SCU in the News (Nov. 11 - Nov. 24 , 2010)

SCU in the News (Nov. 11 - Nov. 24 , 2010)

Phở soup is a San Jose favorite, and customers may be protecting their health as they slurp down the Vietnamese specialty.

Setting back the clocks for daylight savings time makes the days shorter and nights longer. Due to the time change, Kim Vo, a San Jose local, seeks a hot steamy bowl of her favorite chicken noodle soup to alleviate the dark, cold and rainy day blues. For her soup fix, she goes to Phở Ha, a Vietnamese noodle restaurant located in the Little Saigon neighborhood of San Jose. Little does she know, she may also be protecting her health.

As frosty winter days approach and the sniffles begin, over one billion people in the United States will catch a cold virus. When they do, they may find themselves having the virus cold blues. There are over 200 viruses that can cause the common cold. The best medicine for the virus is prevention, this can be done by practicing, “good hand hygiene and avoiding close contact with people who have colds or other upper respiratory infections,” according to the Center for Disease Control's website. But another prevention and care tool comes in chicken soup, and in San Jose its Vietnamese version comes in the form of phở gà.

Currently doctors have not found the cure for the common cold and can only suggest over-the-counter medicines or home remedies for symptom relief. Maria Sanchez, a Registered Nurse, at Regional Medical of San Jose says, “resting and fluids are key when you're sick….[secondarily] have some chicken soup.”

Delicious chicken soup to alleviate the cold virus blues may seem like a hoax but, “the steam from chicken soup may open up congested noses and throats…and provides fluid, which is important for fighting infection,” writes The National Institutes of Health and the U.S. National Library of Medicine on their website.

Homemade chicken soup may be an especially great idea, if Grandma makes it, but what if Grandma lives hundreds of miles away or in another country? What can busy Silicon Valley people do when they are too busy or feel too weak to make chicken soup themselves?

“When my mom can't make homemade soup, the best cure for a cold is phở,” a Vietnamese noodle soup, says Toan Nuygen, a San Jose State student. Although phở may not replace grandma's yummy homemade soup, it can be a quick alternative. There are many phở restaurants throughout the county of Santa Clara; each has reasonable prices ranging from $6.00 - $8.00 per bowl.

Traditional phở is made with beef broth, and different types of meat can be added to the noodles. Meats such as brisket, round eye steak, meat balls, tripe, and or tendon are typical for beef phở. Most restaurants have phở gà, (chicken) and a select few offer vegetable phở with chicken broth.

Typically the steamy broth is served with long thin rice noodles, green and white onions, and cilantro. The bowl of phở may be trimmed with fresh cut basil leaves, bean sprouts, fresh squeezed lemon, sliced jalapenos, Sriracha sauce, and or plum sauce, according to taste. “There is nothing better than a hot steamy plate of phở gà on a cold winter day with spicy Sriracha sauce,” says Vo, a regular at Phở Ha.

Some restaurants may add monosodium glutamate or MSG to the broth as a flavor enhancer. A number of people may be sensitive to MSG; those that are ought to ask the restaurant if it is an ingredient added to the soup before consumption. MSG may cause headaches in few individual like it does with Henry Pham, a local phở consumer. However, “chicken soup contains a mild anti-inflammatory agent,” according to a study conducted by the University of Nebraska, therefore, it may alleviate some minor cold symptoms. An individual may choose to overlook the MSG risks in exchange for the added anti-inflammatory agents the soup provides.

While medical doctors continue researching the cure for the common cold, for now, you may consider the quick, inexpensive, holistic approach to alleviate the common cold, with a hot steamy bowl of delicious phở gà to alleviate the cold virus blues.

Nashely Villalvazo is a student at Santa Clara University and a contributing writer to SJ Beez.

Return to Top

Black Friday is almost here, that annual event where everyone tries to work off their Thanksgiving dinner by rising at 0:dark:30 to hit the stores in search of holiday gift bargains. But if you're not in the mood this year to huddle in the pre-dawn freezing cold, and are looking for that perfect holiday gift, I have a suggestion to offer. Do you want someone to know they are high status and sophisticated? Then this year, get them a share of the Max Tailwag'er hedge fund for only $99.95.

Why a hedge fund?

Hedge funds are exclusive clubs. To even play, you must assert yourself to be an accredited investor. And, according to the SEC, being an accredited investor means that you either:

Earn an individual income of more than $200,000 per year, or a joint income of $300,000, in each of the last two years, and expect to reasonably maintain the same level of income.

Have a net worth exceeding $1 million, either individually or jointly with his or her spouse.

In addition, hedge funds typically have minimum investments of at least $250,000. Thus, imagine the joy the recipient of this gift will experience when they can drop the fact that they own a hedge fund. Guaranteed pride and instant respect.

Why the Max Tailwag'er hedge fund?

While data is scarce, it appears that most hedge funds do a better job of transferring wealth from investors to hedge fund managers. The Tailwg'er hedge fund, however, is led by a general partner, Max Tailwag'er, seen here with the plaque he received from the Consumers' Research Council of America. Note the Presidential like seal. In the year 2008 alone, Mr. Tailwag'er distinguished himself by making $99.3 billion more than the combined geniuses at AIG.

The differences – guarantees and transparency

Hedge funds rarely come with guarantees. That's one of the areas that set this fund apart from the others, in that it comes with a guarantee to perform as well as Bernie Madoff's sophisticated techniques.

Though few hedge funds are transparent, this one is. We fully disclose your money will be invested in ways to benefit the general partner.

Special offer

So don't wait, if you act early, before December 15, we will throw in a second share for you, the gift giver. It may be more blessed to give than to receive, but it's even better to give and receive.

A serious lesson in this post

Meir Statman, finance professor at Santa Clara University, notes that investors want high status and proper respect, perhaps even more so than economic gain. He explores this in his new book, What Investors Really Want.

The economic case against hedge funds is compelling. If not for irrational investors, I suspect they would only exist for very large institutions investing at very low costs. Hedge funds may make little economic sense, but they actually do provide more than status and respect. They provide the illusion of high returns with little risk. Unfortunately, the emotional well being that illusion brings may be short-lived.

So dial 1-800-RESPECT and be sure to mention the special offer code “Accredited Investor.”

More on MoneyWatch

Return to Top

Jury: SAP must pay nemesis Oracle $1.3 billion

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Oracle Corp.'s courtroom clash with archenemy SAP AG has paid off handsomely.

A jury on Tuesday ordered SAP to pay $1.3 billion - more than half of its total profit last year - for a subsidiary's skullduggery in stealing a stockpile of software and customer-support documents from password-protected Oracle websites.

The German software company was caught off guard by the size of the verdict. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

SAP faces another potential problem as well. It previously disclosed that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the matter.

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little to do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

AP Technology Writer Michael Liedtke contributed reporting from San Francisco.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Return to Top

Congratulations to the GMU Law and Economic Center's Samantha Zyontz: Samsung-Stanford Patent Prize Competition Winner

Posted by Josh Wright on November 24, 2010

Searle Civil Justice Institute here at George Mason. Samantha and two co-authors, Michael Mazzeo (Kellogg) and Jonathan Hillel (Northwestern), are one of several recipients of the Inaugural Samsung-Stanford Patent Prize for their paper Are Patent Infringement Awards Excessive?: The Data Behind the Patent Reform Debate . Its a really neat project and worth a read for those following the field. No link available as of yet. The papers will be presented at the February 8 patent remedies conference to be held at Stanford Law School on Friday, February 18, 2011.

I've had the pleasure of working with Samantha on a number of empirical projects - both at the Searle Center at Northwestern and now at George Mason. No doubt the many who have also had the opportunity to work with Sam will agree this is a well deserved accolade. Congratulations!

- Bernard Chao, Assistant Professor, University of Denver Sturm College of Law

Patent Remedies at the International Trade Commission: An Empirical Look at

Kyocera
- Christopher A. Cotropia, Professor of Law, Intellectual Property Institute, University of Richmond School of Law

Four Principles for Calculating Reasonable Royalties in Patent Infringement Litigation

- Thomas F. Cotter, Briggs and Morgan Professor of Law, University of Minnesota Law School

Complexity and Confusion Regarding Patent-Infringement Injunctions' Scope

- John M. Golden, Loomer Family Professor in Law, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law

Theorizing "Patentee Injury": Apportioning Claims for Reasonable Royalty Compensation

- Amy L. Landers, Professor of Law, University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law

The Accession Insight and Patent Infringement Remedies

- Peter Lee, Professor of Law, University of California, Davis School of Law

Are Patent Infringement Awards Excessive?: The Data Behind the Patent Reform Debate

- Michael J. Mazzeo, Associate Professor, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University
- Jonathan Hillel, J.D., Northwestern University School of Law (2009)
- Samantha Zyontz, Senior Research Associate, Searle Civil Justice Institute, George Mason University School of Law

Willful Patent Infringement and Enhanced Damages after

In Re Seagate: An Empirical Study
- Christopher B. Seaman, Visiting Assistant Professor, Chicago-Kent College of Law

Purging Patent Law of 'Private Law' Remedies

- Ted Sichelman, Assistant Professor, University of San Diego School of Law

Why Patentees Litigate
- Damon C. Andrews, 3L, The University of Iowa College of Law

Using a Nuisance Framework to Incentivize Innovation and Prevent Holdouts

- Janet Freilich, 2L, Harvard Law School

Game Theory: A

Zooming and Sliding Method for the Determination of Reasonable Royalties in Patent Damages
- Kanav Hasija, Masters-in-Intellectual Property candidate, University of New Hampshire School of Law
- T. Paul Tanpitukpongse, 3L, University of New Hampshire School of Law

The Relevance of Proven Acts of Direct Infringement to Indirect Infringement Damages: Reasonable Royalties, Unreasonable Confusion, and a Proposed Solution

- Dmitry Karshtedt, 3L, Stanford Law School

Efficient Outcomes Through Reasonable Negotiations: Restoring Sanity to the Calculation of Patent Damages
- Anthony K. Lai, LLM in Law, Science & Technology candidate, Stanford Law School
- Samuel P. Windley, LLM in Law, Science & Technology candidate, Stanford Law School

Analysis of the Entire Market Value Rule in Complex Technology Litigation: Arduous Royalty Base Determinations, Unjust Damage Rewards, and Empirical Approaches to Measuring Consumer Demand

- Ravi Mohan, 3L, Santa Clara University School of Law

The Role of Jury Instructions in Patent Remedy Gatekeeping

- Rhonda Sadler, 3L, Mercer Law School

Like
Be the first to like this post.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO — Oracle Corp.'s courtroom clash with archenemy SAP AG has paid off handsomely.

A jury on Tuesday ordered SAP to pay $1.3 billion – more than half of its total profit last year – for a subsidiary's skullduggery in stealing a stockpile of software and customer-support documents from password-protected Oracle websites.

The German software company was caught off guard by the size of the verdict. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

SAP faces another potential problem as well. It previously disclosed that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the matter.

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little to do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

___

AP Technology Writer Michael Liedtke contributed reporting from San Francisco.

Return to Top

StarTrek.com's semi-regular feature How Star Trek Changed My Life usually focuses on people whose lives have been changed directly by Star Trek, but this month we're going to take a different approach. Let us introduce you to Dr. Philip Kesten, a professor at Santa Clara University in California, who uses Star Trek as a teaching device. In fact, right now, even as you read this, Dr. Kesten might be standing before his 30 or so students teaching Physics 5, The Science of Star Trek. The course explores the physics and physiology, real and imagined, viewed in Star Trek, with Dr. Kesten leading his class in the study of the physics that drive the science of space travel, time travel and transporters.

“The students in my class are not science majors,” Dr. Kesten explained during a recent telephone conversation. “I do have one physics major. I have a couple of theater majors. I have some students who are studying communications. Really, it spans the spectrum. There's a religious studies major in the class. So I can't go into this class, and I don't go into this class, and start writing complicated equations up on the board. What I'm trying to do is motivate some piece of science from Star Trek, and what I tell the students is that we're going to peel back the layers bit by bit by bit. It's a very different approach to one I would take in, say, an introductory physics class, where you start with a basic principle and develop one piece after the other.

“What we're doing in the Physics of Star Trek is literally peeling back a little piece of science that seems interesting and seeing how deeply we can go into it. I started the term by looking at the solar system and then the galaxy and the universe, because, hey, what is Star Trek really about? It's going where no man has gone before. So, what's out there? And once we understand what's out there we can understand why we want to go there and how we're going to get there. So that led me to look at, say, the development of warp drive. But if you don't understand how far away Vulcan is, why would you care about warp drive? So it all has to hang together. It has to hang together the same way a Star Trek story does, and I'm telling them a story, essentially.”

So, do Dr. Kesten's students think he's nuts or brilliant?

“You'd have to ask them,” Dr. Kesten replies, laughing. “I think we're having a good time. Now, I've got to be very candid and say that not all of the students were expecting this to be a science class. You say the Physics of Star Trek and I think some of them imagined that all we'd do is watch Star Trek episodes. So I have to work hard, or initially had to, to get everyone to buy into this ride we're taking. We're actually doing science, real science. There are equations and math. There's plenty of it, but it's woven into a Star Trek thread.”

Dr. Kesten is quick to point out several things that he thinks StarTrek.com readers should know about him and his course. First, he's “watched nearly every episode of every series” and has seen all the features, but doesn't “know every alien and every ship.” Rather, he's just an avid fan who also happened to find himself fascinated by the science he saw in Trek episodes and films. Later, deep into his teaching career, Dr. Kesten became inspired by Lawrence Krause's 1995 book, The Physics of Star Trek. That tome got him thinking about how he might merge Trek and the teaching of physics. Finally, about four years ago, Dr. Kesten set about devising and seeking approval of a course he could teach at Santa Clara University. And when it came to filling a classroom, it helped tremendously that Trek “was made cool again” by J.J. Abrams' Star Trek (2009).

“This fall, right now, is the very first time I'm teaching it as a class,” says Dr. Kesten, who screened First Contact for his students and assigned a five-page term paper on it. “I had to propose this class to the core curriculum committee at the university and it went through a rigorous approval process. So it wasn't just about me having some good ideas, but the course has to satisfy certain objectives set forth for our core curriculum. The course was approved and this was the first opportunity that I've had to teach it since it was approved. And so far, so good. I think I'll teach it every fall.”

As the conversation comes to an end, Dr. Kesten contemplates the big question that his Physics of Star Trek course compels one to ask: Does Star Trek reflect real science or, at this point, does real science reflect Star Trek? “Wow,” Dr. Kesten replies. “Maybe that's a chicken-and-egg thing. Look, there's no doubt that the writers of Star Trek, even going back to the 60's, they got a lot of the science right. And you know what? It's science fiction. I don't take them to task for taking some liberties and stretching things or just making things up. The Heisenberg compensators in the transporter beam? I mean, sorry, we're just not going to be able to do that. And, frankly, the whole idea of protecting yourself against acceleration – you can make warp drive, but you can't get around Newton's Laws. So, OK, they took some liberties, but they got most of the science right. And we've seen it go in the other direction as well, where the science has not just followed Star Trek, but actually in some case came out of it. Either way, it's great.”

Be sure to let us know if Star Trek has changed your life and you could be the subject of next month's story!

Return to Top

FILE - In this Nov. 8, 2010 file photo, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison arrives at the Federal Building in Oakland, Calif., to testify in Oracle's trial against archrival SAP. A federal jury on Tuesday, Nov. 23, 2010, ordered SAP AG to pay $1.3 billion to Oracle Corp., for stealing customer support documents and software in a scheme to siphon off customers. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma, File) (Paul Sakuma, AP / November 8, 2010)

2:51 a.m. CST, November 24, 2010

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Oracle Corp.'s courtroom clash with archenemy SAP AG has paid off handsomely.

