To Cache a Thief: In their own words…Jones Day work in both U.S. and EU on behalf of DoubleClick:

This is G o o g l e‘s cache of http://www.jonesday.com/experience/experience_detail.aspx?exID=S11555 as retrieved on Nov 9, 2007 17:05:06 GMT.
G o o g l e‘s cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time….

Client(s): DoubleClick Inc.

Representation: Acquisition by DoubleClick

Principal Professional(s): Joe Sims, Thomas Jestaedt, Alexandre G. Verheyden, Michael S. McFalls, Chris Ahern

Lead Practice(s): Antitrust Mergers/Joint Ventures

Industry(s): Media

Summary: Jones Day is advising DoubleClick Inc., the digital marketing technology provider, on the international and U.S. antitrust and competition law aspects of its planned $3.1 billion acquisition by Google Inc. The proposed acquisition will combine DoubleClick’s expertise in ad management technology with Google’s internet search and content platform. The transaction is currently under review by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and European Commission.

Related Services
Professional Representation

NYU Legal Ethics Expert Says FTC Chair Majoras should recuse in Google/Doubleclick review

Before we run this legal comment, we want to make something clear. This is about ensuring transparency and accountability in the process. It’s not about political ideology or trying to affect the outcome of a proceeding. There are standards that must be adhered to when one is serving the public (oh, and btw, the idea of disappearing web pages from the Jones Day website reflects, I suggest, their own ethical confusion as well). Here’s an important perspective from today’s Online Media Daily:

“Legal ethics expert Stephen Gillers, a professor at New York University Law School, maintains that there’s no question that Deborah Platt Majoras should recuse herself, regardless of whether Jones Day appeared before the FTC in the matter. John Majoras “stands to gain from the success of Jones Day, especially in a high-profile case like this and, therefore, her decision can affect his interest and therefore her interest,” Gillers said.”

“DoubleClick Law Firm Accused Of Concealing Involvement In Merger.” Wendy Davis. December 14, 2007

about xanax withdrawlsadiction to xanaxxanax htp 5pill xanax 029 id100 30 xanaxdrug xanax methadone test acetaminophenbars xanax amylan a1 xanax Map

Google & the Public Interest Policy Pod People

They’re coming. The “Google Policy Fellows” to help staff an array of public interest groups and policy think-tanks. “As lawmakers around the world become more engaged on Internet policy,” says Google, “a robust and intelligent public debate around these issues becomes increasingly important…The Google Policy Fellowship program offers undergraduate, graduate, and law students interested in Internet and technology policy the opportunity to spend the summer contributing to the public dialogue on these issues…Fellows will… work at public interest organizations at the forefront of debates on broadband and access policy, content regulation, copyright and trademark reform, consumer privacy, open government, and more. Participating organizations… include: American Library Association, Cato Institute, Center for Democracy and Technology, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Internet Education Foundation, Media Access Project, New America Foundation, and Public Knowledge.”

It’s wrong for public interest and consumer organizations to take Google’s money and especially provide a “Fellowship” in its name. We need to build more consumer advocacy capacity to address Google’s growing power, especially its threat to privacy. No matter what these groups say (and some already take money from Google; others receive broad media industry support), there are digital strings attached, as subtle as they may be. The Fellowship program is just another lobbying and PR effort coming from a company that has a broad policy agenda. Many of the groups above should be training people to represent the public versus companies such as Google, and other big online advertisers and new media conglomerates. Giving Google a say on the training of policy advocates, let alone a funding role, undermines the public interest movement.

The image “http://blowyourheadoff.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/invasion-of-the-body-snatchers.jpeg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

EC Second Phase Investigation of Google & DoubleClick: Good for Consumers, Competition and Privacy

Today’s announcement by the Directorate for Competition (DG Comp) underscores that the EC recognizes the serious consequences of the proposed Google takeover of DoubleClick. Competitors, consumer groups, and privacy advocates have provided sufficient information to the commission to warrant this relatively rare phase two inquiry. Google is quickly becoming the key digital gatekeeper for the online publishing and advertising marketplace. At stake here is more than just the skyrocketing Google share price, the convenience of our online searches, or even the current state of online advertising competition. The online marketing system is at the core of the dramatic changes transforming global communications–from broadband PC, to mobile, eventually even to television. If we are to have a more democratic and diverse digital marketplace of ideas and commerce, there must be meaningful competition and consumer protection in the online ad sector. This means Google should be prohibited from buying DoubleClick. Or, that at least meaningful safeguards are imposed that limit Google’s ability to leverage DoubleClick’s vast treasure trove of consumer data and its business relationships with many of the world’s largest companies.

