In the past, we’ve seen MySpace stick it to spammers, winning big settlements against amateur hackers and spam kings alike. But there’s a new kind of menace tearing through MySpace, specifically its group pages, that’s got web developers and group organizers heated. MySpace groups represent niche communities ranging from “home beer brewing… [to] gay rights issues.” But so-called “trolls,” MySpace members who post bogus blank comments, obscene pictures, and hateful messages on group walls, have turned these interest-driven communities into “cyber-graffiti walls.”

PCWORLD.com comments that trolls “delight in making a mess and try to one-up each another with aggressive vandalism.”

MySpace group advocates contend that the social network has neglected to address several glitches which give trolls the ability to spam group walls for their own regressive objectives. One known glitch “allows vandals to post comments on a group even when they aren't an approved member.” Another, referred to as “bombing” allows trolls to post blank comments which in turn “push down the real comments.” Trolls can employ an automated tool which can repeat this process hundreds of times over. The blank comment pages accumulated by this “effectively [ruin] a conversation.” “Pinning,” another infamous glitch, is when a spammer “pins” a random discussion topic to an unrelated, preexisting forum thread. This isn’t exactly harmful, but rather, distracting, confusing, and frustrating for legitimate members.

These legit members and group leaders allege that they have submitted various complaints to MySpace security officials with no progressive results. In fact, they have gone so far as to argue that “MySpace has been lax in fixing [these] well-known glitches.”

Jamie Schumacher, MySpace spokeswoman, denied commenting specifically on these issues on behalf of the company. Still, MySpace “contends it has beefed up its security department” and works to the best of its ability to monitor site spammers and trolls.

But Caroline Dangson, research analyst at IDC, has a different take. “So far, we have seen MySpace do very little to address the issues of trolling,” she stated.

As of 2006, MySpace allegedly only had two young workers addressing the entire site’s spam problems. Since then, however, “security staff has been increased to 30 or 40 employees.”

Well folks, the days of writing off fancy flash text as useless to search engines are over. Google announced in its official blog that it has incorporated Adobe's Flash Player technology to provide a new way for its algorithm to crawl and index Flash files.

“[From] Flash menus, buttons and banners, to self-contained Flash websites,” all text-based Flash elements on your page can now be crawled and indexed by Google. The new Flash indexing algorithm will enable web designers to see their creative efforts in Flash reflected in their page ranking with Google and their overall website visibility.

The secret lies in Google’s recent integration of “Searchable SWF.” Google posted more on this technology in its Webmaster Central blog. “All of the text that users can see as they interact with your Flash file,” the post indicated, is fair game to be crawled and indexed by the spiders. That content, Google writes, “can be used when Google generates a snippet for your website” to be displayed on the SERPs; it can even be matched directly with keywords entered by a web surfer.

For now, only text-based Flash content is traceable. Spiffy images, and all text embedded into an image file, will not be crawled by Google. Also, the post recommended that web developers “do not index FLV files, such as the videos that play on YouTube, because these files contain no text elements.”

Lastly, Google listed three current “main limitations” which may interfere with or annoy developers. These are the limitations as described in the Google blog post:

1. Googlebot does not execute some types of JavaScript. So if your web page loads a Flash file via JavaScript, Google may not be aware of that Flash file, in which case it will not be indexed.

2. We currently do not attach content from external resources that are loaded by your Flash files. If your Flash file loads an HTML file, an XML file, another SWF file, etc., Google will separately index that resource, but it will not yet be considered to be part of the content in your Flash file.

3. While we are able to index Flash in almost all of the languages found on the web, currently there are difficulties with Flash content written in bidirectional languages. Until this is fixed, we will be unable to index Hebrew language or Arabic language content from Flash files.

The post stated that Google is at work to remedy these issues, and to check back for more updates. Until then, Flash your heart out, and know that your hard work can begin to pay off in the algorithms.

The AP contends that this is Microsoft’s attempt to “reach thrifty PC buyers who would otherwise pass on productivity software.” The entire package, which includes Live OneCare, Microsoft’s computer security software, is priced around $200. But the subscription fee will start at a reported $70 per year.

In a non-exclusive agreement, Circuit City retail stores will be selling the subscription-based suite around the country.

Group product manager for Microsoft Office, Bryson Gordon, has commented that some customers don’t “ordinarily buy Office at the same time they purchase a new computer,” but rather, install the bundle with previously purchased Microsoft Office disks or copy the program from a friend.

The Microsoft “Equipt” bundle is said to include the traditional programs of Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote, in addition to the OneCare security software. It is able to be installed on three different computers, and like the existing Microsoft software package, will include “small updates [which] will be made automatically... [and] consumers will have some control over the timing of major upgrades to new versions.”

