google now poses a direct threat to Microsoft--and to Yahoo! (nasdaq: YHOO - news - people ), and eBay (nasdaq: EBAY - news - people ), and cable channels and broadcast networks, and radio, and telecom carriers and still more. “Each company is focused solely on Google as the main threat, but Google has to fight off all of them at once. How are they supposed to do that?” asks Richard Stromback, chief of nanotech shop Ecology Coatings in Akron, Ohio, who watched the Google drama play out in Davos.

Google execs, sharpie sandbaggers that they are, insist the search engine threatens few of these outlets. Yet the company imperils Microsoft because, while the latter sells software, Google essentially gives it away free to get you to look at ads on its site, notes John Sviokla, vice chairman at consulting firm DiamondCluster International (nasdaq: DTPI - news - people ). Google threatens travel sites, too: Some 30% of the private-jet bookings at easyJet last summer came not through Travelocity and other sites but through Google.

Ever insatiable, Google now offers satellite-mapping and news searches and price-discount shopping and local pizza referrals and Internet phone service; it just bought a radio ad delivery firm and touts plans to distribute TV shows and movies over the Internet. Yet at bottom, Google really is little more than an advertising medium, albeit one of the most powerful ad machines ever invented. Sviokla says more than a trillion dollars, 10% of U.S. gross domestic product, is spent on advertising and marketing, and most of this is utterly inefficient, pitching the wrong product to people who aren’t even shopping--they are planted on the sofa at home.

What was it the old retailer John Wanamaker said? He knew that half of his ad budget was wasted; he just didn’t know which half. At long last, Google offers a way to pitch just the right product to a consumer who is shopping for it at just that moment and can buy it on the spot. Google doesn’t have to save the world or free China or stamp out evil, its own earnest inclinations aside. It just has to provide a venue for ads that truly work, and huge riches will follow.

GREAT LITERARY TAUNTS

Dear Book Club Members. To all of us, who are Great Readers and so
understanding of human nature and do not wish to hurt anyone's feelings,
outright. Thought you would enjoy the following taunts.


"I feel so miserable without you, it's almost like having you here." --
Stephen Bishop

"A modest little person, with much to be modest about." -- Winston Churchill
(about Clement Atlee)

"I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's nothing trivial." --
Irvin S. Cobb

"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great
pleasure." -- Clarence Darrow

"He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the
dictionary." -- William Faulkner (about Ernest Hemingway)

"He is not only dull himself, he is the cause of dullness in others." --
Samuel Johnson

"He had delusions of adequacy." -- Walter Kerr

"I've had a perfectly wonderful evening. But this wasn't it." -- Groucho
Marx

"They never open their mouths without subtracting from the sum of human
knowledge." -- Thomas Brackett Reed

"He loves nature in spite of what it did to him." -- Forrest Tucker

"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of
it." -- Mark Twain

"His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork." - Mae West

"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go." -- Oscar
Wilde

"He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends." Oscar Wilde

"He has Van Gogh's ear for music." -- Billy Wilder

Starting out

By Widget Finn (Filed: 28/01/2006)


Writing on the wall for unwanted tattoos

When businessman Richard Simpson-Birks attended an annual tattoo convention in Derby dressed in T-shirt and jeans he says "I stuck out like a sore thumb. I was the only person without any tattoos."

He was there to do some market research after his wife Barbara, a beauty therapist, had received emails from a German tattooist offering a franchise to use his patented chemical method of removing tattoos.


Mr Simpson-Birks says: "One in eight people in the UK have tattoos and the number is increasing rapidly.

"Like all fashions it's bound to wane, and I saw tattoo removal as an interesting business opportunity."

The German tattooist spent 20 years developing his method that, unlike the conventional approach, didn't involve lasers - and he wanted €1.3m for the UK master franchise. "I went to see the procedure in Switzerland and persuaded him that his price was nonsense because of the amount and investment required to get it off the ground. Eventually we agreed a very small selling price plus a profit share on the basis that he had no involvement with the commercial side."

Mr Simpson-Birks discovered that the whole area of tattoo removal is currently unregulated, though the EU is planning to move in. "I decided that it was an opportunity to redesign the tattoo industry. Any legislation would affect me so if I could influence it this would benefit my business. I got on to a consultancy which advises the government in this area."

A key step was to establish through the environmental health department that tattooing and its removal is a cosmetic rather than a medical procedure, so that it can be carried out by qualified beauty therapists and medical clinics. Mr Simpson-Birk says: "I also had to redesign the tattoo gun, since hygiene would be a major issue.

"A Swiss company developed the single-use gun for me while a UK electronics company produced a recordable controller to stop unauthorised people from carrying out the procedure. I invented my own standards which would influence others in the industry."

The Simpson-Birks started using the procedure in Barbara's Derby beauty salon to test the market. After an article in the local paper asking for volunteers to have their tattoos removed the switchboard was jammed.

But Mr Simpson-Birks knew that franchising was the way forward. He says: "I contacted the British Franchise Organisation for advice then we engaged a franchise lawyer to ensure that we offered a watertight agreement."

Coverage in the beauty press brought in more inquiries. "Initially I thought I could sell franchises to anyone, then I realised that the image must be clinical and that we should target established salons and clinics."

They were about to sell the first franchises when the Simpson-Birks were invited to appear on the BBC programme Dragons' Den. "It was the most stressful situation I've experienced. I had a full business plan, forecasts and cash flows, but these were ignored and we were grilled for over two hours without any paperwork. We'd asked for £250,000 and one 'Dragon' offered half, but I didn't take it because I couldn't work with someone looking over my shoulder." The first three five-year franchises were sold for £15,000 each, "a giveaway, for it's the royalty on each removal session which brings in the turnover".

Mr Simpson-Birks is currently negotiating franchises in three branches of Selfridges - with a tattoo company. "I said that I wouldn't sell the process to the opposition but these people share the same standards, and the chance to get into Selfridges is irresistible."

The cost of removing a small tattoo starts at £500, and with all those fashion victims who change their mind, that's an awful lot of royalties for Tattoo Erase.


© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006

IP and email sources

One of the IR reference staff. Bob McCarthy, suggested using: http://www.abika.com/Reports/verifyemail.htm. Neither of us have used it before and the IRC does not have a subscription.

There are only a few website that I know of where public record info can be looked up by e-mail address, none of them produced any results.

I was able to find IP address info using IP Address Directory, see below.

