Merry Christmas, Happy Hanuka, and a Prosperous New Year!!!!
Friday, December 23, 2005
Monday, December 12, 2005
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Pets Are People Too
At least, P&G's Iams treats them that way, fitting human products to Fido's needs
In 2000, A. G. Lafley came to the top job at Procter & Gamble Co. with dog food on his plate. P&G had paid $2.3 billion the year before to buy Iams Co., with its Iams and Eukanuba lines of pet food, and quickly took Iams from specialty shops and veterinarian offices into 25,000 retail outlets. Such distribution muscle has
helped the unit double sales to $1.7 billion last year from $800 million in 1999.
But Iams' growth is about more than just distribution. It also illustrates how the innovation machine at P&G, which has tapped different divisions to jazz up Iams with technology designed for humans, can rev up sales. Soon after the acquisition, P&G created a tartar-control coating for all of its adult pet food, adapted from the polyphosphate technology used in its Crest toothpaste line. The company is extending that formula to treats early next year. And down the road, it is considering pet-oriented extensions for everything from the Swiffer sweeper to Febreze odor remover. P&G also is thinking about introducing a pet shampoo. The goal: to profit from a global trend toward treating pets as family members, with all the pampering and products required by that higher status. "There are great similarities between the mother-baby bond and the owner-pet bond," says Iams' President Jeffrey P. Ansell, who previously worked in P&G's Pampers division.
More important, perhaps, is the way in which P&G sparked a cultural revolution within the pet food division. Iams, which was founded in 1946, has morphed from a somewhat inward-looking animal nutrition company into one aimed at, as Lafley likes to say, delighting the customer. That means more emphasis on satisfying owners' demand for such pet treats as savory sauces in Sizzlin' Bacon and Country Style Chicken flavors to sprinkle on dog food, much like a cheese sauce a mother would use to spice up broccoli. "Before joining P&G, we were pretty arrogant," says Diane Hirakawa, Iams' senior vice-president for research and development. Nutrition was all that mattered. Nobody really cared if people wanted a little something to spoil their pet. "We would never ask the consumer anything."
P&G's innovations draw from the company's practice of conducting extensive consumer research through everything from focus groups to home visits. Among the findings were consumers' persistent concerns about dealing with cats of different weights in the same household. The fat ones would simply eat from the skinny ones' bowls if owners tried to cut back. That led to Multi-Cat, a dry food with Vitamin A and L-Carnitine to reduce fat in heavier cats -- and high protein to help lean cats maintain muscle mass.
P&G, meanwhile, has found that creativity flows both ways. Iams' work in areas such as hairball control formulas sparked the interest of Metamucil executives, for example. They're using the research to better understand fiber's impact on everything from intestinal health to kidney disease. Iams' research in fatty acids helped staffers who developed a line of vitamins under the Olay skin-care brand.
Iams still faces tough rivals such as Nestlé's Purina and Wal-Mart's Ol' Roy private label brand. But it's now the nation's top pet food brand, by dollar sales, according to ACNielsen (VNUVY ) and Roper ASW, accounting for 9.9% of retail sales as of September, 2005, up from 5.7% in 1999. While insiders say Lafley remains more smitten with the potential of face peels than pet food, he clearly craves constant innovation at all brands. That has helped Iams move beyond its niche of nutritious kibbles.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Do you trust e-mail that claims to be from your bank?
That's a tricky question for a lot of us who are inundated with suspicious e-mail from senders that claim to be Citibank, PayPal, or a financial institution we have never heard of.
It turns out more than half of us are deleting messages from banks and financial institutions without even thinking twice. Experts say recipients who receive these e-mails believe that all the messages are part of phishing e-mail scams.
Phishing messages look like they come from a trusted company, but are actually from identity thieves. Phishers attempt to trick e-mail recipients into clicking on a link, going to a Web page, and providing personal information at a site that pretends to be genuine.
Even the federal government has taken notice of the potential for security breaches. Last week federal regulators announced new rules requiring banks to better protect their online customers from fraud. By the end of 2006 bank sites will have to adopt a "two-factor" authentication process. In a letter sent to banks, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council said banks must go beyond just requiring name, account number, and password.
A two-factor authentication system might include biometric devices or smart cards that would deny access to online accounts without some type of physical card or USB token that can be plugged into a PC.
Less costly would be two-factor authentication like that being developed by PassMark Security, which has developed an authentication system that prompts users to answer questions with predetermined secret answers.
For banks, consumer reluctance to trust e-mail from financial institutions is a double-edged sword: On one hand, banks are pleased that their customers are savvy enough not to fork over account information to a fake site. Consider the cost when they do: In 2003 phishing scams cost banks and credit-card companies $1.2 billion, according to market research firm Gartner. On the other hand, banks are suffering because of this lack of consumer trust.
Credibility Crisis
A research report from Javelin Strategy and Research says the first impulse of 55 percent of those who receive an e-mail purporting to be from their bank and asking them to log into their account is to delete the message without blinking an eye.
In another survey, 28 percent of consumers said online attacks influence their online banking activity, Gartner reports. The survey found that 14 percent of this group has stopped paying bills online as a consequence and an additional 4 percent stopped all online banking activity.
The more jaded we become, the more financial institutions stand to lose. Gartner estimates that companies save about 45 cents every time they send an account statement electronically instead of by mail. A bank that mails account statements on paper to 1 million customers could save $450,000 monthly if it sent electronic statements instead.
Personally, I don't trust any e-mail that contains a link to any of my accounts. Just clicking on a link in an e-mail can get you in trouble; phishing e-mails can be used as lures to get you to visit Web sites that secretly download malicious programs.
For this reason, I advise against clicking links in suspicious messages. Instead, just type the URL of the page you want to go to in your browser's address bar, or go to the site's home page and then navigate to the page in question.
Don't get me wrong: I am not a neophyte. I check and manage nearly all my bank and credit cards over the Internet. But when I get an apparently legitimate e-mail that asks me to take action, I call my credit-card company or bank and communicate with them directly.
Call me paranoid; I don't care. But the sad reality is that phishing e-mails have all made us paranoid.
Too Paranoid?
Here is a case in point. When the Wachovia bank sent out an e-mail inviting its customers to go to a new log-in page as a result of its merger with First Union, it got an earful. Wachovia's call center was swamped with calls from message recipients, alerting the bank that criminals were attempting to steal customers' financial information through a bogus link.
Another snafu occurred when EarthLink mistakenly told some of its users that a bank's Web site was a phishing site. Through its free ScamBlocker toolbar, EarthLink warned customers who tried to visit AssociatedBank.com that the site was "potentially fraudulent." EarthLink advised its users to "not continue to this potentially risky site."