Call me crazy but this scenario (the whole Microsoft-Yahoo! drama, I mean) is playing out in my head like so: boy (Microsoft) takes an interest in girl (Yahoo!). Boy bids to buy girl – or attempts to woo her, anyway – with a multi-billion dollar bid which, after several renegotiations, comes to rest at a value of $47.5 billion. Girl feels undervalued – by at least $5.5 billion – girl plays hard to get. Boy gets frustrated and withdraws bid – er... I mean affections. Girl – apparently unfazed – moves onto hunky competition in an attempt to enhance her own image. Boy gets jealous and plots to double-team (I’m not even going to attempt an analogy here) with pals.

That’s been the soap opera up until this point. While details of the discussions are extremely sketchy, the AP, citing the Wall Street Journal, maintains that experts believe Microsoft will not admit defeat so easily, and that the software behemoth is looking to purchase Yahoo!; subsequently, the “rest of the company would be combined with another outlet,” and this is where News Corp, Time Warner, etc, would come into the mix.

The AP maintains that while Yahoo! shares saw a 5.2% increase on Wednesday, bringing it up $1.04 to $21.24, Microsoft shares dropped to $26.41, falling 46 cents.

Because both Microsoft and Yahoo! have not officially released statements of any kind on the matter, we must keep in mind that these are but preliminary events... aka: girl’s room gossip. But you never know... for every he said/she said story that’s out there, some of them are bound to be rooted in reality.

Stay tuned for more updates as these events unfold...

That’s right, PC boys and PC girls— as of this past Monday it’s Vista or the highway. (Or... a Mac.)

AP reported that Microsoft will “provide full technical support for six-year-old Windows XP through 2009” and “limited support through 2014.”

I’m a personal fan of Windows XP, so this recent decision saddens me. It looks like I’m not alone on this one – the AP referenced a group of protesters looking to preserve the familiar, user-friendly operating system. Petitions such as “Save XP” have sprung up, but it looks like their efforts won’t get very far.

On InfoWorld.com, a computer technology-based news website, campaigners posted requests for the software company to continue selling Windows XP until 2009, when Windows 7 is scheduled for release.

No word yet whether or not the small cyber cries have been heard in Washington, where Microsoft headquarters are located. In the mean time, if you feel your eyes burning with rage and your skin crawling with the thought of installing Vista, keep in mind you can purchase Vista Ultimate or Vista Business operating systems, as the AP maintains, and “legally ‘downgrade’ to XP” to get right back to home sweet home.

The halted sales of XP happen to coincide with Bill Gate’s decision to step down from the company he co-founded more than 30 years ago (though I sincerely doubt the two events are related). Gates left Microsoft to concentrate on his medical-based charity, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The new iPhone is scheduled to debut in stores July 11^th, and I’m happy to report that the cost of the device has been altered to make wallets happier. Two versions of the so-called iPhone 3G will be on sale - an 8-gigabyte for an eye-popping $199 and a 16-gig for $299. Those are the prices customers can expect to pay in the store if they purchase the mobile device with the two-year contract. If they opt out of the contract, however, the cost soars to $599 and $699 respectively.

AT&T, which is the exclusive service provider for the iPhone, is looking to profit off “monthly service fees over the life of the contract.”

AT&T spokesman Michael Coe commented that customers without the contract can skip out on the early termination fee if they decide to cancel their account. However, as with the current iPhone, the 3G operates on is “locked” platform with or without a contract which means it is confined to the AT&T network.

As far as package plans go, the AP maintains that they will be the same contract or no contract, but customers without one will be charged an extra $30 every month to cover “data like e-mail and Web surfing.”

For now, the most basic package includes 450 phone minutes, unlimited email and Web time, and is priced at $70 a month (not including taxes and other fees).

Although a prepaid plan for the first generation of iPhones was offered to customers who “failed a credit check,” a prepaid plan for the 3G is still pending.

Users should always be cautious and responsible with the information, images and opinions they post publicly (after all, it is public!) and should never, ever use these virtual venues to instigate or promote offensive behavior or beliefs. Technology had given us fantastic ways to communicate with one another over the web. But what happens when that technology is severely abused?

You get tragic stories like that of Megan Meier.

In October of 2006, after a series malicious online messages—one stating that the “world would be better off without her—” Megan committed suicide by hanging herself in her bedroom closet. She was thirteen years old.

The messages, sent with top social network MySpace, came from “Josh,” a 16-year-old boy with whom Megan had been chatting over the past weeks. This would be another lamentable story of a soured friendship taken to extremes... only there’s one problem: Josh doesn’t exist.