E-mail Directories: (reverse look-up, searched but did not locate any info)

http://www.411locate.com/email.htm

http://emailsearch.addresses.com/email.php

http://www.theultimates.com/email/

http://www.infospace.com/home/white-pages/reverse-email

http://www.arin.net/whois/index.html

http://www.worldemail.com/index.htm

http://www.icq.com/whitepages/

http://email.iaf.net/email-search.html

http://email.people.yahoo.com/py/psAdvSearch.py



IP Address Directory:

Reverse IP Lookup: http://psacake.com/web/eg.asp

"All Who Is" IP Look up: http://www.arin.net/whois/index.html

- both produced the results below:


Search results for: 4.154.225.151


OrgName: Level 3 Communications, Inc.
OrgID: LVLT
Address: 1025 Eldorado Blvd.
City: Broomfield
StateProv: CO
PostalCode: 80021
Country: US...

The Are You a Librarian Test

Kevin Matthew Dames Blog

CopyCense

Google Privacy Case Is Inside Baseball
"The Justice Department went to court last week to try to force Google, by far the world's largest Internet search engine, to turn over an entire week's worth of searches. The move, which Google is fighting, has alarmed its users, enraged privacy advocates, changed some people's Internet search habits and set off a debate about how much privacy one can expect on the Web.

"But the case itself, according to people involved in it and scholars who are following it, has almost nothing to do with privacy. It will turn, instead, on serious but relatively routine questions about trade secrets and civil procedure."

Adam Liptak. In Case About Google's Secrets, Yours Are Safe. The New York Times. Jan. 26, 2006.

(Editor’s Note: The Times allows free access to their stories on the Web for seven days before sending the stories to the paper’s fee-based Archive.)

CopyCense™: K. Matthew Dames on the intersection of business, law and technology. A business venture of Seso Digital LLC.

Posted by K. Matthew Dames at 08:54:00 AM in Cases & Litigation , Privacy & Security , Web & Online | Permalink

Rule 49: Make Safe and Sane Left Turns

here

Left turns at controlled intersections are one of the most dangerous driving maneuvers. They don't have to be -- the dangers can be controlled. The most important thing is to be knowledgeable -- and then MINDFUL -- of what they are.

When you enter an intersection, the immediate danger is the traffic coming from your LEFT on the cross-street. Look left first, to make sure all traffic is stopping before you enter the intersection. Look left first, then right, then left AGAIN before you roll into the intersection. A red light runner is going to arrive, on average, within four seconds of the light change. You don't want to be there if he does.

Pull into the intersection (unless the law in your state dictates otherwise), but leave room for left turners coming the opposite direction to do the same. Modernized intersections have off-set opposing left turn lanes, so that both directions have a good view of the oncoming traffic. Some driving instructors will tell you NOT to enter the intersection until it is clear to turn. I disagree. The greatest danger in entering the intersection is the red light runner -- and after the first four seconds that danger largely evaporates. Sitting behind the crosswalk prevents others from making their left turns on that light cycle. This is unnecessary and holds up traffic flow.

Once you're out there, yield to all oncoming traffic. In my state, the left-turner must yield to ALL oncoming traffic, even if they run the red light. This is because the left-turner is almost always the last person with the opportunity to avoid collision -- since he is typically sitting still, waiting for the traffic to clear. If you do not have a clear view of the oncoming traffic, in all the lanes, then don't begin your turn. When you see that all traffic has stopped, then you can go. I am amazed at the number of drivers who gamble everything they have by making BLIND left turns. I've watched some of them die. If you think about how most people view yellow signal lights ("time to hit the gas"), you understand the dangers!

Don't turn your wheels in the direction you are turning until it is clear to go. If you are rear-ended while you are waiting, your already-turned wheels will guide your vehicle into the oncoming traffic -- so keep them straight until the way is clear to complete your turn. Then, complete the turn into the correct lane.

One last hint -- if the traffic is heavy, the left-turn lane is crowded, and it looks like it will take more than one light cycle to be able to make a left turn, consider continuing through the intersection and make three right turns instead. If you do this on side streets (not private property) it's legal and often quicker (when traffic is congested).

Keep it between the fence posts!

Fair use checklists

http://www.copyright.iupui.edu/checklist.htm

http://www.masters.edu/DeptPageNew.asp?PageID=1757

http://www.copyrightoncampus.com/basics/fairuse_list.asp

To all our Law-Lib colleagues:

The Boston College Law Library has entered the blogging world with its Reference Question of the Week blog. Each week, Legal Information Librarian Joan Shear will post a question recently answered by the Law Library's reference staff with our accompanying answer. The blog is keyword searchable. We hope that it will help your patrons with legal research questions and we look forward to hearing from you with comments about a different research approach or a better source for the answer.

To view and comment on the blog, go to here.

Mary Ann Neary
Legal Information Librarian and Lecturer in Law
Boston College Law Library
885 Centre Street
Newton, MA 02459

stumpers

Try here: http://domin.dom.edu/depts/gslis/stumpers/

It also includes the archive - which is very useful!

Maggie Mills
Manager, West Valley Library

SUSAN HANSEN
Jan 27, 1:01 pm

From: "SUSAN HANSEN" - Find messages by this author
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:01:24 -0600
Local: Fri, Jan 27 2006 1:01 pm
Subject: RE: Stumpers

Stumpers just switched to a new host and are now called Project Wombat. You can access them at:

http://www.project-wombat.org/

Susan Hansen, MA, CIRS,
Librarian
Rochester Public Library
101 2nd Street SE
Rochester MN 55904-3776

@rochester.lib.mn.us
www.rochesterpubliclibrary.org

Corporate Blogs

NYTimes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 7, 2006
What's Online
A Blog That Blogs Corporate Blogs
By DAN MITCHELL
THE Fortune 500 Blogging Wiki (socialtext.net/bizblogs) amasses blogs maintained by employees of the biggest American corporations.

The goal, according to the Wiki's creators, is to collect "active public blogs by company employees about the company and/or its products."

But that can quickly become complicated. As Stephen Baker points out in Business Week's

Blogspotting, "blogging is about niches."

"Big companies have lots of them," Mr. Baker says, "and can spawn lots of blogs."

For instance, Mr. Baker notes that Jason Calacanis's blog, which focuses on technology, blogging and media in general, as well as personal stuff, is counted on the wiki as a Time Warner blog. (Mr. Calacanis created Weblogs Inc., which was bought by Time Warner.) But, Mr. Baker says, Mr. Calacanis "writes about his niche - not much about Dick Parsons or the layoffs at Time magazine."

Still, the nature of a wiki, which can be edited or updated . . .

