DOCSLIB.ORG

Google Privacy Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Google Privacy Assessment United States of America FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 Mike Swift MLex Market Intelligence 324 Metzgar Street HalfMoon Bay, CA 94019 SEP 26' 2012 Re: FOIA-2012-01356 Third Party Privacy Report - Google Dear Mr. Swift: This is in response to your request dated September 13, 2012, under the Freedom of Information Act seeking access to the privacy report Pricewaterhouse Coopers, LLP created pursuant to the Google Buzz consent order, C-4336. In accordance with the FOIA and agency policy, we have searched our records, as of September 13, 2012, the date we received your request in our FOIA office. We have located 34 pages ofresponsive records. I am granting partial access to and am enclosing copies of the accessible records. Four pages and portions of other pages fall within the exemptions to the FOIA's disclosure requirements, as explained below. Some responsive records constitute confidential commercial or financial information, which is exempt fromdisclosure under FOIA Exemption 4, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4). See Critical Mass EnergyProject v. NRC, 975 F.2d 871, 879 (D.C. Cir. 1992). Moreover, because Section 6(±) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 46(±), prohibits public disclosure of this type of information, it is also exempt under FOIA Exemption 3, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3), which exempts from disclosure any information that is protected from disclosure under another federal statute. Based on the fee provisions of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A), and the Commission's Rules ofPractice, 16 CFR § 4.8 et seq., as amended, I am not enclosing an invoice. If you are not satisfied with this response to your request, you may appeal by writing to Freedom oflnformation Act Appeal, Officeof the General Counsel, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington D.C. 20580, within 30 days of the date of this letter. Please enclose a copy of your original request and a copy of this response. Ifyou believe that we should choose to disclose additional materials beyond what the FOIA requires, please explain why this would be in the public interest. If you have any questions about the way we are handling your request or about the FOIA regulations or procedures, please contact Julian Chender at (202) 326-2631. Sincerely, C---'-, 7l,-:7 · 4 _ ., / ✓Z&-J-4 .. .· > �� ..._~� J Dione J. Stearns AssistantGeneral Counsel ·, .,,! July 2, 20-12 Associate Director of Enforcement Bureau of Consumer Protection Federal Trade Commission 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Wasl1ington, DC 20!580 Dear Associate Director of Enforcement: Pursuant to Section IV of the Google Buzz Consent Order, In the Matter of Google Inc., FTC Docl<et No. C-4336 (Oct. 28, 2011), Google hereby submits its Initial Assessrnent Report on Google's Privacy Program ("Assessment Report") prepared by third party Pricewaterl1ouse Coopers LLP. As autt1orized by law, Google requests that the Cornrnission keep the designated portions of tt1e attacl1ed Assessment Report confidential pursuant to '16 C.F.R. § 4.9(c)(1 ). The enclosed request sets out the basis for confidential treatment. I affirm under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the attached is a true and correct copy of the Initial Assessment Report on Google's Privacy Program ("Assessment Repo,rt") prepared by third party Pricewaterhouse -· 1 Coopers LLP. Executed on 1- i. '_ Sincerely, Keith Enrigt1t Google Inc. Perkins I Coie 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Albert Gidari PHONE: 206,359,8000 PHONE: (206) 359•8688 FAX: 206.359,9000 FI\X: (206) 359-9688 EMAIL: [email protected] www.perklnscole.com July 3, 2012 Associate Director of Enforcement Bureau of Consumer Protection Federal Trade Commission Washington, D,C. 20580 Re: In the Matter of Google Inc., F.T.C. Docket No. C-4336; ConfidentialityRequest for Initial Assessment Report on Google Inc,'s Privacy Program Dear Associate Director of Enforcement: Google Inc. ("Google") requests that the Commission keep confidentialthe designated portions of the Initial Assessment Report on Google's Privacy Program (" Assessment Report"). Commission rules permit "[p]ersons submitting material to the Com.missiondescribed in this section" to "designate that material or portions of it [are] confidential and request thatit be withheld fromthe public record." 