Allegedly, a neighbor and mother of Megan’s former friend created the account under false pretenses (which violates MySpace terms and agreements of services). She communicated with Megan under the alias of a sixteen year old boy— Josh— creating a friendly, flirty rapport before crushing the girl with hateful messages.

On Monday, the Associated Press reported that in Megan’s home state of Missouri, Governor Matt Blunt signed a bill prohibiting cyberbullying through more modern mediums.

According to the AP, the bill includes new stipulations which will be added to the existing harassment laws; “harassment” is no longer legally defined as “communication... written or over the telephone.” Now, taking into consideration the influence and popularity of other technologies, the bill encompasses harassment “from computers, text messages and other electronic devices.”

“This new law,” Blunt stated, “will ensure that we have the protections and penalties needed to safeguard Missourians from Internet harassment.”

Megan’s mother was present at the signing of the bill, which was initiated by the terrible circumstances which surrounded the suicide. They all lead back to unfortunate truth highlighted by Ms. Meir— “This is not just one case with Megan.”

The trial against the neighbor is still pending. In the mean time, I implore everyone who enjoys the fruits of social networking websites to handle them responsibly—with care and consideration for every word written, every picture posted, and every intention sent out there in the buzzing cyber world.

ICANN, founded in 1998, had previously limited domain name endings (ie: .com, .net) to English letters a-z, numbers 0-9 and the hyphen symbol, as the AP pointed out. Among other issues at the conferences, ICANN was set to consider integrating non-English characters to URL suffixes; this addendum to the existing guidelines would give countries placed on the “fast track” the chance to have a two-letter country code in their indigenous language characters.

Another topic of discussion was whether additional English domain suffixed should be permitted, for example, “.bank” for banking websites or “.post” for postal-related sites.

Back in 2000 and 2004, ICANN accepted proposals for such suffix changes, but allegedly the submission process was drawn out and response time was inefficient. The AP maintains that from these preliminary submissions, “only 13 have been approved.”

The new process, if contracted, would consist of a review process for the submitted suffix, during which objections could be posed by “anyone.” If concerns arise related to “racism, trademark conflicts [or] similarity to an existing suffix,” authorization of the submission will be deferred indefinitely. “If no objection is raised,” the AP affirmed, “approval would come quickly.”

The Associated Press later reported on the ultimate decisions reached by the ICANN panel on Thursday. The board unanimously voted to instill the new guidelines for alternative English URL suffixes and unanimously agreed to “open public comment” on the issue of integrating non-English characters.

These developments are obviously quite recent, and as such, the AP contends that new URLs won’t spring up until next year. Additionally, stipulations must be set in the coming months, particularly— the matter of “fees for obtaining new names.” The AP alleges that fee will likely “exceed $100,000 each.”

Why so much money for a few letters?

ICANN is expected to shell out “up to $20 million” during this project and the fees would compensate for these expenses. Because of the hefty costs, small businesses will probably not be the first in line for personalized URL suffixes... but as the AP contends, “larger companies might claim brands like ‘.disney.’”

I think these new guidelines will help expand not only the face of the Internet as we know it, but the identity of the parties, companies and countries operating the multitude of websites which populate it.

Still, there are two sides to ever scenario; critics are already worrying that ICANN will exude unnecessary authority, transforming it “into a censorship regime.” Furthermore, skeptics illuminated the lingering legal concerns when “common but trademark names” come into play. And should large companies feel the need to register their domain name for every country which obtains an individual country code suffix?

Pros and cons for the guidelines will likely crop up until they can be properly expressed and brought to the table. AP stated that ICANN will be looking to the public for its opinions in the coming months and will discuss the issues at its next meeting scheduled for November of this year.

Allegedly, eBay permitted the sale of faux-versions of Louis Vuitton and Christian Dior products, and as a consequence, has been fined $61 million, or €38.6 million, to cover collected company damages.

A break down of the fines, which were ultimately slightly less than the sought-after prices, awards approximately €19 million to Vuitton and €16.5 million to Dior with an additional €2.5 million for several perfume brands which were also violated.

LVMH blamed the French branch of eBay for not doing “enough to prevent sales of counterfeit items.” SkyNews reported that the esteemed company additionally cited “culpable negligence” on the e-Commerce website’s behalf, insisting that “eBay knowingly let people use the site to sell fake bags, lipstick, perfumes and clothes purporting to be from the famous names.”

It seems as long as fashion brands have existed, so have cheap, counterfeit knock-offs... and this isn’t eBay’s first brand-authenticity discrepancy.