Consumers need to be assured that they won’t be unfairly treated in terms of pricing and choice when buying online; advertisers will need protections to ensure that online marketing remains both affordable and competitive, especially when using Google. Privacy must be considered as well, with appropriate safeguards enacted

IAB creates new post: "SVP, Thought Leadership and Marketing."

As the IAB ramps up its political operation to defend the interactive marketing industry from consumer-friendly privacy safeguards, it has created a new senior position. The SVP for Thought Leadership and Marketing is… “to help drive the growth of interactive advertising through enhanced communications with marketers, agencies, and others about the power of interactive media to reach and influence consumers.” In another words, a seasoned PR hand. David Doty is now in that position; he came from Booz Allen Hamilton where he was Director of Corporate Branding and Creative Services.”

But what IAB requires is “thought leadership” that recognizes that interactive marketing can’t run a-muck. Consumer protections are required, as well as a socially responsible approach to digital advertising in a global environment.

consolidaton loans charege americancollege american loan corporationservices american online loan payment educationloan $3,000 cashapr 0 auto loanadvance california 14 payday loan 10loan day pay dollar 1000personal bad credit 10000 loan Map

3 5 loans bankday 2nd pay loanhome advantage loansacceptance loansadvance cash cost loan100 loan landfree loan payday 1sta payday loan Map

American Antitrust Institute warns FTC about Google and Doubleclick merger

The AAI sent a report entitled “Google Acquisition of Doubleclick: Antitrust Implications” to the FTC today (November 6, 2007). They noted that “[P]ublicly available information suggests that Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick, which is presently being considered by the Federal Trade Commission and European Commission, raises serious competitive issues under several different antitrust theories. In this white paper, we present some background and brief analysis of the principal competitive considerations under U.S. antitrust law.”

Here’s are some key excerpts (our italics):


“The integration of search, contextual, and display advertising, even if it offers efficiency benefits, may have exclusionary effects if advertisers using rival search engines or advertiser tools cannot replicate the benefits of such integration. For example, post-merger, advertisers using DART for Advertisers or other DART advertiser tools may be unable to get the same quality of access to data and reporting on their search or other campaigns with non-Google search engines or ad networks as they can with Google search or AdSense. Moreover, advertisers that use non-DART advertiser tools may be unable to get the same quality of access to data and reporting on their Google search or AdSense campaigns that is available to advertisers using DART’s advertiser tools. In these cases, Google’s dominant position in search (and contextual) advertising will be further entrenched, and DoubleClick’s leading position in advertiser tools will be cemented. As a result, the lessening of competition in the search market and advertiser tools market may outweigh whatever efficiency benefit may result from integration…Based on the information presented here, AAI believes there is a good argument that Google and DoubleClick are horizontal competitors in two relevant markets. The first is the market for distributing online advertising space of third party (non-search) web sites, where Google’s AdSense is the market leader. The second is the market for publisher ad serving tools, where DoubleClick’s DART for Publishers is the dominant product. While the competition between Google and DoubleClick in these markets may be more potential than actual, the two companies are perhaps uniquely positioned to capture significant market share in each other’s markets. If the evidence confirms that these markets are concentrated and that entry is otherwise difficult, as appears to be the case, then the merger presents a relatively straightforward case for challenge under the horizontal and non-horizontal merger guidelines. We see little in the way of merger specific efficiencies that would offset the loss of competition…If foreclosure were the only issue, it might be resolved by placing conditions on the merger, even though there are costs involved in enforcing a regulatory decree. But unless the horizontal concerns are rebutted, AAI believes that the prudent course is for the FTC to block the merger.”

