Behavioral Advertising: Thumbs Up Or Down?

March 20, 2009

Behavioral or target advertising seeks to direct ads to Internet users based on information collected from their prior online browsing. The goal is to customize the Internet experience so that Internet users receive content that reflects their own interests and preferences. For example, someone who is an avid golfer may want to be shown advertising relating to golf clubs but not about knitting, gardening or other matters unrelated to his or her interests. While such a customized experience may have perceived advantages, there can be privacy worries, as the online world may seem a much smaller place when individual browsing habits are tracked, collected and used to place a person within certain categorical boxes.

At this point, many Internet users are aware of behavioral advertising. Indeed, according to a recent survey by TRUSTe, two out of three are aware that their browsing information may be collected for advertising purposes. Does this mean that there is more discomfort about this form of advertising? No, actually. Consumer discomfort with this form of advertising actually has gone down from 57% in 2008 to 51% this year. But nevertheless, more than half of consumers still have some discomfort.

Consumer discomfort with behavioral advertising has dropped, says Eric Sinrod

Consumer discomfort with behavioral advertising has dropped, says Eric Sinrod

While this discomfort with behavioral advertising persists, 72% of survey respondents report that they find online advertising to be intrusive and annoying when the product and services advertised are not related to their interests. This suggests that a more customized approach reflective of user preferences would be less intrusive and annoying.

But just because some Internet users may favor a customized experience over generalized Internet advertising, this does not mean that they do not have privacy concerns relating to behavioral advertising. Indeed, not only do about half of surveyed consumers have discomfort with targeted advertising, many of them undertake affirmative actions to surf the Web as anonymously as possible. For example, the percentage of people who delete cookies from their computers at least once a week has increased from 42% in 2008 to 48% this year.

An interesting aspect of the TRUSTe survey is the finding that while about 75% of respondents report that they know how to protect their personal information online, 39% concede that they do not do so consistently. This proves the point that privacy is like oxygen. Just like we can state that privacy and oxygen are important to us in the abstract, we can become complacent and only care about them when they are impacted and disappear.

The failure to take steps to protect one’s own privacy can contribute to problems like identity theft. Of survey respondents reporting on the last year alone, 35% believe that their privacy has been invaded based on information they provided online, 6% report that their identity has been stolen, 11% state that they have experienced credit card theft, and 13% indicate that they have suffered from unauthorized sharing of sensitive information such as health or financial records.

As in other areas, the law is struggling to catch up with technology. Technology advances out of the box at warp speed, and the wheels of justice grind slowly in an effort to grapple with new realities. When it comes to behavioral advertising, we still do not have crystallized laws or regulations on the books.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently issued a set of guidelines called Self-Regulatory Principles for Online Behavioral Advertising, however. Your author has summarized those principles in a prior column. In essence, these principles recommend transparency and customer control, as well as reasonable security and limited time periods for retention of customer data. Companies that adhere to these principles will be more likely not to find themselves in legal hot water when it comes to their behavioral advertising practices.

Probably, over time, behavioral advertising will become an expected, and perhaps even greatly desired, part of the Internet experience, with more developed legal regulations to ensure greater consumer privacy protection.

This column is written by Eric Sinrod, an attorney at Duane Morris and a guest blogger on TechPulse 360. It was originally published on FindLaw.com.


The Demographics Of Online Porn Access

March 13, 2009

It is an open secret: some Americans do visit pornographic Web sites as part of their use of the Internet. However, it is not well known whether there are differing degrees of online porn consumption based on U.S. geographic regions. A recent study titled “Red Light States: Who Buys Online Adult Entertainment?,” by Harvard Business School Professor Benjamin Edelman, digs in an attempt to find answers.

Just over a third of Internet users visit at least one adult Web site each month, says Eric Sinrod

Just over a third of Internet users visit at least one adult Web site each month, says Eric Sinrod

Professor Edelman’s methodology behind the study was to analyze credit card data from 2006 to 2008 regarding payment for online adult entertainment based on the postal codes of the purchasers. After adjusting for relative populations and accounting for broadband Internet access between states, the study does not reveal a remarkable difference between the states with the most and least online pornography purchases.