16 C,F.R. § 4.9(c)(l). Sufficientevidenc e to grant a request forconfidential treatment includes a showing that Google is likely to suffer substantial competitive harm,which can be demonstrated by showing that Google is (1) engaged in competition, (2) disclosure of the Assessment Report would result in a likelihood of substantial injury that (3) flowsfrom a competitor's affirmative use of proprietary information. See Public Citizen Health Research Group v. FDA, 704 F.2d 1280, 1288 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (describing required showing to demonstrate confidentialtreatment under the Freedom of InformationAct, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4)); Gulf& W. Indus. v, United States, 615 F.2d 527 (D.C. Cir. 1980); Nat'! Parks& Conservation Ass 'n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765, 770 (D.C. Cir. 1974); see also Gilda Indus. v. U.S. Customs & Border Protection Bureau, 457 F. Supp. 2d 6, 9 (D.D.C. 2006). This standardis met here. Google is engaged in competition. Much of the report describes the steps taken by Google to protect the privacy and confidentiality of user informationand Google's internal procedures to do so. Disclosure of these steps and procedures necessarily compromises that goal, as well as causing commercial harm to Google and potentially its users. The Assessment Report contains detailed confidential and proprietary information regarding the design of Google's privacy program, including its impact on the development and review of products and services; the manner in which personal information is maintained within Google; ANCHORAGE· BEIJING, BELLEVUE, BOISE, CHICAGO· DENVER· LOS ANGELES· MENLO PARK OLYMPIA, PHOENIX, PORTLAND• SAN FRANCISCO, SEATTLE• SHANGHAI· WASHINGTON, D.C. Perkins Cole LLP and Affiliates Associate Director of Enforcement July 3, 2012 Page 2 and related business processes. If disclosed, this otherwise non-public informationcould be easily used and exploited in an unfairmanner by various competitors in the Internetservice provider business seeking to harm Google commercially. Indeed, at least one of Google's fiercest competitors is subject to a similar consent decree requirement and the design of Google's privacy program is thereforecompetitively sensitive. (b)(3):6(f),(b)(4) Google thereforerequests that the Commission keep the designated portions of this Assessment .Report confidential consistent with the Commission Rules, 16 C.F.R. § 4.9(b)(7), (c); the relevant provisions of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 46(f), 57b-2(a-f); FOIA exemptions three, four, and seven, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3), (4), and (7); and all other applicable statutes, regulations, and customary confidentialitypolicies, Section 21(c)(l) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 57b-2(c)(l), prohibits the Commission fromdisclosing informationmarked confidentialexcept in accordance with Sections 21(c)(2) and (3); see also 15 U.S.C. § 57-b(2)(c)(2) (requiring the Commission to "notifysuch person in writing th.at the Commission intends to disclose the document at a date not less than 10 days afterthe date of receipt of the notification"); 15 U.S.C. § 57-b(2)(c)(3) (permitting a person to bring an action in United States District Court to restrain disclosure of materials pursuant to Section 2l(c)(2)). In the event any third party (including any other governmentalagency or body) seeks disclosure of, or access to, these materials, whether under FOIA or another context, Google requests to be timely notified by your officeand given an opportunity ·to object to any such disclosure or grant of access, consistent with the FTC Act and CommissionRules. 15 U.S.C. § 57-b2(c); 16 CFR§ 4.9(c)(l); 16 CPR§ 4.l0(e). Furthermore, in the event that your officediscloses the Assessment Report to any third party, Google requests that you advise such third party of its highly confidential nature. Associate Director of Enforcement July 3, 2012 Page 3 · Consistent with the EnforcementBureau Instructions regarding the submission of confidential and proprietary trade secret business information, Google has submitted two copies of the Assessment Report: one copy in its entirety, and another "redacted" copy in which the confidential portions are redacted and replaced with the word 'redacted,' thereby preserving the original formatting of the document. See Letter fromKatherine Robinson, Federal Trade Commission EnforcementBureau, In the Matter of Google Inc,, FTC Docket No. C�4336 (Nov. 28, 2011) ("Enforcement BureauInstructions"). Very truly yours, rJi � Albert Giqari /:r� AG:JRT pwc Initial Assessment Report on Google's Privacy Program For the period October 29, 2011 - April 