Google

Forbes

Google Ad Network, Google Base Show Significant Promise
Maya Roney, 01.03.06, 2:49 PM ET

Piper Jaffray research analyst Safa Rashtchy maintained an "outperform" rating on Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) and raised his price target to $600 from $445, expecting the company to continue to gain market share, strengthen its brand and generate revenue with new initiatives in 2006.

"2006 should be another banner year for Google," wrote the analyst in a recent research note. "It is singularly well positioned to benefit from the growth of online advertisement and search."

Google is Piper Jaffray's "Top Pick 2006" in the large-cap category. Rashtchy expects the global search market to grow by 41% in 2006, with Google continuing to gain market share. The company gained an additional 5% market share in 2005 and strengthened its brand over the past year with the release of new and innovative products such as Google Maps and Gmail.

Furthermore, the research analyst believes Google's "culture of innovation" has enabled the company to go beyond online search marketing with innovative new products that have "redefined the consumer Internet experience."

Rashtchy believes two of Google's newer products in particular, Google Ad Network and Google Base, show significant promise to fuel Google's string of earnings upside surprises into 2006 and beyond.

Has Your Grief Turned to Depression?

Every person who experiences a loss must complete a four-step grieving process:

1. Accept the loss;
2. Work through and feel the physical and emotional pain of grief;
3. Adjust to living in a world without the person or item lost; and
4. Move on with life.
Depression is more than a feeling of grief after losing someone or something you love; it's a whole body disorder. It can take over the way you think and feel.
Symptoms include:

A sad, anxious, or "empty" mood that won't go away;
Loss of interest in what you used to enjoy;
Low energy, fatigue, feeling "slowed down;"
Changes in sleep patterns;
Loss of appetite, weight loss, or weight gain;
Trouble concentrating, remembering, or making decisions;
Feeling hopeless or gloomy;
Feeling guilty, worthless, or helpless;
Thoughts of death or suicide or a suicide attempt; and
Recurring aches and pains that don't respond to treatment.
If you recently experienced a death or other loss, these feelings may be part of a normal grief reaction. But if these feelings persist with no lifting mood, it's time to ask for help.

Little Dogs

This Profit Track looks for stocks that are paying dividend
yields of greater than 8% along with other attractive
fundamental attributes. Although this screen is based on a
long-term and lower risk approach to investing, it has
consistently beaten the S&P 500 for with returns such as +19.5%
in 2004 and +10.7% in 2005.

Here are four stocks that make the grade for the Growth and
Income Profit Track:

American Capital Strategies Ltd (NASDAQ: ACAS), which has a
current yield of 8.64%, recently declared an additional 2005
dividend of three cents per share. ACAS noted that total
dividends declared for 2005 equal $3.08 per share, an increase
of 6% over 2004. In early November, the company reported
third-quarter earnings of 82 cents per share. The result topped
the consensus estimate by about 5% and outpaced the year prior
total. Continue your research on ACAS at
http://at.zacks.com/?id=2389

Diana Shipping, Inc. (NYSE: DSX) meets the criteria of this
profit track with a favorable yield of 15.16%. The company
recently reaffirmed its fourth-quarter dividend guidance,
stating that it expects the dividend to exceed 36 cents per
share. DSX expects to declare the dividend in early February
2006. In late October, the global provider of shipping
transportation services announced third-quarter earnings per
share that were almost 8% ahead of the consensus estimate.
Continue your research on DSX at http://at.zacks.com/?id=2390.

New Century Financial Corporation (NYSE: NEW), a real estate
investment trust (REIT) and parent company of one of the
nation's premier full-service mortgage finance companies, is
yielding an impressive 18.43%. NEW recently declared a dividend
of $1.70 per share for the fourth quarter. The company mentioned
that this is the fourth consecutive increase in the dividend
since electing to become a REIT in the fourth quarter of 2004.
Continue your research on NEW at http://at.zacks.com/?id=2391.

RAIT Investment Trust (NYSE: RAS), a real estate investment
trust, satisfies the criteria of this Profit Track with a yield
of 9.38%. The company recently declared a fourth-quarter
dividend of 61 cents per share. In early November, RAIT
Investment Trust posted third-quarter earnings of 65 cents per
share, outperforming the previous year's earnings of 63 cents
per share. Continue your research on ACAS at
http://at.zacks.com/?id=2392.

To see the full list of stocks that currently pass this
winning screen, go to http://at.zacks.com/?id=2393

Suit Accuses Google of Infringing Patents

By BLOOMBERG NEWS
Published: December 31, 2005
Google, the Internet search engine, has been accused in a lawsuit of infringing a patent-licensing company's patents with its free Internet telephone system.

The plaintiff, Rates Technology, contends that Google Talk, a voice-over-Internet service, infringes patents issued in 1995 and 1996. One is for a device for routing telephone calls along "a least-cost route," and the other is for a system to update a database that stores billing rates so cheaper calls can be made.

The complaint says Google has been infringing the patent "within the past six years."

Rates Technology filed the suit in Federal District Court in Central Islip, N.Y., on Oct. 5. The suit was reported yesterday by The New York Post.

"R.T.I. has discussed with and given Google notice of its infringement, and has tried to resolve this matter without litigation, but Google has refused to do so," the complaint says. "Thus, Google has forced R.T.I. to file this lawsuit."

A conference on the case is set for Feb. 3, according to court records.

Lynn Fox, a spokeswoman for Google, did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