Last month, as Reuters commented, the leading online auction website was fined €20,000 for permitting the sale of counterfeit Hermes brand handbags, apparel, and other products. Interested in reading more on the hot-cold relationship between eBay and fashion companies? Check out the dawn of the French-eBay drama and other Parisian predicaments.

The blog indicates that Google Media Server will allow users to accomplish the following:

• “Access videos, music, and photos stored on your PC”
• “View Picasa Web Albums”
• “Play your favorite YouTube videos”

On Monday, Greg Sterling posted with SearchEngineLand.com about some other TV-related developments bubbling over at Google. I covered another of Mr. Sterling’s stories last week about Microsoft looking to stream ads with Navic, an advertising business that specializes in online and TV ad campaigns. It looks as if Google is attempting to propel this mission with its own advertisement platform, AdSense. Allegedly, the search company behemoth is interested in mastering the art of “[transferring] content from TV to PC and vice versa.”

Sterling contends that we can “expect a continuing push into TV ad innovation and distribution from Google and Microsoft” alike.

Recently, Google launched a deal with the creator of “Family Guy,” Seth MacFarlane. The deal, as the NY Times reported, would allow Google to stream ads to a plethora of websites which are considered “gathering spots” for Family Guy and MacFarlane fans.

Three different types of advertising methods can be used for the “Cavalcade” video clips which will be embedded on these websites.

• a short, generic “brought to you by” message can be shown before the video begins
• a “preroll” ad can roll a short sponsored commercial before getting to the video begins (similar to what many news websites do now when hosting a video of cover story footage)
• a fixed banner can be placed at the bottom of the video screen displaying sponsor information

Sterling pointed out that these developments are likely to aggregate a two-sided response from critics: some may view them as “a creative extension of Video for AdSense and related experiments” while others may fear the expansion of Google’s already super-power online status as it becomes a sort of “studio or TV network.”

It certainly seems as if the fruits of the past years’ technological developments are headed straight to the big screen. Whether critics, consumers, or companies are ready for it or not, we might have to take a step back and see how popular this TV-Internet spawn of advertising and content viewing becomes.

When links and advertisements to the LifeLock website were coming up in Google SERPs for the keyword “NameSafe,” the company submitted a formal complaint to the search provider. “It did not have any effect,” stated NameSafe founder and Chief Executive David Ridings. “We had no other alternative but to file the lawsuit.”

That very lawsuit was officially filed in Tennessee federal court on Wednesday; it maintains, among other things, that LifeLock “used NameSafe's name in deceptive search ads on Google, Yahoo, and other search engines.”

NameSafe contends that the misleading use of its own company name in links to LifeLock web pages leads consumers “wrongfully and deceptively” to the competitor’s website, thereby confusing the browser “as to origin of NameSafe's services.” Not only can this detract from intended business transactions with NameSafe, but it creates a misrepresentation of the company in the eyes of the consumer.

In addition to trademark infringement, NameSake is arguing that LifeLock violated the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. The company is fighting for an undisclosed amount of monetary compensation for damages and legal fee incurred during the affair. 

According to Shankland, LifeLock repeatedly denied these claims – insisting that it never intentionally purchased “NameSake” as an ad keyword. Rather, it placed the blame on “one of its 3,000 partners that resell its services.” LifeLock released a statement in which it affirmed that the “non-compliant” reseller found accountable for this error “has subsequently been terminated.”

“Search engines are gateways that lead potential customers to companies,” Shankland wrote, and he’s 100% right. In that regard, the order in which links are displayed on SERPs is invaluable to many e-Businesses, whether it revolves around sponsored ad campaigns or organic search results. If their link is unjustly being swept to the side for competitors using sneaky keywords, that’s just not right – and in the end, it could mean the difference between boosting traffic (which could lead to potential sales) and getting left behind in the cyber dust.

On Thursday, Saul Hansell reported with the NY Times that Google in particular is changing the way it delivers online advertisements, and what’s more, is changing the way it uses the behavioral data it personally tracks every second.

Hansell began by noting that for every computer Google tracks (and, oh, there are millions), it assigns a cookie— “a unique identifying number.” Google stores these cookies— as well as a variety of online activity, such as search queries— in its database. Until now, the leading search company has not used this information to shape its online ad delivery service.

Now, Google’s got its hand in its own cookie jar— changing the face of SERP ads as we know them. Now, Hansell writes, Google has begun “testing ways to use some of the data it has been gathering.” The goal: to deliver more relevant ads. Well, that hasn’t changed. The method: undisclosed. Hmm... I smell a cyber mystery.

Hansell credited Piper Jaffray analyst, Gene Munster, as the first to discover the changes bubbling over at Google. His tests, which began several months ago, monitored the ads Google generated for different keyword queries.