The owner of the site, Associated Banc-Corp, was furious and sued EarthLink in a U.S. District Court in Wisconsin. Associated Banc-Corp argued that EarthLink's negligence had injured its business reputation. EarthLink said it had licensed the list of phishing Web sites used by the ScamBlocker toolbar from a third party, and therefore shouldn't be held responsible. Last month U.S. District Judge John Shabaz agreed with EarthLink's position and dismissed Associated Bank's lawsuit.
Taking Action
A growing number of financial institutions are determined to win our confidence and stop phishers. The problem is that, through their antiphishing public education programs, banks have made the public leery of online banking, says Amir Orad, executive vice president for marketing at the antifraud and consulting firm Cyota. That's why banks are now focusing on ways to go after the bad guys.
One of the ways is to proactively seek phishing e-mails and that they link to. Cyota scans 1.4 billion e-mails a day looking for phishing lures. When it finds one, it works with law enforcement and with ISPs to shut down access to the site.
Another way is to make it harder for phishers to fake messages from banks. To this end, Bank of America is testing a technology from PassMark Security called SiteKey. The technology requires Bank of America's online customers to choose one of a thousand digital images from a library.
They are also asked to create a short phrase. Those phrases appear in the subject line of e-mail messages; the images are used in the body of the messages. All this is meant to reassure customers the e-mail is legitimate. If the test is successful, Bank of America plans to roll out it nationwide later this year.
Other banks try to win customer confidence by including each one's first and last name in the subject line of their e-mail messages. Still other banks like Wachovia are testing a system in which customers get e-mail alerting them that a message is waiting for them in their Wachovia mailbox. The e-mail message doesn't include any links, so customers have to visit the Web site and log on to read their messages.
All this makes me wonder how much inconvenience consumers will put up with to take advantage of online banking.
Morphing Scams
The advent of more secure customer authentication is having a predictable impact: Phishers are now moving away from large financial institutions that use such antifraud technology and targeting smaller banks that don't.
Cyota has seen a 633 percent increase in the number of attacks against smaller banks since the beginning of 2005. Cyota also is seeing an increase in personalized phishing attacks that use stolen data like a name or the last four digits of a credit card. The use of such personal information in a phishing message gives it the appearance of credibility.
Another way phishers and spammers collect your personal information is through a technique called hostile profiling.
Experts I spoke with say it's too early to tell whether the good guys are stopping the fraudsters or the bad guys are succeeding at ripping more of us off. "The fraudsters are always raising the bar, making our job harder," Cyota's Orad says.
Andrew Dresner, a vice president at First Manhattan Consulting Group, told me he thinks online banking is just too convenient to be slowed down by phishing attacks. "Once people become more acquainted with online banking they are more likely to spot fraud," Dresner says.
The Javelin Strategy and Research study found that for every customer that refused to bank online out of security concerns, three online banking customers increased their usage of online accounts.
So what's your personal policy when it comes to phishy e-mails? I suggest that a healthy dose of skepticism will go a long way when evaluating any e-mail tied to personal information.
That's a tricky question for a lot of us who are inundated with suspicious e-mail from senders that claim to be Citibank, PayPal, or a financial institution we have never heard of.
It turns out more than half of us are deleting messages from banks and financial institutions without even thinking twice. Experts say recipients who receive these e-mails believe that all the messages are part of phishing e-mail scams.
Phishing messages look like they come from a trusted company, but are actually from identity thieves. Phishers attempt to trick e-mail recipients into clicking on a link, going to a Web page, and providing personal information at a site that pretends to be genuine.
Even the federal government has taken notice of the potential for security breaches. Last week federal regulators announced new rules requiring banks to better protect their online customers from fraud. By the end of 2006 bank sites will have to adopt a "two-factor" authentication process. In a letter sent to banks, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council said banks must go beyond just requiring name, account number, and password.
A two-factor authentication system might include biometric devices or smart cards that would deny access to online accounts without some type of physical card or USB token that can be plugged into a PC.
Less costly would be two-factor authentication like that being developed by PassMark Security, which has developed an authentication system that prompts users to answer questions with predetermined secret answers.
For banks, consumer reluctance to trust e-mail from financial institutions is a double-edged sword: On one hand, banks are pleased that their customers are savvy enough not to fork over account information to a fake site. Consider the cost when they do: In 2003 phishing scams cost banks and credit-card companies $1.2 billion, according to market research firm Gartner. On the other hand, banks are suffering because of this lack of consumer trust.
Credibility Crisis
A research report from Javelin Strategy and Research says the first impulse of 55 percent of those who receive an e-mail purporting to be from their bank and asking them to log into their account is to delete the message without blinking an eye.
In another survey, 28 percent of consumers said online attacks influence their online banking activity, Gartner reports. The survey found that 14 percent of this group has stopped paying bills online as a consequence and an additional 4 percent stopped all online banking activity.
The more jaded we become, the more financial institutions stand to lose. Gartner estimates that companies save about 45 cents every time they send an account statement electronically instead of by mail. A bank that mails account statements on paper to 1 million customers could save $450,000 monthly if it sent electronic statements instead.
Personally, I don't trust any e-mail that contains a link to any of my accounts. Just clicking on a link in an e-mail can get you in trouble; phishing e-mails can be used as lures to get you to visit Web sites that secretly download malicious programs.
For this reason, I advise against clicking links in suspicious messages. Instead, just type the URL of the page you want to go to in your browser's address bar, or go to the site's home page and then navigate to the page in question.
Don't get me wrong: I am not a neophyte. I check and manage nearly all my bank and credit cards over the Internet. But when I get an apparently legitimate e-mail that asks me to take action, I call my credit-card company or bank and communicate with them directly.
Call me paranoid; I don't care. But the sad reality is that phishing e-mails have all made us paranoid.
Too Paranoid?
Here is a case in point. When the Wachovia bank sent out an e-mail inviting its customers to go to a new log-in page as a result of its merger with First Union, it got an earful. Wachovia's call center was swamped with calls from message recipients, alerting the bank that criminals were attempting to steal customers' financial information through a bogus link.
Another snafu occurred when EarthLink mistakenly told some of its users that a bank's Web site was a phishing site. Through its free ScamBlocker toolbar, EarthLink warned customers who tried to visit AssociatedBank.com that the site was "potentially fraudulent." EarthLink advised its users to "not continue to this potentially risky site."
The owner of the site, Associated Banc-Corp, was furious and sued EarthLink in a U.S. District Court in Wisconsin. Associated Banc-Corp argued that EarthLink's negligence had injured its business reputation. EarthLink said it had licensed the list of phishing Web sites used by the ScamBlocker toolbar from a third party, and therefore shouldn't be held responsible. Last month U.S. District Judge John Shabaz agreed with EarthLink's position and dismissed Associated Bank's lawsuit.
Taking Action
A growing number of financial institutions are determined to win our confidence and stop phishers. The problem is that, through their antiphishing public education programs, banks have made the public leery of online banking, says Amir Orad, executive vice president for marketing at the antifraud and consulting firm Cyota. That's why banks are now focusing on ways to go after the bad guys.
