Eolas Technologies may be the biggest patent troll the Internet has ever seen. The company, alongside the University of California, claimed patents that pertained to the “interactive web.” This includes moving images, music clips, maps, search features, etc. Essentially, they claimed to have a patent for the modern Internet according to Wired.

Eolas took over a dozen companies to court in 2009 over these ridiculous patent claims. Some of those companies included Google, Amazon.com, Adobe and others.

Some companies just settled after the initial lawsuit to avoid further court costs. Those companies included Apple, Playboy and EBay. Google and others kept on fighting the claims that Eolas had a patent on the “interactive web.”

Well, good news comes to those who wait as a federal jury in Tyler, Texas yesterday said that the two patents owned by Eolas were invalid. Those who settled back in 2009 must be feeling pretty silly right now.

If the jury found their patents valid, the case would have gone forward with each company being tried for infringement. The jury invalidated the need for those trials and Eolas will never get their dirty money.

What may have tipped the odds in the general Internet’s favor was that Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the Internet, and Pei-Yuan Wei, developer of a Web browser before Eolas, testified on behalf of the companies still fighting.

If Eolas wants to keep fighting, they could appeal the decision. They probably won’t, however, as it would be too costly. They also would not be able to target any more companies during the appeal proceedings.

It just once again goes to show you that companies shouldn’t settle with patent trolls. Fighting them will usually expose just how fraudulent their patent claims are.

Dubbed operation “Texas Takedown Thursday,” the group defaced the texaspolicechiefs.org and exposed the slew of private email communications between members of various state police departments.

Yesterday evening, Anonymous tweeted about their exploits, announcing the website defacement as well as linked to a release on the operation.

They give multiple reasons for the attack – first, as a retaliation for arrests of alleged Anonymous suspects all over the world. Second, “Chinga La Migra,” as they take issue with Texas law enforcment continuing to “harass immigrants and use border patrol operations as a cover for their backwards racist prejudice.” Also:

We are doing this in solidarity with the “Anonymous 16″ PayPal LOIC defendants,
accused LulzSec member Jake Davis “Topiary”, protesters arrested during #OpBart
actions, Bradley Manning, Stephen Watt, and other hackers and leakers worldwide.

A little later, they announced the pastebin leak of the alleged emails –

Lewd jokes? Check. Racist chain mails? Check. You lost your radio license? Lulz. Playing on the fears of voters? Check. But we already figured that.

Indeed, the massive leak does have some pretty interesting communcations. Take the very first email from the leak, one from Friendswood Chief of Police Robert Wieners:

Subject: Stupid Bitch

That stupid bitch who started that stolen car chase at Yale and 610 got what she deserved (I’ll bet she was fat and black too). Same with that pervert that got shot by the county. Fuck that guy, see ya. That all sounds like good police work to me. Those folks got the criminal cure. It’s guaranteed, they will never commit a crime again.

To be fair, the dump is huge and contains mostly innocuous communications. But there are some that stand out, like this anti-muslim chain letter or sorts –

Subject: 1,400 years of inbreeding among Muslims
Attachments:
View As Web Page
GUYS,
I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS GUY IS ONTO SOMETHING!!

JESS

Subj: 1,400 years of inbreeding among Muslims

Read the article and make up your own mind. JHB

Hi everyone, this very interesting one came in tonight maybe it explains some of why the radical Muslims act so unreasonably brutal. Are the fact true? Don’t know but if it is true that they have as a common practice of marrying first cousins, all kinds of problems can erupt. OK, I looked at all my “hoax sites” but couldn’t find anything. But, just typing “1,400 years of inbreeding among Muslims” on Google results in a large number of articles discussing this topic. Is Bryan Fischer for real? Yep, See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Fischer and other sites about him.
Doc <°)))><

Anyway, here's the article that came in:

I admit that I have not studied the Koran or Quroan or whatever it is, nor do I intend to !! I was subjected to enough of of their total nonsense as only a casual observer in their part of the world :( .... I only forward this for your reading pleasure and to add to our understanding of the Muslim world. Sharing my opinion that they need to stay in their own sandbox instead of trying to inflict their insane beliefs and religion upon civilized people. (Shucks, now they will call me an infidel)
..... JD

According to AnonymousIRC, the texaspolicechiefs.org site was defaced for over 3 hours before it was restored. Apparently, it was defaced again.