Apparently, Munster discovered “that the ads you see on one search may be influenced by what you searched for a few minutes ago” and not just the previous search.

Perhaps there were early indicators that something like this was on the horizon. Several years ago, as Hansell points out, Google amended its privacy policy to include the possibility of tracking personal information about browsers; Google justified this by maintaining it sought to enhance “the display of customized content and advertising.” Despite this ambiguous diction, the search company insisted it was not using the obtained information to determine which ads to deliver.

In 2007 Google began monitoring browsers’ “immediately previous search when considering ads,” but Hansell commented that to do this, the search engine did not need to tap into the cookies just yet. Why? Because search keywords are directly embedded into the address bar, and that address URL is automatically communicated by the web browser from one SERP to the next.

Nick Fox, a Google director of product management and monitor of search site ads, affirmed in a phone interview with Hansell that “Google is testing the use of more search queries in its ad targeting” but did not comment much further on the developments.

Hansell mentioned that compared to the sneaky tactics used by other companies to tailor online advertisements specifically for relevant keywords, Google tapping into its cookies and behavior targeting isn’t overtly underhanded. But “if the ad targeting system draws information from my entire experience with Google through my Google account,” he writes, “I’d like to know more about that.”

Unfortunately, unless analysts like Munster do more extensive tests—or Google releases some more statements on the matter—we’ll be left in the dark on this one.

Until then, I’m interested to see the ads I’m presented with when I search for DVD sales of “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre”... and then, a few minutes later, “adoption centers for kittens.”

I knew watching videos online was a popular, expanding trend... but I guess I didn't know how widespread that trend had become. Would you believe that in March of this year, comScore reported that more than 11.5 billion videos were streamed and watched online by viewers in the U.S. alone, amounting to more than three hours of video-viewing per person? It's true— and as Jeff Porter writes, it's "these statistics [that] make video an attractive means for advertisers to reach their audience."

On Thursday, the vice president and general manager at R.H. Donnelley posted with SearchEngineLand.com some great tips for tailoring online video advertisements. Those 11.5 billion videos, however, weren't in-your-face ads. Who would want to sit and watch three straight hours of commercials? Not me... unless they're those addictive infomercials on how to shrink wrap my little brother.

Porter smartly contends that "users want to be entertained with online video and not necessarily watch commercials." But where's the happy medium between pitching your sales product and keeping the viewers content? Where's the line between selling and serving?

Porter addressed several tips for creating online videos that will actually speak to your audience, keeping them informed and interested. I've condensed the sections of his article into the following bold-faced bullet points (though I fully recommend you check out his in-depth explanations on each point):

•  "Understand how consumers use commercially-oriented videos in their search and buy process" – video ads generally still surpass written descriptions of products. Who's got time to read in this high-speed Internet connection? I mean world...
• "Know who to target and where to reach them" – consider your demographic and what would be the most appropriate way to address them.
• "Decide on the appropriate type of video and determine the cost" – plan out your budget so production, distribution, and hosting fees don't bite you in the bum.
• "Determine the best site(s) for the video" – choose a site with an audience that reflects your own. Drawn to interaction in a community-based environment? Consider hosting your video on a popular social networking website.
• "Understand that the business model for video-online is evolving" – times they are a'changin... and most companies are migrating away from "premium-priced video offers" to a more independent, accessible approach of hosting their own videos free of charge.

My favorite success story of online video advertising has to be that of BlendTec. This company's "Will It Blend?" vlog campaign went totally viral thanks in part to the clips they hosted on popular video-sharing website, YouTube.com. Even if I never bought one of their high tech blenders, their catchy commercials certainly stuck with me.

And let's just say, if I ever wanted to give my iPhone the ax, I know just what kitchen appliance brand I would seek out...

A few days ago I wrote about the launch of the YouTube Virtual Screening Room, an interactive venue working to give independent filmmakers a place to showcase their work while introducing viewers to fresh, entertaining content from around the world.

Over the last year, YouTube has continued to update its services by hosting high quality videos, letting users create their own YouTube embedded baby, implementing international interfaces, offering multi-video uploaders, revamping video-flagging features... even giving average Joe’s the chance to take a bite out of crime.

All of these changes, enhancements, and updates have demonstrated that YouTube is commitment to delivering a pleasant experience to members and viewers alike; it’s this commitment that has allowed YouTube to expand exponentially in user-popularity.

Okay, enough of my fawning. Let’s crunch some numbers. InformationWeek indicated that as of May 2008, the traffic flow to YouTube accounts “for more than 75% of U.S. traffic to video sites.” The statistics are in, and graciously were taken from Internet metrics firm, Hitwise (so we don’t have to crunch the numbers afterall...).