One of the ways is to proactively seek phishing e-mails and that they link to. Cyota scans 1.4 billion e-mails a day looking for phishing lures. When it finds one, it works with law enforcement and with ISPs to shut down access to the site.
Another way is to make it harder for phishers to fake messages from banks. To this end, Bank of America is testing a technology from PassMark Security called SiteKey. The technology requires Bank of America's online customers to choose one of a thousand digital images from a library.
They are also asked to create a short phrase. Those phrases appear in the subject line of e-mail messages; the images are used in the body of the messages. All this is meant to reassure customers the e-mail is legitimate. If the test is successful, Bank of America plans to roll out it nationwide later this year.
Other banks try to win customer confidence by including each one's first and last name in the subject line of their e-mail messages. Still other banks like Wachovia are testing a system in which customers get e-mail alerting them that a message is waiting for them in their Wachovia mailbox. The e-mail message doesn't include any links, so customers have to visit the Web site and log on to read their messages.
All this makes me wonder how much inconvenience consumers will put up with to take advantage of online banking.
Morphing Scams
The advent of more secure customer authentication is having a predictable impact: Phishers are now moving away from large financial institutions that use such antifraud technology and targeting smaller banks that don't.
Cyota has seen a 633 percent increase in the number of attacks against smaller banks since the beginning of 2005. Cyota also is seeing an increase in personalized phishing attacks that use stolen data like a name or the last four digits of a credit card. The use of such personal information in a phishing message gives it the appearance of credibility.
Another way phishers and spammers collect your personal information is through a technique called hostile profiling.
Experts I spoke with say it's too early to tell whether the good guys are stopping the fraudsters or the bad guys are succeeding at ripping more of us off. "The fraudsters are always raising the bar, making our job harder," Cyota's Orad says.
Andrew Dresner, a vice president at First Manhattan Consulting Group, told me he thinks online banking is just too convenient to be slowed down by phishing attacks. "Once people become more acquainted with online banking they are more likely to spot fraud," Dresner says.
The Javelin Strategy and Research study found that for every customer that refused to bank online out of security concerns, three online banking customers increased their usage of online accounts.
So what's your personal policy when it comes to phishy e-mails? I suggest that a healthy dose of skepticism will go a long way when evaluating any e-mail tied to personal information.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Monday, August 22, 2005
How To Escape The Oil Trap
This is a great article from Newsweek. Why are we letting the Saudies get away wth this???
They cannot be trusted and I refused to do business with them as they are taught to lie and lie and lie!!!!
By Fareed Zakaria
Newsweek
Aug. 29 - Sept. 5, 2005 issue - If I could change one thing about American foreign policy, what would it be? The answer is easy, but it's not something most of us think of as foreign policy. I would adopt a serious national program geared toward energy efficiency and independence.
Reducing our dependence on oil would be the single greatest multiplier of American power in the world. I leave it to economists to sort out what expensive oil does to America's growth and inflation prospects. What is less often noticed is how crippling this situation is for American foreign policy. "Everything we're trying to do in the world is made much more difficult in the current environment of rising oil prices," says Michael Mandelbaum, author of "The Ideas That Conquered the World." Consider:
Terror. Over the last three decades, Islamic extremism and violence have been funded from two countries, Saudi Arabia and Iran, not coincidentally the world's first and second largest oil exporters. Both countries are now awash in money and, no matter what the controls, some of this cash is surely getting to unsavory groups and individuals.
Democracy. The centerpiece of Bush's foreign policy—encouraging democracy in the Middle East—could easily lose steam in a world of high-priced oil. Governments reform when they have to. But many Middle Eastern governments are likely to have easy access to huge surpluses for years, making it easier for them to avoid change. Saudi Arabia will probably have a budget surplus of more than $26 billion this year because the price of oil is so much higher than anticipated. That means it can keep the old ways going, bribing the Wahhabi imams, funding the Army and National Guard, spending freely on patronage programs. (And that would still leave plenty to fund dozens of new palaces and yachts.) Ditto for other corrupt, quasi-feudal oil states.
Iran. Tehran has launched a breathtakingly ambitious foreign policy, moving determinedly on a nuclear path, and is also making a bid for influence in neighboring Iraq. This is nothing less than an attempt to replace the United States as the dominant power in the region. And it will prove extremely difficult to counter—more so, given Tehran's current resources. Despite massive economic inefficiency and corruption, Iran today has built up foreign reserves of $29.87 billion.
Russia. A modern, Westernized Russia firmly anchored in Europe would mean peace and stability in the region. But a gush of oil revenues has strengthened the Kremlin's might, allowing Putin to consolidate power, defund his opponents, destroy competing centers of power and continue his disastrous and expensive war in Chechnya. And the "Russian model" appears to have taken hold in much of Central Asia.
Latin America. After two decades of political and economic progress in Latin America, we are watching a serious anti-American movement gain ground. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela—emboldened by his rising oil wealth—was the first in recent years to rebel against American influence, but similar sentiments are beginning to be heard in other countries, from Ecuador to Bolivia.
I could go on, from Central Asia to Nigeria. In almost every region, efforts to produce a more stable, peaceful and open world order are being compromised and complicated by high oil prices. And while America spends enormous time, money and effort dealing with the symptoms of this problem, we are actively fueling the cause.
Rising oil prices are the result of many different forces coming together. We have little control over some of them, like China's growth rate. But America remains the 800-pound gorilla of petroleum demand. In 2004, China consumed 6.5 million barrels of oil per day. The United States consumed 20.4 million barrels, and demand is rising. That is because of strong growth, but also because American cars—which guzzle the bulk of oil imports—are much less efficient than they used to be. This is the only area of the American economy in which we have become less energy-efficient than we were 20 years ago, and we are the only industrialized country to have slid backward in this way. There's one reason: SUVs. They made up 5 percent of the American fleet in 1990. They make up almost 54 percent today.
It's true that there is no silver bullet that will entirely solve America's energy problem, but there is one that goes a long way: more-efficient cars. If American cars averaged 40 miles per gallon, we would soon reduce consumption by 2 million to 3 million barrels of oil a day. That could translate into a sustained price drop of more than $20 a barrel. And getting cars to be that efficient is easy. For the most powerful study that explains how, read "Winning the Oil Endgame" by energy expert Amory Lovins (or go to oilendgame.com). I would start by raising fuel-efficiency standards, providing incentives for hybrids and making gasoline somewhat more expensive (yes, that means raising taxes). Of course, the energy bill recently passed by Congress does none of these things.
We don't need a Manhattan Project to find our way out of our current energy trap. The technologies already exist. But what we're searching for is perhaps even harder—political leadership and vision.
This is a great article from Newsweek. Why are we letting the Saudies get away wth this???
They cannot be trusted and I refused to do business with them as they are taught to lie and lie and lie!!!!