There nevertheless were some interesting findings. For example, the largest relative online porn purchasing state was Utah, which averaged 5.47 adult content subscriptions per 1,000 home Internet broadband users. Montana, on the other hand, came in last as an adult entertainment purchasing state, with 1.92 adult content subscriptions per 1,000 home Internet broadband users.

What are the reasons for these differences in terms of apparent consumption? Well, there could be other unaccounted for factors at play. For example, it has been reported that hard copy pornography tends to be more difficult to obtain in Utah than other states, and that many adult entertainment companies will not ship materials to Utah based on tough state and local laws. As a result, it is possible that a greater percentage of people in Utah than other states who seek adult content will turn to the Internet, because other sources are less available.

Perhaps of greater macro interest is that the study documents that 36% of Internet users visit at least one adult Web site each month, as of June 2008. An average visit to an adult site goes for 11.6 minutes, and of people who access at least on such site a month, they actually visit adult Web sites an average of 7.7 times per month.

Bottom line, while there may be some minor differences between states in terms of online porn consumption that may be caused by differing variables, Americans generally have a fairly large appetite for Internet adult entertainment and that industry, even though subject to certain legal regulations, likely will not disappear any time soon.

This column was written by Eric Sinrod, an attorney at Duane Morris and a guest blogger on TechPulse 360. It was originally published on Findlaw.com.


Monitoring Of Internet Communications By Educational Institutions

March 6, 2009

Faculty, administrators and students often use the IT systems of educational institutions to gain access to the Internet, to visit Web sites and to send and receive emails. That is all well and good. The question arises, though, as to how much educational institutions should monitor the use of such IT systems.

Educational institutions do have an interest in ensuring that their IT systems are used properly and for legitimate purposes. For example, educational institutions do not want their IT systems to be used by faculty to allow intellectual property belonging to the institutions to be disseminated to the outside world, and they do not want students and others associated with the institutions to engage in improper speech that defames others. Monitoring of IT systems can deter such behavior and can root out problems.

Schools have an interest in making sure their IT systems are used properly, says Eric Sinrod

Schools have an interest in making sure their IT systems are used properly, says Eric Sinrod

Furthermore, educational institutions want to do their best to avoid having viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and other malware from infecting their systems, Monitoring potentially could enable IT administrators to ascertain whether system users are taking steps to avoid practices that could lead to infection from such sources.

Still, educational institutions are considered bastions of freethinking and speech. Potential monitoring of communications on IT systems of educational institutions could be perceived as possibly undermining the higher mission of the institutions.

So, what are educational institutions to do? Should they not require users of their IT systems to agree to monitoring of user communications on their systems? Should they provide for monitoring only under certain circumstances? Or, should they allow for monitoring whenever they deem appropriate?

This author believes that educational institutions really should be able to monitor the use of their IT systems. Educational institutions, for the reasons expressed above, truly to have valid interests in proper use of their IT systems. Indeed, improper use of the systems could cause disruption or damage to the systems themselves, and potentially could subject the institutions to legal liability.

The next question is how far and wide should be the scope of the potential monitoring. One approach could be that educational institutions would only monitor communications on their IT systems if they had something akin to “probable cause” to believe that particular users are engaging in improper conduct.

This standard can create ambiguity, however. Plus, if educational institutions do not have full consent to monitor, they might run afoul of the law if they choose to monitor when it is later determined that they did not have sufficient cause. Moreover, the very ability of educational institutions to be able to monitor whenever they deem appropriate could deter users from engaging in improper conduct.

At the end of the day, this author believes that educational institutions should require users of their IT systems to agree explicitly that the institutions can monitor their IT systems whenever the institutions decide that such monitoring is appropriate.