Mr McMillan Speaks

Paraphrasing Yale Hirsch, "Santa Claus has failed to call (so far), so Bears may come to Broad and Wall." Mr. Hirsch coined the term "Santa Claus rally," and did the research on its effects. It extends over seven trading days -- the last 5 trading days of one year and the first 2 of the next year. So far, four of the seven days have passed, and $SPX is down 14 points and the NASDAQ Composite Index is down 28 points. If the seven-day period finishes with a loss, Mr. Hirsch has noted that that has negative implications for the ensuing weeks and perhaps months -- not always, but often.
Looking at our technical indicators, they are in a tenuous state, but are not all on full-fledged sell signals yet. $SPX broke down below 1260 this week, which means it violated an initial support area, and it fell below its 20-day moving average as well. This is mildly negative, but more important is the support at 1250. As long as that holds, the downside would be limited. Conversely, if $SPX should plunge below 1250, it will probably generate heavy selling as many traders are placing "stops" just below there.
The equity-only put-call ratios are now both bearish -- a new development. The weighted ratio gave a sell signal last week and has moved higher, solidifying that sell signal (Figure 3). The standard ratio joined its "partner" on Thursday with a sell signal of its own -- at least according to our computer projections. This is very similar to last year (look at the left hand side of Figures 2 and 3), when the weighted ratio gave an early sell signal, while the standard sell signal came more or less simultaneously with the top near the beginning of 2005.
Breadth has been bouncing back and forth. As a result, the breadth has given several sell signals, the last of which occurred early this week.
Volatility indices ($VIX and $VXO) had recently dropped once again to near 10-year lows ($VXO was below 10!). This week, there has been a modest increase in these indices, which is modestly negative. However, unless $VIX closes above 12.50, we would consider its movements as merely noise within a bullish overall picture of $VIX remaining low.
In summary, these indicators are starting to get quite negative. We expect $SPX and $VIX to follow suit, but we are reluctant to get too bearish without their confirmation. We would not take negative positions in $SPX until it breaks below 1250.
One final point: the media and the bulls are saying that there is a lot of pessimism out there, and that markets don't necessarily repeat themselves, so they expect January to be bullish. Of course, markets don't repeat themselves, but that's hardly a reason to be bullish for January. As for the pessimism, we don't see it. $VIX is near historic lows; that's not pessimistic -- it's complacent, if anything. Furthermore, put-call ratios are not at highs -- which is where they'd be if there were pervasive pessimism.

To receive the complete commentary plus reccomendations visit here:
http://www.optionstrategist.com/offers/strategist.htm

Bloomberg on Abramoff

here

`Six Degrees of Abramoff' Snares a Boy Scout: Margaret Carlson
Dec. 29 (Bloomberg) -- In Washington scandals, when the frenzy intensifies, there often comes a moment when a loyal retainer will say, ``Remember, no one died here.''

We now have the Washington scandal where someone did die. In one of the deals that went especially bad for notorious lobbyist Jack Abramoff and a partner, Adam Kidan, the owner of a gambling cruise ship fleet, Gus Boulis, was shot and killed in his car at point-blank range in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Two of those arrested on first-degree murder charges had received payments from Kidan for catering and surveillance services.

This is the most grisly of the charges that have swamped Abramoff and his various associates over the last year. Now a pack of congressmen is playing ``Six Degrees of Jack Abramoff.'' Anyone separated by less than two degrees will retain counsel. Anyone with checks from Abramoff will never take another, and there's been a rush to send back previous ones.

Anyone who took a trip paid for by Abramoff wishes there were a way to return it. Those on two infamous excursions to St. Andrew's in Scotland may never swing a nine iron easily again.

Ney Leads Pack

Leading the pack is Representative Robert Ney, a Republican from Ohio, for whom ``Six Degrees'' is no mere parlor game but a struggle to clear his name with the Justice Department and keep the seat he has held since 1995. He had the terrible misfortune of attacking Boulis in the Congressional Record when Abramoff and Kidan were trying to buy Boulis's SunCruz fleet. For that, Ney has found himself memorialized in Justice Department documents as ``Representative #1.'' Prosecutors are investigating him as part of their indictment of Abramoff and Kidan for fraud in the SunCruz purchase.

What's important to know about Ney is that if he's bad, Capitol Hill is just hopeless. A nicer guy you'd never want to meet. Until he fell in with bad company, Ney was just going about his business of mutual back-scratching, log-rolling and favor-swapping.

One day, he realizes that one of those favors was for a bunch of fixers who used to work on the Hill, but now are mixed up with characters so unsavory they could star in their own made-for-TV movie. Abramoff is influence-peddling run amok and Ney's name is now inextricably tied to him and SunCruz.

Casinos, Cell Phones

Ney says he has done nothing wrong and that he was duped by Abramoff. The Justice Department says he was doing a favor for a lobbyist who had donated money and given him meals, trips, sports tickets and held fundraisers in his MCI Center skybox. Ney, in turn, had done favors for Abramoff, including helping reopen a casino for an Indian tribe and awarding a license to wire the House for cell phones to an Israeli company that paid Abramoff more than a quarter-million dollars.

Ney, who is such a Boy Scout he donated a chunk of his political action committee money to them, is a former schoolteacher who took the seat once held by Representative Wayne Hays. (Hays achieved unwanted fame by putting his mistress on the payroll.) Ney immediately was taken under the wing of then-House Whip Tom DeLay and joined in his fundraising effort, Retain Our Majority.

Dispensing Goodies

Ney was rewarded in 2001 when DeLay boosted him over a more senior member to chair the House Administration Committee. That's a backwater to those outside Capitol Hill but crucial to those inside. Like a shop steward, Ney doles out the goodies that allow DeLay to spoil and punish colleagues. Want a choice parking space or a nice place to throw a party? Ney's your man. When everyone got mad at the French, Ney decreed that french fries would be replaced by ``freedom fries'' on the Capitol menu. That's about as famous as he got until now.

Shortly after arriving in Washington, Ney intersected with Abramoff on a trip to Montenegro sponsored by one of Abramoff's shell foundations. In 2000, Ney moved within one degree of separation when Abramoff's associate, former DeLay spokesman Michael Scanlon, got him to put two statements in the Congressional Record.

Ney, hailing from Midwestern farm country, hardly had a dog in the SunCruz fight, but he called Boulis a ``bad apple'' hurting innocent casinos. Ney followed up with another statement when the ``bad apple'' got tough after Abramoff and Kidan came up $23 million short in paying him. Shortly thereafter, Boulis was murdered.

How did Ney end up in this mess? He's said little, preferring to deal with the Justice Department rather than the media. A close associate says Ney thought he was doing a favor for friends, former chief of staff Neil Volz and Scanlon, men he didn't know were mixed up with Abramoff. Ney has further embarrassed himself by saying his purpose in traveling to the Scottish links was to speak to the Parliament there, although it wasn't in session at the time.

Safe District

The associate also points out that Ney hardly needed Abramoff's contributions, since his district has been redrawn to be safely Republican. But if not needing the money was a reasonable excuse, there would be no Bernie Ebbers or Andrew Fastow, no Martha Stewart or John Rigas. Not one of them needed a payday bigger than those they had long enjoyed.

What differentiates the Republicans is that their grab for the goodies comes with a gloss of public piety and partisan purity. DeLay might wish now that he hadn't insisted that K Street lobbyists exclude Democrats from their bounty.

You couldn't ask for a better poster child of the new corruption than Abramoff, with his extravagant religiosity and simultaneous venality. You would hardly think Ney would be ``Representative #1'' in his wake. But the way Washington works now, even Boy Scouts get soiled.