Out of the 10 million participating visitors, Hitwise tracked 63 video streaming sites. Here’s a breakdown of the stats for the big Top Five...

Overall shares in video-streaming website traffic:

1. YouTube – 75%
2. MySpaceTV - 9%
3. Google Video - 3.73%
4. Yahoo Video - 1.92%
5. Veoh - 1.13%

Traffic fluctuations from May 2007 – May 2008:

1. YouTube – rose by 26%
2. MySpaceTV – fell by 44%
3. Google Video – fell by 52%
4. Yahoo Video – fell by 31%
5. Veoh – rose by 32%

Returning visitors from May 2007 – May 2008:

1. YouTube – 82%
2. MySpaceTV - 64%
3. Google Video -  54%
4. Yahoo Video - 51%
5. Veoh -  48%

If the stats don’t illuminate YouTube’s success enough, consider this quote from a Hitwise spokesperson: “YouTube is synonymous with online video. It just keeps growing.”

In my opinion, YouTube has indeed become the household name— the one stop shop, the go-to joint— for viewing videos on the web, much in the same way that Google is often thought of as the household name of online search engines. You know what they say: like father, like son (replace with the feminine-version of motto if you wish).

Yes, when Google bought YouTube back in October, 2006 for $1.65 billion, I’m sure this is just the kind of all-star success it hoped for.

Still, in a televised interview back in April, Google chief executive Eric Schmidt admitted “that the company had yet to figure out ‘the perfect solution of how to make money [with YouTube], and we're working on that.’”

Schmidt went on to introduce one of the company’s top priorities for the remainder of the year – to boost YouTube’s role as a key advertising tool for its papa. What’s on the agenda? InformationWeek alleges that a slew of “new ad campaigns” are on the horizon- some that will hopefully “go beyond its current ad lines that run at the bottom of videos.”

The product in general will serve as man things, namely a full-blown archive machine capable of storing and organizing SMS messages and call logs from the iPhone as well as certain data from the recently-released iPhone 3G. As Mark/Space maintains, “...considering the content of your average SMS, [this particular feature] might be a great way track the story of your love life...”

Furthermore, the Missing Sync will give users the chance to search, send, copy, paste, edit, and catalog notes back and forth between their iPhone and computer.

MacWorld indicated that a variety of devices will be supported by the application, such as those put out by BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, and Palm OS, as well as Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola, and other devices working on the Symbian OS. Data such as meetings, appointments, and address book contacts will be able to be uploaded from these devices to the new iPhone using the Missing Sync.

On its homepage, The Missing Sync for iPhone claims to be “a suite of iPhone data transfer tools you need!” Stay tuned for product success stories as they (hopefully) unfold...

After more than thirty with the behemoth software company he helped build with Paul Allen, Gates is focusing the majority of his business life on more altruistic ventures. The recipient of his resources and efforts will be the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, a charitable organization Gates developed with his wife eight years ago. Among other things, the married-team funds research on preventable and treatable diseases in order to develop “vaccines, drugs, and other tools to fight diseases common in developing countries.”

Gates leaves the Redmond, Washington-based business in less-than-ideal conditions, facing heat from continuous competitors Google (in the search industry) and Apple (in the software industry).

Apparently, Gates’ role in the company was so significant, it will take a team of three chief employees to “fill the void” and managerial responsibilities he once did. Ray Ozzie will be Microsoft’s new chief software architect, Craig Mundie will be the new chief research and strategy officer duties, and Steve Ballmer will assume the title of chief executive officer.

Still, AFP commented that Gates will stay on as chairman to the Microsoft board of directors, as well as the company’s principal investor. Likewise, “Gates is expected to maintain the ears of Microsoft leaders.”

A gala dinner will be hosted tonight to commemorate Mr. Gates and his many contributions to the software industry.

Schneider, who joined Yahoo! two years ago, is formerly a newspaper executive; Patel, who has been with the company for twelve years, helped develop central features of Yahoo! such as its instant messaging service. Both executives can expect to wield more control over products and sales teams, the AP indicated.

In addition to Schneider and Patel, Yahoo! is allegedly restructuring its technology division in order to get more out of its “computing power” and streamline communication between two the fundamental company branches: product developers and engineers.

The AP contends that this company revamp – the third in less than two years – is yet another “attempt to snap out of a financial malaise.” Yes, Yahoo! has certainly seen some tough times as of late. Perhaps most notable was mass investor-backlash in response to the company’s rejection of Microsoft’s $47.5 billion offer for acquisition.