25, 2012 FOIA -- Confidential Treatment Requested. The contents of this document contain PwC Proprietary Information that shall be protected from disclosure outside of the Government in accordance with the U.S. Trade Secrets Act, the U.S. Freedom of Information Act and/or any other similar Jaws. This repmt is intended solely for the information and use of the management of Google and the United States Federal Trade Commission and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified paities. pwc Google Inc. ("the Company") has implemented and maintains a comprehensive Privacy Program, which is documented in written policies and procedures. Google has designated specific officials as responsible for the Privacy Program. On October 22, 2010, Dr. Alan Eustace, Senior Vice President of Engineering announced the appointment of Dr. Alma Whitten as the Director of Privacy across Engineering and Product Management. Dr. Whitten and her team lead Google's implementation of effective privacy controls in Google products and services.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • |||GET||| Google+ for Business How Googles Social Network Changes
    GOOGLE+ FOR BUSINESS HOW GOOGLES SOCIAL NETWORK CHANGES EVERYTHING 2ND EDITION DOWNLOAD FREE Chris Brogan | 9780789750068 | | | | | Google Maps is the new social network Here's a quick recap of Google's social media moves in February 8 : The Wall Street Journal reports Google prepared to unveil a Google+ for Business How Googles Social Network Changes Everything 2nd edition component to Gmail that would display a stream of "media and status updates" within the web interface. More Insider Sign Out. Google then goes out and gathers relevant content from all over the Web. Facebook vs. July 15, The Internet is a great tool for job hunting, but it Google+ for Business How Googles Social Network Changes Everything 2nd edition also made competing for a job much more challenging. Location-based services: Are they there yet? June Digg co-founder Kevin Rose posts a tweet that a "very credible" source said Google would be launching a Facebook competitor, called Google Me "very soon. Because each of these tools operates differently and has its own set of goals, the specific tactics will vary greatly for each of the sites. Although there isn't any word on specific product details David Glazer, engineering director at Google confirms the company will invest more effort to make its services more "socially aware" in a recent blog post. My next post will examine some of the strategies and tactics that can be used to generate new business from each of these social networking tools. The purchase rehashed speculation that the search giant is interested in working its way into social media, possibly with a game-centered service called "Google Me.
    [Show full text]
  • Jon Leibowitz, Chairman J. Thomas Rosch Edith Ramirez Julie Brill
    102 3136 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS: Jon Leibowitz, Chairman J. Thomas Rosch Edith Ramirez Julie Brill ____________________________________ ) In the Matter of ) ) GOOGLE INC., ) a corporation. ) DOCKET NO. C-4336 ____________________________________) COMPLAINT The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Google Inc. (“Google” or “respondent”), a corporation, has violated the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), and it appearing to the Commission that this proceeding is in the public interest, alleges: 1. Respondent Google is a Delaware corporation with its principal office or place of business at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043. 2. The acts and practices of respondent as alleged in this complaint have been in or affecting commerce, as “commerce” is defined in Section 4 of the FTC Act. RESPONDENT’S BUSINESS PRACTICES 3. Google is a technology company best known for its web-based search engine, which provides free search results to consumers. Google also provides various free web products to consumers, including its widely used web-based email service, Gmail, which has been available since April 2004. Among other things, Gmail allows consumers to send and receive emails, chat with other users through Google’s instant messaging service, Google Chat, and store email messages, contact lists, and other information on Google’s servers. 4. Google’s free web products for consumers also include: Google Reader, which allows users to subscribe to, read, and share content online; Picasa, which allows users to edit, post, and share digital photos; and Blogger, Google’s weblog publishing tool that allows users to share text, photos, and video.