By Fareed Zakaria
Newsweek
Aug. 29 - Sept. 5, 2005 issue - If I could change one thing about American foreign policy, what would it be? The answer is easy, but it's not something most of us think of as foreign policy. I would adopt a serious national program geared toward energy efficiency and independence.
Reducing our dependence on oil would be the single greatest multiplier of American power in the world. I leave it to economists to sort out what expensive oil does to America's growth and inflation prospects. What is less often noticed is how crippling this situation is for American foreign policy. "Everything we're trying to do in the world is made much more difficult in the current environment of rising oil prices," says Michael Mandelbaum, author of "The Ideas That Conquered the World." Consider:
Terror. Over the last three decades, Islamic extremism and violence have been funded from two countries, Saudi Arabia and Iran, not coincidentally the world's first and second largest oil exporters. Both countries are now awash in money and, no matter what the controls, some of this cash is surely getting to unsavory groups and individuals.
Democracy. The centerpiece of Bush's foreign policy—encouraging democracy in the Middle East—could easily lose steam in a world of high-priced oil. Governments reform when they have to. But many Middle Eastern governments are likely to have easy access to huge surpluses for years, making it easier for them to avoid change. Saudi Arabia will probably have a budget surplus of more than $26 billion this year because the price of oil is so much higher than anticipated. That means it can keep the old ways going, bribing the Wahhabi imams, funding the Army and National Guard, spending freely on patronage programs. (And that would still leave plenty to fund dozens of new palaces and yachts.) Ditto for other corrupt, quasi-feudal oil states.
Iran. Tehran has launched a breathtakingly ambitious foreign policy, moving determinedly on a nuclear path, and is also making a bid for influence in neighboring Iraq. This is nothing less than an attempt to replace the United States as the dominant power in the region. And it will prove extremely difficult to counter—more so, given Tehran's current resources. Despite massive economic inefficiency and corruption, Iran today has built up foreign reserves of $29.87 billion.
Russia. A modern, Westernized Russia firmly anchored in Europe would mean peace and stability in the region. But a gush of oil revenues has strengthened the Kremlin's might, allowing Putin to consolidate power, defund his opponents, destroy competing centers of power and continue his disastrous and expensive war in Chechnya. And the "Russian model" appears to have taken hold in much of Central Asia.
Latin America. After two decades of political and economic progress in Latin America, we are watching a serious anti-American movement gain ground. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela—emboldened by his rising oil wealth—was the first in recent years to rebel against American influence, but similar sentiments are beginning to be heard in other countries, from Ecuador to Bolivia.
I could go on, from Central Asia to Nigeria. In almost every region, efforts to produce a more stable, peaceful and open world order are being compromised and complicated by high oil prices. And while America spends enormous time, money and effort dealing with the symptoms of this problem, we are actively fueling the cause.
Rising oil prices are the result of many different forces coming together. We have little control over some of them, like China's growth rate. But America remains the 800-pound gorilla of petroleum demand. In 2004, China consumed 6.5 million barrels of oil per day. The United States consumed 20.4 million barrels, and demand is rising. That is because of strong growth, but also because American cars—which guzzle the bulk of oil imports—are much less efficient than they used to be. This is the only area of the American economy in which we have become less energy-efficient than we were 20 years ago, and we are the only industrialized country to have slid backward in this way. There's one reason: SUVs. They made up 5 percent of the American fleet in 1990. They make up almost 54 percent today.
It's true that there is no silver bullet that will entirely solve America's energy problem, but there is one that goes a long way: more-efficient cars. If American cars averaged 40 miles per gallon, we would soon reduce consumption by 2 million to 3 million barrels of oil a day. That could translate into a sustained price drop of more than $20 a barrel. And getting cars to be that efficient is easy. For the most powerful study that explains how, read "Winning the Oil Endgame" by energy expert Amory Lovins (or go to oilendgame.com). I would start by raising fuel-efficiency standards, providing incentives for hybrids and making gasoline somewhat more expensive (yes, that means raising taxes). Of course, the energy bill recently passed by Congress does none of these things.
We don't need a Manhattan Project to find our way out of our current energy trap. The technologies already exist. But what we're searching for is perhaps even harder—political leadership and vision.
Friday, June 03, 2005
50 th class reunion St Stephen's
Amazing!! We had an 8th grade 50th class reunion and was amazed at the amount of classmates that showed up. It was a most enjoyable afternoon and alot of memories.
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Feds probe mysterious credit card charges
Complaints mount over bills for phantom DVD purchase
Federal authorities have opened an investigation into a rash of mysterious $30 and $40 charges
appearing on consumer credit cards around the country, MSNBC.com has learned. The charges
are for the purchase of DVDs and CDs from a company named "Pluto Data Ltd." Thousands of
complaints about the charges have appeared on a Web site devoted to the mystery, with
consumers saying they've never heard of the company.
Adding to the mystery -- most consumers report a 1 cent or $1 charge appearing on their cards
first, followed by the larger charge from Pluto Data or PLUTO D, NICOSIA.
Phone calls to the toll free number listed next to the charge on the credit card bills provide little
additional information. The firm answering the calls, Answer Quick Telecommunications Inc.,
located in Baton Rouge, La., says it was an answering service for Pluto Data prior to closing the
account several weeks ago. Answer Quick referred questions to local law enforcement
investigators.
Don Kelly, a spokesman for the Baton Rouge police, said his office has received 125 complaints
about the alleged fraud. "We are working with the FBI and the Secret Service," he said. He added that Answer Quick was not a suspect. "We are keeping track of the complaints and doing what we can to help them on what's going on."
Officials from the FBI in Louisiana and the Baton Rouge Secret Service office wouldn't comment
on the investigation. Dave Collett, a spokesman for Mastercard, said an investigation was ongoing, but he would not provide details. "We are auditing the merchant." Consumers who find the alleged fraudulent charge on their accounts are not liable for it, he said.
A February surprise
The mysterious charges began appearing around Valentine's Day. Many frustrated consumers
who searched the Internet for help found each other on a bulletin board service named
BroadBandReports.com. By Thursday, there were 35 pages of complaints on the site, with
hundreds of victims and over 50,000 visits, suggesting the number of victims could be larger than the 125 complaints logged by local police so far."I'm just so angry, and so is everybody else on that site," said Connie Shotkoski, of Columbus, Neb.
Rich Sinclair, a consumer in Salem, Ill., said he just found out about the alleged scam Wednesday
when he tried to buy paint at Wal-Mart and was declined. His card had been suspended a day
earlier by his credit card company after a suspicious $1 charge and a $40 charge were rung up on it, he said. He was impressed by his bank's quick action to stop the fraud -- and knows he's not liable for the charges -- but said the experience is still frustrating."I don't like it, not a bit," he said. "I use this card for charging business expenses, and it'll be 10 days before I get another card."