A jury on Tuesday ordered SAP to pay $1.3 billion — more than half of its total profit last year — for a subsidiary's skullduggery in stealing a stockpile of software and customer-support documents from password-protected Oracle websites.

The German software company was caught off guard by the size of the verdict. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

SAP faces another potential problem as well. It previously disclosed that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the matter.

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little to do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Oracle Corp.'s courtroom clash with archenemy SAP AG has paid off handsomely.

A jury on Tuesday ordered SAP to pay $1.3 billion — more than half of its total profit last year — for a subsidiary's skullduggery in stealing a stockpile of software and customer-support documents from password-protected Oracle websites.

The German software company was caught off guard by the size of the verdict. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

SAP faces another potential problem as well. It previously disclosed that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the matter.

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little to do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO - Oracle Corp.'s courtroom clash with archenemy SAP AG has paid off handsomely.

A jury on Tuesday ordered SAP to pay $1.3 billion — more than half of its total profit last year — for a subsidiary's skullduggery in stealing a stockpile of software and customer-support documents from password-protected Oracle websites.

The German software company was caught off guard by the size of the verdict. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

SAP faces another potential problem as well. It previously disclosed that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the matter.

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little to do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

___

AP Technology Writer Michael Liedtke contributed reporting from San Francisco.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO_Oracle Corp.'s courtroom clash with archenemy SAP AG has paid off handsomely.

A jury on Tuesday ordered SAP to pay $1.3 billion _ more than half of its total profit last year _ for a subsidiary's skullduggery in stealing a stockpile of software and customer-support documents from password-protected Oracle websites.

The German software company was caught off guard by the size of the verdict. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

SAP faces another potential problem as well. It previously disclosed that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the matter.

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little to do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

___

AP Technology Writer Michael Liedtke contributed reporting from San Francisco.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Oracle Corp.'s courtroom clash with archenemy SAP AG has paid off handsomely.

A jury on Tuesday ordered SAP to pay $1.3 billion - more than half of its total profit last year - for a subsidiary's skullduggery in stealing a stockpile of software and customer-support documents from password-protected Oracle websites.

The German software company was caught off guard by the size of the verdict. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

SAP faces another potential problem as well. It previously disclosed that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the matter.

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little to do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO -Oracle Corp.'s courtroom clash with archenemy SAP AG has paid off handsomely.

A jury on Tuesday ordered SAP to pay $1.3 billion — more than half of its total profit last year — for a subsidiary's skullduggery in stealing a stockpile of software and customer-support documents from password-protected Oracle websites.

The German software company was caught off guard by the size of the verdict. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

SAP faces another potential problem as well. It previously disclosed that the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the matter.

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little to do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

AP Technology Writer Michael Liedtke contributed reporting from San Francisco.

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO

No amateur tennis player would walk onto the court thinking he could beat the likes of Roger Federer, yet individual investors enter the stock market thinking that they can beat an unknown opponent, which could be Goldman Sachs.

That is one of the many “mental mistakes” that investors make, according to Meir Statman, a Santa Clara University finance professor and author of the new book “What Investors Really Want.”

Statman is an authority in behavioral finance, which he defines as “finance with normal people in it — sometimes normal smart and sometimes normal stupid. Standard finance is finance with rational people in it.”

His book is full of anecdotes that try to explain things such as why so many people fell for Bernie Madoff. His running theme is that ordinary investors cannot get a better risk-adjusted return than they can in low-cost index funds, yet they continue to try.

The reason: People want more from investments than a decent return. They might want their investments to convey status (owning a hedge fund means I have substantial means), to be socially responsible (I don't want to support tobacco or nuclear power), to stick it to the tax man or to provide the thrill of winning.

That's all well and good, as long as people realize it. Here are excerpts of an interview with Statman about his philosophy:

Q: You pound the drum for index funds. Is that because you think the markets are efficient and therefore unbeatable over the long-term?

A: The market is not efficient. It's crazy, but that it's crazy doesn't make you a psychiatrist. It's crazy like a wild animal. You wouldn't want to go against a wild lion because it's crazy. It's crazy in ways you cannot understand and cannot forecast.

People in behavioral finance and standard finance come to the same conclusion: Don't try to beat the market. Whether it is rational, as people in standard finance say, or crazy, as I say, don't try it.

Practically speaking, individual investors should treat the market as unbeatable and realize that when they try to beat it because it is inefficient, they are likely to injure themselves, rather than gain at the expense of another.

Q: Do you think pros can beat the market?

A: Yes, they can. But it's still a zero-sum game. If some people win, it means that some people lose relative to what they can get by being in an index fund. People above average tend to be the professionals and people below average tend to be individuals.

You might say that individuals can beat the market by hiring a professional, but after paying all the expenses of the money manager, they are losing.

Q: What are some of the biggest mistakes investors make?

A: The biggest mistake is not understanding the nature of the game.

People really think that playing the market is like playing tennis against a wall, instead of an opponent with potentially more skills and smarts. . . .

If everyone who listened to Jim Cramer buys the stock, the price will go up and it won't be the bargain it was when he suggested it.

Q: What about other mistakes?

A: Another big one is availability errors. If your friends who go to Las Vegas always tell you when they win but never tell you when they lose, you are left with the impression it is easy to win. Because mutual funds always advertise their winners and never their losers, it seems like there are many winners.

Hindsight is also a big thing. It gives you false confidence in your ability to tell the future. When people look back at 2007, they can look at all the signs that pointed to the market's collapse and think they should have predicted it. . . . Hindsight fools you into thinking visibility is good.

Q: Should investors buy nothing but index funds?

A: People should be clear about what they want. If they want the highest ratio of return to risk, index funds are the way. If they want to be socially responsible, buy a socially responsible mutual fund.

If they have hope of being a winner, look for a winning mutual fund or manager, but don't try to tell me you are maximizing return to risk. You are doing it because you like the game. . . .

It's like buying a car. If you want a reliable car at a decent price, buy a Honda. If you want one that also has status and better leather, buy an Acura. If . . . you really want to impress people, buy a Jaguar or Bentley. If you want to be socially responsible, buy a Prius. . . . But if you buy a Mercedes and tell me it's high quality, I can tell you, according to Consumer Reports, that the repair record of Mercedes-Benz is inferior. You are lying to yourself or me, or you are ignorant or, in all likelihood, a combination of the three.

If you want to gamble, don't gamble the tuition money.

Kathleen Pender (

kpender@sfchronicle.com) writes for The San Francisco Chronicle.

Return to Top

Reuters: SAP AG must pay Oracle Corp $1.3 billion for software theft in a jury verdict that could be the largest-ever for copyright infringement.

The decision, by a US district court jury in Oakland California, drew a gasp from the courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued the case for years.

The damages dwarfed SAP's own estimate of the damages. Oracle's shares rose 1.5 per cent in after-hours trade, while SAP's U.S.-listed stock slid 1.4 percent.

Europe's top software maker, which said it was disappointed by the verdict, could now try to get the dollar amount knocked down by the trial judge, or pursue an appeal.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

SAP has acknowledged that its TomorrowNow subsidiary had wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files. With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much was owed in damages. SAP said no more $40 million, while Oracle sought at least $1.65 billion.

Attorneys for the top U.S. software company called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said, that would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," Boies said.

The three-week courtroom drama, which captivated Silicon Valley, featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison -- whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" -- and President Safra Catz.

SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in U.S. legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain."

NO APOTHEKER

Testimony in the trial wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current Hewlett-Packard CEO Leo Apotheker.

During the trial, Oracle linked Apotheker to the operations of TomorrowNow. But it did not appear to produce evidence to prove he knew of the theft.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Catz said in a statement.

"The trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Ellison has publicly charged Apotheker with overseeing an "industrial espionage scheme" to steal Oracle software. But both SAP and HP characterized the Apotheker issue as a sideshow and said Oracle offered no proof to back up its allegations.

Oracle's arguments about the importance of protecting intellectual property appeared to carry weight with the jury. Juror Joe Bangay, who works as an auto body technician, said the group did not focus on the star CEOs during their deliberations.

"Their information was helpful, but basically I was figuring on the property that was stolen," said Bangay, 57.

The U.S. government is also conducting a criminal investigation into the events surrounding TomorrowNow but has not disclosed details. SAP said it has been cooperating with Department of Justice investigators.

"They didn't split the baby did they? It's a big number and they decided fast," said Patrick Walravens at JMP Securities. "If you step back, I think it would've been difficult for any jury to deal with the fact that one company broke into another company's computer systems and just took so much stuff."

"The jury had a choice of either using the fair market value of the license, or using a loss-profit calculation, and the fair market valuation tended to lead you to larger numbers, so that's obviously the direction they decided to go."

But Chris Scott Graham, a partner with the Dechert law firm, said U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton could now cut the size of the award.

"The function of the judge is to look at it from a more clinical standpoint to see if there is error... Sometimes jurors do get caught up in the rhetoric," Graham said. "There is a risk to Oracle that the judge could say 'I do not see enough legal evidence to support that award.'"

The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Oracle USA, Inc., et al. v. SAP AG, et al, 07-1658.

Return to Top

(PhysOrg.com) -- The Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, nanosatellite managed by NASA's Ames Research Center, successfully launched at 5:25 p.m. PST on Friday, Nov. 19, 2010, from Alaska Aerospace Corporation?s Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska.

O/OREOS rode into orbit aboard a four-stage Air Force Minotaur IV rocket. Also aboard were the Air Force Research Laboratorys Space Test ProgramSat-2 (STPSat-2), NASA's Fast, Affordable, Science and Technology Satellite, or FASTSAT, payload bus which carried the NanoSail-Demonstration, NASA's first solar sail, as well as other satellites developed by universities and industry.

The goal of the O/OREOS mission is to demonstrate the capability to conduct low-cost astrobiology science experiments on autonomous nanosatellites in space. Scientists will apply the knowledge they gain from O/OREOS to plan future experiments in the space environment to study how exposure to space changes organic molecules and biology. These experiments will help answer astrobiologys fundamental questions about the origin, evolution and distribution of life in the universe.

"It was a spectacular sunset launch as O/OREOS got a piggyback ride into space on the STPSat-2 mission," said Bruce Yost, O/OREOS mission manager at Ames. "We're off to a great start, having made contact with O/OREOS with our ground station at Santa Clara University, received confirmation that the spacecraft successfully deployed and initiated the first experiment. The amateur radio community also has been listening to O/OREOS and giving the operations team important information about the health and status of the spacecraft," Yost added.

"The O/OREOS science team is excited to receive the first real-time measurements from samples onboard two science experiments," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "This will demonstrate that CubeSat technologies can be used for future missions to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

Approximately 19 minutes after launch, O/OREOS separated from the Minotaur IV rocket and entered low Earth orbit at an altitude of approximately 400 miles. About three hours after launch, amateur radio operator, Marco Bruno, in Torino, Italy received the first signals from O/OREOS. After a spacecraft checkout period, O/OREOS autonomously initiated the first of two experiments, which will last approximately six months and transmit data for as long as a year. The second experiment will start on Friday, Nov. 26, 2010.

Now that O/OREOS is activated and has begun transmitting radio signals to ground control stations at Santa Clara University, the nanosatellite will send mission data to the NASA Mission Management and science teams at Ames for analysis.

The STPSat-2 launch was the STP's 26th small launch vehicle mission. The Air Force Space Commands Space and Missile Systems Centers Space Development and Test Wing at Kirtland AFB, N.M., has overall management of the STPSat-2 mission.

The Small Spacecraft Division at Ames manages the O/OREOS payload and mission operations with the professional support of staff and students from Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif., in support of the Astrobiology Small Payloads program under the Planetary Science Division of the Science Mission Directorate at NASAs Headquarters in Washington.

More information: For information about the O/OREOS nanosatellite, visit: http://www.nasa.go /ooreos/main Provided by JPL/NASA (news : web)

November 23, 2010 all stories Comments: 0 / Earth Sciences 13 hours ago | 3.3 / 5 (6) | 3 | (PhysOrg.com) -- In an effort to understand how fast sea level could rise as the climate warms, a University of Michigan researcher has developed a new theory to describe how icebergs detach from ice sheets ... / Earth Sciences 13 hours ago | 3.7 / 5 (13) | 0 | (PhysOrg.com) -- In the first comprehensive global survey of temperature trends in major lakes, NASA researchers determined Earth's largest lakes have warmed during the past 25 years in response to climate ...

Return to Top

SAP must pay Oracle $1.3 billion for software theft in a jury verdict that could be the largest-ever for copyright infringement.

The decision, by a district court jury in Oakland, California, drew a gasp from the courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued the case for years.

The damages dwarfed SAP's own estimate of the damages. Oracle's shares rose 1.5 per cent in after-hours trade, while SAP's US-listed stock slid 1.4 per cent.

Europe's top software maker, which said it was disappointed by the verdict, could now try to get the dollar amount knocked down by the trial judge, or pursue an appeal.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

SAP has acknowledged its . With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much was owed in damages. SAP said no more $40 million, while Oracle sought at least $1.65 billion.

Attorneys for the top US software company called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said it would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," he said.

The three-week courtroom drama, which captivated Silicon Valley, featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle chief executive (CEO) Larry Ellison – whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" – and president Safra Catz.

SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologised to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in US legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain."

No Apotheker

Testimony in the trial wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current HP CEO Leo Apotheker.

During the trial, Oracle linked Apotheker to the operations of TomorrowNow. But it did not appear to produce evidence to prove he knew of the theft.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Catz said in a statement.

"The trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Ellison has publicly charged Apotheker with overseeing an "industrial espionage scheme" to steal Oracle software. But both SAP and HP characterised the Apotheker issue as a sideshow and said Oracle offered no proof to back up its allegations.

Return to Top

European software giant SAP has been ordered by a Californian court to pay US rival Oracle $1.3bn (£820m) after losing a data theft case.

The case revolved around customer-support documents and software stolen by SAP's subsidiary TomorrowNow.

Oracle alleged that the German company intended to use the data to poach the 358 customers involved, and demanded $1.65bn compensation.

SAP had claimed it owed only $40m, but the jury decided in Oracle's favour.

SAP said it was disappointed with the jury's decision and would look to challenge the verdict.

"[We will] pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," it said in a statement.

It did, however, reiterate that it had made a mistake: "We regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle".
'Big dreams'

Oracle co-president Safra Catz expressed her satisfaction with the verdict: "For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers.

"The trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Observers said the verdict represented a resounding victory for the US firm, which launched its lawsuit against SAP in March 2007.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true. It just turned out to be a real windfall for them," said Eric Goldman, law professor at Santa Clara University.

The three-week trial included testimony from Oracle's chief executive, Larry Ellison, as well as SAP co-chief executive Bill McDermott.

The jury reached its decision after only a day of deliberation.