Last Updated: December 29, 2005 00:06 EST

Mobile librarian -- "cellarian?"

NY Times

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 30, 2005
Advertising
When Answers (With Ads) Are Just a Phone Call Away
By JULIE BOSMAN

THE new technology start-up company AskMeNow hopes to play concierge to business travelers who have a cellphone or BlackBerry but no access to the Internet for hotel recommendations, weather forecasts or stock quotes.

The service works like this: After registering at www.askmenow.com and downloading the free software onto a cellphone or BlackBerry, users can call a toll-free number any time, leave a question and receive an answer in a text message, usually within a few minutes.

A 49-cent charge appears on the user's cellphone bill for each question. (The questions are answered by English-speaking employees from a data center in the Philippines.)

It is too early to tell whether AskMeNow, which started in November and began full service this week, will lure large numbers of subscribers. (So far, it has signed up about 35,000 users.)

The company also gives marketers an opportunity to expand their reach in mobile advertising. The answers sent by AskMeNow carry a line from an advertiser at the bottom.

For instance, a call to AskMeNow for a recommendation of a Mexican restaurant in Brooklyn was answered with three text messages, each with the name, address and phone number of a restaurant. At the end of one text message, a line read: "Still searching? Call U.S. Search, 800-877-3272."

AskMeNow, a division of the Ocean West Holding Corporation, has signed up about 50 advertisers so far, including Hotels.com, 1-800-Flowers and the Progressive car insurance company.

Part of the appeal for marketers is the opportunity to choose who receives their advertising messages. When users sign up for the service, they provide information like their name, age, ZIP code and occupation. AskMeNow gradually compiles a detailed profile of each user by recording each question asked, to determine preferences. When advertisers sign up for the service, they can select recipients based on those preferences.

Companies can also choose who receives their ads based on keywords - for instance, the Internet ticket company StubHub, which advertises on AskMeNow, can deliver its ad to anyone who uses the word "ticket" in a question.

Darryl Cohen, the chief executive of AskMeNow, said the company was introducing the advertising slowly so users are not overwhelmed by it. (Not every text message answer contains an advertisement.)

AskMeNow fields questions of many types, though it makes no promises of accuracy.

When asked what movies were playing at the Film Forum theater in Manhattan, AskMeNow responded with four text messages in rapid succession, listing accurate movie titles and times.

It also tackled thornier questions that go beyond the needs of business travelers.

When asked, "Does Franklin Delano Roosevelt deserve credit for ending the Depression?" an extensive but noncommittal response followed, beginning, "President Franklin Roosevelt's 'New Deal' fought the Great Depression on a number of fronts."

AskMeNow can be stumped. The question, "Who was a more influential leader, Malcolm X or Martin Luther King Jr.?" received a response of, "Your request returned no exact results. The closest results are as follows." (That message was followed by brief biographies of both men.)

Since AskMeNow was created with travelers in mind, it has joined with Avis to offer three months of free service to Avis customers at the 100 busiest rental locations in the United States.

Michael Caron, the vice president of product and program development for Avis, said the company's partnership with AskMeNow was intended to expand its competitive services for customers.

"If you're on the road and you're not able to access information, and you need access to a restaurant or whatever it might be, this service makes a lot of sense," he said.

This week, AskMeNow introduced free automated information like weather forecasts, stock prices and directions, available by calling a toll-free number, 1-888-EZ-ASK-ME. The company has also created an advertising campaign, which includes television commercials that will begin appearing on national cable channels at the end of January.

Eventually, AskMeNow may expand its advertising to include a sponsor at the top and the bottom of each text message.

"We'd like to do it right away, but we think it's a little over the top now," Mr. Cohen said.



Copyright 2005The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map Back to Top

Google Leaves 'Em Agape

By Jonathan Berr
TheStreet.com Senior Writer
12/29/2005 7:04 AM EST
URL: http://www.thestreet.com/tech/internet/10258592.html

Ask any investor in the Internet sector what's on his mind for 2006 and chances are he'll say Google (GOOG:Nasdaq) . Will the stock continue to soar or will it finally come back to earth?

Well, we have some encouraging news for this Internet investor, and a few other stocks in the Internet sector that he should consider as well.

But first, the Google dilemma. Google is, hands down, Larry Haverty's favorite search engine. The veteran money manager uses it to look up movie listings and all sorts of other data.

But when it comes to investing, Haverty much prefers the stock of rival Yahoo! (YHOO:Nasdaq) , which he says is cheaper than its Silicon Valley rival. For one eye-popping figure, consider the price tag the market is attaching to each worker at the Internet giants, Haverty says. Going by recent data, each of Google's 5,000 employees is worth more than $25 million, based on the company's $126 billion market cap.

"That's expensive," says Haverty, whose Gabelli Global Media Trust fund owns a stake in both stocks. By the same measure, using recent figures, Yahoo!'s 9,600 workers are valued at a mere $6 million or so apiece.

Haverty's unease about Google's shares is hardly uncommon. Skeptical investors have been questioning the value of the Mountain View, Calif., company ever since it exploded onto the scene in a closely watched August 2004 initial public offering. At the time, the stock fetched $85, a level that was already raising eyebrows among the so-called value investors who seek out stocks using various quantitative measures.

Now, Google trade above $400, having more than doubled this year and quadrupled off its IPO price. Gowth managers, including Thrivent Financial's Mike Binger, say the ride is far from over.

"It was too expensive at $200 and too expensive at $300," says Binger. "Until the numbers show that they won't have these spectacular growth rates anymore, we are going to continue to own it."

Google's unstinting rise has divided investors into two camps, those who agree with Haverty and those who side with Binger. Figuring out which group has the bulk of the evidence on its side is a monumental task, given the fast-changing nature of the Internet and the media business. And just for good measure there's a third group of investors who are betting that even if Google doesn't continue to soar, the trends that sent it skyward will lift smaller players.

Google's stock is tough to handicap in part because the company doesn't provide earnings guidance and is at the forefront of an industry that many observers say is in its infancy. But Binger argues that people can find the real strength in Google merely by looking at its sequential growth. In the third quarter, revenue rose 14% from the second quarter, while net income increased 11%. Those are strong numbers indeed, considering how rare it is to find companies growing at such a rate year over year.

Noting Google's continued strength, five analysts have raised their price targets on the stock since it hit $400 on Nov. 17. The most bullish price targets now reach $500.

"One factor that we believe gets overlooked by the market in focusing on (the company's) absolute stock price is that in a relative basis it's actually valued similarly to other net leaders," wrote Citigroup analyst Mark Mahaney, in a Dec. 8 note to clients. He raised his price target to $490 from $430 and rates the shares as a buy.