    [Show full text]
  • EPIC FTC Google Purchase Tracking Complaint
    Before the Federal Trade Commission Washington, DC In the Matter of ) ) Google Inc. ) ) ___________________________________) Complaint, Request for Investigation, Injunction, and Other Relief Submitted by The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) I. Introduction 1. This complaint concerns “Store Sales Measurement,” a consumer profiling technique pursued by the world’s largest Internet company to track consumers who make offline purchases. Google has collected billions of credit card transactions, containing personal customer information, from credit card companies, data brokers, and others and has linked those records with the activities of Internet users, including product searches and location searches. This data reveals sensitive information about consumer purchases, health, and private lives. According to Google, it can track about 70% of credit and debit card transactions in the United States. 2. Google claims that it can preserve consumer privacy while correlating advertising impressions with store purchases, but Google refuses to reveal—or allow independent testing of— the technique that would make this possible. The privacy of millions of consumers thus depends on a secret, proprietary algorithm. And although Google claims that consumers can opt out of being tracked, the process is burdensome, opaque, and misleading. 3. Google’s reliance on a secret, proprietary algorithm for assurances of consumer privacy, Google’s collection of massive numbers of credit card records through unidentified “third-party partnerships,” and Google’s use of an opaque and misleading “opt-out” mechanism are unfair and deceptive trade practices subject to investigation and injunction by the FTC. II. Parties 4. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (“EPIC”) is a public interest research center located in Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommendations for Businesses and Policymakers Ftc Report March 2012
    RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BUSINESSES AND POLICYMAKERS FTC REPORT FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | MARCH 2012 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BUSINESSES AND POLICYMAKERS FTC REPORT MARCH 2012 CONTENTS Executive Summary . i Final FTC Privacy Framework and Implementation Recommendations . vii I . Introduction . 1 II . Background . 2 A. FTC Roundtables and Preliminary Staff Report .......................................2 B. Department of Commerce Privacy Initiatives .........................................3 C. Legislative Proposals and Efforts by Stakeholders ......................................4 1. Do Not Track ..............................................................4 2. Other Privacy Initiatives ......................................................5 III . Main Themes From Commenters . 7 A. Articulation of Privacy Harms ....................................................7 B. Global Interoperability ..........................................................9 C. Legislation to Augment Self-Regulatory Efforts ......................................11 IV . Privacy Framework . 15 A. Scope ......................................................................15 1. Companies Should Comply with the Framework Unless They Handle Only Limited Amounts of Non-Sensitive Data that is Not Shared with Third Parties. .................15 2. The Framework Sets Forth Best Practices and Can Work in Tandem with Existing Privacy and Security Statutes. .................................................16 3. The Framework Applies to Offline As Well As Online Data. .........................17
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Socializing Online Social Networks
    Re-Socializing Online Social Networks Michael D¨urr1 and Martin Werner1 Mobile and Distributed Systems Group Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Germany {michael.duerr,martin.werner}@ifi.lmu.de, Web: http://www.mobile.ifi.lmu.de/ Abstract. Recently the rapid development of Online Social Networks (OSN) has extreme influenced our global community's communication patterns. This primarily manifests in an exponentially increasing number of users of Social Network Services (SNS) such as Facebook or Twitter. A fundamental problem accompanied by the utilization of OSNs is given by an insufficient guarantee for its users informational self-determination and an intolerable dissemination of socially incompatible content. This reflects in severe shortcomings for both the possibility to customize pri- vacy and security settings and the unsolicited centralized data acquisition and aggregation of profile information and content. Considering these problems, we provide an analysis of requirements an OSN has to fulfill in order to guarantee compliance with its users' privacy demands. Furthermore, we present a novel decentralized multi-domain OSN design which complies with our requirements. This work signifi- cantly differs from existing approaches in that it, for the first time, allows for a technically mature mapping of real-life communication patterns to an OSN. Our concept forms the basis for a secure and privacy-enhanced OSN architecture which eliminates the problem of socially incompatible content dissemination. Key words: Availability, Informational Self-Determination, Online So- cial Networks, Privacy, Trust 1 Introduction Online Social Networks (OSN) represent a means to map communication flows of real-life relationships to existing computer networks such as the Internet. Al- most all successful Social Network Service (SNS) providers like LinkedIn, Xing, MySpace, Facebook, Google Buzz, YouTube, Twitter, and others, operate their services commercially and in a centralized way.
