An interesting patent was granted to Google on November 8, titled “Customization of Content and Advertisements in Publications.”
A number of blogs picked it up and speculated that Google may soon begin to offer users the ability to create customized, printed magazines from Internet content. And print ads included in the magazine would be customized, too.
The speculation doesn’t appear to be far off. The patent, which was filed in May, 2006, points out the flaws in existing print magazines:
Consumers may purchase a variety of publications in various forms, e.g., print form (e.g., newspapers, magazines, books, etc.), electronic form (e.g., electronic newspapers, electronic books (”e-Books”), electronic magazines, etc.), etc. The publishers define the content of such publications, and advertisers define which advertisements (ads) may be seen in the publications. Since consumers have no control over publication content or advertisements, they may purchase a publication that contains at least some content and advertisements that may be of no interest to them.
Publishers often lack insight into the profiles of consumers who purchase their publications, and, accordingly, miss out on subscription and advertisement revenue due to a lack of personalized content and advertisements. Likewise, consumer targeting for advertisers is limited, and there is virtually no standardization for ad sizes (e.g., an ad that is supposed to be a full page may need to be reduced in size to fit within a publication). Accordingly, advertisers sometimes purchase sub-optimal or worthless ad space in an attempt to reach their target markets. Advertisers also have difficulty identifying new prospective market segments to target because they have limited insight into the desires and reactions of consumers.
The solution, Google says, is to give users the ability to search and browse their own content, and receive an electronic or hard copy version of the final product. And that final product will include advertisements highly relevant to the user.
Google also possibly sees the use of kiosks to create and print these documents:
…the customer interface documents may be provided via a kiosk. For example, kiosks containing the customer interface documents may be provided in stores (e.g., Target, supermarkets, retail stores, etc.) in a similar way as picture kiosks are currently provided in such stores.
Of course, this is just a patent at this stage, and Google’s history when dabbling with print stuff is terrible. It could be years, if ever, before Google tries to productize this. But I also wonder how effective this patent would be if established magazines tried to allow users to customize content in a similar way - Google could step in and claim infringement. Their hope, of course, would be to license the patent and supply all the advertisements.
Thanks for the tip, Patrick.
Apple’s much loved iPhone has a hidden feature, and it’s not going to be welcomed by everyone: it phones home.
According to 9 to 5 Mac, the iPhone sends the users IMEI number, IP address and stock quote preferences amongst a number of things via a hidden string to Apple via the Weather and Stock apps. The information could be used by Apple to build user profiles that includes data on travel, financial and banking preferences, work details…even personal browsing information (if you’re using your iPhone to surf porn be warned).
Hackers are now apparently working on a way to block this functionality. In the mean time the only way of stopping data being sent to Apple is to delete the stock and weather applications via jailbreak.
Ive had an interesting conversation privately in the last couple of hours in relation to my previous post on YouTube looking to provide HD videos. The contention comes down to exactly what was meant when Steve Chen of YouTube told CNet that “high quality” videos were coming to YouTube.
Liz Gannes over at NeeTeeVee contends that high quality doesn’t mean HD, and argues that the context of the quote is YouTube simply providing a higher quality video than they are currently doing. Gannes noted that levels below 720p can be “high quality”, but not high definition, and yet I cant help than wonder; isn’t high quality in a HD age really high quality, quality at the top of the spectrum of choices? Is marketing a service as “high quality” when it’s not HD somewhat misleading to customers when they would naturally link to two?
The exact format of YouTube’s “high quality” video offering is yet to be seen, but given the growing number of competitors now offering HD it would certainly be strange of YouTube to ignore HD as an option in the future. Bandwidth still limits accessibility to all but no one is arguing that HD isn’t where all content is eventually heading. YouTube still leads the market by a long way, but standing still (not providing HD) as the market evolves around it would not be a good long term strategy to maintain this lead.
Update: Liz has a post up on this now here.
Update 2: pointed out to me that 480 is generally termed “standard definition” which you’d presume wouldn’t be at the top of the high quality spectrum either. Perhaps the problem is a need for a set of standard definitions.
Google is being investigated for tax evasion by the Chinese Inland Revenue Department following a tip off from an “informant” alleging wrong doing.
According to local reports, the investigation into Google includes evasion of business and personal tax, and tax on employee options.
At least some of the investigation relates to how Google has previously treated transactions from Chinese customers to its US head office. Between 2000 and 2003 Google offered Adwords services to Chinese citizens that did no go via the local subsidiary, resulting in no local records from which authorities can check for tax avoidance. A further allegation suggests that domestic customers until 2007 could use agents to place Adwords ads, avoiding a formal invoice and auditable paper trail, possibly in breach of Chinese tax law.
Sina.com (in Chinese) received some sort of confirmation from the Chinese tax authorities that the investigation was underway, and went on to say that the investigation could widen to include other online companies operating in China, including Taobao, Baidu and Yahoo.
Thanks to Billsdue for the tip
SyncTV from electronics maker Pioneer will launch in private beta Monday with a service that promises to deliver ala carte television viewing by allows users to download content from channels and subscribe only to channels they are interested in.
The service will charge between $2 to $4 per month per channel with individual shows (we presume from unsubscribed channels) offered at $2 per episode.
The service will be initially computer only, with support for Windows and Macs, with the Marlin digital rights management system in place to stop programs being copied and played elsewhere. SyncTV is currently in talks with set-top box manufacturers and may even be offered with television sets themselves at a later date. Sync TV downloads will not be compatible with iPods, but will be “available on as-yet-unavailable portable devices.” Programs will be offered in “home-theater quality” (DVD quality) with some programming in HD.
The service will be available to the public from January 2008.
(via Reuters)