Return to Top

Reporter: THE SOLAR PANELS ARE HERE. THE WIND TURBINE ARRIVED LAST MONTH. SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY IS NOW ON COURSE TO BECOME THE FIRST COLLEGE IN THE BAY AREA TO INSTALL A SMART GRID GENERATING MEASURING AND CONTROLLING ITS OWN ELECTRICITY. THE FIRST GOAL IS TO GIVE US RELIABLE ENERGY. THE SECOND GOAL IS TO GIVE US SOME ABILITY TO CONTROL THE COST OF ENERGY. Reporter: COMPUTER SOFTWARE MONITORS WHEN DEMAND EXCEEDS SUPPLIES OR WHEN BUILDINGS AREN'T IN USE. LIGHTS ARE THEN AUTOMATICALLY DIMMED AND SERVICE VENTS ARE TURNED UP TO CUT DOWN ON AIR CONDITIONING. WHEN ROOMS ARE EMPTY, THE LIGHTS GO OFF. OUR SOFTWARE ALLOWS THE UNIVERSITY TO GATHER DATA ABOUT THEIR FACILITY, ANALYZE THAT DATA IN METHODS THAT WOULD NOT BE OTHERWISE EASY FOR THEM TO DO. Reporter: BRIAN KNOWS THE CAMPUS WELL. HE WAS A STUDENT HERE AND HELPED BUILD A GREEN ENERGY HOME TO COMPETE IN THE 2007 INTERNATIONAL SOLAR DECATHLON COMPETITION. SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY PLACED THIRD THAT YEAR. HE IS NOW A SOFTWARE ARCHITECT, PROVING HE SAYS THAT GREEN ENERGY IS WHERE THE JOBS ARE. GREEN TECHNOLOGY IS ONE OF THOSE FIELDS WHERE THE INDUSTRY THE TOTAL AVAILABLE MARKET OUT THERE IS ENORMOUS. Reporter: AND THE POTENTIAL SAVINGS ARE ALSO ENORMOUS. SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY EXPECTS TO EVENTUALLY CUT ENERGY USE BY AS MUCH AS 50% AND TRIM 20% OFF ENERGY COSTS. THE GRID ALSO PROVIDES A BACKUP PLAN IN CASE DISASTER STRIKES. AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE KATRINA IN NEW ORLEANS WHERE THEY HAD TO CLOSE THEIR UNIVERSITY FOR SIX MONTHS. STUDENTS CAME TO SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY AND EVENTUALLY GRADUATED FROM SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY. WELL, WE DON'T WANT OUR STUDENTS GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE. Reporter: THE GOAL IS TO HAVE THE UNIVERSITY GENERATE ENOUGH POWER THROUGH GREEN SOURCES LIKE THIS TO KEEP IT GOING EVEN DURING NATURAL DISASTERS AND POWER OUTAGES. ULTIMATELY HAVING ENOUGH POWER TO KEEP CLASSES RUNNING FOR SIX MONTHS. A SMART IDEA WITH THE HELP OF A SMART GRID. IN SANTA CLARA, THUY VU, CBS 5.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO_A federal jury on Tuesday ordered SAP AG to pay $1.3 billion to its archenemy, Oracle Corp., for stealing customer-support documents and software in a scheme to siphon off customers.

The verdict amounts to more than half of SAP's total profit last year and stunned the German software maker. It had only set aside $160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid $120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the $10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

___

AP Technology Writer Michael Liedtke contributed reporting from San Francisco.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Return to Top

European software giant SAP has been ordered by a Californian court to pay US rival Oracle $1.3bn (£820m) after losing a data theft case.

The case revolved around customer-support documents and software stolen by SAP's subsidiary TomorrowNow.

Oracle alleged that the German company intended to use the data to poach the 358 customers involved, and demanded $1.65bn compensation.

SAP had claimed it owed only $40m, but the jury decided in Oracle's favour. SAP said it was disappointed with the jury's decision and would look to challenge the verdict. "[We will] pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," it said in a statement.

It did, however, reiterate that it had made a mistake: "We regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle". Oracle co-president Safra Catz expressed her satisfaction with the verdict: "For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers. "The trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning." Observers said the verdict represented a resounding victory for the US firm, which launched its lawsuit against SAP in March 2007. "Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true. It just turned out to be a real windfall for them," said Eric Goldman, law professor at Santa Clara University.

The three-week trial included testimony from Oracle's chief executive, Larry Ellison, as well as SAP co-chief executive Bill McDermott.

The jury reached its decision after only a day of deliberation.

Return to Top

OAKLAND, California (Reuters) - SAP AG must pay Oracle Corp $1.3 billion for software theft in a jury verdict that could be the largest-ever for copyright infringement.

The decision, by a district court jury in Oakland California, drew a gasp from the courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued the case for years.

The damages dwarfed SAP's own estimate of the damages. Oracle's shares rose 1.5 percent in after-hours trade, while SAP's U.S.-listed stock slid 1.4 percent.

Europe's top software maker, which said it was disappointed by the verdict, could now try to get the dollar amount knocked down by the trial judge, or pursue an appeal.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

SAP has acknowledged that its TomorrowNow subsidiary had wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files. With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much was owed in damages. SAP said no more $40 million, while Oracle sought at least $1.65 billion.

Attorneys for the top U.S. software company called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said, that would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," Boies said.

The three-week courtroom drama, which captivated Silicon Valley, featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison -- whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" -- and President Safra Catz.

SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in U.S. legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain."

NO APOTHEKER

Testimony in the trial wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current Hewlett-Packard CEO Leo Apotheker.

During the trial, Oracle linked Apotheker to the operations of TomorrowNow. But it did not appear to produce evidence to prove he knew of the theft.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Catz said in a statement.

"The trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Ellison has publicly charged Apotheker with overseeing an "industrial espionage scheme" to steal Oracle software. But both SAP and HP characterized the Apotheker issue as a sideshow and said Oracle offered no proof to back up its allegations.

Oracle's arguments about the importance of protecting intellectual property appeared to carry weight with the jury. Juror Joe Bangay, who works as an auto body technician, said the group did not focus on the star CEOs during their deliberations.

"Their information was helpful, but basically I was figuring on the property that was stolen," said Bangay, 57.

The U.S. government is also conducting a criminal investigation into the events surrounding TomorrowNow but has not disclosed details. SAP said it has been cooperating with Department of Justice investigators.

"They didn't split the baby did they? It's a big number and they decided fast," said Patrick Walravens at JMP Securities. "If you step back, I think it would've been difficult for any jury to deal with the fact that one company broke into another company's computer systems and just took so much stuff."

"The jury had a choice of either using the fair market value of the license, or using a loss-profit calculation, and the fair market valuation tended to lead you to larger numbers, so that's obviously the direction they decided to go."

But Chris Scott Graham, a partner with the Dechert law firm, said U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton could now cut the size of the award.

"The function of the judge is to look at it from a more clinical standpoint to see if there is error... Sometimes jurors do get caught up in the rhetoric," Graham said. "There is a risk to Oracle that the judge could say 'I do not see enough legal evidence to support that award.'"

The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Oracle USA, Inc., et al. v. SAP AG, et al, 07-1658.

(Addition reporting by Ritsuko Ando and Jim Finkle in New York; Editing by Edwin Chan, Steve Orlofsky and Bernard Orr)

(c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2010. Check for restrictions at: http://about.reuters.com/fulllegal.asp

Page: 1

Related Sites: Creative Mac , Digital Producer , Media Workstation , Digital Video Editing , Digital CAD , Digital Animators , Animation Artist , Audio Video Producer , Digital Game Developer , Digital Pro Sound , DV Format , Presentation Master , After Effects , PhotoShop , Vegas , Digital Intermediates , DVD Studio Pro , IBN - IT Business Net , IBN - Storage , IBN - Networking , IBN - Internet , IBN - ProductivityApps , IBN - Security , IBN - SoftwareDev , USDailyNews , Digital Facility , VideoBasedTutorials , BN - Encoding

Related Newsletter: Tutorial Finder , Review Seeker , IBN - IT Weekly Newsletter

Return to Top

OAKLAND, California (Reuters) - SAP AG must pay Oracle Corp $1.3 billion for software theft in a jury verdict that could be the largest-ever for copyright infringement.

The decision, by a district court jury in Oakland California, drew a gasp from the courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued the case for years.

The damages dwarfed SAP's own estimate of the damages. Oracle's shares rose 1.5 percent in after-hours trade, while SAP's U.S.-listed stock slid 1.4 percent.

Europe's top software maker, which said it was disappointed by the verdict, could now try to get the dollar amount knocked down by the trial judge, or pursue an appeal.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

SAP has acknowledged that its TomorrowNow subsidiary had wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files. With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much was owed in damages. SAP said no more $40 million, while Oracle sought at least $1.65 billion.

Attorneys for the top U.S. software company called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said, that would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," Boies said.

The three-week courtroom drama, which captivated Silicon Valley, featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison -- whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" -- and President Safra Catz.

SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in U.S. legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain."

NO APOTHEKER

Testimony in the trial wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current Hewlett-Packard CEO Leo Apotheker.

During the trial, Oracle linked Apotheker to the operations of TomorrowNow. But it did not appear to produce evidence to prove he knew of the theft.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Catz said in a statement.

"The trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Ellison has publicly charged Apotheker with overseeing an "industrial espionage scheme" to steal Oracle software. But both SAP and HP characterized the Apotheker issue as a sideshow and said Oracle offered no proof to back up its allegations.

Oracle's arguments about the importance of protecting intellectual property appeared to carry weight with the jury. Juror Joe Bangay, who works as an auto body technician, said the group did not focus on the star CEOs during their deliberations.

"Their information was helpful, but basically I was figuring on the property that was stolen," said Bangay, 57.

The U.S. government is also conducting a criminal investigation into the events surrounding TomorrowNow but has not disclosed details. SAP said it has been cooperating with Department of Justice investigators.

"They didn't split the baby did they? It's a big number and they decided fast," said Patrick Walravens at JMP Securities. "If you step back, I think it would've been difficult for any jury to deal with the fact that one company broke into another company's computer systems and just took so much stuff."

"The jury had a choice of either using the fair market value of the license, or using a loss-profit calculation, and the fair market valuation tended to lead you to larger numbers, so that's obviously the direction they decided to go."

But Chris Scott Graham, a partner with the Dechert law firm, said U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton could now cut the size of the award.

"The function of the judge is to look at it from a more clinical standpoint to see if there is error... Sometimes jurors do get caught up in the rhetoric," Graham said. "There is a risk to Oracle that the judge could say 'I do not see enough legal evidence to support that award.'"

The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Oracle USA, Inc., et al. v. SAP AG, et al, 07-1658.

(Addition reporting by Ritsuko Ando and Jim Finkle in New York; Editing by Edwin Chan, Steve Orlofsky and Bernard Orr)

(c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2010. Check for restrictions at: http://about.reuters.com/fulllegal.asp

Page: 1

Related Sites: Creative Mac , Digital Producer , Media Workstation , Digital Video Editing , Digital CAD , Digital Animators , Animation Artist , Audio Video Producer , Digital Game Developer , Digital Pro Sound , DV Format , Presentation Master , After Effects , PhotoShop , Vegas , Digital Intermediates , DVD Studio Pro , IBN - IT Business Net , IBN - Storage , IBN - Networking , IBN - Internet , IBN - ProductivityApps , IBN - Security , IBN - SoftwareDev , USDailyNews , Digital Facility , VideoBasedTutorials , BN - Encoding

Related Newsletter: Tutorial Finder , Review Seeker , IBN - IT Weekly Newsletter

Return to Top

OAKLAND: SAP AG must pay Oracle Corp $1.3 billion for software theft in a jury verdict that could be the largest-ever for copyright infringement.

The decision, by a US district court jury in Oakland California, drew a gasp from the courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued the case for years.

The damages dwarfed SAP's own estimate of the damages. Oracle's shares rose 1.5 per cent in after-hours trade, while SAP's US-listed stock slid 1.4 per cent.

Europe's top software maker, which said it was disappointed by the verdict, could now try to get the dollar amount knocked down by the trial judge, or pursue an appeal.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

SAP has acknowledged that its TomorrowNow subsidiary had wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files. With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much was owed in damages. SAP said no more $40 million, while Oracle sought at least $1.65 billion.

Attorneys for the top US software company called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said, that would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," Boies said.

The three-week courtroom drama, which captivated Silicon Valley, featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison -- whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" -- and President Safra Catz.

SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman , an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in US legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain."

Return to Top

By Diane Curtis

The State Bar's chief trial counsel has ordered a review of claims by the Innocence Project that the bar isn't tough enough on prosecutors who violate ethics rules.

In response to the Oct. 4 release of the report by the Northern California Innocence Project at Santa Clara University School of Law, Chief Trial Counsel James Towery appointed Deputy Trial Counsel Cydney Batchelor to study the project's criticisms and recommendations, as well as determine if more action should be taken against about 130 attorneys named in the report whose cases resulted in reversal.

“We're happy to see the report because it shines a light on something that deserves attention,” said Towery. At the same time, he added, the bar is striving for a “balanced response.”

“On the one hand, there has been an historical underreporting and, as a result of that, underprosecuting of prosecutorial misconduct,” he said. “On the other hand, we know there are some flaws in the report.” Those flaws include the fact that early State Bar research indicates that a number of cases cited in the report involve minor violations of the rules and do not rise to a level of discipline. Also, many instances of prosecutorial misconduct are never reported to the bar. “We're looking at those which made a difference in trial and will weigh whether further investigation is warranted,” said Towery.

Innocence Project researchers said they reviewed more than 4,000 state and federal appellate rulings issued from 1997 to 2009, as well as media reports and trial court decisions. In 3,000 of the cases, the report states, the courts rejected prosecutorial misconduct allegations, in 707 they found misconduct and in 282 they did not decide whether the prosecutors' actions were improper. Of 4,741 public disciplinary actions in the California Bar Journal from 1997 to September 2009, 10 involved prosecutors, the report said.

The 113-page report by Professor Kathleen Ridolfi and Maurice Possley criticized the courts, prosecutors and the State Bar. “Courts fail to report prosecutorial misconduct (despite having a statutory obligation to do so), prosecutors deny that it occurred, and the California State Bar almost never disciplines it.”

The report praised the bar for showing signs of progress by reaffirming its protection of the courts, the legal profession and the public in 2009 and agreeing to separate out seven categories of attorneys, including prosecutors, in its reports of misconduct and annual report of complaints.

The report recommended adopting the ABA's Model Rule 3.8, which makes it a disciplinary offense to prosecute a charge without probable cause, to seek to have an unrepresented defendant waive rights, and to make public comments that might harm a defendant. It also recommended that the bar expand discipline for prosecutorial misconduct, increase disciplinary transparency and require prosecutors who have committed misconduct more than once to take an ethics class especially targeted at criminal prosecutors.

Batchelor noted that the board of governors recently adopted for submission to the Supreme Court for its review a new Rule 3.8 similar to the ABA Model Rule, and, in that respect, discipline will be expanded for prosecutors. The bar also is working proactively with both the courts and prosecutors so they are aware of their responsibilities. As for the issue of transparency, Batchelor said, “We are bound by our confidentiality rules and statutes.” Any changes in confidentialty rules would have to come via a change in statute. “We understand the request but the legislature and the Supreme Court may be the ones who are able to implement it,” she said.

Batchelor laid out a plan for months of research into the cases cited in the report, which means locating the case, checking on its final outcome and matching it with the attorney who was the prosecutor. “We can't respond until we look at each of these cases . . . At this point and until the end of the year, we're going to be in an information-gathering mode.”

When State Bar prosecutors do look at the cases, they'll consider such issues as the bar's mission to protect the public, the legal profession and the courts, whether misconduct is an isolated incident, whether there's a record, whether the burden of proof is the same as that of the trial and appellate courts, whether the State Bar Court already addressed the issues, whether the courts reported the misconduct and how long ago it happened. “One of the things the court looks at in deciding to impose discipline is how old a case is,” she said, noting that two of the cases cited in the report were more than 20 years old.

Batchelor pointed out that the State Bar is repeatedly criticized by district attorneys for being too hard on prosecutors and by defense attorneys for being too easy on them. “This is a continuing tension. That said, we are taking the report seriously and we're going to take a look at it. But we're going to be very careful and very measured.”