But the path of business-related troubles can be traced back to 2006, when Terry Semel, Yahoo! Chief Executive, resigned and was replaced by Jerry Yang. Since then, Yahoo!’s market value fell by about $10 billion— a dismal 24%.

The AP pointed out that events such as this have “ravaged its stock price, jeopardized its independence and demoralized employees.”

In an interview with the Associated Press, Yahoo! president Susan Decker commented that despite these hard times, the search company is maintaining the optimistic goal to “become a one-stop destination for online advertisers and build an even more appealing Web site for consumers.”

On its homepage, Navic comments on its campaign management tools which provide users with “real-time audience measurement data to optimize the delivery and placement of targeted interactive media.” Sterling reports that Navic makes use of a technology known as “addressable advertising;” this feature allows marketers to deliver TV ads to specific demographics at a designated time to ensure relevance and interest.

Citing news aggregator AdWeek, Sterling contended that the recent merger between Microsoft and Navic represents one piece of “a larger vision for adCenter,” Microsoft’s own ad placement company. Similar to competitors such as Google’s AdWords, adCenter generates content ads based on selected keywords and then displays them “alongside relevant high-traffic editorial pages on the Microsoft content network.”

In the long run, the software behemoth is aiming to transform adCenter into an all-inclusive platform where marketers can “place, target and track ads on the Web, mobile, in video games and now TV.”

Prior to this acquisition, it was alleged that Microsoft looked to purchase Spot Runner, a similar TV/Internet ad company.

Despite Microsoft’s aspirations for its advertising branch, and the hope to break into cable TV ad industry, Sterling warned of the numerous concerns “for the business of TV in moving to a more performance-based ad model.” He further commented that this particular market is facing considerable pressure “to prove value to advertisers who see audiences fleeing to the Internet.”

In its company blog, YouTube boasted that it’s new “Virtual Screening Room” will present every film on its High Quality player and serve as “a platform for films from around the world to find the audiences they deserve.”

Every week, four new films will be featured in the Virtual Screening Room, all hand-picked by a YouTube editorial panel, as the AP indicated. Submissions won’t be entirely Internet-based— the same panel will consider the work in independent film festivals such as Sundance.

In addition to exposure, filmmakers can expect to “collect a majority share of ad revenue generated from views of their work.” YouTube indicated that if the volume of viewers was high enough, filmmakers could make as much as “several thousand dollars a month” in advertisement-related profits alone.

A third benefit is the e-Commerce plug filmmakers can choose to implement; by attaching a “Buy Now” button to their content, they can link viewers directly to a site with stock on their own DVDs or other merchandise.

The feature is also designed to be considerably interactive; YouTube commented that all content is “posted with the filmmaker's involvement” and likewise encouraged members to “converse with the filmmakers,” comment on their work, rate their favorites and share other feedback.

The blog post indicated that the first films selected to air in the Virtual Screening Room include “an Academy Award nominee from the United States, an Academy Award winner from Norway, the world's first animated opera from Sweden, and a poignant short from indie favorites Miguel Arteta and Miranda July, also from the United States.”

Personally, I think this is a fantastic platform YouTube is offering. All artists need to get their big break somewhere, and the Virtual Screening Room could be the perfect first step in that direction. As with any online content, it doesn’t matter how great it is unless it’s being received by some sort of audience! The art of viral vlogging has grown tremendously over the months, in many ways thanks to YouTube and similar video streaming websites. If you deal particularly with online videos and media content, vlogging can be the ideal way to get your message out there.

Interested in submitting your work to the YouTube Virtual Screening Room? Write up a description of your film and send it to YouTube at this address (ytscreeningroom@youtube.com) to be considered.

Last Friday, USAToday.com reported that several more of Yahoo!s top executives have flown the coop, leaving the once primary e-champ “with more key openings to fill.” Among those lost are Brad Garlinghouse, Jeff Weiner and married tag-team Caterina Fake and Stewart Butterfield.

At the risk of making this sound like an obit, their contributions to Yahoo! and the Internet community were plentiful. Garlinghouse, formerly senior vice president to the company, oversaw Yahoo!s popular email and instant messaging services; Weiner organized and headed up general search; Fake and Butterfield were responsible for founding one of the biggest photo sharing websites, Flickr, which was acquired by Yahoo! in 2005.

USA Today commented on the “turmoil” Yahoo! has faced over the last few years in areas other than employment. The company still lags behind top search company, Google, in terms of total traffic and especially in the online advertising industry.