It is true that at first blush this may cause some users to believe that Orwell’s Big Brother has arrived in the form of the IT administrators of educational institutions. But even with such general consent to monitoring, the truth of the matter is that the institutions do not have unlimited resources, and they generally will not have the time, capacity or interest to engage in so-called fishing expeditions. They will be more interested in ferreting out true problems, even though users have given consent for general monitoring.

More importantly, users simply should engage in proper communications on educational institution IT systems. If they do that, they will not have to worry about anything that unlikely monitoring would reveal.

This column was written by Eric Sinrod, an attorney at Duane Morris and a quest blogger at TechPulse 360. It was originally published at FindLaw.com.


Electronic Discovery: Separating The Wheat From The Chaff

February 20, 2009

Discovery burdens in civil litigation are growing exponentially. There are a variety of driving factors, including the sheer magnitude of electronically stored information (ESI) and relatively recent amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that force assessment and handling of ESI early in litigation.

In the past, lawyers used to review documents for relevance, privilege and other determinations in response to production demands. However, dedicating armies of attorneys to analyze oceans of electronic data simply is not cost-effective for clients, especially in this economy.

Dedicating armies of attorneys to analyze oceans of documents is not cost effective, says Eric Sinrod

Dedicating armies of attorneys to analyze oceans of documents is not cost effective, says Eric Sinrod

So what are companies on the receiving end of broad production demands to do in seeking to meet their ediscovery obligations?

In this climate, it is not surprising that a number of providers have come out of the woodwork that offer to manage, search and cull ESI in response to discovery demands. These solutions themselves can be expensive and technically burdensome. Moreover, it can be difficult for companies to evaluate effectively the provider that is appropriate for a given case.

Clearwell Systems provides ediscovery software for early case assessment that is worthy of consideration for cases that are email-intensive in the discovery arena. Clearwell provides the ability to project potential attorney review costs, an early understanding of case facts and key players, and visual insight into chains of email discussions to allow for the pinpointing of important or otherwise missing custodians.

Importantly, Clearwell allows for easy removal of non-responsive information from email collections right up front based on simple inputted criteria, which can cut down on attorney review time in a massive way, to the substantial savings of the company. Indeed, Clearwell reports that review time can be reduced by up to 90%.

Defensible ediscovery truly requires a three-pronged approach. The client company must be involved and must be cooperative. The company must work with a law firm experienced and skilled in ediscovery matters to guide the process. And a technical solution should be put in place to facilitate, expedite and streamline the work of the attorneys. When it comes to email discovery, Clearwell provides a solution worthy of consideration.

This column was written by Eric Sinrod, an attorney at Duane Morris and a guest blogger at TechPulse 360. It was originally published at FindLaw.com.


This Just In: More People Getting Their News From The Internet Than From Newspapers

February 13, 2009

When you think news, do you think of print newspapers? If so, you are outnumbered, as more people now obtain their news from the Internet, according to a recent survey.

Whereas only 24% of people reported obtaining their national and international news from the Internet as recently as September, 2007, that number now has jumped to 40%, higher than the 35% of people who currently get their news from newspapers, according to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for People & the Press in December, 2008. Not to be lost in the shuffle, of course, is that fully 70% of respondents reported that they are informed about the news by television, the most dominant news medium.

The growing interest in the Internet as a news source has been attributed to major news stories in the past year relating to the poor economy, the Wall Street bailout, fluctuating gas prices, and the 2008 Presidential election. Furthermore, as time goes on, the Internet continues to be a more widely used communication and research tool in society.

In addition, people under the age of 30 tend to rely on the Internet more than older age groups. Indeed, 59% of the under-30 set reports the use of the Internet as a main news source, equal to reliance on television for the news.

We live in the information age, and plainly people can obtain their news from a variety of sources, with the Internet growing in popularity for national and international news.

This column was written by Eric Sinrod, an attorney at Duane Morris and a guest blogger at TechPulse 360. It was originally published on Findlaw.com.