It looks like they have taken that last bit of advice, as this is what you see when you visit the site right now –

Back in August, Anonymous began their #FreeTopiary campaign after the alleged hacker was arrested in the Shetland Islands in correlation with hacks against Sony and British authorities.

The small town of Forney, Texas recently held a Facebook contest to elect one child, aged 8 to 13, “Mayor for a Day.” Adults were asked to nominate children by sending an email to the current Mayor of Forney, Darren Rozell, explaining why the kid would make a good chief executive.

On Monday, the town announced the winner via Facebook. 11-year-old Caroline Gonzalez received the honor – which came with responsibilities like leading City Council Meetings. Given all that power, free executive reign over an entire town, what did young Caroline do for her first Mayoral act?

She renamed a street in the town “Justin Bieber Way.” And not just any street, but Main Street.

The City of Forney’s Facebook page posted the entry the secured Caroline the win. It came from her father, and praised Caroline for being part of the Gifted and Talented Program, for playing softball, basketball and cheerleading, and for volunteering to help the poor through outreach programs. The nomination said nothing about her being a rabid Justin Bieber fan.

I say this is grounds for impeachment.

According to KDAF in Dallas, Rozell had this to say:

“I can’t really say that I know a lot of Justin Bieber’s music, but I know that he’s really popular these days, and if she wanted to name it Bieber Way, we were going to make that happen”

Luckily, Caroline’s regin of terror is over as she was only Mayor for one day. And Justin Bieber Way will be changed back to Main St. But the damage has been done. Anyone that drove through downtown Forney, Texas saw, for a split second, a street named Bieber.

Check out the video below, which is worth it simply for the female news anchor referring to “Justin Beaver” a couple of times.

Sounds like Twitter has something else in common with Facebook, in terms of taking action without warning.

Here’s a snippet of EmpowerTexans’ explanation:

While the Empower Texans team members engage in political conversations and advocacy using the Twitter medium, they certainly do not use the medium to sell particular products or to generate spam. Empower Texans uses the Twitter medium in good faith to engage and actively contribute to the social media/networking experience. We talk about political ideas, Texas issues, as well as topics of personal interests from Aggie football to UT baseball, families and vacations to history and pop-culture.

If this series of unfounded suspensions prove to be the result of a political prank, Twitter’s automated system — confounded by the byzantine nature of its appeals process — has proven highly susceptible to those wishing to manipulate it.

According to Austin Post, AgendaWise – described as “another right-leaning Texas organization” had similar issues.

The Twitter accounts have now been restored, however. Empower Texans posted the following to their Facebook Page:

Texans for Fiscal ResponsibilityThe @EmpowerTexans Twitter account has been reinstated! They sent nice notes apologizing for the inconvenience. Now that we’re back up, be sure to click below and follow us! 1 hour ago · 33 likes · 5 comments

They seem pleased with the apology, but offer no clues as to what the issue was. Given the organization’s apparent acceptance of Twitter’s apologies, it doesn’t seem like they’re too upset with Twitter itself over the ordeal anymore.

There haven’t been any new tweets from either the Empower Texans or the AgendaWise accounts since though.

It’s not hard to see why this practice upsets some groups within the states, especially those who protect the interests of brick and mortar stores both large and small. Why would a customer buy a $700 home theater system from a local electronics retailer and pay 6% sales tax (or more) when they can get it shipped to their door free of that state-imposed sales tax via Amazon?

Some states have stepped up and voted to approve new tax laws that require online retailers to collect state sales taxes. Most recently the state of California voted on this issue as part of their new budget.

Here’s how it usually goes – a state decides to enact laws requiring companies like Amazon to collect sales tax. Amazon threatens to sever ties with the affiliates in that state. TheStreet.com has a nice map that shows the current state of the union when it comes to the Amazon tax wars.

