April 2009

High profile Internet security/safety/privacy problems continue to spotlight the Open Internet's growing security problem.

"Computer hacking attacks soar as gangs focus on financial data" -- FT

• "Computer hackers stole more sensitive records last year than in the previous four combined, with ATM cards and Pin information growing in popularity as targets, according to a study..."

"Computer Attackers target popular sites in quest for profit" IBD

• Symantec...  "found new varieties of malware rose 265% last year vs. 2007."
• "This is about fraud and theft — I don't think there's any doubt in anyone's mind," said Dean Turner, director of Symantec's global intelligence network unit. "Where this is headed is not good for anybody."

"Computer Spies Breach Fighter Jet Project" WSJ

• "...He spoke of his concerns about the vulnerability of U.S. air traffic control systems to cyber infiltration, adding "our networks are being mapped." He went on to warn of a potential situation where "a fighter pilot can't trust his radar."

"New Military Comand to Focus on Cybersecurity" WSJ

Even some strong proponents of net neutrality now apparently recognize:

• Bandwidth is not unlimited or free;
• The real need for reasonable network management; and that
• Internet networks can have legitimate economic reasons to -- limit bandwidth, block access, or offer slow/fast lanes -- that are not necessarily in violation of net neutrality or anticompetitive. 

An excellent New York Times article provides real world examples of the above points.

• One Internet Village, Divided: In Developing Countries, Web Grows Without Profit.

The article, which I recommend reading, explains that many Internet companies are coming to the realization that many users cost more to provide access to than an Internet advertising model can economically support.

The DOJ investigation of the Google Book Settlement suggests that a broader antitrust spotlight may be returning to Google.

• Apparently the DOJ is investigating whether the Book Settlement sets a competitive or anti-competitive trajectory for the search of digitized books, and of "orphan works in particular.
  • Google argues the settlement is pro-competitive and increases access to books.
  • The DOJ's antitrust investigative scrutiny suggests otherwise. 
• Since little involving the Internet happens in a vacuum, this antitrust investigation may have much broader implications than most appreciate for:
  • The new Administration's overall antitrust approach;
  • The FTC's oversight of behavioral advertising, and
  • The FTC/Congress' focus on online privacy.   

To start however, it is important to get an update of important facts since antitrust is so fact-driven. Recent facts only confirm and bolster the DOJ's public assessment 11-05-08 that Google had monopoly market power in search advertising and search advertising syndication.