Return to Top

If you knew that by passing legislation to allow 2.1 million American students to pursue higher education or military service, our government could collect $3.6 trillion over the next 40 years, would you do it?

We think you would. That's why we support the Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors Act. After years of advocacy, we are hopeful that it can pass the House and Senate before Congress adjourns in December.

The DREAM Act is bipartisan, offering a conditional six-year path to legal, permanent U.S. residence for immigrant youth brought here as children. They need to complete high school, demonstrate good moral character and complete at least two years of higher education or U.S. military service.

Without the DREAM Act, about 65,000 students a year honor roll students, star athletes, talented artists and aspiring teachers graduate from high school and then hit a roadblock. Instead of entering college or the military, and gaining upward mobility and higher education, they are forced to live in the shadows and work in low-paying jobs.

Researchers estimate that this nightmare is a reality for up to 2.1 million current and graduated high school students across the country, a quarter of them in California. Many students are leaders like Pedro Ramirez, president of the Cal State Fresno student body poised to make great contributions to our nation. If we would only allow them the opportunity.

The DREAM Act could convert these 2.1 million students into a taxable cohort of individuals, who could contribute additional trillions of dollars to our still struggling economy. Their earning power over the next 40 years (in current dollars) is $3.6 trillion, according to a new report from the University of California at Los Angeles's North American Integration and Development Center not to mention the significant return on investment in youth that the public school system educates in their K-12 years.

San Jose residents, for example, would encourage our highly motivated students to study at Santa Clara University, San Jose State or Stanford University and then succeed in Silicon Valley, as the next generation of engineers and entrepreneurs, rather than watch them finish high school and get left behind their dreams stifled and potential untapped.

The need for the DREAM Act, however, goes beyond its economic benefits. In California, none of us are strangers to the heartbreaking stories of the high-achieving students who work hard in high school but whose immigration status limits their ability to fully participate in our community.

Hardworking students like Steve “Shing Ma” Li of the City College of San Francisco, who did nothing wrong but now faces deportation to Peru, where he has no friends or family should not be punished for circumstances beyond their control. Most were brought here at an age when they had no say and have since overcome language barriers and often poverty to succeed. Their unfortunate situation could be resolved in a targeted manner with the DREAM Act.

The irony behind the DREAM Act's name is that its advocates are not remotely dreamy-eyed about what we are promoting. We have 65,000 high school graduates ready each year to contribute to our economy but without the mechanisms to do so.

Providing a clear pathway to earned legalization is a small investment with a big return. Hundreds of thousands of high school graduates stand ready and waiting to help our economy.

The gains are too inviting to ignore and these students' dreams too promising to pass up. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have both expressed their intention to bring the DREAM Act for a vote in the coming weeks.

We strongly urge both chambers to pass this long-overdue bill.

Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) is the chairman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. Marcine Seid is a San Jose immigration attorney and serves on the board of governors of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

Return to Top

Students hold signs in support of the DREAM Act. | AP Photo Close

If you knew that by passing legislation to allow 2.1 million American students to pursue higher education or military service, our government could collect $3.6 trillion over the next 40 years, would you do it?

We think you would. That's why we support the Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors Act. After years of advocacy, we are hopeful that it can pass the House and Senate before Congress adjourns in December.

The DREAM Act is bipartisan, offering a conditional six-year path to legal, permanent U.S. residence for immigrant youth brought here as children. They need to complete high school, demonstrate good moral character and complete at least two years of higher education or U.S. military service.

Without the DREAM Act, about 65,000 students a year — honor roll students, star athletes, talented artists and aspiring teachers — graduate from high school and then hit a roadblock. Instead of entering college or the military, and gaining upward mobility and higher education, they are forced to live in the shadows and work in low-paying jobs.

Researchers estimate that this nightmare is a reality for up to 2.1 million current and graduated high school students across the country, a quarter of them in California. Many students are leaders — like Pedro Ramirez, president of the Cal State Fresno student body — poised to make great contributions to our nation. If we would only allow them the opportunity.

The DREAM Act could convert these 2.1 million students into a taxable cohort of individuals, who could contribute additional trillions of dollars to our still struggling economy. Their earning power over the next 40 years (in current dollars) is $3.6 trillion, according to a new report from the University of California at Los Angeles's North American Integration and Development Center — not to mention the significant return on investment in youth that the public school system educates in their K-12 years.

San Jose residents, for example, would encourage our highly motivated students to study at Santa Clara University, San Jose State or Stanford University and then succeed in Silicon Valley, as the next generation of engineers and entrepreneurs, rather than watch them finish high school and get left behind — their dreams stifled and potential untapped.

The need for the DREAM Act, however, goes beyond its economic benefits. In California, none of us are strangers to the heartbreaking stories of the high-achieving students who work hard in high school but whose immigration status limits their ability to fully participate in our community.

Hardworking students — like Steve “Shing Ma” Li of the City College of San Francisco, who did nothing wrong but now faces deportation to Peru, where he has no friends or family — should not be punished for circumstances beyond their control. Most were brought here at an age when they had no say and have since overcome language barriers and often poverty to succeed. Their unfortunate situation could be resolved in a targeted manner with the DREAM Act.

The irony behind the DREAM Act's name is that its advocates are not remotely dreamy-eyed about what we are promoting. We have 65,000 high school graduates ready each year to contribute to our economy — but without the mechanisms to do so.

Providing a clear pathway to earned legalization is a small investment with a big return. Hundreds of thousands of high school graduates stand ready and waiting to help our economy.

The gains are too inviting to ignore and these students' dreams too promising to pass up. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have both expressed their intention to bring the DREAM Act for a vote in the coming weeks.

We strongly urge both chambers to pass this long-overdue bill.

Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) is the chairman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. Marcine Seid is a San Jose immigration attorney and serves on the board of governors of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

Return to Top

Google is facing a class action lawsuit after a Texas resident filed a complaint claiming it snooped on his emails.

Keith Dunbar alleged the search giant had skimmed information he'd sent to Gmail users in order to sell targeted advertising, claiming Google's tactics breached the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986.

"Google intercepts and uses information from non-Gmail account holders without regard to the private or proprietary nature of the information,” the lawsuit alleged.

“No consent from non-Gmail account holders is given prior to Google using the content of non-Gmail account holders for the purpose of delivering targeted ads,” the complaint read. “Google does not inform non-Gmail account holders that it scans the content of their emails for the purpose of delivering targeted text ads.”

This is not the first time Google has faced this issue. It was brought up in legal challenges as far back as 2004, and lawyers suggest the company is unlikely to lose out in a battle that was first addressed six years ago.

"The topic was exhaustively debated when Gmail first publicly launched in 2004," Santa Clara University School of Law professor Eric Goldman told Information Week, which first reported the case.

"There were numerous calls on government agencies to investigate Google, and [politicians] proposed anti-Gmail legislation in the California legislature. Frankly, after all the furor died down a half-decade ago, I had assumed everyone had moved on long ago."

Google's privacy statement also states that no-one other than the recipient of mails is allowed to read incoming Gmail messages.

Subscribe to PC Pro magazine. We'll give you 3 issues for £1 plus a free gift - click here

Return to Top

A Texas man has fired a legal broadside against Gmail in a federal lawsuit that claims the Google service violates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986.

Keith Dunbar of Bowie County, Texas, claims that emails he sent from a non-Gmail service to Gmail users were scanned by Google algorithms without his consent. The algorithms are designed to serve Gmail users targeted ads based on the content of messages they receive. "No consent from non-Gmail account holders is given prior to Google using the content of non-Gmail account holders for the purpose of delivering targeted ads and other related information to Gmail account holders," the complaint, filed in US District court in Texarkana, Texas, stated. "Google does not inform non-Gmail account holders that it scans the content of their emails for the purpose of delivering targeted text ads and other related information to Gmail account holders."

The complaint is seeking class-action status so other non-Gmail users may also joint the action. It seeks damages of $100 a day for each violation or $10,000, whichever is greater, and the disgorgement of profits made by Google as a result of the Gmail scanning.

"We haven't received a formal complaint and can't comment on specifics," a Google spokesman wrote in an email on Monday. "To be clear though, Gmail – like most webmail providers – uses automatic scanning to fight against spam and viruses. We use similar technology to show advertisements that help keep our services free.  This is how Gmail has always worked."

Indeed, internet law expert Eric Goldman, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law, told [1] InformationWeek that there were numerous calls to investigate Google for such behavior in 2004. "Frankly, after all the furor died down a half-decade ago, I had assumed everyone had moved on long ago," he told the publication. Google's  [2] seems also to take issue with the lawsuit's claims. Among other things, it states in bold letters:

"Using Gmail does not violate the privacy of senders since no one other than the recipient is allowed to read their email messages, and no one but the recipient sees targeted ads and related information." ®

Return to Top

More on Information Technology

Internet giant Google is being sued by a Texas man who claims that the company breached the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

The lawsuit claims that the way in which Gmail scans the content of email messages to serve targeted ads actually breaks the law.

"Google intercepts and uses the information from non-Gmail account holders without regard to the privacy or proprietary nature of the information," the complaint states, according to Information Week. "As a result of Google's actions intercepting non-Gmail account holders' e-mail, Google obtains a monetary benefit without the consent of the Class members and without compensation to them."

However, this isn't the first time someone has complained about this issue and it isn't likely to cause much strife. Santa Clara University associate professor Eric Goldman has said the issue was dealt with years ago.

"The topic was exhaustively debated when Gmail first publicly launched in 2004," told IF. "There were numerous calls on government agencies to investigate Google, and Cal. Sen. Figueroa proposed anti-Gmail legislation in the California legislature."

Return to Top

State ethics rules require a written record when a member of a Kentucky board or commission owns up to a potential conflict of interest.

But a loosely worded executive order signed by Gov. Steve Beshear in 2008 leaves open the possibility that sometimes the disclosure goes undocumented — and that memory may be the only proof that someone divulged the potential conflict.

That's because the order doesn't say how the written disclosure must be made, or what happens, for example, if a disclosure made at a meeting is not written down.

The issue has arisen in the case of a $2.8 million contract to build concrete-block walls at the new KFC Yum! Center that was awarded to a company run by Ron Carmicle, chairman of the Kentucky State Fair Board, which manages the facility.

Carmicle said he told the fair board's budget and finance committee that his company, River City Development Corp., was vying for the downtown arena work.

Other board members, as well as its president, Harold Workman, said in interviews that they recall Carmicle's disclosure. But the board can't produce records that support those claims.

Under state ethics rules Beshear imposed, members of the fair board and dozens of other policy-making and regulatory boards must disclose “any direct or indirect interest in any undertaking that puts the member's personal interest in conflict with that of the agency.”

The order, implemented shortly after Beshear took office, extended ethics rules from employees in the executive branch to include those on state boards and commissions.

The rules require that the disclosures be made in writing or recorded in meeting minutes.

But beyond that, the rules are vague, said Edward Queen, director of leadership education programs at Emory University's Center for Ethics, offering as an example, “Do I scribble a note on a piece of paper to the chair of the board and say, ‘Oh by the way, I own this company'?”

Need for transparency

Queen said reporting potential conflicts of interest ought to be transparent, and a better solution would be a requirement that members use a uniform disclosure form.

(2 of 3)

“Government cannot and ought not be operated on a ‘he said-she said' basis: ‘Oh yeah, I think I remember him telling me this at some point,' ” he said.

Ellen Hesen, Beshear's general counsel, said she believes the procedure is “adequate” and lays out the best way for board members to deal with conflicts of interest.

“It's certainly more than we had in the past,” Hesen said. No one has alleged wrongdoing on Carmicle's part.

River City Development

Allen Troshinsky, director of operations for arena construction manager M.A. Mortenson Co., said River City Development was “absolutely” the lowest bidder on the masonry job, but he declined to provide records of the other two bids.

He added that he wasn't aware of Carmicle's involvement with the fair board until earlier this month when asked about it by a reporter.

River City Development, which Carmicle founded in 1974, is listed as a subcontractor on a spreadsheet showing an overview of Mortenson's procurement on the $238 million arena.

Mortenson's records of bidders and bids on the masonry work aren't required to be made public, according to a 2009 opinion from Attorney General Jack Conway's office.

Only contracts awarded by the arena authority — such as the contract between the authority and Mortenson — fall under the state's open records laws, the attorney general said.

The fair board was selected as the arena's operator in early 2006 when the Kentucky General Assembly approved $75 million in funds to start the project. But arena construction was overseen by the Louisville Arena Authority, and Mortenson awarded contracts.

The fair board's role included “planning, designing and construction of the arena,” according to the operations management agreement between the authority and the fair board.

Workman serves as executive director of the arena authority.

Carmicle said he also had disclosed to the fair board River City Development's involvement when the company was pursuing work for an addition to the North Wing of the Kentucky Exposition Center, which the fair board operates.

(3 of 3)

“My involvement up there has always been to try to disclose,” he said.

River City Development worked on the North Wing project as a subcontractor under Messer Construction and did not directly bid on the job. The 2006 award was based on Messer submitting the lowest bid, according to a 2006 Finance Cabinet determination that Carmicle's involvement didn't create a conflict of interest.

“I do not consider either one of those to be a conflict of interest because of the notice provision and the fact that I felt like I competed for it in a fair manner,” he said.

He said he is the sole stockholder in River City Development.

The company's Louisville work includes, along other projects, Waterfront Park Place, the headquarters of Kentucky Fried Chicken and Jewish Hospital's Rudd Heart and Lung Center, he said.

Carmicle, a close friend of University of Louisville men's basketball coach Rick Pitino, was named chairman of the fair board in April. Since then, he has served as a nonvoting member of the arena authority. Carmicle also served on the state arena task force that selected the project's location.

Expert: Rule needs work

Alan Rosenthal, a public policy professor at Rutgers University, said he'd argue that the state ethics rules for board members should be “cleaned up and made a little more formal.”

“It does suggest that there's a better way of doing it, both to inform the public and protect members who want to disclose a conflict — or what might be a conflict,” Rosenthal said.

The requirements for board and commission members were one part of Beshear's executive order from May 2008. It also changed how the governor appointed members to the Executive Branch Ethics Commission and required quarterly reports of contributions to a state official's legal defense fund.

Hesen said that the order sets forth “suggested guidelines” for board members — although the order's language mandates disclosures.

Judy Nadler, a former mayor of Santa Clara, Calif., and senior fellow specializing in government ethics at Santa Clara University, said the fair board case has implications for agencies across the state.

“If this was an oversight, one would then ask how many other board and commission meetings have there been these loose rules and oversights?” Nadler said. “There has been this executive order. It does carry weight and should be taken seriously.”

Reporter Marcus Green can be reached at (502) 582-4675.I

Return to Top

State ethics rules require a written record when a member of a Kentucky board or commission owns up to a potential conflict of interest.

But a loosely worded executive order signed by Gov. Steve Beshear in 2008 leaves open the possibility that sometimes the disclosure goes undocumented — and that memory may be the only proof that someone divulged the potential conflict.

That's because the order doesn't say how the written disclosure must be made, or what happens, for example, if a disclosure made at a meeting is not written down.

The issue has arisen in the case of a $2.8 million contract to build concrete-block walls at the new KFC Yum! Center that was awarded to a company run by Ron Carmicle, chairman of the Kentucky State Fair Board, which manages the facility.

Carmicle said he told the fair board's budget and finance committee that his company, River City Development Corp., was vying for the downtown arena work.

Other board members, as well as its president, Harold Workman, said in interviews that they recall Carmicle's disclosure. But the board can't produce records that support those claims.

Under state ethics rules Beshear imposed, members of the fair board and dozens of other policy-making and regulatory boards must disclose “any direct or indirect interest in any undertaking that puts the member's personal interest in conflict with that of the agency.”