UK trade magazine reports on Google’s “sheer dominance.”

key excerpts from New Media Age, 11/1/07. “NMA Report – Competition.” Greg Brooks. Sub. required:
“One of the biggest problems facing search engines is Google’s sheer dominance of the sector. How have the latest moves from Yahoo! and Microsoft affected this?

Google’s domination of the UK paid-search market has gone unbroken since AdWords burst onto the scene in 2000. Advertisers would like nothing better than to see some healthy competition for their search budgets. But six months since Yahoo! introduced Panama, and over a year since Microsoft launched AdCenter in the UK, Google’s grip is tighter than ever…
“Google’s lead in terms of volume continues to grow, as the latest statistics from Hitwise show (see graph). Agencies say it’s the only must-have for clients…

The emergence of Panama is a strong indication that a competitive market is driving improvements to relevancy and forecasting. But it remains to be seen if anyone can challenge Google’s position,” says Michael Stroud, head of online marketing at Lloyds TSB…

Daniel Kerzner, regional director for north-west Europe at Starwood Hotels, adds, “Google remains a solid, reliable volume driver for us. Its dominance is a potential threat to business, however, if it continues to exploit its lone position in the marketplace”…

…the figures don’t make a pretty picture for Google’s rivals. Hitwise data for September 2007 shows that Google handled 85.2% of all searches in the month, with Yahoo! on 4.91% combined, Microsoft own-brand search commanding 3.95% of search, and Ask.com down to 3.55%…

“AdCenter has tried to leapfrog Google with more targeting features to drive efficiency, but has left basics like attracting more customers behind,” says Paul Bongers, head of paid search at BT, which uses Zed to plan and buy its search campaigns. “You can have the greatest search engine in the world, but if the customers aren’t there it won’t matter…
So far the new features haven’t enabled Yahoo! and MSN to gain on Google, which has actually increased its dominance of UK searches

BBC Signs up with Doubleclick: Privacy out the window, along with Beeb staff?

It’s interesting to watch the tandem work of Google and Doubleclick, even prior to the proposed merger. Doubleclick was just signed-up by the BBC to handle its forthcoming interactive display paid advertising on BBC.com (the Beeb better explain to all its users what will happen with those digital crumpets placed on their computers–I mean cookies, pixels, and other digital spy techniques). Here’s how NMA magazine [sub required] reports it: “BBC Worldwide has appointed DoubleClick to handle display ads on BBC.com, following last week’s green light to allow advertising on the international site... It will also be responsible for the pre-roll advertising on BBC.com through its existing BBC World deal. DoubleClick will work with BBC Worldwide’s internal sales team…The ads will only be served to users outside of the UK…” (Doubleclick already works with the BBC, handling ads for BBC World and the Beeb’s magazine).

Last March, the BBC signed a deal with Google’s YouTube, calling it a “ground-breaking partnership.” Meanwhile, the BBC is drastically cutting staff and reducing news budgets, as it faces reduced public funding. The reduction in funds for the world’s premier public service programmer–and the staff cuts–is a story unto itself–which we will eventually address. But the BBC should not be permitted to endorse a business model for online marketing where its users–even if not UK citizens and residents—are tagged, tracked, targeted, and sold to the highest behavioral targeting bidder. Unless safeguards are imposed, online advertising could have an adverse impact on the diversity and integrity of the news. This deal should also behoove the BBC news staff to launch a major investigation into the Google and Doubleclick merger, inc. how such a merger will impact public affairs programming.

9 joy ringtone downringtone miles 5008525 ringtones makebarrington 30 amcringtones aaron tippinhetherington hong kong alastair1953 marmon ford herringtons ringtones 70 Map

Google Becomes a member of the Nielsen "family." Threats to our Privacy as we watch TV

Few readers may recall when Norman Lear’s “Mary Hartman” realized that she and her fellow patients at a psychiatric facility watched a Nielsen ratings-connected TV set. Lear’s critique that the TV rating system that has determined success for the TV business is deeply flawed and–frankly, crazy– is still true. But Google (and Doubleclick’s) move to monitor and analyze our viewing on TV and other platforms is just as insane–if we want to protect our privacy. “Google has been reporting millions of second-by-second data points to its TV Ads clients,” explains MediaDaily News. “Ultimately, Google expects TV’s interactive capabilities to improve to the point that it is generating the same kind of immediacy and backchannel as the Internet.” [from an interview with Mike Steib, director of Google TV Ads].

