RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Legal’ Category

Wal-Mart & Worker’s Rights

20 Jan 2006

We all knew that Wal-Mart was a special store with special policies, but I’ve been sent to this link and it kind of made me wonder about how far an employer can actually go to avoid having to deal with some sort of union that represents the rights of the employees. It’s actually is even worse than it looked like. Tune in and be amazed of the guts this merchant displays:

Wal-Mart

When Wal-Mart employees stand up for themselves and try to form a union, they face threats, propaganda, discrimination, intimidation, and even firings in retaliation. Learn more about Wal-Mart’s unionbusting practices on the American Rights at Work website:

  • An entire Wal-Mart store in Jonquière, Quebec successfully formed a union. But rather than negotiate with the employees for decent wages, affordable health care, and a respectable work environment, Wal-Mart shut down the store. Click here to read more.
  • A large number of academics have raised their concern over Wal-Mart’s decision to close the store in Jonquière, Quebec. Click here for the list of academics who signed a statement calling on Wal-Mart to respect human rights and to conform to international standards.
  • A Wal-Mart worker in Alaska mentioned “the need to have a union” to a co-worker. After being interrogated by the store’s management, the worker was fired. Read his story.

Check out the website to learn more.

 

The End Of Black Hat SEO

29 Nov 2005

Greg Jarboe is the guru of cranking up web visibility through effective optimization of press
releases and leveraging news search. Greg went to a search conference in Sweden and managed to take a ‘black hat’ to dinner when the conference was over. In between courses, the black hat confessed he was thinking about crossing the line from ‘evil’ to ‘good’, meaning he started to see ‘white hat’ SEO was catching up with ‘black hat’ SEO, and the future wasn’t looking as bright as it used to in his dark corner of the market. Here’s a rabbit that popped out of the hat, taken from an article from the hand of Gord Hotchkiss, the President and CEO of Enquiro.

"Up to now, online has been the Wild West. The sheriff hadn’t come to town yet. Black hats could get mediocre sites to the top of the rankings because the vast majority of legit sites had no clue about search engine optimization. Reams of content were hidden in content management systems, locked off from the search engines by impenetrable dynamic URLs. [...]

Brands are clueing into the importance of algorithmic search. Spider friendliness is usually a requirement in evaluations of new CMS solutions or site redesigns. And when you take a site that has thousand of pages of content, with rich internal linking structures and scads of legitimate, authoritative incoming links, it will jump to the top of the search results. It’s inevitable. [...]

Today, these huge brands are turning to white hat search practitioners to help unlock the full potential of their sites. [...] It doesn’t matter what tricks a black hatter has up their sleeve, you can’t beat the sheer bulk of these killer sites, as long as they’re properly optimized.

So, as the online geography becomes more civilized through the influx of legitimate business, black hats are forced to move off Main Street into the back alleys. There’s less territory for them to operate in. And now, they’re competing for position against other black hats who are as ruthless as they are, rather than against naïve site owners who have never heard of a meta tag or Pagerank. It gets harder to make a buck."

From [Enquiro] – Read the entire article ‘A Whiter Shade of Black
by Gord Hotchkiss.
This content is copyrighted by Enquiro Search Solutions Inc.

Ohter interesting reads :

Matt Cutts: Celebrity Google Engineer
The NetProfit Article Archive
The MarketingMonitor Article Archive

 

Data Retention To Fight Terrorism? I Think Not !

13 Nov 2005

The European ministers of Justice and the European Commission want to keep all telephone and internet traffic data of all 450 million Europeans. If you are concerned about this plan, please sign the petition.

What’s wrong with data retention? The proposal to retain traffic data will reveal who has been calling and e-mailing whom, what websites people have visited and even where they were with their mobile phones. Telephone companies and internet services providers would be ordered to store all traffic data of their customers. Police and intelligence agencies in Europe would be granted access the traffic data. Various, competing proposals in Brussels mention retention periods from 6 months up to four years.

Data retention is an invasive tool that interferes with the private lives of all 450 million people in the European Union. Data retention is a policy that expands powers of surveillance in an unprecedented manner. It simultaneously revokes many of the safeguards in European human rights instruments, such as the Data Protection Directives and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Data retention means that governments may interfere with your private life and private communications regardless if you are suspected of a crime or not.

Data retention is not a solution to terrorism and crime!

If you are concerned about the European plans for data retention, please sign the petition and alert as many people as you can to support this campaign.
The signatures will be sent to the European Commission and the European Parliament.