A proactive defense
Consumers from around the United States -- as well as several from outside the country,
including Australia and Britain -- have complained about the charges, suggesting the scope may
be widespread. Initially when consumers called Answer Quick, they were told a refund request would be filed with Pluto Data. But it's not clear if the firm has issued refunds, so many consumers elected to dispute the charge directly with their credit cards. That's a good idea, says credit card fraud expert Dan Clements. "It's better for the consumers to be proactive," Clements said. "If ... Pluto has their merchant account go belly up, (then there are) no funds to credit customers. The consumers will have to dispute to get the charges taken off."
A two-step fraud
Clements speculated that the charges resulted from a common two-step fraud: thieves steal a
batch of credit cards, then steal or set up a fake merchant account, and run a series of charges
through it. When the money is deposited into the merchant's bank account, the criminals
withdraw it and disappear. The incident is similar to a fraud involving a Web site named PharmacyCard.com, reported by MSNBC.com a year ago. Eventually, PharmacyCard officials were sued by the Federal Trade Commission, which said the site owners gleaned $10 million from 90,000 consumers before the operation was shut down. The FTC said that a firm in Nicosia, Cyprus was involved in that incident, and that money taken from consumers was headed for a bank account there. Some of the charges in the Pluto Data incident appear as "Pluto D Nicosia Cy" suggesting a Cyprus connection in this incident, as well.The longer the operators can keep this kind of credit card scam going, the better, Clements said. That's why consumers found the 1 cent or $1 charges, he said -- it created a track record so the
merchant account appeared to have a normal volume of transactions when the higher-priced
fraud began.
Complaints mount over bills for phantom DVD purchase
Federal authorities have opened an investigation into a rash of mysterious $30 and $40 charges
appearing on consumer credit cards around the country, MSNBC.com has learned. The charges
are for the purchase of DVDs and CDs from a company named "Pluto Data Ltd." Thousands of
complaints about the charges have appeared on a Web site devoted to the mystery, with
consumers saying they've never heard of the company.
Adding to the mystery -- most consumers report a 1 cent or $1 charge appearing on their cards
first, followed by the larger charge from Pluto Data or PLUTO D, NICOSIA.
Phone calls to the toll free number listed next to the charge on the credit card bills provide little
additional information. The firm answering the calls, Answer Quick Telecommunications Inc.,
located in Baton Rouge, La., says it was an answering service for Pluto Data prior to closing the
account several weeks ago. Answer Quick referred questions to local law enforcement
investigators.
Don Kelly, a spokesman for the Baton Rouge police, said his office has received 125 complaints
about the alleged fraud. "We are working with the FBI and the Secret Service," he said. He added that Answer Quick was not a suspect. "We are keeping track of the complaints and doing what we can to help them on what's going on."
Officials from the FBI in Louisiana and the Baton Rouge Secret Service office wouldn't comment
on the investigation. Dave Collett, a spokesman for Mastercard, said an investigation was ongoing, but he would not provide details. "We are auditing the merchant." Consumers who find the alleged fraudulent charge on their accounts are not liable for it, he said.
A February surprise
The mysterious charges began appearing around Valentine's Day. Many frustrated consumers
who searched the Internet for help found each other on a bulletin board service named
BroadBandReports.com. By Thursday, there were 35 pages of complaints on the site, with
hundreds of victims and over 50,000 visits, suggesting the number of victims could be larger than the 125 complaints logged by local police so far."I'm just so angry, and so is everybody else on that site," said Connie Shotkoski, of Columbus, Neb.
Rich Sinclair, a consumer in Salem, Ill., said he just found out about the alleged scam Wednesday
when he tried to buy paint at Wal-Mart and was declined. His card had been suspended a day
earlier by his credit card company after a suspicious $1 charge and a $40 charge were rung up on it, he said. He was impressed by his bank's quick action to stop the fraud -- and knows he's not liable for the charges -- but said the experience is still frustrating."I don't like it, not a bit," he said. "I use this card for charging business expenses, and it'll be 10 days before I get another card."
A proactive defense
Consumers from around the United States -- as well as several from outside the country,
including Australia and Britain -- have complained about the charges, suggesting the scope may
be widespread. Initially when consumers called Answer Quick, they were told a refund request would be filed with Pluto Data. But it's not clear if the firm has issued refunds, so many consumers elected to dispute the charge directly with their credit cards. That's a good idea, says credit card fraud expert Dan Clements. "It's better for the consumers to be proactive," Clements said. "If ... Pluto has their merchant account go belly up, (then there are) no funds to credit customers. The consumers will have to dispute to get the charges taken off."
A two-step fraud
Clements speculated that the charges resulted from a common two-step fraud: thieves steal a
batch of credit cards, then steal or set up a fake merchant account, and run a series of charges
through it. When the money is deposited into the merchant's bank account, the criminals
withdraw it and disappear. The incident is similar to a fraud involving a Web site named PharmacyCard.com, reported by MSNBC.com a year ago. Eventually, PharmacyCard officials were sued by the Federal Trade Commission, which said the site owners gleaned $10 million from 90,000 consumers before the operation was shut down. The FTC said that a firm in Nicosia, Cyprus was involved in that incident, and that money taken from consumers was headed for a bank account there. Some of the charges in the Pluto Data incident appear as "Pluto D Nicosia Cy" suggesting a Cyprus connection in this incident, as well.The longer the operators can keep this kind of credit card scam going, the better, Clements said. That's why consumers found the 1 cent or $1 charges, he said -- it created a track record so the
merchant account appeared to have a normal volume of transactions when the higher-priced
fraud began.
MASSIVE CREDIT CARD FRAUD PERPETRATED AGAINST VISA/MASTERCARD CLIENTS
Starting in mid-February 2005, mysterious charges are appearing on thousands of Visa/MasterCard accounts for phantom purchases. These charges are by a company called Pluto Data Ltd, located in either the UK or Cypress
For_Immediate_Release:
Starting in mid-February 2005, mysterious charges have appeared on thousands of Visa/MasterCard accounts for online “phantom” purchases. These charges have been by a company called Pluto Data Ltd, possibly originating in either the UK or Cypress.
To date, thousands of cardholders have found first a ping amount of either .01 or $1.00 followed within hours or days by a purchase for either $29.99 or $39.99. The product is supposedly a DVD of varying titles. Shipping addresses are all over the US and phone numbers typically from still a different state.
The company acting as their call center, AnswerQuick in Baton Rouge, LA says they are innocent and have terminated Pluto Data's account.
We called our credit card company and the were not aware of this fraud. How could they miss it when it is all over the internet.
Request a new card immediately
Starting in mid-February 2005, mysterious charges are appearing on thousands of Visa/MasterCard accounts for phantom purchases. These charges are by a company called Pluto Data Ltd, located in either the UK or Cypress
For_Immediate_Release:
Starting in mid-February 2005, mysterious charges have appeared on thousands of Visa/MasterCard accounts for online “phantom” purchases. These charges have been by a company called Pluto Data Ltd, possibly originating in either the UK or Cypress.