Based on Wall Street's 2006 earnings estimates, Google's price-to-earnings ratio is 46 and its ratio of enterprise value to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization is 29. That is in line with Amazon (AMZN:Nasdaq) , eBay (EBAY:Nasdaq) and Yahoo!, Mahaney says.

Google, which gets most of its revenue from advertising, should also continue to benefit from the still-growing popularity of search among advertisers. Forrester Research estimates that U.S. search-engine marketing spending will hit $11.7 billion by 2010, a gain of 170% from 2004.

Even with all of those factors going Google's way, some analysts and investors say that there is still good reason to be cautious.

Google's position on top of the search engine market is under assault from well-funded rivals including Microsoft (MSFT:Nasdaq) . In addition, Google continues to develop nonsearch services and products, with mixed results. For example, some advertisers have criticized the company for rushing Google Base, the free listings service, into testing before it was ready.

"It's not terribly difficult to build a search engine," said Rick Summer, an analyst with Morningstar, which puts the fair value of Google's shares at $254. "The technology is not why Google is successful in search. Brand is very important, and it would take a real effort for anyone to take customers away from Google."

Finding bargains in the Internet sector isn't easy, since many stocks including Yahoo!, the most popular Web site, have shown big gains and are near their price targets. Still, many of the same trends that are helping Google are helping companies that do business with the Internet behemoth and compete against it.

Like Google, ValueClick (VLCK:Nasdaq) is benefiting from the shift of advertising online. The Internet advertising services company also is a favorite of Wall Street. Eleven out of the 14 analysts who follow the online advertising firm recommend purchasing its stock. The average target price for the shares, which currently trade around $19, is $21.60, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

"The fundamentals are solid," says Hoefer & Arnett analyst Martin Pyykkonen, who has a strong buy rating on the stock and doesn't own it, in an interview. "There is upside to '06 numbers."

Pyykkonen expects ValueClick to make 60 cents a share next year based on generally accepted accounting principles and 72 cents on a so-called pro forma basis, excluding certain costs. He has a price target of $23.

Yahoo!, which is second to Google in the search market, also shouldn't be ignored, according to Pyykkonen. Indeed, 24 out of 35 analysts rate the most popular Internet site as a buy, with an average price target of $43.22, Bloomberg says. It currently trades around $40.84.

"Yahoo's relationship with big advertisers is broader and deeper than Google," Pyykkonen says. "It's not to say Google can't catch up. Right now, Google has the upper hand in paid search and Yahoo! has the upper hand in branded image ads."

IAC/InterActive (IACI:Nasdaq) is another Internet stock gaining favor with Wall Street. Ten out of the 18 analysts who follow the New York-based company, which owns the Ask Jeeves search engine, rate it as a buy. Their average target price for the New York-based company, which recently traded at $27.69, is $32.50. Piper Jaffray analyst Safa Rashtchy's target is a bit more ambitious at $32.

"The stock is not owned by the same growth investors who have Google and Yahoo!," says Rashtchy, who rates the shares outperform and doesn't own them.

Another interesting play is HouseValues (SOLD:Nasdaq) , says Rashtchy, though he adds it's been a target of short-sellers. He praises the company, which provides services for realtors, for its "not so sexy business model." His target price for the stock, which traded recently around $14, is $23.

Analysts have also taken a shine to E.W.Scripps (SSP:NYSE) , the media company. Scripps owns the Shopzilla.com comparison searching engine along with cable channels with popular Web sites such as the Food Network. Their average target price for the Cincinnati-based company, which trades around $48, is $57.60. Ten out of 17 analysts say the stock is a buy.

"This is overlooked," says Edward Atorino, an analyst with Benchmark who recommends the shares but doesn't own them. "Shopzilla is exceeding all expectations."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Googl]Ying or [Jerry]Yang?

GCN

GCN home > web stories

12/23/05

OMB policy on posting information sparks debate

By Jason Miller
GCN Staff

The Office of Management and Budget’s new policy asking agencies to improve how they disseminate public information is at the heart of a larger battle over how much categorization is needed to make government information publicly accessible.

The new policy, required by the E-Government Act of 2002, is another piece in an ongoing disagreement over whether search technology is good enough to find specific instances of government information or whether metadata tagging and other categorization techniques are necessary at some level.

In a memo issued late last week, Clay Johnson, OMB’s deputy director for management, detailed three steps—for the most part involving publishing materials online—agencies must complete by Sept. 1 to meet the requirements outlined in Section 207 of the E-Government Act of 2002.

The memo also encourages agencies to use the newest version of the Federal Enterprise Architecture Data Reference Model to meet those requirements. OMB released Version 2.0 of the DRM earlier this week.

The memo follows recommendations from the Interagency Committee on Government Information that were sent to OMB in December 2004. The E-Government Act directed OMB to set up the committee to help implement Section 207.

But at least one federal official, who requested anonymity, said OMB ignored the committee’s suggestions and is asking agencies to do nothing more than they are doing now.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the bill’s author, said there are “serious concerns about whether OMB’s new guidelines comply with the act’s requirements.” He added that he intends to ask OMB officials “to explain how the policy meets statutory mandates.”

Lieberman’s office would not offer any more specifics on his concerns.

Patrice McDermott, deputy director for government relations for the American Library Association, called the policy “disturbing.”

“Essentially, what OMB appears to be saying is, for information you want to make publicly accessible, if you put it on your Web site or post it electronically, you have fulfilled all requirements of law,” McDermott said. “That is not true. That is not the spirit or intent of the law.”

She added that intent of law was to give the public the ability to know about and gain access to all information the government creates.

“There was a lot of discussions of how deep that goes and the distinctions between publications and records,” McDermott said. “That becomes less and less clear on the Web, but the intent was for agencies do an inventory of all of their information and to categorize or catalog it, and apply some metadata to it so that anyone going in anywhere in government could search across agencies and meaningfully find things.”

But OMB disputes the complaints.

“This policy certainly meets the spirit and intent of the E-Government Act and capitalizes the extraordinary advances in search technology including the way they crawl and index information preparing it for retrieval over the Internet,” said an OMB official, who requested anonymity. “To say that this policy ‘only’ requires agencies to post information ignores the great advances in search technologies over the past two or so years and the considerable ongoing research.”

In the guidance, Johnson said that agencies might be meeting some of these requirements already. Agencies must:

1. Organize and categorize information intended for public use and ensure it is searchable across agencies. This includes publishing information directly to the Web, and performing advance preparation, such as taxonomies and ontologies.