The order, implemented shortly after Beshear took office, extended ethics rules from employees in the executive branch to include those on state boards and commissions.

The rules require that the disclosures be made in writing or recorded in meeting minutes.

But beyond that, the rules are vague, said Edward Queen, director of leadership education programs at Emory University's Center for Ethics, offering as an example, “Do I scribble a note on a piece of paper to the chair of the board and say, ‘Oh by the way, I own this company'?”

Need for transparency

Queen said reporting potential conflicts of interest ought to be transparent, and a better solution would be a requirement that members use a uniform disclosure form.

(2 of 3)

“Government cannot and ought not be operated on a ‘he said-she said' basis: ‘Oh yeah, I think I remember him telling me this at some point,' ” he said.

Ellen Hesen, Beshear's general counsel, said she believes the procedure is “adequate” and lays out the best way for board members to deal with conflicts of interest.

“It's certainly more than we had in the past,” Hesen said. No one has alleged wrongdoing on Carmicle's part.

River City Development

Allen Troshinsky, director of operations for arena construction manager M.A. Mortenson Co., said River City Development was “absolutely” the lowest bidder on the masonry job, but he declined to provide records of the other two bids.

He added that he wasn't aware of Carmicle's involvement with the fair board until earlier this month when asked about it by a reporter.

River City Development, which Carmicle founded in 1974, is listed as a subcontractor on a spreadsheet showing an overview of Mortenson's procurement on the $238 million arena.

Mortenson's records of bidders and bids on the masonry work aren't required to be made public, according to a 2009 opinion from Attorney General Jack Conway's office.

Only contracts awarded by the arena authority — such as the contract between the authority and Mortenson — fall under the state's open records laws, the attorney general said.

The fair board was selected as the arena's operator in early 2006 when the Kentucky General Assembly approved $75 million in funds to start the project. But arena construction was overseen by the Louisville Arena Authority, and Mortenson awarded contracts.

The fair board's role included “planning, designing and construction of the arena,” according to the operations management agreement between the authority and the fair board.

Workman serves as executive director of the arena authority.

Carmicle said he also had disclosed to the fair board River City Development's involvement when the company was pursuing work for an addition to the North Wing of the Kentucky Exposition Center, which the fair board operates.

(3 of 3)

“My involvement up there has always been to try to disclose,” he said.

River City Development worked on the North Wing project as a subcontractor under Messer Construction and did not directly bid on the job. The 2006 award was based on Messer submitting the lowest bid, according to a 2006 Finance Cabinet determination that Carmicle's involvement didn't create a conflict of interest.

“I do not consider either one of those to be a conflict of interest because of the notice provision and the fact that I felt like I competed for it in a fair manner,” he said.

He said he is the sole stockholder in River City Development.

The company's Louisville work includes, along other projects, Waterfront Park Place, the headquarters of Kentucky Fried Chicken and Jewish Hospital's Rudd Heart and Lung Center, he said.

Carmicle, a close friend of University of Louisville men's basketball coach Rick Pitino, was named chairman of the fair board in April. Since then, he has served as a nonvoting member of the arena authority. Carmicle also served on the state arena task force that selected the project's location.

Expert: Rule needs work

Alan Rosenthal, a public policy professor at Rutgers University, said he'd argue that the state ethics rules for board members should be “cleaned up and made a little more formal.”

“It does suggest that there's a better way of doing it, both to inform the public and protect members who want to disclose a conflict — or what might be a conflict,” Rosenthal said.

The requirements for board and commission members were one part of Beshear's executive order from May 2008. It also changed how the governor appointed members to the Executive Branch Ethics Commission and required quarterly reports of contributions to a state official's legal defense fund.

Hesen said that the order sets forth “suggested guidelines” for board members — although the order's language mandates disclosures.

Judy Nadler, a former mayor of Santa Clara, Calif., and senior fellow specializing in government ethics at Santa Clara University, said the fair board case has implications for agencies across the state.

“If this was an oversight, one would then ask how many other board and commission meetings have there been these loose rules and oversights?” Nadler said. “There has been this executive order. It does carry weight and should be taken seriously.”

Reporter Marcus Green can be reached at (502) 582-4675.I

Return to Top

LOUISVILLE - State ethics rules require a written record when a member of a Kentucky board or commission owns up to a potential conflict of interest.

But a loosely worded executive order signed by Gov. Steve Beshear in 2008 leaves open the possibility that sometimes the disclosure goes undocumented - and that memory may be the only proof that someone divulged the potential conflict.

That's because the order doesn't say how the written disclosure must be made, or what happens, for example, if a disclosure made at a meeting is not written down.

The issue has arisen in the case of a $2.8 million contract to build concrete-block walls at the new KFC Yum! Center that was awarded to a company run by Ron Carmicle, chairman of the Kentucky State Fair Board, which manages the facility.

Carmicle said he told the fair board's budget and finance committee that his company, River City Development Corp., was vying for the downtown arena work.

Other board members, as well as its president, Harold Workman, said in interviews that they recall Carmicle's disclosure. But the board can't produce records that support those claims.

Under state ethics rules Beshear imposed, members of the fair board and dozens of other policy-making and regulatory boards must disclose "any direct or indirect interest in any undertaking that puts the member's personal interest in conflict with that of the agency."

The order, implemented shortly after Beshear took office, extended ethics rules from employees in the executive branch to include those on state boards and commissions.

The rules require that the disclosures be made in writing or recorded in meeting minutes.

But beyond that, the rules are vague, said Edward Queen, director of leadership education programs at Emory University's Center for Ethics, offering as an example, "Do I scribble a note on a piece of paper to the chair of the board and say, 'Oh by the way, I own this company'?"

Queen said reporting potential conflicts of interest ought to be transparent, and a better solution would be a requirement that members use a uniform disclosure form.

"Government cannot and ought not be operated on a 'he said-she said' basis: 'Oh yeah, I think I remember him telling me this at some point,' " he said.

Ellen Hesen, Beshear's general counsel, said she believes the procedure is "adequate" and lays out the best way for board members to deal with conflicts of interest.

"It's certainly more than we had in the past," Hesen said. No one has alleged wrongdoing on Carmicle's part.

Alan Rosenthal, a public policy professor at Rutgers University, said he'd argue that the state ethics rules for board members should be "cleaned up and made a little more formal."

"It does suggest that there's a better way of doing it, both to inform the public and protect members who want to disclose a conflict - or what might be a conflict," Rosenthal said.

The requirements for board and commission members were one part of Beshear's executive order from May 2008. It also changed how the governor appointed members to the Executive Branch Ethics Commission and required quarterly reports of contributions to a state official's legal defense fund.

Hesen said that the order sets forth "suggested guidelines" for board members - although the order's language mandates disclosures.

Judy Nadler, a former mayor of Santa Clara, Calif., and senior fellow specializing in government ethics at Santa Clara University, said the fair board case has implications for agencies across the state.

"If this was an oversight, one would then ask how many other board and commission meetings have there been these loose rules and oversights?" Nadler said. "There has been this executive order. It does carry weight and should be taken seriously."

Return to Top

LOUISVILLE - State ethics rules require a written record when a member of a Kentucky board or commission owns up to a potential conflict of interest.

But a loosely worded executive order signed by Gov. Steve Beshear in 2008 leaves open the possibility that sometimes the disclosure goes undocumented - and that memory may be the only proof that someone divulged the potential conflict.

That's because the order doesn't say how the written disclosure must be made, or what happens, for example, if a disclosure made at a meeting is not written down.

The issue has arisen in the case of a $2.8 million contract to build concrete-block walls at the new KFC Yum! Center that was awarded to a company run by Ron Carmicle, chairman of the Kentucky State Fair Board, which manages the facility.

Carmicle said he told the fair board's budget and finance committee that his company, River City Development Corp., was vying for the downtown arena work.

Other board members, as well as its president, Harold Workman, said in interviews that they recall Carmicle's disclosure. But the board can't produce records that support those claims.

Under state ethics rules Beshear imposed, members of the fair board and dozens of other policy-making and regulatory boards must disclose "any direct or indirect interest in any undertaking that puts the member's personal interest in conflict with that of the agency."

The order, implemented shortly after Beshear took office, extended ethics rules from employees in the executive branch to include those on state boards and commissions.

The rules require that the disclosures be made in writing or recorded in meeting minutes.

But beyond that, the rules are vague, said Edward Queen, director of leadership education programs at Emory University's Center for Ethics, offering as an example, "Do I scribble a note on a piece of paper to the chair of the board and say, 'Oh by the way, I own this company'?"

Queen said reporting potential conflicts of interest ought to be transparent, and a better solution would be a requirement that members use a uniform disclosure form.

"Government cannot and ought not be operated on a 'he said-she said' basis: 'Oh yeah, I think I remember him telling me this at some point,' " he said.

Ellen Hesen, Beshear's general counsel, said she believes the procedure is "adequate" and lays out the best way for board members to deal with conflicts of interest.

"It's certainly more than we had in the past," Hesen said. No one has alleged wrongdoing on Carmicle's part.

Alan Rosenthal, a public policy professor at Rutgers University, said he'd argue that the state ethics rules for board members should be "cleaned up and made a little more formal."

"It does suggest that there's a better way of doing it, both to inform the public and protect members who want to disclose a conflict - or what might be a conflict," Rosenthal said.

The requirements for board and commission members were one part of Beshear's executive order from May 2008. It also changed how the governor appointed members to the Executive Branch Ethics Commission and required quarterly reports of contributions to a state official's legal defense fund.

Hesen said that the order sets forth "suggested guidelines" for board members - although the order's language mandates disclosures.

Judy Nadler, a former mayor of Santa Clara, Calif., and senior fellow specializing in government ethics at Santa Clara University, said the fair board case has implications for agencies across the state.

Return to Top

LOUISVILLE - State ethics rules require a written record when a member of a Kentucky board or commission owns up to a potential conflict of interest.

But a loosely worded executive order signed by Gov. Steve Beshear in 2008 leaves open the possibility that sometimes the disclosure goes undocumented - and that memory may be the only proof that someone divulged the potential conflict.

That's because the order doesn't say how the written disclosure must be made, or what happens, for example, if a disclosure made at a meeting is not written down.

The issue has arisen in the case of a $2.8 million contract to build concrete-block walls at the new KFC Yum! Center that was awarded to a company run by Ron Carmicle, chairman of the Kentucky State Fair Board, which manages the facility.

Carmicle said he told the fair board's budget and finance committee that his company, River City Development Corp., was vying for the downtown arena work.

Other board members, as well as its president, Harold Workman, said in interviews that they recall Carmicle's disclosure. But the board can't produce records that support those claims.

Under state ethics rules Beshear imposed, members of the fair board and dozens of other policy-making and regulatory boards must disclose "any direct or indirect interest in any undertaking that puts the member's personal interest in conflict with that of the agency."

The order, implemented shortly after Beshear took office, extended ethics rules from employees in the executive branch to include those on state boards and commissions.

The rules require that the disclosures be made in writing or recorded in meeting minutes.

But beyond that, the rules are vague, said Edward Queen, director of leadership education programs at Emory University's Center for Ethics, offering as an example, "Do I scribble a note on a piece of paper to the chair of the board and say, 'Oh by the way, I own this company'?"

Queen said reporting potential conflicts of interest ought to be transparent, and a better solution would be a requirement that members use a uniform disclosure form.

"Government cannot and ought not be operated on a 'he said-she said' basis: 'Oh yeah, I think I remember him telling me this at some point,' " he said.

Ellen Hesen, Beshear's general counsel, said she believes the procedure is "adequate" and lays out the best way for board members to deal with conflicts of interest.

"It's certainly more than we had in the past," Hesen said. No one has alleged wrongdoing on Carmicle's part.

Alan Rosenthal, a public policy professor at Rutgers University, said he'd argue that the state ethics rules for board members should be "cleaned up and made a little more formal."

"It does suggest that there's a better way of doing it, both to inform the public and protect members who want to disclose a conflict - or what might be a conflict," Rosenthal said.

The requirements for board and commission members were one part of Beshear's executive order from May 2008. It also changed how the governor appointed members to the Executive Branch Ethics Commission and required quarterly reports of contributions to a state official's legal defense fund.

Hesen said that the order sets forth "suggested guidelines" for board members - although the order's language mandates disclosures.

Judy Nadler, a former mayor of Santa Clara, Calif., and senior fellow specializing in government ethics at Santa Clara University, said the fair board case has implications for agencies across the state.

"If this was an oversight, one would then ask how many other board and commission meetings have there been these loose rules and oversights?" Nadler said. "There has been this executive order. It does carry weight and should be taken seriously."

Return to Top

Now that O/OREOS is activated and has begun transmitting radio signals to ground control stations at Santa Clara University, the nanosatellite will send mission data to the NASA Mission Management and science teams at Ames for analysis. by Staff Writers

Moffett Field CA (SPX) Nov 24, 2010

The Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, nanosatellite managed by NASA's Ames Research Center, successfully launched at 5:25 p.m. PST on Friday, Nov. 19, 2010, from Alaska Aerospace Corporations Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska.

O/OREOS rode into orbit aboard a four-stage Air Force Minotaur IV rocket. Also aboard were the Air Force Research Laboratorys Space Test ProgramSat-2 (STPSat-2), NASA's Fast, Affordable, Science and Technology Satellite, or FASTSAT, payload bus which carried the NanoSail-Demonstration, NASA's first solar sail, as well as other satellites developed by universities and industry.

The goal of the O/OREOS mission is to demonstrate the capability to conduct low-cost astrobiology science experiments on autonomous nanosatellites in space.

Scientists will apply the knowledge they gain from O/OREOS to plan future experiments in the space environment to study how exposure to space changes organic molecules and biology. These experiments will help answer astrobiologys fundamental questions about the origin, evolution and distribution of life in the universe.

"It was a spectacular sunset launch as O/OREOS got a piggyback ride into space on the STPSat-2 mission," said Bruce Yost, O/OREOS mission manager at Ames.

"We're off to a great start, having made contact with O/OREOS with our ground station at Santa Clara University, received confirmation that the spacecraft successfully deployed and initiated the first experiment.

"The amateur radio community also has been listening to O/OREOS and giving the operations team important information about the health and status of the spacecraft," Yost added.

"The O/OREOS science team is excited to receive the first real-time measurements from samples onboard two science experiments," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "This will demonstrate that CubeSat technologies can be used for future missions to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

Approximately 19 minutes after launch, O/OREOS separated from the Minotaur IV rocket and entered low Earth orbit at an altitude of approximately 400 miles. About three hours after launch, amateur radio operator, Marco Bruno, in Torino, Italy received the first signals from O/OREOS.

After a spacecraft checkout period, O/OREOS autonomously initiated the first of two experiments, which will last approximately six months and transmit data for as long as a year. The second experiment will start on Friday, Nov. 26, 2010.

Now that O/OREOS is activated and has begun transmitting radio signals to ground control stations at Santa Clara University, the nanosatellite will send mission data to the NASA Mission Management and science teams at Ames for analysis.

The STPSat-2 launch was the STP's 26th small launch vehicle mission. The Air Force Space Commands Space and Missile Systems Centers Space Development and Test Wing at Kirtland AFB, N.M., has overall management of the STPSat-2 mission.

Return to Top

Source: Ames Research Center

MOFFETT FIELD, Calif. - The Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, nanosatellite managed by NASA's Ames Research Center, successfully launched at 5:25 p.m. PST on Friday, Nov. 19, 2010, from Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska.

O/OREOS rode into orbit aboard a four-stage Air Force Minotaur IV rocket. Also aboard were the Air Force Research Laboratory's Space Test ProgramSat-2 (STPSat-2), NASA's Fast, Affordable, Science and Technology Satellite, or FASTSAT, payload bus which carried the NanoSail-Demonstration, NASA's first solar sail, as well as other satellites developed by universities and industry.