To date, thousands of cardholders have found first a ping amount of either .01 or $1.00 followed within hours or days by a purchase for either $29.99 or $39.99. The product is supposedly a DVD of varying titles. Shipping addresses are all over the US and phone numbers typically from still a different state.
The company acting as their call center, AnswerQuick in Baton Rouge, LA says they are innocent and have terminated Pluto Data's account.
We called our credit card company and the were not aware of this fraud. How could they miss it when it is all over the internet.
Request a new card immediately
Wednesday, February 16, 2005
Throw Syria out of Lebanon!!
The ramifications of Hariri's assassination
The assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in a massive bombing in central Beirut on Monday sends a loud and deadly message - but the nature, origin, destination and intent of the message all remain painfully unclear to many observers. What is crystal clear, though, is that this crime will send out important political ripples in at least three dimensions.
The two most immediate dimensions are internal Lebanese politics and the Syrian-Lebanese relationship. The third dimension is the relationship between Syria and external powers - the U.S. and France most notably, the UN and the Europeans more broadly. The speed, clarity and intensity with which Lebanese opposition groups Monday blamed Syria and its allied Lebanese government for the killing spoke volumes about the troubled Syrian-Lebanese axis being the central political context in which this whole matter must be analyzed. That became obvious immediately after the bombing, as affirmed by the behavior of the three principal protagonists - the Syrian government, the Lebanese opposition and the United States government.
The events of Monday have unleashed political forces that could transform both Lebanon and, via the Syrian connection, other parts of the Middle East. The already intense backlash to the assassination may lead to an accelerated Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, and faster reform movements inside both Lebanon and Syria.
The fact that within just hours of the murder five distinct parties were singled out as possible culprits - Israel, Syria, Lebanese regime partisans, mafia-style gangs, and anti-Saudi, anti-U.S. Islamist terrorists - also points to the wider dilemma that disfigures Lebanese and Arab political culture in general: the resort to murderous and destabilizing violence as a chronic option for those who vie for power, whether as respectable government officials, established local warlords, or freelance political thugs.
The madness is not just in the murder of a fine man and a true Lebanese and Arab patriot; it is in the ongoing legacy of rampant and often brutal political violence that at once defines, disfigures and demeans political elites and perhaps even Arab society as a whole. That madness has now been even more deeply institutionalized and anchored in the modern history of this region due to the impact of the American-British invasion of Iraq and the new wave of violence it has spurred. One of the reasons why the Lebanese-Syrian relationship has become increasingly contentious in the past year is the consequence of American pressure on Syria to be more cooperative on Iraq. The circle of violence that engulfs the Middle East is as vast and intertwined as it is senselessly destructive.
But this murder was not primarily about our wider Arab dilemma. Regardless of who carried it out, the murder and its fallout have focused attention on a tortured Lebanese-Syrian relationship that is problematic in its own right, and that has become the crucible for testing new forms of American and Western political intervention in the Arab world.
It was not at all surprising that opposition forces in Lebanon quickly came together and openly pinned responsibility for the assassination on Syria and its allied Lebanese government. For the most significant political development in Lebanon in recent months, in my view, has been the Lebanese opposition's coalescing around an increasingly clear and sharp rejection of Syria's military presence in the country and its political interference in domestic Lebanese affairs. This position became more focused and vocal last autumn after the Syrian-backed extension of Lebanese President Emile Lahoud's term by an additional three years. American-French diplomatic pressure on Syria and the passage of UN Security Council Resolution 1559 demanding Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon are all part of that same thrust.
This escalated almost instantly to a new level of intensity and importance in the hours after Hariri's death: The opposition not only blamed Syria, but also held the Lebanese government responsible and asked it not to participate in Hariri's funeral Tuesday. In Arab political culture, I cannot think of a more acerbic, angry and insulting gesture than asking the incumbent political leadership to stay away from the funeral of a leading statesman who almost single-handedly (working with the Syrians!) rebuilt Beirut and Lebanon. The Lebanese opposition has taken its battle with the Lebanese and Syrian governments to a new level, with unpredictable consequences.
As fascinating as the opposition's speedy accusations against Syria was Syria's equally swift rejection of the accusations. Damascus marshaled an unprecedented array of its officials who spoke to the mass media simultaneously on three continents, and who pointed the finger at Israel and others who are accused of wanting to destabilize Lebanon. Not losing a beat or a step, the U.S. State Department and White House weighed in at the same moment with their not-very-veiled linkage of Hariri's killing with the need for Lebanon to enjoy total sovereignty from Syrian influence and control.
Investigations may or may not identify and prosecute the killers of Hariri, as was the case in half a dozen other assassinations of Lebanese leaders in recent decades. Despite the quick accusations against Syria, the regime in Damascus, like all other accused parties, will get its moment in the court of public opinion, and in the deliberations of the UN Security Council, where the contested Syrian-Lebanese relationship is likely to be debated. The reality now is that Hariri's assassination, regardless of who did it, has vastly speeded up and intensified the efforts of Lebanese political forces that are demanding that Syria get its troops and political operatives out of Lebanon.
The ramifications of Hariri's assassination
The assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in a massive bombing in central Beirut on Monday sends a loud and deadly message - but the nature, origin, destination and intent of the message all remain painfully unclear to many observers. What is crystal clear, though, is that this crime will send out important political ripples in at least three dimensions.
The two most immediate dimensions are internal Lebanese politics and the Syrian-Lebanese relationship. The third dimension is the relationship between Syria and external powers - the U.S. and France most notably, the UN and the Europeans more broadly. The speed, clarity and intensity with which Lebanese opposition groups Monday blamed Syria and its allied Lebanese government for the killing spoke volumes about the troubled Syrian-Lebanese axis being the central political context in which this whole matter must be analyzed. That became obvious immediately after the bombing, as affirmed by the behavior of the three principal protagonists - the Syrian government, the Lebanese opposition and the United States government.
The events of Monday have unleashed political forces that could transform both Lebanon and, via the Syrian connection, other parts of the Middle East. The already intense backlash to the assassination may lead to an accelerated Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon, and faster reform movements inside both Lebanon and Syria.
The fact that within just hours of the murder five distinct parties were singled out as possible culprits - Israel, Syria, Lebanese regime partisans, mafia-style gangs, and anti-Saudi, anti-U.S. Islamist terrorists - also points to the wider dilemma that disfigures Lebanese and Arab political culture in general: the resort to murderous and destabilizing violence as a chronic option for those who vie for power, whether as respectable government officials, established local warlords, or freelance political thugs.
The madness is not just in the murder of a fine man and a true Lebanese and Arab patriot; it is in the ongoing legacy of rampant and often brutal political violence that at once defines, disfigures and demeans political elites and perhaps even Arab society as a whole. That madness has now been even more deeply institutionalized and anchored in the modern history of this region due to the impact of the American-British invasion of Iraq and the new wave of violence it has spurred. One of the reasons why the Lebanese-Syrian relationship has become increasingly contentious in the past year is the consequence of American pressure on Syria to be more cooperative on Iraq. The circle of violence that engulfs the Middle East is as vast and intertwined as it is senselessly destructive.