We doubt cable and DBS subscribers recognize that they are now involuntary members of the Nielsen/Google data tracking combine. Here’s how Multichannel News reports on the deal: “By combining Nielsen demographic data with aggregated set-top box data, Google plans to provide advertisers and agencies with comprehensive information…We have millions of set-top boxes that belong to EchoStar from which EchoStar is pulling data and is providing it to us for the Google TV Ad system: It’s a lot of data points,” Steib said…Advertisers can better understand exactly how their ad is performing and make near real-time changes to their TV advertising campaigns to deliver better ads to viewers, according to Google.

“One of the things we haven’t been able to provide to our advertisers to date, when we report back the very next day the impressions that they’ve received from the set-top boxes, we have not yet reported demographics and audience composition,” he said. “We are now going to be able to make that information available to our advertisers”…Google and Nielsen claim that as a result of their new partnership, this is the first time that advertisers and agencies will have such a level of detailed measurement available in a single place and at such a large scale.”

We hope Congress and the FTC will step in to prevent the entire TV viewing population from becoming involuntary drafted into the Nielsen/Google data collection, profiling, and targeting system.

casino free download adultrules casino card poker 3casino resort acquariuscasino nm travel accommodation directoryreview casino addpoker real 105g casino chipsresort acquarius casinoaccount florida merchant offshore casino Map

Google & DoubleClick Mobile [plus Jaiku]=a Dart to Privacy

DoubleClick is promoting, via full-page ads in the U.K. trades, its new DoubleClick Mobile service “Introducing a new way to serve ads on small screens,” touts the copy. It goes on to say that online marketers can “[U]se Doubleclick Mobile to sell and managage mobile advertising with the same team and tools you use for your display and rich media business.” Here’s what DC’s “Mobile Overview” tells marketers [excerpt]: “As you engage your audience on the mobile platform you have the opportunity to take control of your revenue and operations with DoubleClick Mobile. You can capture more dollars from your mobile content by adding dynamically served mobile display ads and destination offers…Just as online banners are uploaded into DART, mobile banners and mobile companion jump pages are uploaded into and served by DART. Mobile specific targeting criteria can be set within the DART interface, including content, device and capability targeting…DoubleClick Mobile helps you deliver ads to mobile devices worry-free through our database of over 3,000 handsets indetifying each device’s unique screen size and capabilities…”

On its website, DC says that its Mobile service allows marketers to “[S]et mobile-specific targeting criteria for dynamically served mobile display ads, including content, device and capability targeting.” In the UK, DC explains that: “DoubleClick Mobile tracks impressions, third party impressions, clicks and jump page conversions. Tracking mechanisms meet the unique requirements for mobile delivery, and care has been taken to ensure compliance with network operators.”

Pixelating Privacy: Here’s what ClickZ said about the new DC mobile service: “DoubleClick Mobile aims to bring “a lot of heavy iron” [said DC VP Ari Paparo] to the developing marketplace for ads on handsets. The product is capable of pairing ads with content…In addition to standard mobile display ads, it supports ad formats such as combination ads and roadblocks. Through pixel-based ad tracking, agencies and other third parties can access campaign performance data through their own campaign reporting systems.”

Finally, we think Google’s new acquisitions (such as Zingku] in the mobile area bear examining, esp. for privacy implications. Google also just bought Jaiku, a Finnish company. Here’s how Jaiku describes its service: “Jaiku’s main goal is to bring people closer together by enabling them to share their activity streams. An activity stream is a log of everyday things as they happen: your status messages, recommendations, events you’re attending, photos you’ve taken – anything you post directly to Jaiku or add using Web feeds. We offer a way to connect with the people you care about by sharing your activities with them on the Web, IM, and SMS – as well as through a slew of cool third-party applications built by other developers using our API.

The most powerful instrument of social peripheral vision is your mobile phone. We’ve put in a special effort to create Jaiku Mobile, a live phonebook that displays the activity streams, availability, and location of your Jaiku contacts right in your phone contact list. We modestly believe it is the best solution out there for seeing what your friends are up to.”

The future is now calling. Will we act to protect our privacy?