Information Technology Can Help In Repairing National Infrastructure

February 6, 2009

There is no question that our nation’s infrastructure is crying out for repair, as highlighted by a number of bridge failures, levee breaks, and other disasters over recent years.

It is not entirely surprising then, given the deteriorating infrastructure and an anemic economy that truly needs a dose of job creation, that the new administration seeks to repair our infrastructure through stimulus funding.

Not to be lost in the shuffle is how information technology can assist in this effort.

A national clearinghouse and database for infrastructure issues would help, says Eric Sinrod

A national clearinghouse and database for infrastructure issues would help, says Eric Sinrod

Barry B. LePartner, a construction expert, has come forward with several infrastructure repair solutions. Among them, is his suggestion that a national clearinghouse and database should be created that would be accessible to every state transportation agency as well as the general public.

The purpose of the database would be to identify all design and construction issues impacting the U.S. infrastructure. This database then could be used to allow federal authorities to alert all state transportation departments of any infrastructure failure along with methodologies for remedial design to prevent further problems. Furthermore, the alerts could provide guidance as to maintenance issues relating to different infrastructure elements.

The real point is to allow for immediate transmission of information to address infrastructure problems as they happen or, even better, proactively. Infrastructure issues should not remain “buried” in state files, and politicians no longer should punt problems into the future beyond their own tenure in office.

In other contexts, industry alerts have proven helpful. The airline industry, through the FAA, apparently has been receiving alerts providing immediate information relating to problems with an aircraft and directing immediate attention prior to similar aircraft being placed back in service.

Information is power. And here, power can be unleashed positively to help protect the public when it comes to our nation’s dilapidated infrastructure.

This column was written by Eric Sinrod, an attorney at Duane Morris and a guest blogger at TechPulse 360. It was originally published on FindLaw.com.


Majority Of US Patents Recipients Now Outside Of The US

January 30, 2009

Well, it finally has happened – the majority of U.S. patents granted in 2008 were to non-American companies. This is the finding, among others, contained in an annual patent compilation created by IFI Patent Intelligence.

While the compilation suggests that American dominance with respect to new U.S. patents may be receding, it indicates that the overall flow of U.S. patent activity has not subsided, at least yet, notwithstanding the sour economy. Indeed, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) issued 157,774 utility patents in 2008, compared to 157,248 in 2007.

Japanese companies hold five of the top ten places, says Eric Sinrod

Japanese companies hold five of the top ten places, says Eric Sinrod

IBM still leads the pack in terms of patents issued (with a record of 4,186), but American companies only were awarded 49% of 2008 U.S. utility patents. Moreover, U.S. companies only hold four of the top ten places among new patent recipients, and only 12 of the top 35 places.

In contrast, Japanese companies hold five of the top ten places, and 14 of the top 35 places.

There were some American bright spots besides IBM. Microsoft was issued 2,030 new patents in 2008, up 24% over 2007. And Cisco was issued 704 new patents in 2008, up 21% over 2007.

Of course, quantity does not always translate into quality. Simply racking up patents does not necessarily create business advantage if the patents do not have true commercial and competitive value.

Even though the economy is down, it appears that companies still want to take the time and effort to secure patent rights. And, this could be even more the case during troubled times, as companies need to seek any potential competitive edge possible.

However, we cannot draw too many conclusions about the 2008 patent numbers relative to the economy yet. That is because many of the patents issued in 2008 were first sought a couple years earlier, before the market downturn. It may be more interesting to assess the flow of patents to issue a couple from now, after patents have moved through the pipeline after the onset of the troubled economy.

In terms of sectors in which the largest numbers of U.S. patents were awarded in 2008, 4,430 patents were issued each in the semiconductor manufacturing and multiplex communications areas, and 2,990 patents were issued in the drug compositions area, with 2,680 patents issued in the biotechnology area. Perhaps this could be an indicator of greater future employment in these sectors. Stay tuned.

This column was written by Eric Sinrod, an attorney at Duane Morris and a guest blogger at TechPulse 360. It was originally published on Findlaw.com


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers