Mashable.com has published an interesting article on the legal implications of Augmented Reality as a marketing and advertising tool.
In the past year, AR has increasingly moved out of the “gee-whiz” phase of just being a technological marvel into becoming a legitimate and increasingly adopted tool in the marketing arsenal of a significant number of companies. (The Mashable article cites Ikea and Philips electronics as two examples, but there are many more, with new-comers jumping on board each day.)
There are, however, a number of significant legal implications that companies need to factor into their decision of whether or not AR is an appropriate tool to use and, if so, how to implement it.
These legal concerns include general privacy and data security issues, truth in advertising regulations, child protection (COPPA) issues, just to name a few.
The takeaway here is: if you are using AR in your marketing and product delivery process OR if you are thinking of adding AR to the mix, make sure that you have thought through and implemented policies and procedures that will keep you on the right side of the applicable laws and regulations that apply. Failing to do so can lead you into a ugly (and expensive) virtual dead-end.
I am not sure which is more creepy, the way in which Apple has been using Unique Device Identifiers (UDIDs) to track iPhone and iPad users’ behavior or the fact that (if the claims of where these leaked UDIDs came from are true) the fact that an FBI agent had a trove of over 12 Million of them, along with other personally identifiable information matched up to these UDIDs.
In any event, it goes to show that there remain many concerning security and privacy issues surrounding the use of mobile devices.
According to an article on Ars Technica, California’s state legislature passed the Location Privacy Act of 2012 (SB-1434) on Wednesday, which would make it mandatory for law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant before gathering any GPS or other location-tracking data that a suspect’s cell phone might be sending back to its carrier.
This is a different tack than the federal appeals court took last week in a different case. In that case the appeals court ruled that police were allowed to track a GPS coming from a suspect’s prepaid phone without a warrant.
It is clear that there remains a significant divide between courts and jurisdictions on the issue of expectation of privacy and Fourth Amendment search and seizure issues in the electronic age. It may be quite some time before these issues are decided with clarity. In the meantime the privacy debate rages on.
Oh Boy! Yet another patent slug-fest in the making. This time Google’s recently acquired Motorola Mobility unit is suing Apple for infringing upon a number of its patents, including locations reminders, e-mail reminders, and even “Siri”.
I am hoping that at some point soon, someone is going to realized that the current rounds of patent-based mutually assured destruction are a huge detriment to innovation (and the economy) and that some form or rational cross licensing of technology will take place, before the mobile ecosystem becomes a blighted wasteland.
This piece offers a profile on start-up called ReDigi which applies a novel system to allow its customers to “resell” digital music. Using digital fingerprinting technology, ReDigi’s user download software which verifies (a) that the music the user is seeking to sell is a legitimately purchased track and (b) that the file is erased not only form the user’s computer but also from all synced devices.
This approach, not surprisingly, is still drawing the ire of RIAA and similar groups. It will be interesting to see whether ReDigi’s model survives legal scrutiny.
Here is an interesting article from Andrew Chen’s blog in which he draws parallels between the current mobile app start-up boom (and bust) and the bursting of the tech bubble in 1999.
Chen doesn’t offer up any easy answers to companies seeking to avoid the boom-bust cycle, but he does make a good point: many companies are burning over 1/2 of the their available cash before even launching v1 of their product. This leaves companies with a VERY short runway to get their product off the ground.
As always, keeping burn-rates low and hoarding cash as much as possible are keys to maintaining enough longevity to give a product time to build market-share and, if necessary, to go back and tweak the product if v1 is not “all that”.
47% of BYOD employees don't have passwords on their phone!
51% say their company doesn't have the ability to remote wipe the BYOD!!
And 49% say their IT Departments never even talked to them about security on the device!!!
Survey says: FAIL!!!!
Apple’s well oiled machine continues to draw a disproportionate share of developer attention and love to its iOS platform. And not just “fart apps”. Increasing numbers of developers are betting on iOS as the best positioned mobile OS to succeed in enterprise market.
A recent survey from Appcelerator now pegs that 53% of app developers are chose iOS as the enterprise winner vs. 38% picking Android. As Blackberry (among its many problem) has learned to its woe, developer sentiment and dedication are a huge factor in gaining and maintaining market penetration for a mobile OS. And iOS is the undisputed (at least for now) 900 pound gorilla in this category.
Hopefully this increasing push into the enterprise space will cause Apple to move to fix some of iOS still not insignificant security and device management issues.
While I’m not sure anyone can make realistic projections about what the web will be like in 8 years, this article does hit on some key problems and opportunities that arise from the current economic state of the internet.
The author, astutely I believe, identifies a coming shift in monetiztion of the web. The author argues that, in order to fight device-based fragmentation of markets, consumer intent needs to become (and perhaps already is) the glue holding the continuum of usage together across multiple devises and platforms.
Of course, such a prospect carries a number issues with it, not the least of which are the privacy implications. Still, this is, very probably, the wave of the economic future for the web.