There’s a wiki for updates & background info – via [IrishEyes]

 
 

Good Things, Bad things & A Ticket To The Sun

09 Sep 2005

This morning I went to school to find out about the results of the ten exams I’ve been doing between the 17th of august and the 1st of september. I made it ! I’m going to the next and final year of my studies of interactive marketing. Nothing to redo, only new stuff to come. I’ve swept it off with a overall total of 65%. And yes. I could’ve done better I know. I’d like to thank all the teachers that believed in me during the deliberation. So : thanx, really appreciate it and I’ll try to improve myself next year (too).

This also means my school related temp job at i-merge can kick off for real now. No more maybies (?) no more buts. Time to build up something.

On another note : I crashed my mom’s car a bit today. It started drifting when I was making a U-turn and it doesn’t have the ABS thing to control the breaks automatically. Pumping didn’t work. It happened so fast, yet so slow. I was doing 10 miles and hour or something, but there was a construction thing going on right around the corner and the street was filled with very fine white sand. The tires just lost their grip and the car just ’skated’ sideways. Man ! That’s gonna cost me. The hood, the bumper and the radiator frame were dented, one of the lights is broken. It still works though, but it looks crappy. I felt really ridiculous. The little pole I bumped into didn’t have the slightest scratch on it and the people that were drinking on a terrace nearby said : ‘We haven’t seen anything, just drive along ! Nothing’s broken, we’ll shut up.’ But I didn’t trust them for a penny, so I called the cops myself. I don’t want to come home from Mallorca with some cops looking for me because I fled the scene of an accident. Even if no one’s hurt, you still should report it. It’s common sense.

So my mom wasn’t too pleased when I told her what happened. It’s going to cost me a few hundred Euros I think, but we’ll see. Maybe we can find a way through the insurance or something. I don’t know. I’ll let my dad figure that out. That’s one of the things he’s very good at : finding fitting solutions. He’ll come up with something. I have good faith in that.
Despite the small accident, both my parents were very happy I made it to the third year, and since it’s the first time I had an accident in the few years I’m driving the car, they’re not too pissed off at me. Thank God for that. Otherwise the vacation-mood would have melted away in the sun I ‘m heading for.

In four hours my plane takes off to Mallorca. I’m going to tune out for a fat week :)
Thanx a lot for tuning in. If you’re bored and looking for videos to see, check out the YouTube post I made recently and go have a blast.

 

Flex Your Rights : Subway Searches

27 Jul 2005

The Flex Your Rights Foundation is a public education group teaching people to understand, appreciate, and assert their constitutional rights during police encounters. In response to the recent London terror attacks, New York police officers are now conducting random searches of bags and packages brought into the subway. Luckily the Belgian coppers haven’t turned to paranoid searchers yet. But it’s legal to refuse such a search. You have that right. Nobody can force you to comply ‘just because’ you’re told to.

“While Flex Your Rights takes no position on the usefulness of these searches for preventing future attacks, we have serious concerns that this unprecedented territorial expansion of police search powers is doing grave damage to people’s understanding of their Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. “If you’re carrying a bag or package into the subway, here’s what you need to know and do in order to safely and intelligently “flex” your rights :

  1. When Refusing a Search, Be Cool
  2. Refusal is Not Guilt
  3. Shut Your Mouth and Your Wallet
  4. Do Not Physically Resist
  5. WARNING: Do Not Run !
    If you refuse to be searched and run into the station, you could be shot to death! On Friday, an innocent man was shot in the head by police in a London subway station. The man had run away after being approached by an undercover officer.

More about your rights at [FlexYourRights] via [BoingBoing]

 
No Comments

Posted in Blogs, Legal

 

Google Fights Back And Wins

09 Jul 2005

Gary Price over at SearchEngineWatch points to a news-article that states Google has emerged victorious in a domain name dispute. Google has sued ’some people’ who were keeping domains that either had a part of the word Google in it, or that were aiming at common typo’s from surfers to then guide the surfers to ’services alike’ or to bad services and the distribution of malware. Could this be the end of the free use of Googlesomething.ext domains? Perhaps, yes.

Here in Belgium, there’s at least one service I know that could suffer a cease and desist because it reproduces Google’s services, but in a colourful regional/local accent. Visit [Hoehel] – pronounced ‘Hoohle’ – and try to understand how the western part of my country speaks. ;)

Well. The site has been in the news multiple times already, and the author doesn’t hide this. He already made his intentions clear to continue his folklorism on another domain, should the big ‘G’ shut him down. That’s why he’s registered [Jagoe]. Stating clearly he will turn his parody to the Yahoo Search, if Google succeeds in the cease and desist.

The cease and desist [already has been delivered] on june 15th 2004, but the author refuses to stop the service, and translated the letter rather ‘freely’ into the Western-Flemish ‘native tongue’.

Refusal to quit Hoehel.be is based on following points :

1. In Belgium, parodies are exempted of any claims.
2. He doesn’t make money of it, it’s not a commercial business.
3. Hoehel and Google are not resembling in characters.
4. He says the logo might look the same, but Google only had it ® on the 21st of March 2005. Which he considers ‘rather’ late.