    [Show full text]
  • Google Overview Created by Phil Wane
    Google Overview Created by Phil Wane PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:03:55 UTC Contents Articles Google 1 Criticism of Google 20 AdWords 33 AdSense 39 List of Google products 44 Blogger (service) 60 Google Earth 64 YouTube 85 Web search engine 99 User:Moonglum/ITEC30011 105 References Article Sources and Contributors 106 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 112 Article Licenses License 114 Google 1 Google [1] [2] Type Public (NASDAQ: GOOG , FWB: GGQ1 ) Industry Internet, Computer software [3] [4] Founded Menlo Park, California (September 4, 1998) Founder(s) Sergey M. Brin Lawrence E. Page Headquarters 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, California, United States Area served Worldwide Key people Eric E. Schmidt (Chairman & CEO) Sergey M. Brin (Technology President) Lawrence E. Page (Products President) Products See list of Google products. [5] [6] Revenue US$23.651 billion (2009) [5] [6] Operating income US$8.312 billion (2009) [5] [6] Profit US$6.520 billion (2009) [5] [6] Total assets US$40.497 billion (2009) [6] Total equity US$36.004 billion (2009) [7] Employees 23,331 (2010) Subsidiaries YouTube, DoubleClick, On2 Technologies, GrandCentral, Picnik, Aardvark, AdMob [8] Website Google.com Google Inc. is a multinational public corporation invested in Internet search, cloud computing, and advertising technologies. Google hosts and develops a number of Internet-based services and products,[9] and generates profit primarily from advertising through its AdWords program.[5] [10] The company was founded by Larry Page and Sergey Brin, often dubbed the "Google Guys",[11] [12] [13] while the two were attending Stanford University as Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    International Journal of Management & Information Systems – First Quarter 2011 Volume 15, Number 1 The Security Implications Of Ubiquitous Social Media Chris Rose, Walden University, USA ABSTRACT Social media web sites allow users to share information, communicate with each other, network and interact but because of the easy transfer of information between different social media sites, information that should be private becomes public and opens the users to serious security risks. In addition, there is also massive over-sharing of information by the users of these sites, and if this is combined with the increased availability of location-based information, then all this can be aggregated causing an unacceptable risks and unintended consequences for users. INTRODUCTION he dot-com bubble in 2001 was an economic disaster and marked a turning point for the Internet. At that time many pundits claimed that the importance of the Internet as a vehicle for commerce was T overstated, however, in many of these instances a collapse was just a result of evolving technologies and the rise of Web 2.0. "The concept of "Web 2.0" began with a conference brainstorming session between O'Reilly and MediaLive International. Dale Dougherty, web pioneer and O'Reilly VP, noted that far from having "crashed", the web was more important than ever, with exciting new applications and sites popping up with surprising regularity" (O"Reilly, 2005). At the Open Government and Innovations Conference in Washington in 2009, speakers noted that people talk about Web 2.0 as if it is a fully evolved media when in fact it is not.