The law of the land for a while has said that states cannot force businesses to collect sales tax if it doesn’t have a physical presence within the state. In states like Kentucky, Kansas and New York, Amazon already collects sales tax because those states contain Amazon offices. But no actual Amazon offices equals no sales tax. Amazon’s CEO Jeff Bezos has said that it is protected in the U.S. constitution’s prohibition of state’s interference in interstate commerce -

And in the U.S., the Constitution prohibits states from interfering in interstate commerce. And there was a Supreme Court case decades ago that clarified that businesses — it was mail-order at that time because the Internet did not exist — that mail-order companies could not be required to collect sales tax in states where they didn’t have what’s called “nexus.”

But now, more and more states are saying that Amazon affiliates count as physical presences and are enacting sales tax regulations on the company. Texas is one of those states that is currently in battle with Amazon.

Apparently, Amazon has extended a compromise to the Lone Star State. Amazon proposes that they would spend $300 million in the establishment of distribution centers across the state that would provide over 5,000 jobs to Texans. All they ask in return is to remain exempt from collecting sales tax for the next 4 1/2 years.

They also suggest that Texas’ comptroller sets up a separate website for the collection of voluntary sales tax owed on Amazon purchases. That money would then go directly to the state. It’s highly suspect that many people would choose to pay a sales tax, however.

The current push for online-tax regulation in Texas is part of a pending school finance bill. Governor Rick Perry is unable to line-item veto that online-tax provisions, so he would have to veto the entire school funding bill if he wanted to keep his state online sales tax free.

Texas will certainly not be the last state to debate this issue. What do you think? Should Amazon be forced to collect sales tax? Or does that interfere with interstate commerce laws? Should the federal government step in and mandate a standard online sales tax? Let us know what you think.

According to Forbes, The Groping bill would have made illegal any pat-downs performed by the TSA that involved touching the “anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast…including through the clothing.” Texas law enforcement would have been able to arrest TSA officials for sexual harassment. The penalty could range from fines of up to $4,000 and/or jail time.

The Texas House of Representative actually passed the bill, much to the chagrin of the TSA. They blogged about the passing of the bill, saying that “We wish we lived in a world where you could just walk on a plane with no security screening, but that just isn’t the case unfortunately. Aviation security agencies worldwide have been using pat-downs long before TSA was created to prevent dangerous items from getting onto airplanes.”

As the bill was about to be voted upon in the Texas Senate, the U.S. Attorney from the state passed out a letter that warned of the consequences of enacting the new law. Basically, the Groping law would be in violation of federal law, and states are not allowed to pass measures that regulate the federal government.

HB 1937 would conflict directly with federal law. The practical import of the bill is that it would threaten criminal prosecution of Transportation Security Administration personnel who carry out the security procedures required under federal statutes and TSA regulations passed to implement those statutes. Those officials cannot be put to the choice of risking criminal prosecution for carrying out their federal duties.

If HR 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute. Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.

Basically, pull the groping bill or you guys aren’t flying anywhere.

Republican bill sponsor Dan Patrick withdrew the proposal after the realization that he wouldn’t have enough votes in the Senate to pass it. The U.S. government messed with Texas, and won.

The TSA is a popular punching bad across the interwebs, as images and videos from pat-down procedures often go viral. Last month, this video went viral of a 6-year-old girl being checked by an TSA agent:

And earlier this month, this twitpic also made the rounds showing what looks like the investigation of a baby for a diaper bomb.

Facebook has a plethora of pretty funny pages to like if you too feel oppressed by the TSA – “When TSA gropes me, I will fake orgasm” and “If the TSA wants to grope me, they should at least buy me dinner first” being two of my favorites.

How do you feel about this state vs. federal government stand off? Should TSA agents pay for privacy invasions, or are they just doing their jobs?

Lead image Courtesy

Grady Burnett, Director of Global Online Sales and Operations at Facebook, said in a statement, "We are delighted to formally announce that Facebook will open an online sales and operations office in Austin.  The area’s world-class educational system and talented workforce give us the means to quickly establish a strong outfit."

"Strong" works out to at least 200 employees, by the way, making the new office a rather significant investment.  It’ll represent a fair amount of growth, too, since Facebook’s actually supposed to hire 200 Texans instead of just relocate a lot of current employees.

Burnett acknowledged, "We look forward to building our team here in Austin and enjoying all the wonderful things the city has to offer."