But this murder was not primarily about our wider Arab dilemma. Regardless of who carried it out, the murder and its fallout have focused attention on a tortured Lebanese-Syrian relationship that is problematic in its own right, and that has become the crucible for testing new forms of American and Western political intervention in the Arab world.
It was not at all surprising that opposition forces in Lebanon quickly came together and openly pinned responsibility for the assassination on Syria and its allied Lebanese government. For the most significant political development in Lebanon in recent months, in my view, has been the Lebanese opposition's coalescing around an increasingly clear and sharp rejection of Syria's military presence in the country and its political interference in domestic Lebanese affairs. This position became more focused and vocal last autumn after the Syrian-backed extension of Lebanese President Emile Lahoud's term by an additional three years. American-French diplomatic pressure on Syria and the passage of UN Security Council Resolution 1559 demanding Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon are all part of that same thrust.
This escalated almost instantly to a new level of intensity and importance in the hours after Hariri's death: The opposition not only blamed Syria, but also held the Lebanese government responsible and asked it not to participate in Hariri's funeral Tuesday. In Arab political culture, I cannot think of a more acerbic, angry and insulting gesture than asking the incumbent political leadership to stay away from the funeral of a leading statesman who almost single-handedly (working with the Syrians!) rebuilt Beirut and Lebanon. The Lebanese opposition has taken its battle with the Lebanese and Syrian governments to a new level, with unpredictable consequences.
As fascinating as the opposition's speedy accusations against Syria was Syria's equally swift rejection of the accusations. Damascus marshaled an unprecedented array of its officials who spoke to the mass media simultaneously on three continents, and who pointed the finger at Israel and others who are accused of wanting to destabilize Lebanon. Not losing a beat or a step, the U.S. State Department and White House weighed in at the same moment with their not-very-veiled linkage of Hariri's killing with the need for Lebanon to enjoy total sovereignty from Syrian influence and control.
Investigations may or may not identify and prosecute the killers of Hariri, as was the case in half a dozen other assassinations of Lebanese leaders in recent decades. Despite the quick accusations against Syria, the regime in Damascus, like all other accused parties, will get its moment in the court of public opinion, and in the deliberations of the UN Security Council, where the contested Syrian-Lebanese relationship is likely to be debated. The reality now is that Hariri's assassination, regardless of who did it, has vastly speeded up and intensified the efforts of Lebanese political forces that are demanding that Syria get its troops and political operatives out of Lebanon.
Saturday, February 12, 2005
AND SHE GETS TO KEEP HER COMPUTER!!!
Read the last line!
Fiorina Exiting Hewlett-Packard With More Than $42 Million
Carleton S. Fiorina, the former chief executive of Hewlett-Packard, will receive a severance package worth about $21.4 million, and stands to gain at least $21.1 million more.
The additional amount reflects the estimated value of her pension, stock options and Hewlett stock holdings, which the company did not include in her severance package.
Ms. Fiorina was forced to resign Tuesday after the board concluded that she failed to reverse Hewlett's sagging stock price and accelerate the company's turnaround after the merger with Compaq Computer.
She will receive $14 million in severance pay, according to terms of the agreement submitted yesterday in regulatory filings.
She will also receive a $7.38 million bonus for meeting certain performance goals in 2004 and the first quarter of this year, even though on Wednesday the board singled out Ms. Fiorina's failure to accelerate the company's strategy.
In addition, Hewlett agreed to pay her $50,000 for legal, financial and career counseling and will continue her health and personal security benefits for about a year.
Paul Hodgson, a senior compensation analyst at the Corporate Library, questioned the severance in light of her initial pay package. Ms. Fiorina received a $3 million signing bonus along with a restricted stock grant worth more than $65.5 million at the time to woo her away from Lucent Technologies, according to filings.
"And as she leaves," he said, "she gets $21 million, when in fact, stockholders have gotten negative returns."
More than $21.1 million in additional compensation was not reflected in the severance package.
Because the company's share price has fallen more than 50 percent since Ms. Fiorina took over in July 1999, most of her six million vested options have no current market value. Only a small portion of the 700,000 options granted in 2003 have value and are worth about $1 million, which was not reflected in the filings.
Ms. Fiorina also received restricted grants of about 826,000 shares during her tenure, that along with her other Hewlett holdings, now have a market value of $18.2 million.
In addition, Ms. Fiorina will receive a pension of at least $200,000 a year that was not included in the company's severance calculations. The pension could be worth at least $2 million, compensation specialists said. She will also keep her computer, receive technical support for three months, and have access to a secretary for six months.
Read the last line!
Fiorina Exiting Hewlett-Packard With More Than $42 Million
Carleton S. Fiorina, the former chief executive of Hewlett-Packard, will receive a severance package worth about $21.4 million, and stands to gain at least $21.1 million more.
The additional amount reflects the estimated value of her pension, stock options and Hewlett stock holdings, which the company did not include in her severance package.
Ms. Fiorina was forced to resign Tuesday after the board concluded that she failed to reverse Hewlett's sagging stock price and accelerate the company's turnaround after the merger with Compaq Computer.
She will receive $14 million in severance pay, according to terms of the agreement submitted yesterday in regulatory filings.
She will also receive a $7.38 million bonus for meeting certain performance goals in 2004 and the first quarter of this year, even though on Wednesday the board singled out Ms. Fiorina's failure to accelerate the company's strategy.
In addition, Hewlett agreed to pay her $50,000 for legal, financial and career counseling and will continue her health and personal security benefits for about a year.
Paul Hodgson, a senior compensation analyst at the Corporate Library, questioned the severance in light of her initial pay package. Ms. Fiorina received a $3 million signing bonus along with a restricted stock grant worth more than $65.5 million at the time to woo her away from Lucent Technologies, according to filings.
"And as she leaves," he said, "she gets $21 million, when in fact, stockholders have gotten negative returns."
More than $21.1 million in additional compensation was not reflected in the severance package.
Because the company's share price has fallen more than 50 percent since Ms. Fiorina took over in July 1999, most of her six million vested options have no current market value. Only a small portion of the 700,000 options granted in 2003 have value and are worth about $1 million, which was not reflected in the filings.
Ms. Fiorina also received restricted grants of about 826,000 shares during her tenure, that along with her other Hewlett holdings, now have a market value of $18.2 million.
In addition, Ms. Fiorina will receive a pension of at least $200,000 a year that was not included in the company's severance calculations. The pension could be worth at least $2 million, compensation specialists said. She will also keep her computer, receive technical support for three months, and have access to a secretary for six months.