The goal of the O/OREOS mission is to demonstrate the capability to conduct low-cost astrobiology science experiments on autonomous nanosatellites in space. Scientists will apply the knowledge they gain from O/OREOS to plan future experiments in the space environment to study how exposure to space changes organic molecules and biology. These experiments will help answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution and distribution of life in the universe.

"It was a spectacular sunset launch as O/OREOS got a piggyback ride into space on the STPSat-2 mission," said Bruce Yost, O/OREOS mission manager at Ames. "We're off to a great start, having made contact with O/OREOS with our ground station at Santa Clara University, received confirmation that the spacecraft successfully deployed and initiated the first experiment. The amateur radio community also has been listening to O/OREOS and giving the operations team important information about the health and status of the spacecraft," Yost added.

"The O/OREOS science team is excited to receive the first real-time measurements from samples onboard two science experiments," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "This will demonstrate that CubeSat technologies can be used for future missions to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

Approximately 19 minutes after launch, O/OREOS separated from the Minotaur IV rocket and entered low Earth orbit at an altitude of approximately 400 miles. About three hours after launch, amateur radio operator, Marco Bruno, in Torino, Italy received the first signals from O/OREOS. After a spacecraft checkout period, O/OREOS autonomously initiated the first of two experiments, which will last approximately six months and transmit data for as long as a year. The second experiment will start on Friday, Nov. 26, 2010.

Now that O/OREOS is activated and has begun transmitting radio signals to ground control stations at Santa Clara University, the nanosatellite will send mission data to the NASA Mission Management and science teams at Ames for analysis.

The STPSat-2 launch was the STP's 26th small launch vehicle mission. The Air Force Space Command's Space and Missile Systems Center's Space Development and Test Wing at Kirtland AFB, N.M., has overall management of the STPSat-2 mission.

The Small Spacecraft Division at Ames manages the O/OREOS payload and mission operations with the professional support of staff and students from Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif., in support of the Astrobiology Small Payloads program under the Planetary Science Division of the Science Mission Directorate at NASA's Headquarters in Washington.

For information about the O/OREOS nanosatellite, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/smallsats/ooreos/main

For more information about NASA and agency programs, visit: http://www.nasa.gov

Return to Top

San Francisco: A federal jury on Tuesday ordered SAP AG to pay USD 1.3 billion to its archenemy, Oracle Corp, for stealing customer-support documents and software in a scheme to siphon off customers.

The verdict amounts to more than half of SAP's total profit last year and stunned the German software maker. It had only set aside USD 160 million for anticipated damages, and already paid USD 120 million of that to Oracle's lawyers.

The penalty is one of the largest on record for software piracy, and has the potential to reshape the business software landscape because of the extent of the damage to the pocketbook and reputation of one of its biggest players.

The verdict came after less than a full day of jury deliberations, and followed a three-week trial that turned into a Silicon Valley sideshow.

Stoking the drama were colorful public provocations by Oracle's outspoken CEO Larry Ellison, the looming possibility of a crushing verdict against a company that makes ubiquitous business software, and the specter of Silicon Valley's most elusive new celebrity, Hewlett-Packard Co CEO Leo Apotheker.

In the end, Oracle turned the trial into a double feature: a grinding attack on SAP, whose dominance in business applications is under assault from Oracle, and HP, another technology industry heavyweight with which Oracle shares a decades-long partnership that is now coursing with bad blood.

"For more than three years, SAP stole thousands of copies of Oracle software and then resold that software and related services to Oracle's own customers," Oracle co-president Safra Catz said after the verdict. "Right before the trial began, SAP admitted its guilt and liability. Then the trial made it clear that SAP's most senior executives were aware of the illegal activity from the very beginning."

Representatives of SAP, which is based in Walldorf, Germany, expressed disappointment and said the company will "pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary."

If the size of the punishment is ultimately allowed to stand, SAP's takeover in 2005 of a small software-support firm called TomorrowNow, which dragged the company into this mess, will end up costing SAP significantly more than the USD 10 million it paid for the acquisition.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation," SAP said in a statement. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TomorrowNow, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle. ... Our focus now is looking forward."

It's difficult to think of a more thorough legal victory for a software maker pursuing a copyright infringement claim, said Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman.

Besides collecting the damages, Oracle was able to publicly humiliate one of its biggest rivals while making another competitor, HP, squirm as it skirted questions concerning the whereabouts of its new CEO, Leo Apotheker. Oracle repeatedly tried to serve a subpoena on Apotheker, a former CEO and top sales executive at SAP, but couldn't find him within the jurisdiction of the Oakland federal court.

"Oracle has always dreamed big in this case and all their dreams came true," Goldman said. "It just turned out to be a real windfall for them."

SAP boxed itself into a corner by admitting it had trampled on Oracle's copyrights before the trial began. That left SAP with little do but plead for leniency and "it turned out to be a tough sales pitch," Goldman said. "This was just a bad case for SAP, up and down the board."

Oracle, based in Redwood Shores, is the leading maker of database software, which helps companies organize their information. Its aggressive expansion into business applications has forced Oracle into a faceoff with SAP, the leader in that space.

HP was a late addition to the dustup: After HP's former CEO, Mark Hurd, was ousted in August in the wake of a sexual harassment investigation, Oracle hired Hurd, HP hired Apotheker, and Ellison used both of HP's decisions as reasons to blast the company.

At the heart of Oracle's claim against SAP was a series of golden gotcha moments, in which Oracle noticed unusual behavior on secured websites it maintained to help customers solve problems, and uncovered a scheme in which an extraordinary amount of software and documents were being plundered and shipped back to TomorrowNow servers.

Oracle technicians spotted the scam by investigating accounts that were registered with clearly bad information (such as phone numbers like "777-7777") and user names seemingly connected to the SAP subsidiary (names such as "Tom Now").

SAP admitted that the now-shuttered subsidiary was secretly siphoning off instruction manuals and technical specifications for Oracle's software. But its lawyers argued that Oracle's claims of injury were exaggerated.

Oracle demanded billions based on its estimate of the value of its intellectual property and business it lost.

SAP posited that TomorrowNow actually wasn't that good at stealing customers from Oracle, and that SAP should only pay for money it made from the 358 customers it gained with the stolen data.

The jury sided with Oracle's argument that the value of its intellectual property is vast, and that aggressively enforcing copyrights is critical to nourishing a healthy technology industry and funding innovation.

SAP conceivably could ask the judge to lower the damages determined by the jury, but that is usually a difficult argument to win, Goldman said.

"The size of this verdict further reduces SAP's flexibility," he said.

SAP shares fell 67 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $48.02 in extended U.S. trading, after the verdict was announced. The stock had fallen 71 cents, or 1.4 percent, to finish the regular trading session at $48.69.

Oracle shares rose 37 cents, or 1.4 percent, to $27.56 in extended trading, after falling 86 cents, or 3.1 percent, to finish the regular session at $27.19.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO — The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they’re more familiar than ever, now that it’s hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation — and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? “Free.”

Whether it’s free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free, or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won’t see it that way.

“Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it’s shocking to me how much they’re willing to spend to get that something for nothing,” says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don’t stop to think.

“What I hear is ‘free,’ ” says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University’s business school in California. “For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that’s a lot of work.”

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to “up their game,” Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. “Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there’s nothing like the fear of missing out.”

In addition to “free” and “limited” offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount “clubs,” all kinds of coupons and “private” short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking “inside” deals to “friends and family.”

Don’t fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping — in person and online — and never letting down your guard.

“We are going to get the discount one way or another,” says Yarrow, calling discounts “standard” in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities — ways to do something special and define yourself — rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of comparisons with “regular” prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise “new,” “discounted” or “reduced” prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

“The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations,” says author William Poundstone. “We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price.... Instead, we’re very sensitive to contrast.”

Return to Top

OAKLAND, California (Reuters) SAP AG must pay Oracle Corp $1.3 billion for software theft, a jury decided, awarding damages that could be the largest-ever for copyright infringement.

The decision, by a U.S. district court jury in Oakland California, drew a gasp from the courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued their case for years. Oracle's shares rose 1.5 percent in after-hours trade, while those of SAP slipped 1.4 percent. SAP, Europe's top software maker, said it was disappointed by the verdict and might appeal. "We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

Attorneys for Oracle called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said, that would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," Boies said. SAP SAYS $40 MLN AT MOST At the outset of the trial, the German company acknowledged that its TomorrowNow subsidiary had wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files. With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much Oracle was owed in damages. SAP said no more $40 million, while Oracle at least $1.65 billion. "The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TN, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle," SAP said after the verdict was announced. "Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in U.S. legal history. "I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain." The three-week trial featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison -- whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" -- and President Safra Catz. SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

NO APOTHEKER

Testimony in the trial, which captivated Silicon Valley, wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current Hewlett-Packard CEO Leo Apotheker.

During the trial, Oracle linked Apotheker to the operations of TomorrowNow. But it did not appear to produce evidence to prove he knew of the theft.

Ellison has publicly charged Apotheker with overseeing an "industrial espionage scheme" to steal Oracle software. But both SAP and HP characterized the Apotheker issue as a sideshow and said Oracle offered no proof to back up its allegations.

The U.S. government is also conducting a criminal investigation into the events surrounding TomorrowNow but has not disclosed details. SAP said it has been cooperating with Department of Justice investigators. "They didn't split the baby did they? It's a big number and they decided fast," said Patrick Walravens at JMP Securities. "If you step back, I think it would've been difficult for any jury to deal with the fact that one company broke into another company's computer systems and just took so much stuff." "The jury had a choice of either using the fair market value of the license, or using a loss-profit calculation, and the fair market valuation tended to lead you to larger numbers, so that's obviously the direction they decided to go." The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Oracle USA, Inc., et al. v. SAP AG, et al, 07-1658.

(Addition reporting by Ritsuko Ando and Jim Finkle in New York; Editing by Edwin Chan and Steve Orlofsky)

Return to Top

SAP AG must pay Oracle Subscribe to The Economic Monitor Subscribe to The Economic Monitor to get the day's most relevant news, data and anlaysis . Sample

The decision, by a U.S. district court jury in Oakland California

Oracle's shares rose 1.5 percent in after-hours trade, while those of SAP slipped 1.4 percent.

SAP, Europe's top software maker, said it was disappointed by the verdict and might appeal.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict. Attorneys for Oracle called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said, that would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," Boies said.

SAP SAYS $40 MLN AT MOST

At the outset of the trial, the German company acknowledged that its TomorrowNow subsidiary had wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files.

With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much Oracle was owed in damages. SAP said no more $40 million, while Oracle at least $1.65 billion.

"The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TN, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle," SAP said after the verdict was announced.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in U.S. legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain."

The three-week trial featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison -- whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" -- and President Safra Catz. SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow. Testimony in the trial, which captivated Silicon Valley, wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current Hewlett-Packard CEO Leo Apotheker.

During the trial, Oracle linked Apotheker to the operations of TomorrowNow. But it did not appear to produce evidence to prove he knew of the theft.

Ellison has publicly charged Apotheker with overseeing an "industrial espionage scheme" to steal Oracle software. But both SAP and HP

The U.S. government is also conducting a criminal investigation into the events surrounding TomorrowNow but has not disclosed details. SAP said it has been cooperating with "They didn't split the baby did they? It's a big number and they decided fast," said Patrick Walravens at JMP Securities. "If you step back, I think it would've been difficult for any jury to deal with the fact that one company broke into another company's computer systems and just took so much stuff."

"The jury had a choice of either using the fair market value of the license, or using a loss-profit calculation, and the fair market valuation tended to lead you to larger numbers, so that's obviously the direction they decided to go."

The case in U.S. District Court

(Addition reporting by Ritsuko Ando and Jim Finkle in New York

Return to Top

OAKLAND, Calif: SAP AG (SAPG.DE) must pay Oracle Corp (ORCL.O) $1.3 billion in damages for software theft, a jury verdict on Tuesday, Nov 23 that marked a victory for the U.S. company and ranked among the largest-ever payouts for copyright infringement.

The decision at the close of the sensational trial sent shares in Oracle up 1.5 percent in after-hours trade. The verdict drew a gasp from a packed courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued their case for years.

Europe's top software maker, which said it was disappointed by the verdict and may appeal, had previously accepted liability for its TomorrowNow subsidiary having wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files. But it had estimated it owed no more than about $40 million in compensation .

Oracle had sought at least $1.65 billion in damages.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called among the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in U.S. legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. they have to climb an even steeper mountain."

The two companies, which dominate the global market for software that helps businesses run more efficiently, this month began slugging it out in an Oakland, California courtroom, to determine the amount of damages.

The three-week trial featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison -- whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" -- and President Safra Catz. SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary" SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

"The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TN, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle."

NO APOTHEKER

Testimony in the trial, which captivated Silicon Valley, wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current Hewlett-Packard Co CEO Leo Apotheker. - Reuters

Return to Top

SAP must pay Oracle $US1.3 billion ($1.33 billion) for software theft, a jury decided, awarding damages that could be the largest-ever for copyright infringement.

The decision, by a US district court jury in Oakland California, drew a gasp from the courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued their case for years.

Oracle's shares rose 1.5 per cent in after-hours trade, while those of SAP slipped 1.4 per cent.

SAP, Europe's top software maker, said it was disappointed by the verdict and might appeal.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

Attorneys for Oracle called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said, that would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," Boies said.

At the outset of the trial, the German company acknowledged that its TomorrowNow subsidiary had wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files.

With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much Oracle was owed in damages. SAP said no more than $US40 million, while Oracle at least $US1.65 billion.

"The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TN, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle," SAP said after the verdict was announced.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in US legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain."

The three-week trial featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle chief executive Larry Ellison - whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" - and President Safra Catz. SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

Testimony in the trial, which captivated Silicon Valley, wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current Hewlett-Packard CEO Leo Apotheker.

During the trial, Oracle linked Apotheker to the operations of TomorrowNow. But it did not appear to produce evidence to prove he knew of the theft.

Ellison has publicly charged Apotheker with overseeing an "industrial espionage scheme" to steal Oracle software. But both SAP and HP characterised the Apotheker issue as a sideshow and said Oracle offered no proof to back up its allegations.

The US government is also conducting a criminal investigation into the events surrounding TomorrowNow but has not disclosed details. SAP said it has been cooperating with Department of Justice investigators.

"They didn't split the baby did they? It's a big number and they decided fast," said Patrick Walravens at JMP Securities. "If you step back, I think it would've been difficult for any jury to deal with the fact that one company broke into another company's computer systems and just took so much stuff."

"The jury had a choice of either using the fair market value of the license, or using a loss-profit calculation, and the fair market valuation tended to lead you to larger numbers, so that's obviously the direction they decided to go."

Return to Top

* Award dwarfs SAP's estimate, expert calls it home run

* Oracle shares climb 1.5 percent

* Jury decides on $1.3 bln damages to Oracle (Adds expert comment, SAP's statement, share action)

By Dan Levine

OAKLAND, Calif., Nov 23 (Reuters) - SAP AG must pay Oracle Corp $1.3 billion for software theft, a jury decided, awarding damages that could be the largest-ever for copyright infringement.

The decision, by a U.S. district court jury in Oakland California, drew a gasp from the courtroom and prompted hugs and handshakes among Oracle's legal team, which has pursued their case for years.

Oracle's shares rose 1.5 percent in after-hours trade, while those of SAP slipped 1.4 percent.

SAP, Europe's top software maker, said it was disappointed by the verdict and might appeal.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," SAP said in a statement in response to the verdict.