According to last month’s traffic stats tracked by ComScore Media Metrix, “Google attracted 143.3 million visitors” and its “share of search jumped to a record 61.8%.” Yahoo! saw 142.9 million visitors, and took a 20.6% stake in search. Trailing third was Microsoft with 121.2 million visitors and 8.5% of total search.

Greg Sterling, professional analyst and writer for SearchEngineLand.com, commented on the gloomy cloud over Yahoo!, indicating that “it looks like it's getting worse before it's going to get better.”

Since then, the AP began to draft new guidelines for acceptable use of its content. Rightly so, in my opinion, this further provoked amateur bloggers and active members of the online community; many shared Michael Arrington's sentiment that “the A.P. doesn't get to make its own rules around how its content is used, if those rules are stricter than the law allows.”

That being said, here’s the scoop on this past weekend’s events as reported by the Associated Press itself.

Allegedly, late last week brought about negations between the companies which ultimately “resolved [the] dispute.” Rogers Cadenhead, proprietor of the Drudge Retort, released a statement on Friday on the matter, commenting that he was “glad” the issue has come to rest.

But as AP maintained, Cadenhead feels there is “a larger conflict” lingering— that of the so-called “guidelines” the AP seeks to compile and impose. Despite this, in a statement released by the news aggregator late Thursday, the AP contended that it sufficiently “provided additional information to Cadenhead about posting its material online.”

The article further assured that both parties believe the matter is officially “closed” but both Cadenhead and AP spokesman Paul Colford declined any further comments on the situation.

Perhaps this particular incident is closed, but if you ask me, the AP’s initial hasty action opened a Pandora’s Box of copyright concerns and issues between big-time companies and independent bloggers. It seems as if the underdog escaped this one unscathed, but who’s to say what the next conflict will bring.

Perhaps to make the launch more exhilarating, Mozilla looked to set a world record for the “most software downloads in a 24-hour period.” Well the numbers are in, folks. Here’s a breakdown of the results as reported by the Associated Press:

In the first 24 hours after the version was released, Firefox saw:

• more than 8 million downloaded copies
• amounting to more than 17,000 copies a minute
• from about 200 different countries

The number of visitors itching for the new web browser was so great that the site was lagging and darn near inaccessible up until about 15 minutes before the launch time. In fact, the release was “delayed more than an hour” because of the heavy traffic.

So were Mozilla and its plentiful enthusiasts successful in setting the world record? I suppose they would have been, if the record category existed! That’s right, this is a new one for the Guinness World Records; and before Mozilla can set a record, the category must be approved and certified.

The AP contends that this procedure “could take a week or longer.” But if there’s no preexisting record, surely Mozilla must have set the standard. So even if it’s not official, I extend my congratulations to Firefox 3!

In the mean time, FireFox 3 is available for free download but as AP reported, these download “won't count toward the potential record.”

After repeated requests made by webmasters, Google launched an API specifically for Webmaster Tools. According to the post, this new facet of Webmaster Tools will support features such as:

• Managing Sites
• Retrieving a list of your sites
• Adding your sites
• Verifying your sites
• Removing your sites
• Working with Sitemaps
• Retrieving a list of your submitted Sitemaps
• Adding Sitemaps
• Removing Sitemaps

Google contends that as far as the functionality offered by Webmaster Tools, “this is only the beginning.” To join up with this new platform, check out the Google’s own Developer Guide with info on the Webmaster Tools Data API.

MySpace expressed its satisfaction with the ruling and with its own efforts against inappropriate behavior on the site: “This award reflects MySpace's continued momentum and holistic approach to ridding the site of spammers and phishers. We will continue to do our part in cleansing the Internet of this invasive onslaught of spam.”

The fines, which were delivered Thursday, amount to $4.8 million in damages and $1.2 million in legal fees.

This isn’t Richter’s first offense with MySpace. Back in January 2007, the lead social network sued Richter for suspicious behavior dating back to August 2006. During that time, MySpace members were allegedly spammed by thousands of messages sent by Richter.

In fact, Richter’s history with spamming extends back through his family company history. His father, Steven Richter, stated, “We respect the decision of the arbitrator and we're not going to appeal it. We're going to pay the money he awarded.” Steven Richter is also the president and general counsel of Media Breakaway.

Richter’s risky behavior stretches back further to 2005 when Optinrealbig.com, another company he worked for, shelled out $7 million “to settle similar charges” against Microsoft, PCWORLD.com claimed.

Richter and his company, Media Breakaway expressed in a statement that they “were happy to have this matter behind them,” noting that the court-assigned arbitrator delivered a total sum fines 95% less than that of the amount MySpace percent less than the amount sought by MySpace.

Back in May, MySpace won big against Spam Kings in what was referred to as the “the largest anti-spam award ever.”