2. Review the performance and results of your information dissemination program to identify gaps in meeting new or existing user needs, and take corrective action.

3. Publish your information resources management strategic plan on your Web site. The IRM plan will detail how the agency will meet new and existing information dissemination requirements, the results of the agency’s program review and the plan to reduce gaps. It also would discuss how the agency would use the taxonomy or ontology.

These three steps do not include any of the ICGI’s recommendations, the federal official said. The ICGI defined what categorizable information is, suggested searchable identifiers such as handles or the Uniform Resource Name, and said agencies should use ISO standard 23950 for interoperable search.

“Libraries have been doing this for 100 years and agencies been doing this for many years,” McDermott said. “Agencies need to do some serious cross walking using common standards and build on those efforts that were quite successful in government. They don’t have to catalog to the level that libraries do, but have to do more than they are doing now and that the policy calls for.”

The OMB official said the administration did consider the ICGI’s recommendations, but found them “unnecessarily complex and too costly for agencies to implement and sustain over time.”

Agencies still are trying to understand the policy. A Government Printing Office spokeswoman said the agency is discussing the guidance with OMB.

Johnson also identified three ways for the new DRM to help agencies meet the three requirements. The DRM could help agencies:

-Determine how data is created, maintained, accessed and used

-Define data and describe relationships between mission and program performance and information resources to improve the efficiency of mission performance

-Define data and describe relationships among data elements used in the agency’s and others information systems. In addition to this guidance, OMB is developing guidance for sharing terrorism information as required under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.

The policy comes at the same time as OMB released the results of responses from industry and government on a request for information on how to improve government search technology.

The Story of Kwaanza

The Dartmouth Review

...
The shooting at UCLA caused Karenga to become deeply paranoid and spurred his bizarre behavior. At his trial, the question of Karenga’s sanity arose. The psychiatrist’s report stated, ‘This man now represents a picture which can be considered both paranoid and schizophrenic with hallucinations and elusions, inappropriate affect, disorganization, and impaired contact with the environment.’ The psychiatrist observed that Karenga talked to his blanket and imaginary persons and believed that he had been attacked by dive-bombers.

Eight years later California State University at Long Beach made Karenga the head of its Black Studies Department. Karenga had toned down his rhetoric and abandoned his cultural nationalism for straightforward Marxism. As an academic Karenga has authored various books on such topics as Egyptian art and has guest lectured at Stanford....

Happy Days!

Kwanzaa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
In order to deal with vandalism, editing of this page is temporarily restricted to users who are logged into an account that is not new. Please discuss changes or request unprotection.
This article is in need of attention.

You can help Wikipedia by editing it into a better article.
Please also consider changing this notice to be more specific.
This article contains information that has not been verified and thus might not be reliable. If you are familiar with the subject matter, please check the article for inaccuracies and modify as needed, citing sources.
Not to be confused with the Kwanza River in Angola, or the Angolan currency, "Kwanza".

A woman lights kinara candles on a table decorated with the symbols of Kwanzaa.Kwanzaa (sometimes spelled Kwaanza) is a week-long secular holiday observed from December 26 to January 1 honoring African-American heritage. Kwanzaa is celebrated almost exclusively by a small minority of African-Americans in the United States of America. Kwanzaa consists of seven days of celebration, featuring activities such as candle-lighting and pouring of libations, and culminating in a feast and gift-giving. According to one survey, Kwanzaa is celebrated by 1.6% of all Americans[1].

Kwanzaa was founded by black nationalist Ron Karenga, and first celebrated from December 26, 1966 to January 1st 1967. Karenga calls Kwanzaa the African American branch of "first fruits" celebrations of classical African cultures. Karenga has since further developed his vision and hosts the "Official Kwanzaa Web Site"

Contents [hide]
1 Origins
2 Principles of Kwanzaa
3 Observance
4 Etymology
5 References
6 External links




Origins

United States Postal Service "Kwanzaa" stampKwanzaa was created by political activist Ron Karenga in California in 1966, during his leadership of the black nationalist United Slaves Organization (also known as the "Us Organization").

Kwanzaa was originally intended to be an African-American alternative to Christmas. Karenga stated

"...it was chosen to give a Black alternative to the existing holiday and give Blacks an opportunity to celebrate themselves and history, rather than simply imitate the practice of the dominant society."
— Kwanzaa: origin, concepts, practice, p. 21 [2]
In 1997, Karenga moderated his stance, stating that Kwanzaa is an African-American holiday, but can be celebrated by people of any race.

"...other people can and do celebrate it, just like other people participate in Cinco de Mayo besides Mexicans; Chinese New Year besides Chinese; Native American pow wows besides Native Americans."
— Kwanzaa: A Celebration of Family, Community and Culture, p. 110 [3]

Principles of Kwanzaa
Kwanzaa is a holiday celebrating "The Seven Principles of Blackness", or Nguzo Saba (originally Nguzu Saba). These seven principles comprise Kawaida, a Swahili term for tradition and reason. Karenga chose Swahili, an East African language, to celebrate African American ties to Africa even though census data indicates that most African Americans are descended from West African people[4]. Kwanzaa is an adjunct of Kawaida. Each of the seven days of Kwanzaa is dedicated to one of the following principles. In order, they are:

Umoja (Unity)
Kujichagulia (Self-determination)
Ujima (Collective work and responsibility)
Ujamaa (Cooperative economics)
Nia (Purpose)
Kuumba (Creativity)
Imani (Faith)

Observance
Families celebrating Kwanzaa decorate their households with objects of art, colorful African cloth, especially the wearing of the Uwole by women, and fresh fruits that represent African idealism. It is customary to include children in Kwanzaa ceremonies and to give respect and gratitude to ancestors. Often alcoholic beverages are poured to the ground as libations, an ancient custom that has survived in the African-American community to this day.

At first, observers of Kwanzaa eschewed the mixing of the holiday or its symbols, values and practice with other holidays. They felt that doing so would violate the principle of kujichagulia (self-determination) and thus violate the integrity of the holiday, which is partially intended as a reclamation of important African values. Today, many African-American families celebrate Kwanzaa along with Christmas and New Year's. Frequently, both Christmas trees and kinaras, the traditional candle holder symbolic of African-American roots, share space in kwanzaa celebrating households. To them, Kwanzaa is an opportunity to incorporate elements of their particular ethnic heritage into holiday observances and celebrations of Christmas.