    [Show full text]
  • Social CRM in Higher Education Introduction Many Colleges And
    Social CRM in Higher Education Introduction Many colleges and universities employ sophisticated CRM (customer relationship management) tools to manage relationships with their constituents. Campuses use CRM to help recruit high- quality students, communicate with parents, manage relationships with current students, promote events, and keep in contact with alumni. The growing popularity of Web 2.0 social network tools creates a new challenge for colleges. Many of their most important constituents, late-teen and early twenty-year olds, are abandoning traditional CRM media such as print, email, and telephones in favor of social media. Having invested heavily in CRM during the past decade campuses must now retool their communication strategies to incorporate social media. The integration of social networking sites into CRM systems is known as “Social CRM.” Social networking sites include blogs, wikis, social bookmarking, consumer reviews, and video sharing. Table 1 provides a list of Web 2.0 tools and the names of popular web sites that provide these tools. The popularity of social software sites has increased dramatically in recent years. Four of the top ten most popular web sites in April 2012 are social software sites (Alexa.com, 2012). Social software is very popular with college students. A 2007 survey of 31,500 first-year college students found that 94-percent used social networking sites at least weekly (Higher Education Research Institute, 2007). RateMyProfessors.com, a social networking site that allows anonymous ratings of professors, is visited by approximately 3 million college students each month. It claims to publish over 10 million student-generated ratings of more than one million professors (RateMyProfessors.com, 2010).
    [Show full text]
  • FPF-Safe-Harbor-Report1.Pdf
    PREFACE FROM THE CO-CHAIRS OF THE FUTURE OF PRIVACY FORUM As the Future of Privacy Forum (FPF) celebrates its fifth anniversary, we welcome the opportunity to participate in the discussions over trans-Atlantic privacy and, in particular, the effectiveness and utility of the EU-US Safe Harbor. For five years, FPF has been at the forefront of examining practical ways to advance responsible data practices. With an advisory board comprised of corporate privacy professionals, privacy scholars and consumer advocates, we play a unique role in the examination of contemporary privacy issues. Our current focus on the “Internet of Things,” from Smart Grid to connected cars to retail analytics, is illustrative of our practical approach to protecting privacy while encouraging beneficial uses of data. We want to thank a number of people for their input and work on this Report. FPF Fellows Joseph Jerome and Joe Newman took the laboring oar in researching and drafting. Our former colleague, Molly Crawford, who served as Policy Director when this project began, played a critical role in organizing this work. Thanks to members of the FPF Advisory Board who reviewed drafts. Thanks, too, to the government officials and business representatives whose input is reflected here, as well as to Bret Cohen and Jared Bomberg at Hogan Lovells US LLP for their editorial and production assistance. We hope this report contributes to a constructive trans-Atlantic dialogue on ways to improve the protection of personal privacy. Jules Polonetsky Christopher Wolf December 11, 2013 Washington, DC i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In November 2013, in the wake of the revelations about the National Security Agency’s (NSA) widespread surveillance activities, the European Commission released a report critical of the United States (US) – European Union (EU) Safe Harbor program.
    [Show full text]
  • Leaping Into Google+
    Chapter 1 Leaping into Google+ In This Chapter ▶ Figuring out how to use Google+ ▶ Getting familiar with the Google+ interface ▶ Registering for Google+ ▶ Understanding your Google+ profile ou’ve probably gotten the invitation by now—“so and so Yhas invited you to Google+.” Or maybe you’ve seen your friends on Facebook asking if anyone wants a Google+ invite, and you’re curious about this new-fangled social network by Google. Whatever your reasoning, your interest is piqued — now what? The best way to learn about any social network is to just dive in and use it. Just like driving a car, anyone can tell you how to get in, turn the keys, and step on the gas, but until you get in and start driving and run over a few curbs and bushes, you’ll never really learn what driving a car is all about. The first step to beginning your quest to use Google+ is to, like the car example, just dive in, create an account, and start using it! In this chapter, I show you how to do just that, from creating your account, to finding and organizing contacts, to postingCOPYRIGHTED your first post. MATERIAL Creating Your Account Creating your Google+ account is easy, you simply need to visit http://plus.google.com and sign up! You’ll have to create a Google account if you don’t already have one, or you 004_9781118181294-ch01.indd4_9781118181294-ch01.indd 5 110/6/110/6/11 77:31:31 PMPM 6 Google+ For Dummies, Portable Edition just need to log in with an existing account to access your new Google+ profile.