Finally, in other Austin-related news, don’t forget that SXSW has begun.  WebProNews is on hand to bring you live video coverage along with the usual articles and recorded interviews.  This promises to be a fun (and informative) conference.

Fittingly enough, Perry’s office announced the development with a Facebook note.  In it, he stated, "Facebook’s expansion in Austin will enhance the area’s robust technology industry, create 200 jobs for Texans, and strengthen the economy in Central Texas."

There were also a few figures implying that $1.4 million isn’t an insane bribe, as the Texas Enterprise Fund has already doled out more than $388 million to create another 52,000 jobs.

Finally, Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s COO, said, "We’ve been exploring various options around the U.S. to establish an additional online sales and operations office and we’re grateful to the assistance we’ve received from the Governor’s office and the state’s leadership in discussing the possibilities in Austin. . . .  Austin, with its deep talent pool, would allow us to hire the high-caliber employees we need to properly serve the people, advertisers and developers that rely on our service."

Which all sounds very nice.  The one remaining step (aside from choosing a site and actually building and staffing the office) is to get the City of Austin’s okay.   A vote should take place in the near future to settle that matter.

"I was surprised by the findings because the widely held assumption is that people are using their profiles to promote an enhanced impression of themselves," said Gosling of the more than 700 million people worldwide who have online profiles.

"In fact, our findings suggest that online social networking profiles convey rather accurate images of the profile owners, either because people aren’t trying to look good or because they are trying and failing to pull it off."

Gosling and a team of researchers collected 236 profiles of college-aged people from the United States (Facebook) and Germany (StudiVZ, SchuelerVZ). The researchers used questionnaires to assess the profile owners’ actual personality characteristics as well as their ideal-personality traits (how they wished to be). The personality traits include: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism and openness.

In the study, observers rated the profiles of people they did not know. These ratings were then compared to the profile owners’ actual personality and their ideal personality. Personality impressions based on online social network profiles were accurate and were not affected by profile owners’ self-idealization.

Accuracy was strongest for extraversion, mirroring results of face-to-face meetings and lowest for neuroticism. Those findings were consistent with previous research showing that neuroticism is difficult detect without being in person.

"I think that being able to express personality accurately contributes to the popularity of online social networks in two ways," said Gosling. "First, it allows profile owners to let others know who they are and, in doing so, satisfies a basic need to be known by others.

"Second, it means that profile viewers feel they can trust the information they glean from online social network profiles, building their confidence in the system as a whole."

Related Articles:

> Yahoo Deepens Integration With Facebook

>Facebook Cracks 350 Million Users, Adjusts Privacy Settings

>Nearly Half Of Consumers Would Recommend A Product On Facebook

That’s right – banned. Not limited or restricted – just banned. Oh, you say, there can’t be any teeth in that policy. How could he possibly enforce that? Fear might work since he has already suspended one player indefinitely from the team because of breaking the rule. If there is any question, Mashable reports

Following a few suspect tweets by team members, Coach Mike Leach has announced that Texas Tech players are now banned from Twitter altogether. SportingNews also reports that one of the offending Twitterers, offensive lineman Brandon Carter, was “suspended indefinitely for violating team rules and his Twitter page was nowhere to be found.”

Honestly, I am at a loss on this one. Here is one of the tweets that Carter floated

My hope is that there is more than this tweet used to suspend someone like this kid indefinitely. There was no finger pointing except at himself so that seems to be harsh. I will say that there could be more to this since this was the only tweet from Carter that was shown.

All of this points back to the need for organizations from companies to sports teams and all stops in between to understand that the world has changed. Whether it’s for the better or not is not the debate. Right now, it is just a fact that it has. Everyone is going to have to be definitive in their stance but there may need to be a little flexibility moving forward like the SEC (Southeastern Conference) did recently regarding the use of social media in any form as it relates to the events that are in a college stadium in the league. I did a double take on that one because it is just asinine to even think it let alone say it.

We have seen social media in sports be addressed by the NFL and other colleges in other sports. We have seen social media addressed in a variety of ways by companies and organizations worldwide as well. My question is are we any closer to actually understanding what the implications of using or banning social media will be in the near and long term?

Go ahead, Pilgrims, take your shots (or your swings or –insert sports cliché here-).

Comments