Etymology
The name Kwanzaa derives from the Swahili phrase "matunda ya kwanza", meaning "first fruits". The additional "a" was added to "Kwanza" so that the word would have seven letters, for two reasons. At the time there were seven children in Karenga's United Slaves Organization, each wanted one of the letters in Kwanzaa[5]. The name was also meant to have a letter for each of the Seven Principles of Blackness. Kwanzaa is also sometimes spelled kwaanza, which also has seven letters.


References
^ "2004 Holiday Spending by Region", 'Survey by BIGresearch, conducted for National Retail Foundation', 14 October 2004.
^ "Where in Africa did African Americans Originate?", excerpted from Philip Curtin's "Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census", June 1969.

External links
The Official Kwanzaa Website
Everything About Kwanzaa (The International Kwanzaa Exchange [TIKE])
"The Story of Kwaanza (sic)" (The Dartmouth Review, January 15, 2001)
Special Kwanzaa section at CNN (1996)
The Gist: "Kwanzaa" (Slate.com column, December 14, 1996)
Happy Kwanzaa (Basic Info about Nguzo Saba and Kwanzaa Symbols)
An anti-Kwanzaa article by Paul Mulshine of Frontpagemag.com
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwanzaa"
Categories: Semi-protected | Pages needing attention | Wikipedia articles needing factual verification | Winter holidays | Holidays | African American culture

The Option Strategist Weekly Updater

December 23, 2005

To receive the complete commentary plus reccomendations visit here:
http://www.optionstrategist.com/offers/strategist.htm
Note: Use the following link to view

To receive the To receive the complete commentary plus reccomendations visit here:
http://www.optionstrategist.com/offers/strategist.htm
Note: Use the following link to view this week's charts:
http://www.optionstrategist.co
m/products/advisories/hotline/charts.asp


We have now entered the time frame of the 'Santa Claus' rally -- the last five trading days of one year and the first two days of the next. This will likely keep the market buoyed for the rest of this year. However, underlying this seasonal rally is a deteriorating technical condition that will likely lead to sell signals in the new year. Such sell signals have not been confirmed yet (for $SPX), so one must be patient and wait for them.

$SPX has held above the 1250 support level (Figure 1). This is perhaps the most important single fact that can be stated about the current state of the market. As long as that support holds, there will be no serious decline (unless it comes from a much higher level at a later time). So, if this sideways movement continues long enough for the other technical indicators to regenerate themselves, then perhaps a further rally could occur. However, what is most pressing right now is that 1250 level. If it gives way, much lower prices could result.

The equity-only put-call ratios measure the option activity of all stock options, but its signals are most apropos to the state of the big-cap, broad market. The weighted ratio gave a confirmed sell signal this week (Figure 3). The companion, standard, put-call ratio (Figure 2) is very near to a sell signal as well, but our computer models have not yet confirmed it. Hence, one is bearish and the other is nearly so.

Finally, volatility indices ($VIX and $VXO) are remaining bullish in that they are at extremely low levels (Figure 4). Eventually, a low $VIX can lead to trouble, but that's only after it begins to trend higher (something that appeared to be happening a couple of weeks ago, but did not follow through). In general, $VIX below 12 can be considered bullish or, at worst, neutral.

In summary, we do not have a preponderance of sell signals for $SPX, nor do we have a breakdown below 1250. Without those, one cannot be bearish on the index. However, the deterioration of the indicators makes it look like we are very late in the bullish cycle

Schaeffer Says

Investor's Business Daily
Online Broker TradeStation Has Plenty Of Survival Skills
Published: 12/19/2005

Brief summary:


This article takes a bullish look at online brokerage TradeStation Group (TRAD: sentiment, chart, options). Although they are smaller and less known that most brokerages, their small niche of active traders is growing much faster than the industry as a whole. "Many of our customers come from regular online brokerages," co-CEO Ralph Cruz said. "They gain more experience in trading and want to move beyond what's available at those other brokers." TRAD stands out because it has software that can scan thousands of stock charts for various patterns. Plus the firm's customers trade at a much higher frequency than most on-line traders - as the average TRAD customer makes 740 trades a year versus 15 for your average E-Trade Financial (ET: sentiment, chart, options) customer. Looking to the future they are trying to get smaller investment firms to use their products, not just home traders.


Contrarian Takeaway:


Few sectors have been hotter than on-line brokerages this year, and TRAD has been leading the charge with the shares up 78-percent year-to-date. Looking at the sentiment on TRAD, it does appear that not many have noticed the shares yet. This is bullish, as it shows there could still be lots of money left on the sidelines. First off, there's very little open interest in near-term options and only two analysts rate it - both suggesting the presence of money on the sidelines. Also there aren't many shorts betting against the shares, but that could just be another sign that no one has shorted the shares because no one has heard of it. In conclusion, TRAD sports a Schaeffer's Equity Scorecard reading of 7.0 out of 10.0, indicating the path of least resistance is probably higher.

Foreign and Transnational Legal Forms

LLRX

Lawyers like to draft documents by using models, such as blank templates or examples of similar documents. While finding these forms can be difficult for US transactions and litigation, the search becomes even harder if the forms are foreign or transnational. This guide identifies various sources of foreign and transnational forms. Its emphasis is on transactional forms (instruments), rather than litigation forms, but some litigation forms (also called pleadings or court forms) are included.

To locate other sources for forms in library catalogs, try adding terms such as forms, annotated, sample, or model to your search. To locate useful Westlaw or LexisNexis databases, start with reference attorneys or customer service representatives. On Westlaw, most databases that include foreign or transnational forms are listed individually under the directory heading "Forms" (under "Treatises, CLEs, Practice Guides"). Lexis includes its foreign or transnational forms sources under International - Treatises & Analytical Materials. Finding international forms on the web can be extremely difficult; you will often find numerous references to the kind of form you need, but not the actual text. Try including language that appears in typical legal documents. For example, "hereby agree as follows," or "agree as follows" helps retrieve agreements. "In witness whereof" and "subscribed and sworn" help retrieve many types of legal forms. . . .

Googling AOL

Wash Post

David A. Vise
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 19, 2005; 1:30 PM


Washington Post staff writer David A. Vise will be online at 1:30 p.m. ET today to discuss Google's $1 billion investment in AOL as part of a large advertising partnership.

The deal is proving good news for the mega search engine. As of 11:45 a.m. today, Google's stock was up to 443 points, an all-time high.

Vise, author of The Google Story, will answer quesitons about Google's win in their battle with Microsoft and tomorrow's Time Warner board meeting where the company is expected to vote on the deal.