    [Show full text]
  • Federated (Mobile) Social Networking
    GRUPPO TELECOM ITALIA May 2012 Università di Bologna Federated (Mobile) Social Networking • The past, present & future of the next generation of social communications Telecom Italia /Innovation & Industry Relations – Laurent-Walter Goix laurentwalter.goix@telecomitalia .it Table of contents ► Part 1: Introduction to the Social Networking topic, current trends & issues ► Part 2: Technical overview of the Social Network “standards” landscape ► Part 3: Internal “Research & Prototyping “activities Part 1: Introduction to the Social Networking topic, current trends & issues The value of Federated (Mobile) Social Networking Source: http://makemesocialblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/where-were-you/ May 2012 The FbkFacebook story The new communication ppgaradigm, the “wall”, is introduced in September 2006 http://mashable.com/2006/09/05/facebooks-facelift-mini-feeds- and-news-feeds/ GOIX Laurent-Walter / II.RP 4 The value of Federated (Mobile) Social Networking May 2012 Fundamental #1: what is the “wall” about? • For its owner, the “wall” (and its usual settings) can be considered –As the history of private/public activities (social, but potentially SMS sent, calls, etc) –As a privacy filter when propagating information (based on followers/circles/lists) The “wall” (or stream) is an always-on virtual presence on the Internet • For a viewer –Access to *authorized* content anytime, anywhere (without being seen, no real-time constraints) –Notification settings The “wall” is a new way of communicating: asynchronous, indirect • The wall may only be a
    [Show full text]
  • Vysoke´Ucˇenítechnicke´V Brneˇ
    VYSOKE´ UCˇ ENI´ TECHNICKE´ V BRNEˇ BRNO UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY FAKULTA INFORMACˇ NI´CH TECHNOLOGII´ U´ STAV INFORMACˇ NI´CH SYSTE´ MU˚ FACULTY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS SOCIAL NETWORK INTEGRATION INTO AN INFOR- MATION PORTAL BAKALA´ Rˇ SKA´ PRA´ CE BACHELOR’S THESIS AUTOR PRA´ CE DRAHOMI´RA HERRMANNOVA´ AUTHOR BRNO 2010 VYSOKE´ UCˇ ENI´ TECHNICKE´ V BRNEˇ BRNO UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY FAKULTA INFORMACˇ NI´CH TECHNOLOGII´ U´ STAV INFORMACˇ NI´CH SYSTE´ MU˚ FACULTY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS INTEGRACE SOCIA´ LNI´CH SI´TI´ DO INFORMACˇ NI´HO PORTA´ LU SOCIAL NETWORK INTEGRATION INTO AN INFORMATION PORTAL BAKALA´ Rˇ SKA´ PRA´ CE BACHELOR’S THESIS AUTOR PRA´ CE DRAHOMI´RA HERRMANNOVA´ AUTHOR VEDOUCI´ PRA´ CE Ing. RADEK BURGET, Ph.D. SUPERVISOR BRNO 2010 Abstrakt Cílem bakalářské práce Integrace sociálních sítí do informačního portálu“ bylo vytvoření ” portálu, který by předvedl způsoby integrace současných sociálních sítí na internetu do jednoho portálu. Práce obsahuje seznámení se základními pojmy v této oblasti, jako je Social Web, Web 2.0 a sociální sítě. Dále představuje jednotlivé sociální sítě, které byly intergovány do portálu, a technologie a standardy k tomu použité - OpenID, OAuth a OpenSocial. Dále práce popisuje také jednotlivé etapy vývoje zadaného webového portálu. V závěru práce je také shrnutí a zhodnocení výsledků a zamyšlení nad možnými rozšířeními výsledného portálu. Abstract The task of the Bachelor’s Thesis Social Network Integration into an Information Portal“ ” was creating a web portal, which would demonstrate technical possibilities of integration of current social networks on the internet into one portal. The thesis contains introduction of basic concepts in this field - Social Web, Web 2.0 and Social Networking.
    [Show full text]