Dogs: Making Money Web

I’ve often wondered if the early Web pioneers had it all to do over again if Web companies would have put less of an emphasis on free.

People have been conditioned against paying for services or content on the Web, and the Web elite only have each other to blame. For all the talk of Web companies getting users first and “figuring out” how to make money later, the only two jaw-droppingly, multi-billion-dollar, innovative new ways to advertise online have been Google’s paid search ads and Groupon’s solution to unlocking local ad dollars on a mass scale. Those who win big–like Google– just perpetuate the cult of free content and services as a way of spoiling would be competitors. Witness a big disconnect between popularity and money. Exhibit A: Yahoo.

As a result, Netflix and Match.com are two of the only companies to have figured out ways to build large, lucrative subscription businesses online. Meanwhile, LinkedIn is one of the only Web 2.0 companies that has created a huge business with a freemium business model.

But on the mobile Web it’s a do-over, and it’s a totally different playbook from FREE! People are conditioned to pay for stuff over phones in a way they aren’t online, and they’re not flinching. According to Citibank’s US Internet Stock 2011 Playbook released today, Apple will generated as much as $2 billion in gross app revenue in 2011. For perspective, that’s about the same size as Citibank’s estimate for the entire online video advertising market next year, nevermind way more people watch YouTube than have an iPhone and it’s been in the cultural zeitgeist longer.

The report also cites Gartner’s estimates that the total app market was around $4 billion in 2010 and should grow to a whopping $27 billion by 2013. The biggest driver is smart phone penetration, the impact of which Citibank compares to the spread of broadband on the computer-based Internet in the early 2000s. Globally, smart phone unit sales grew 53% in 2010, and Citibank expects it to grow 29% in 2011 and stay in the mid-20% growth range through 2013.

Several years ago, it was controversial to say that a fledgling product called Android — not the hyped up purchase of YouTube– would be Google’s best bet at another hit on the scale of paid search. Android is already making $1 billion in revenues with an indirect monetization strategy, and Citibank expects that could double next year– not only eclipsing YouTube but the entire online video category. Now calling Android Google’s future is almost a cliche. Good thing Google hedged its bets.

California’s SB 1411, which adds a layer of criminal and civil penalties for certain online impersonations, goes into effect starting today. The consequences include a fine of up to $1,000, and/ or up to a year in jail. So don’t go and do something crazy like impersonate Google CEO Eric Schmidt on Facebook. There may be consequences.

The full text and a summary of the bill are below. There’s a good overview and analysis of it as well, on ZDNet. The state has created a new crime, and a new section is being added to the penal code.

There has to be intent to harm, intimidate, threaten, or defraud another person – not necessarily the person you are impersonating. Free speech issues, including satire and parody, aren’t addressed in the text of the bill. The courts will likely sort it out. Hopefully without my direct participation.

SB 1411, Simitian. Impersonation: Internet.

Existing law makes it a crime to falsely impersonate another in

either his or her private or official capacity, as specified.

Existing law also makes it a crime to knowingly access and, without

permission, alter, damage, delete, destroy, or otherwise use any

data, computer, computer system, or computer network in order to

devise or execute any scheme or artifice to defraud, deceive, or

extort, or wrongfully control or obtain money, property, or data. For

a violation thereof, in addition to specified criminal penalties,

existing law authorizes an aggrieved party to bring a civil action

against the violator, as specified.

This bill would provide that any person who knowingly and without

consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on an

Internet Web site or by other electronic means, as specified, for

purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another

person is guilty of a misdemeanor. The bill would, in addition to

the specified criminal penalties, authorize a person who suffers

damage or loss to bring a civil action against any person who

violates that provision, as specified. Because the bill would create

a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local

agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the

state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that

reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this

act for a specified reason.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 528.5 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

528.5. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person

who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another

actual person through or on an Internet Web site or by other

electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening,

or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable

pursuant to subdivision (d).

(b) For purposes of this section, an impersonation is credible if

another person would reasonably believe, or did reasonably believe,

that the defendant was or is the person who was impersonated.

(c) For purposes of this section, “electronic means” shall include

opening an e-mail account or an account or profile on a social

networking Internet Web site in another person’s name.

(d) A violation of subdivision (a) is punishable by a fine not

exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a

county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and

imprisonment.

(e) In addition to any other civil remedy available, a person who

suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of subdivision (a)

may bring a civil action against the violator for compensatory

damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief pursuant to

paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (5) of subdivision (e) and subdivision

(g) of Section 502.

(f) This section shall not preclude prosecution under any other

law.

SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to

Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because

the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school

district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or

infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty

for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the

Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the

meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California

Constitution.

surface encounters surface encounters noblesville

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Making Money Web

No comments:

Post a Comment