Back to the lawsuit with an extract from the [NationalArbitrationForum]:

“The National Arbitration Forum announces today that a ruling has been issued in favor of Google regarding rights to the Internet domain names googkle.com, ghoogle.com, gfoogle.com and gooigle.com.”

“A copy of the decision, Google Inc. v. Sergey Gridasov, is available for viewing on the National Arbitration Forum Web site at: http://www.arb-forum.com/domains/decisions/474816.htm

Interesting reflection of Gary :

“It will be worth monitoring to see if the Googlepex will begin asserting their legal rights over other registered domains that either resemble Google or include the word Google in the domain name.”

The article on [SearchEngineWatch]

 

Microsoft Patents How To Classify Music

07 Jul 2005

US PATENT 6.913.466, by Microsoft : System and methods for training a trainee to classify fundamental properties of media entities. A system and methods are provided for training a trainee to analyze media, such as music, in order to recognize and assess the fundamental properties of any piece of media, such as a song or a segment of a song.

The process includes an initial tutorial and a double grooving process. The tutorial phase exposes the trainee to a canonical set of classifications and then exposes the trainee to certain definitive song examples for each classification level of fundamental properties.

The double grooving phase leverages the skills of the experts that defined the canonical set of classification terms to ensure that new listeners, even though exposed to the tutorial, appropriately recognize all fundamental musical properties.

Thus, for specific song examples, a new listener matches results with the system experts within a degree of tolerance. When a high enough degree of cross-listening consensus is reached, the new listener becomes a groover and can classify new songs or segments of songs.

[...]

In the classical music context, musicologists have developed names for various attributes of musical compositions. Terms such as adagio, fortissimo, or allegro broadly describe the strength with which instruments in an orchestra should be played to properly render a musical composition from sheet music. In the popular music context, there is less agreement upon proper terminology. Composers indicate how to render their musical compositions with annotations such as brightly, softly, etc., but there is no consistent, concise, agreed-upon system for such annotations.

As a result of rapid movement of musical recordings from sheet music to pre-recorded analog media to digital storage and retrieval technologies, this problem has become acute. In particular, as large libraries of digital musical recordings have become available through global computer networks, a need has developed to classify individual musical compositions in a quantitative manner based on highly subjective features, in order to facilitate rapid search and retrieval of large collections of compositions.

[...]

variety of inadequate classification and search approaches are now used. In one approach, a consumer selects a musical composition for listening or for purchase based on past positive experience with the same artist or with similar music. This approach has a significant disadvantage in that it involves guessing because the consumer has no familiarity with the musical composition that is selected.

In another approach, a merchant classifies musical compositions into broad categories or genres. The disadvantage of this approach is that typically the genres are too broad. For example, a wide variety of qualitatively different albums and songs may be classified in the genre of “Popular Music” or “Rock and Roll”.

In still another approach, an online merchant presents a search page to a client associated with the consumer. The merchant receives selection criteria from the client for use in searching the merchant’s catalog or database of available music. Normally the selection criteria are limited to song name, album title, or artist name. The merchant searches the database based on the selection criteria and returns a list of matching results to the client. The client selects one item in the list and receives further, detailed information about that item. The merchant also creates and returns one or more critics’ reviews, customer reviews, or past purchase information associated with the item.

Read more at [USPTO]
via [TechDirt]

 

Google Wins Click-Fraud Case

05 Jul 2005

Google 1 – Auctions Expert 0.

from [MediaBuyerPlanner] :

“Google won its suit against an AdSense partner publisher that it had accused of deliberate click fraud. Two months ago, a California judge granted Google a $75,000 judgment against Auction Experts, a Texas firm, according to MediaPost. In its complaint, Google had alleged that Auction Experts had hired individuals to click on the ads that appeared on the firm’s sites, racking up advertiser costs of at least $50,000.”

From [MediaPostPublications] :

“Google’s lawsuit, filed late last year in Santa Clara County Superior Court in California, charged that the Houston-based Auctions Expert “artificially and/or fraudulently” generated clicks on the ads Google served to the company’s Web site. Auctions Expert, like other AdSense publishers, received a share of pay-per-click revenue when Web visitors clicked on certain ads on the Auctions Expert page.

Google alleged in legal papers that Auctions Expert hired dozens of people to click on the site’s ads, to the tune of at least $50,000.

When Google sued Auctions Expert, the search company presented the move as part of its anti-click fraud efforts. A company representative stated at the time: “We are vigilant in protecting our advertisers and the integrity of our programs… This lawsuit against Auctions Expert demonstrates the success of our anti-fraud system and that we will take legal action when appropriate.”