Attorneys for Oracle called the verdict the largest ever for a copyright infringement case.

While SAP could appeal, Oracle attorney David Boies said, that would raise the possibility of a retrial. "If I were SAP, and I'm not, but if I were SAP, I'm not sure I would want to have another trial," Boies said.

SAP SAYS $40 MLN AT MOST

At the outset of the trial, the German company acknowledged that its TomorrowNow subsidiary had wrongfully downloaded millions of Oracle's files.

With the admission of liability, the issue before the jury was how much Oracle was owed in damages. SAP said no more $40 million, while Oracle at least $1.65 billion.

"The mark of a leading company is the way it handles its mistakes. As stated in court, we regret the actions of TN, we have accepted liability, and have been willing to fairly compensate Oracle," SAP said after the verdict was announced.

"Home run!" Eric Goldman, an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, wrote in an email. He expected SAP to appeal what he called one of the 10 or 20 largest jury verdicts in U.S. legal history.

"I would expect there to be lots more shenanigans. but now SAP is truly on the run. They have to climb an even steeper mountain."

The three-week trial featured testimony from such top executives as Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison -- whom SAP's lawyers accused of plucking damages numbers "out of the air" -- and President Safra Catz. SAP co-CEO Bill McDermott also took the stand and apologized to Oracle for the events surrounding TomorrowNow.

NO APOTHEKER

Testimony in the trial, which captivated Silicon Valley, wrapped up last week without a hoped-for appearance by former SAP chief and current Hewlett-Packard CEO Leo Apotheker.

During the trial, Oracle linked Apotheker to the operations of TomorrowNow. But it did not appear to produce evidence to prove he knew of the theft.

Ellison has publicly charged Apotheker with overseeing an "industrial espionage scheme" to steal Oracle software. But both SAP and HP characterized the Apotheker issue as a sideshow and said Oracle offered no proof to back up its allegations.

The U.S. government is also conducting a criminal investigation into the events surrounding TomorrowNow but has not disclosed details. SAP said it has been cooperating with Department of Justice investigators.

"They didn't split the baby did they? It's a big number and they decided fast," said Patrick Walravens at JMP Securities. "If you step back, I think it would've been difficult for any jury to deal with the fact that one company broke into another company's computer systems and just took so much stuff."

"The jury had a choice of either using the fair market value of the license, or using a loss-profit calculation, and the fair market valuation tended to lead you to larger numbers, so that's obviously the direction they decided to go."

The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Oracle USA, Inc., et al. v. SAP AG, et al, 07-1658. (Addition reporting by Ritsuko Ando and Jim Finkle in New York; Editing by Edwin Chan and Steve Orlofsky) (dan.levine@thomsonreuters.com; +1 415 348-4726)

Return to Top

It's a question the courts have been grappling with for more than century: How much control can copyright owners exercise over copies of their works?

Back in 1908, the Supreme Court rejected a book publisher's attempt to control the resale of its books. But just a few months ago, the 9th Circuit distinguished that decision and upheld a software publisher's attempt to control the resale of its software.� The 9th Circuit panel held, in Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., that simply by adopting the right legal terminology, copyright owners can license their works instead of sell them—and the resulting licenses can limit what anyone, even third parties, may do with the works.

The ruling thus upholds the clickwrap and shrinkwrap licenses that software companies routinely require users to accept. "What this ruling means to software companies is that they can continue business as usual," says Suzanne Bell, a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. But the ruling may do far more than that. It may enable all copyright owners to impose tough new restrictions on customers' use of the works they have paid for. "This case could potentially have profound implications," says Eric Goldman, associate professor at Santa Clara University School of Law. "Copyright owners could use it to control the resale of books, movies, music and other copyrighted works. They could eliminate the resale market altogether." He adds, "This [ruling] could create all kinds of opportunities for copyright owner mischief. I couldn't even begin to imagine all the things copyright owners could do because they are pretty crafty."A Sale Isn't a Sale

When it comes to copyrighted works, a sale isn't simply a sale. When someone purchases a book, a music CD or a videogame cartridge, the purchaser's right to use this item is limited; the copyright owner can still prevent unlawful copying of the underlying copyrighted work.

The sale, however, does curtail some of the copyright owner's rights in the purchased item. For instance, the copyright owner loses the right to control further distribution of that particular item.

This limit on copyright was first enunciated in the Supreme Court's 1908 ruling in Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus. The copyright owner in that case, Bobbs-Merrill, tried to set a minimum sale price for its copyrighted novel. It placed a notice on the book's copyright page stating that dealers were authorized to sell the book for $1 per copy, and "a sale at a less price will be treated as an infringement of the copyright." R.H. Macy & Co. purchased some of these books from a wholesaler and resold them for 89 cents each. Bobbs-Merrill sued the store

for infringement.

The Supreme Court found for R.H. Macy, ruling that copyright law did not give a copyright owner the right "to qualify the title of a future purchaser." This was the birth of the "first sale doctrine," which is now codified in Section 109 of the Copyright Act.

But according to the 9th Circuit, Autodesk Inc. has found a way around the first sale doctrine—by avoiding any sales. Lease Loophole

Autodesk makes AutoCAD software, a popular computer-aided design program. Each copy of AutoCAD comes with a license agreement, which customers must accept in order to install the software. This agreement specifies that Autodesk retains title to all copies and that the customer has only a nonexclusive and nontransferable license to use the software. The agreement also restricts what users can do with the software. It forbids them, for instance, from transferring the software without Autodesk's prior consent or using the software outside the Western Hemisphere. If a customer violates any of the restrictions, the license is terminated.

Despite this, two AutoCAD customers resold their copies of the software to Timothy Vernor. Vernor, who makes his living by selling used items on eBay, in turn resold some of these copies online.

Autodesk objected to Vernor's online sales, asserting they constituted copyright infringement. Vernor, who had never opened the boxes of software or agreed to the license terms, claimed his actions were protected under the first sale doctrine—once Autodesk sold its software to a customer, the company couldn't control any resales. Vernor went to court, seeking a declaratory judgment that he was legally allowed to resell the software.

The district court ruled in Vernor's favor, holding, among other things, that his sales were non-infringing under the first sale doctrine.

The 9th Circuit reversed. The key issue before the court was whether the software was sold or leased—because if it was leased, the first sale doctrine did not apply.

Put to the Test

Prior to Vernor, the 9th Circuit had used two conflicting tests to determine when software is leased. MAI Sys. Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc. and its progeny basically hold that if a contract stated software was leased, it was leased. An older case, United States v. Wise, holds that in order to determine whether software was sold or leased, a court must examine the transaction holistically. The court must consider factors such as whether the party acquiring the software makes a single payment, the extent of contractual use restrictions, and most importantly, whether the software maker has the ability to regain possession of the copy. "Vernor created a new three-part test rather than adopt either of the two earlier lines of cases," Bell says. The panel stated that "a software user is a licensee rather than an owner of a copy where the copyright owner (1) specifies that the user is granted a license; (2) significantly restricts the user's ability to transfer the software; and (3) imposes notable use restrictions." In the wake of this ruling, software companies "will take a pretty close look at their licenses to make sure they fall within this three-part test," says Bell. Other copyright owners, too, may seek to profit from this ruling and to license their works instead of sell them (see "No Limits"). The panel's ruling may not last, however. On Oct. 1, Vernor requested the decision be reviewed en banc.

Moreover, other 9th Circuit panels are handling two more cases that address the same basic issue as Vernor—when can a copyright owner use a license to impose restrictions on use of a work? "We'll have to see all three rulings to see the net effect," Goldman says. "Ninth Circuit panels really struggle about how much deference to give to other panel rulings. Especially on Internet issues, 9th Circuit panels tend to flip-flop pretty quickly."

Return to Top

In San Jose, diversity is king, even on the ice. With hockey season about to begin, writer Elisa Demuro profiles San Jose Shark star Devin Setoguchi, a Japanese-Canadian playing in a league that features few players of color.

The puck is fiercely passed back and forth from player to player as the blades of skates skin the surface of the ice, with one goal in mind — to score. Yes, it's finally hockey season, and San Jose is swarming with eager Sharks fans ready to cheer their team to victory. San Jose has many unique features, but one that many fail to recognize in a sports context is that it is has an interesting cultural variety. “The Bay Area is so diverse and it's good they have that connection to culture,” says Ivan Markov, an active Sharks fan who writes a blog about the team. Markov moved to the United States from Russia and is overwhelmed by the variety of ethnic backgrounds in the Bay Area community. In comparison, throughout the NHL there is not much diversity throughout sports teams.

Devin Setoguchi, a 23-year-old Japanese-Canadian plays right wing for the San Jose Sharks and is one of only nine active Asian NHL players. Setoguchi is the only Japanese player for the Sharks this season. “I take pride in my background in the fact that there are not that many Japanese players,” he says confidently.

Setoguchi's mother is Canadian and his father is Japanese. Both have always been supportive and encouraging of his dream to be an NHL player. Setoguchi also talks about his grandparents and how they were sent to internment camps in Taber, Alberta, during WWII. His grandparents' determination has inspired Setoguchi to succeed. “I owe it to them for the reason I play,” he says. Similar to most players, he worked hard to achieve his ultimate dream of playing for the NHL, in which he was drafted in 2005.

The fact that the team has even one player of Japanese descent is surprising to some. Setoguchi was talented enough to get drafted at a young age. “He seems like one of the fastest players in the NHL,” says Chris Amaral, a hockey player and die-hard Sharks fan of 20 years.

Many fans are unaware of the fact that there are so few hockey players of Asian descent currently playing for the NHL. “I didn't know there were so little, but I think the diversity is pretty cool,” says Amaral.

Chris Beckford-Tseu, Yataka Fukufuji, Paul Kariya, Steve Kariya, Jonathan Matsumoto, Richard Park, Raymond Sawada, and Brandon Yip are the other eight players of Asian descent currently playing for the NHL. Most of these nine Asian players are half Caucasian.

“The Sharks are simply looking for the best possible team regardless of their background and their culture,” says Scott Emmert, director of media relation for the Sharks. This statement pertains to all teams in the NHL. Recruiting players isn't really about the culture they bring to the team but rather their level of skill on the ice, he says.

Although the array of cultures may be irrelevant to the team's success, members of the Asian community and Sharks fans in general are greatly appreciative of the fact there are players who represent their culture in the NHL. “I think its good overall to see more Asians playing in the NHL, particularly for a city like San Jose that has strong ties to Asian communities and cultures…” says Ian MacCauley, a Sharks fan and member of the Asian community.

Whether the team is culturally mixed or not, the team simply wants to become champions. Each player regardless of their cultural descent brings different talent to the team, which makes each of them valuable.

Elisa Delmuro is a student at Santa Clara University and a contributing writer to SJ Beez.

Return to Top

Philadelphia man sued twice over alleged copyright infringements (11-19-2010)

Two more website operators face Righthaven copyright lawsuits (11-18-2010)

Righthaven settles with Sharron Angle over R-J story posting (11-17-2010)

Righthaven seeks to dismiss suit over posting of R-J story (11-16-2010)

Free speech group files counterclaim against copyright enforcement firm (10-30-2010)

Righthaven gets legal win in copyright lawsuit campaign (10-28-2010)

Righthaven files 2 copyright lawsuits, settles 3 (10-27-2010)

Six more website operators facing Righthaven copyright lawsuits (10-21-2010)

Righthaven defendant wins first lawsuit dismissal motion (10-20-2010)

Righthaven files, settles more copyright lawsuits (10-13-2010)

Sharron Angle signals interest in settling copyright lawsuit (10-9-2010)

Attorneys accuse Righthaven of settlement shakedown (10-8-2010)

Two more website operators sued for copyright infringement (10-7-2010)

Seven more defendants settle Righthaven copyright lawsuits (10-6-2010)

Group plans to sue over right to sell insurance to nonprofits (10-6-2010)

Nevada Democratic Party settles copyright lawsuit (10-2-2010)

Righthaven reaches another copyright settlement over R-J website content (9-30-2010)

Amid new criticism, Righthaven sues additional website operators (9-29-2010)

R-J owner faces counterclaim in copyright lawsuit campaign (9-28-2010)

5 more website operators sued over R-J copyrights (9-28-2010)

Attorneys attack Review-Journal copyright suit arrangement (9-27-2010)

Executive says suing over R-J copyrights worth the negative publicity (9-26-2010)

Lawyers argue R-J stories on Web aren't protected by copyright (9-25-2010)

Attorney: Righthaven copyright suits a free speech threat (9-23-2010)

Observers note uncertainty over future of Righthaven/R-J copyright suits (9-21-2010)

A federal judge in Las Vegas is examining whether another Righthaven online copyright infringement lawsuit should be dismissed on fair use grounds.

Righthaven LLC is the Las Vegas Review-Journal's copyright enforcement partner that since March has sued at least 172 website operators and bloggers throughout North America in federal court in Las Vegas, charging material from the Review-Journal was posted on their sites without authorization.

The Review-Journal and its owner, Stephens Media LLC, say the lawsuits, typically filed without warning, are necessary to deter infringements of Review-Journal material. Righthaven files the suits after detecting infringements and then obtaining copyrights to the stories at issue from Stephens Media.

Critics say the lawsuit campaign amounts to a settlement shakedown effort involving frivolous suits that are cheaper to settle than fight. They note most of the newspaper industry tries to resolve copyright problems out of court before resorting to litigation.

In one of the Righthaven lawsuits involving Realty One Group Inc., U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks on Oct. 19 dismissed the suit against defendant real estate agent Michael Nelson, saying his posting of the first eight sentences of a 30-sentence story amounted to fair use of the Review-Journal story.

Righthaven settled with Nelson so it can't appeal that ruling. But Righthaven expects a similar fair use ruling from Hicks involving codefendant Realty One Group, and plans at that time to appeal it to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

In the meantime, U.S. District Judge James Mahan has ordered Righthaven to show cause why another of its lawsuits shouldn't be dismissed on fair use grounds.

That case involves the Center for Intercultural Organizing of Portland, Ore., which was sued by Righthaven in August after an entire 33-paragraph Review-Journal story about Las Vegas immigrants from June 28 was posted on the center's website, crediting the Review-Journal.

The nonprofit says it was founded by Portland-area immigrants and refugees to combat widespread anti-Muslim sentiment after 9/11. It now works to strengthen immigrant and refugee communities through education, civic engagement, organizing and mobilization.

Mahan didn't elaborate in his show cause order on the fair use issue, and Righthaven hasn't yet responded to the order.

The order came as a surprise as it was Mahan, not the defendant, who directly raised the fair use issue.

Attorneys for the Center for Intercultural Organizing with the Las Vegas law firm of Olson, Cannon, Gormley & Desruisseaux have so far focused their defense on a jurisdictional issue. They say the Nevada court doesn't have jurisdiction in the dispute since the Center for Intercultural Organizing doesn't do business in Nevada and doesn't try to serve a Nevada audience with its website.

The attorneys for the Center for Intercultural Organizing, in their responses, have also been critical of Righthaven's litigation strategy.

"Plaintiff was solely established to operate under a business model in which it trolls the Internet to locate articles it believes originated from the Las Vegas Review-Journal website without the express consent of the copyright holder," attorneys James Olson and Michael Stoberski wrote in a September filing. "In most cases, the complaints are filed against people or organizations who do not profit in any way from posting such articles, that are already offered for free on the Las Vegas Review-Journal website. Rather than issue any type of cease and desist letters, plaintiffs immediately file suit and attempt to extract settlements from the defendants."