Friday, February 04, 2005
Kazaa is Terrible, Not worth Downloading
Kazaa's a nuisance--so says Kazaa maker's staff
Employees at peer-to-peer provider Sharman Networks "hate" installing the company's own Kazaa software because it has ill effects on their computers, according to an internal document written by Sharman's chief technology officer.
The document, entitled "Kazaa Technology 2004" and written by Phil Morle, says that Sharman needs to be careful about installing too much adware on a computer upon the installation of Kazaa. The document is part of a bundle for which a request for confidentiality was rejected this week by Justice Murray Wilcox, the judge overseeing a copyright trial against Sharman in Australia.
The adware "slows down users' machines and can affect other activity such as browsing the Internet," Morle wrote. "We are also adding increasing p2p networks to the users' machines. These are good value to users but they use more resources and create confusion for users as to what resources they are sharing and where this can be controlled."
These two issues could be reasons why Kazaa manages to "lose users by over-stepping the mark," the document said, adding that the company should take into account how many employees at Sharman refuse to install the peer-to-peer software.
"Consider how many people that work for Sharman Networks and its partners that hate installing Kazaa on their machine," Morle wrote.
Record labels Universal Music Australia, EMI, Sony/BMG, Warner, Festival Mushroom and 25 additional applicants are suing Sharman and associated parties--including Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Altnet and Sharman CEO Nikki Hemming--over alleged music copyright infringement made through the Kazaa software.
The Australian record companies assert that Sharman misrepresented the situation when it claimed that "the performance of a personal computer will not be, or is unlikely to be, noticeably affected by its functioning as a supernode for the purposes of the Kazaa software."
Morle's document also stated the company's awareness of the legal risks involved with the technology.
"Our competitors are taking risks legally, but delivering compelling consumer solutions. We need confidence in what we do and must take similar leaps of faith. eDonkey is not yet being sued and is in a strong position to out-innovate us," Morle wrote.
Kazaa's a nuisance--so says Kazaa maker's staff
Employees at peer-to-peer provider Sharman Networks "hate" installing the company's own Kazaa software because it has ill effects on their computers, according to an internal document written by Sharman's chief technology officer.
The document, entitled "Kazaa Technology 2004" and written by Phil Morle, says that Sharman needs to be careful about installing too much adware on a computer upon the installation of Kazaa. The document is part of a bundle for which a request for confidentiality was rejected this week by Justice Murray Wilcox, the judge overseeing a copyright trial against Sharman in Australia.
The adware "slows down users' machines and can affect other activity such as browsing the Internet," Morle wrote. "We are also adding increasing p2p networks to the users' machines. These are good value to users but they use more resources and create confusion for users as to what resources they are sharing and where this can be controlled."
These two issues could be reasons why Kazaa manages to "lose users by over-stepping the mark," the document said, adding that the company should take into account how many employees at Sharman refuse to install the peer-to-peer software.
"Consider how many people that work for Sharman Networks and its partners that hate installing Kazaa on their machine," Morle wrote.
Record labels Universal Music Australia, EMI, Sony/BMG, Warner, Festival Mushroom and 25 additional applicants are suing Sharman and associated parties--including Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Altnet and Sharman CEO Nikki Hemming--over alleged music copyright infringement made through the Kazaa software.
The Australian record companies assert that Sharman misrepresented the situation when it claimed that "the performance of a personal computer will not be, or is unlikely to be, noticeably affected by its functioning as a supernode for the purposes of the Kazaa software."
Morle's document also stated the company's awareness of the legal risks involved with the technology.
"Our competitors are taking risks legally, but delivering compelling consumer solutions. We need confidence in what we do and must take similar leaps of faith. eDonkey is not yet being sued and is in a strong position to out-innovate us," Morle wrote.
Sunday, January 16, 2005
A Great Trainer for your Dog
http://www.teacherspetnj.com/
Teacher's Pet, located in central New Jersey, specializes in custom in-home dog training and behavior modification. Founded by clicker trainer/behaviorist and American Kennel Club CGC Evaluator, Diana S. Coles, Teacher's Pet brings over 20 years of dog training experience into your home. Teacher's Pet is endorsed by veterinarians and animal rescue organization and has been featured in cover stories in the Asbury Park Press and Home News Tribune.
Successful!
Teacher's Pet continues to enjoy unparalleled success. Unlike most dog training businesses in New Jersey, Teacher's Pet uses positive reinforcement (clicker training) to teach new commands and behaviors. Clicker training is based on established scientific facts on how animals learn. SeaWorld uses clicker training for all of it's marine mammals and it's often used to train animals for movies and television.
Guaranteed!
No choke chains, prong collars or metal collars of any kind are ever used. We are so confident of our technique that every dog trained by Teacher's Pet is given a Lifetime Guarantee!
Rewarding!
Many families give up on their dog because of behavioral problems and animal shelters are filled with these dogs. We don't want this to happen to your dog. We want to help your dog and your family reach their full potential together. We want to keep your dog with your family!
http://www.teacherspetnj.com/
Teacher's Pet, located in central New Jersey, specializes in custom in-home dog training and behavior modification. Founded by clicker trainer/behaviorist and American Kennel Club CGC Evaluator, Diana S. Coles, Teacher's Pet brings over 20 years of dog training experience into your home. Teacher's Pet is endorsed by veterinarians and animal rescue organization and has been featured in cover stories in the Asbury Park Press and Home News Tribune.
Successful!
Teacher's Pet continues to enjoy unparalleled success. Unlike most dog training businesses in New Jersey, Teacher's Pet uses positive reinforcement (clicker training) to teach new commands and behaviors. Clicker training is based on established scientific facts on how animals learn. SeaWorld uses clicker training for all of it's marine mammals and it's often used to train animals for movies and television.
Guaranteed!
No choke chains, prong collars or metal collars of any kind are ever used. We are so confident of our technique that every dog trained by Teacher's Pet is given a Lifetime Guarantee!
Rewarding!
Many families give up on their dog because of behavioral problems and animal shelters are filled with these dogs. We don't want this to happen to your dog. We want to help your dog and your family reach their full potential together. We want to keep your dog with your family!
Friday, January 07, 2005
Bear Search Foundation
http://www.bearsearchandrescue.org/
This is a great organization. Please read the link to learn more. 70% of the rescue dogs who were on the 9/11 site for the first 10 days died of cancer. 50% of the rescue workers, working with rescue dogs have formed some sort of cancer. Most of this has been kept a secret!!! Donations are needed for them to continue the great work they do.
http://www.bearsearchandrescue.org/
This is a great organization. Please read the link to learn more. 70% of the rescue dogs who were on the 9/11 site for the first 10 days died of cancer. 50% of the rescue workers, working with rescue dogs have formed some sort of cancer. Most of this has been kept a secret!!! Donations are needed for them to continue the great work they do.
A new addition
We adopted a second boxer named Rocky.
He is 14 months young and loves our boxer,Dempsey.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)