Noting the Center for Intercultural Organizing is a nonprofit that does not charge subscription fees or derive any income from its website; and the center's efforts are directed solely at Portland residents, the attorneys wrote: "To subject a nonprofit organization to the jurisdiction of Nevada under these facts would be unreasonable."

They also argued the Review-Journal "allows articles to be copied and pasted easily from its website."

"Moreover, it encourages its readers to send articles to third parties. Through these actions, the original holder has granted its readers an implicit license to re-publish its articles," the center's attorneys wrote.

Righthaven attorneys, however, insisted in a court filing that the court in Nevada has jurisdiction as: "The defendants committed blatant copyright infringement of a Righthaven-owned literary work which clearly derives from a Nevada-based daily publication and is of specific concern to Nevada residents."

Hicks' ruling in the Realty One case didn't set a binding precedent for the other Nevada federal judges presiding over Righthaven cases. But Righthaven observer Eric Goldman said Mahan's order to show cause in the Intercultural Organizing case likely resulted from Mahan becoming aware of Hicks' ruling.

"It could be that the judge already assumes the defendants made a fair use and is wondering if Righthaven has anything persuasive to convince him otherwise. More likely, the judge is aware of the Realty One opinion and wants Righthaven to help explain how this case differs. Either way, this is not a good development for Righthaven; but if it's the latter, it's not necessarily bad as Righthaven can distinguish the situations on several grounds," said Goldman, associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law in California and director of the High Tech Law Institute there.

"Even so, the fact the judge raised this issue unprompted is a sign that judges want to clear their dockets of low-merit cases, even if they have to jumpstart that inquiry themselves," Goldman added.

Return to Top

Melbourne Journal of International Law, Vol. 11-1: Opinio Juris Online Symposium
We are delighted to introduce the second online symposium issue of the Opinio Juris. This week will feature three pieces published in our most recent issue issue 11(1). The issue was generalist in its focus and saw articles on topics as diverse as the law of space tourism, the right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses in international criminal courts and the nature of legal inquiry in the Mekong River basin. Three of the authors published in 11(1) will be contributing to this online symposium. Ramesh Thakur, Distinguished Fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation, and Professor of Political Science at the University of Waterloo, Canada. Professor Thakur's article, ' Law, Legitimacy and United Nations', identifies a gap between law and legitimacy in the practice of the United Nations and posits that this is a serious challenge to the authority of the Thakur detects this 'legitimacy deficit ' with respect to a number of areas. He points to the difficulties with international sanctions regimes, the concerns regarding the structure of the Security Council and questions relating to the motivations underpinning humanitarian intervention, all of which challenge the claims to universality and legitimate authority made by the United Nations. The respondent will be Director of the United Nations University Office at the United Nations in New York. Steven Freeland, Associate Head of School and Professor of International Law at the University of Western Australia School of Law. Professor Freeland's article, entitled ' Fly Me To The Moon: How Will International Law Cope with Space Tourism? 'The Laws of War and the Fight Against Somali Piracy: Combatants or Criminals?' argues that the laws of armed conflict are prima facie inapplicable to the current counter-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden off Somalia, and further, that the application of these principles would be counter-productive or question begging given that there is already a clearly established framework for law-enforcement operations at sea . Guilfoyle also examines some issues relating to the applicability of the laws of armed conflict to civil war insurgents who take to the seas to overthrow their government. The respondent will be Beth Van Schaack, Associate Professor at Santa Clara University School of Law and contributor to IntLawGrrls. here. If you would like any further information about the Journal, please contact the Editors at law-mjil [at] unimelb [dot] edu [dot] au
No Related Post

November 22nd, 2010 - 5:53 AM EDT |

Trackback Link |

http://opiniojuris.org/2010/11/22/melbourne-journal-of-international-law-vol-11-1-opinio-juris-online-symposium/

email (will not be published) *

Gotta say, even though I write about issues of self-determination, secession, and statehood, I didn't expect to read this on the front page of the Arts and Leisure section of the Sunday New York Times: At a glance it looked like any small-town fair, with smoke wafting from the barbecue, families gathering around picnic tables, music percolating over loudspeakers and doting parents trailing after happy toddlers in front of white tents hawking brightly colored T-shirts and knickknacks. But the Ghjurnate Internaziunale di Corti (the International Days of Corte) were hardly fun and games. This is a wild tale of self-execution (which, I'm fairly sure, is the first time anyone has used the adjective "wild" to describe the self-execution concept). For years, the Bush Administration sought to get the U.
Human Rights Watch's Tom Malinowski and Ben Wittes -- whom, for the record, I consider a friend -- have been having an interesting and useful dialogue about targeted killing. Here is how Malinowski lays out HRW's position: Our position on targeted killing is that its use can be legally justified so long as it is limited to situations involving a combatant on a genuine battlefield or its equivalent beyond the reach of law enforcement, or in a law enforcement situation when the threat to life is imminent and there is no alternative. Last week I had the privilege to attend an investment arbitration conference and FDI moot court competition at Pepperdine. Kudos to Murdoch University of Australia for winning the competition and my alma mater NYU for winning the highest overall ranking.

Return to Top

Sydney Crosby of Team Canada skates during warm-up before their men's hockey game against Norway at the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics, February 16, 2010.

Photograph by: Shaun Best, REUTERS

The theory that red or black uniforms give athletes an aggressive edge has long been claimed in sports research, with most of it citing the hues' evolutionary and cultural associations with such things as dominance and power.

But Team Canada might want to hold the high-fives, with a comprehensive new study putting that theory on thin ice — at least in the context of professional hockey.

Reporting in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, researchers say no matter how they measured — penalty minutes, number of severe penalties, team wins — there wasn't a shred of meaningful evidence that black or red jerseys lead to a spike in aggressive behaviour, or even perceived aggression, among National Hockey League players.

"For more than 20 years, people have been talking about this idea that wearing black causes athletes to act more aggressively. Then, more recently, there's been talk that red might have the same effect," says co-author Jerry Burger.

"But when we actually do a controlled study, we don't find any evidence for those claims at all — which is kind of too bad, since it's a really interesting suggestion."

Between 2008 and 2010, 326 NHL games were identified in which the home team played the same opponent within a single season: once wearing a black or red uniform, once wearing a uniform of another colour. This naturally occurring experiment was made possible by the NHL's decision to let teams wear a third jersey design for a limited number of home games.

For each pair of games, researchers compared total penalty minutes, number of severe penalties (a composite of such violent infractions as roughing, fighting and game misconduct), number of games that became atypically aggressive, and team success.

Across all categories, Burger says the differences between the two jersey conditions were "so small that we can't draw any conclusions."

The study is thought to be the first to eliminate or control for what researchers describe as the "severe limitations that plagued earlier investigations."

"It's not that previous findings about colour and aggression weren't real. Being able to say that one caused the other is the hang-up," says Burger, a psychology professor at Santa Clara University.

With black, the speculation has been that athletes pick up on cultural associations between the hue and badness, subconsciously altering their behaviour accordingly. With red, an evolutionary angle has been proposed, with scientists noting links in the animal kingdom between crimson and male dominance.

That one of the most high-profile of these earlier studies drew its data from the 1970s and early '80s may be a factor, suggests a Canadian hockey historian, noting that the game has since seen sharp declines in major brawling.

"Intimidation in the NHL used to be a much larger factor than it is today," says Earl Zukerman of McGill University in Montreal. "I think if you applied the (current) study to NHL fight data from the 1970s and earlier, you may come up with entirely different findings, as that was arguably an era where fighting and other roughhouse tactics were almost encouraged."

Nicholas Holt, a University of Alberta sports psychologist, suggests the study is a call to accountability. Although it's easy to pin aggression on uniform colour, he says it makes more sense to take a hard look at team leadership.

"If a coach encourages very physical and aggressive play, then athletes will likely follow his or her instructions," says Holt, associate professor in the faculty of physical education. "We really need to think about the messages conveyed by coaches, and in youth sport parents, in order to understand athletes' behaviours."

mharris@postmedia.com

Professional Hockey

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Wall Street Journal

Professional Hockey

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Sydney Crosby of Team Canada skates during warm-up before their men's hockey game against Norway at the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics, February 16, 2010.

Return to Top

Sydney Crosby of Team Canada skates during warm-up before their men's hockey game against Norway at the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics, February 16, 2010.

Photograph by: Shaun Best, REUTERS

The theory that red or black uniforms give athletes an aggressive edge has long been claimed in sports research, with most of it citing the hues' evolutionary and cultural associations with such things as dominance and power.

But Team Canada might want to hold the high-fives, with a comprehensive new study putting that theory on thin ice — at least in the context of professional hockey.

Reporting in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, researchers say no matter how they measured — penalty minutes, number of severe penalties, team wins — there wasn't a shred of meaningful evidence that black or red jerseys lead to a spike in aggressive behaviour, or even perceived aggression, among National Hockey League players.

"For more than 20 years, people have been talking about this idea that wearing black causes athletes to act more aggressively. Then, more recently, there's been talk that red might have the same effect," says co-author Jerry Burger.

"But when we actually do a controlled study, we don't find any evidence for those claims at all — which is kind of too bad, since it's a really interesting suggestion."

Between 2008 and 2010, 326 NHL games were identified in which the home team played the same opponent within a single season: once wearing a black or red uniform, once wearing a uniform of another colour. This naturally occurring experiment was made possible by the NHL's decision to let teams wear a third jersey design for a limited number of home games.

For each pair of games, researchers compared total penalty minutes, number of severe penalties (a composite of such violent infractions as roughing, fighting and game misconduct), number of games that became atypically aggressive, and team success.

Across all categories, Burger says the differences between the two jersey conditions were "so small that we can't draw any conclusions."

The study is thought to be the first to eliminate or control for what researchers describe as the "severe limitations that plagued earlier investigations."

"It's not that previous findings about colour and aggression weren't real. Being able to say that one caused the other is the hang-up," says Burger, a psychology professor at Santa Clara University.

With black, the speculation has been that athletes pick up on cultural associations between the hue and badness, subconsciously altering their behaviour accordingly. With red, an evolutionary angle has been proposed, with scientists noting links in the animal kingdom between crimson and male dominance.

That one of the most high-profile of these earlier studies drew its data from the 1970s and early '80s may be a factor, suggests a Canadian hockey historian, noting that the game has since seen sharp declines in major brawling.

"Intimidation in the NHL used to be a much larger factor than it is today," says Earl Zukerman of McGill University in Montreal. "I think if you applied the (current) study to NHL fight data from the 1970s and earlier, you may come up with entirely different findings, as that was arguably an era where fighting and other roughhouse tactics were almost encouraged."

Nicholas Holt, a University of Alberta sports psychologist, suggests the study is a call to accountability. Although it's easy to pin aggression on uniform colour, he says it makes more sense to take a hard look at team leadership.

"If a coach encourages very physical and aggressive play, then athletes will likely follow his or her instructions," says Holt, associate professor in the faculty of physical education. "We really need to think about the messages conveyed by coaches, and in youth sport parents, in order to understand athletes' behaviours."

mharris@postmedia.com

Professional Hockey

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Dallas Morning News

Wall Street Journal

Sydney Crosby of Team Canada skates during warm-up before their men's hockey game against Norway at the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics, February 16, 2010.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO - The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation - and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free, or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing," says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,'" says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to "up their game," Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. "Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping - in person and online - and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or another," says Yarrow, calling discounts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities - ways to do something special and define yourself - rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of comparisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," ''discounted" or "reduced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations," says author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price.... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smart phones, which retailers initially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a reality check inside a store, says Poundstone, author of "The Myth of Fair Value" and other books.

All this is part of businesses "systematically" removing barriers that might prevent people from making impulsive purchases, says David Bell, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he says, is charging a membership fee - think of warehouse club memberships or Amazon.com's flat annual shipping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell says. "But if I'm encountering Amazon Prime or a situation like Walmart is doing - all shipping for free - people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend - to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regularly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 extra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he says.

To avoid being taken in, research the product itself, especially in the case of items like mattresses or appliances, where the variations among models are almost infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given features are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something really valuable," says Robert Schindler, a marketing professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO -- The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, ex­clusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation -- and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free ship­ping, buy-one-get-one-free, or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to re­ceive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're will­ing to spend to get that some­thing for nothing," said Kit Yarrow, psychology depart­ment chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francis­co.

Most people probably real­ize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,'" said Ed McQuarrie, an asso­ciate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to cal­culate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, re­tailers had to "up their game," Yarrow said.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and brand­ing have long carried, she said.

"Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wal­let out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote dis­count "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawk­ing "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items nor­mally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping -- in person and online -- and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or anoth­er," said Yarrow, calling dis­counts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities -- ways to do something special and de­fine yourself -- rather than rational choices, Yarrow said.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of com­parisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," "discounted" or "re­duced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physi­cal sensations," said author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price. ... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smart phones, which retailers ini­tially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a real­ity check inside a store, said Poundstone, author of "The Myth of Fair Value" and oth­er books.

All this is part of business­es "systematically" remov­ing barriers that might pre­vent people from making impulsive purchases, said David Bell, a marketing pro­fessor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he said, is charging a membership fee -- think of warehouse club memberships or Ama­zon.com's flat annual ship­ping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell said. "But if I'm encounter­ing Amazon Prime or a situ­ation like Walmart is doing -- all shipping for free -- people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend -- to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regu­larly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 ex­tra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he said.

To avoid being taken in, research the product itself, especially in the case of items like mattresses or ap­pliances, where the varia­tions among models are al­most infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given fea­tures are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something re­ally valuable," said Robert Schindler, a marketing pro­fessor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

Return to Top

I paid off my mortgage a few months back. I can give you more reasons that was a bad idea than I can reasons it was a good one. (And MoneyWatch explained last year why you shouldn't pre-pay your mortgage.) But like my colleague Stacey Bradford, I took off my financial wizard robes for the day and paid if off anyway. Was that smart? Or just chicken? You decide.

Let's start with the reasons not to do what I did.

You need the liquidity. You should have enough cash in a safe, readily accessible account like a money fund or bank account to support your family for at least six months. Money tied up in your house isn't safe and it sure isn't readily accessible. Liquidity wasn't an issue for me, but if paying down your mortgage would bring you below the six-month cash threshold, don't do what I did. Use the cash you'd be applying to the mortgage to build up your cash reserve instead.

You could probably do better investing the money elsewhere. A 30-year fixed-rate mortgage today costs less than 4.5%-ridiculously cheap by historic standards. Since mortgage interest is deductible, let's call it 3.0% after federal and state taxes.  So paying off the mortgage is the equivalent of earning a measly 3% after taxes. Couldn't you do better than that by keeping the mortgage and investing in stocks?

You might.  But is it even necessary to mention you might also do a lot worse?  “Consciously or not, when you own both a mortgage and a stock portfolio, you're acting like a hedge fund,” says Brad Barber, a professor of finance at the University of California, Davis, Graduate School of Management.  “You're playing the market with borrowed money.” When you put it that way…

The monthly return from paying down the mortgage, on the other hand, is a sure thing. So the fair comparison is not with stocks but with other close-to-sure things, like Treasury bonds or CDs. That makes the mortgage payoff look a little less dumb. I know of only a handful of CDs paying 3% before taxes. Treasury bonds don't even come close.

The one exception would be when the saving alternative is a 401(k). There the company match, which might typically be 50% if your company offers one, can make the return on a conservative stable-value fund competitive with the payoff you get from wiping out your mortgage. Where else are you going to get an immediate 50% return, guaranteed? Of course, if you're already contributing as much to your 401(k) as the company will match (and you are, aren't you?) that option isn't available.

You expect inflation. A fixed-rate mortgage is a good hedge against inflation. You pay the lender a fixed number of dollars, even as inflation makes each dollar less valuable and puts more dollars in your paycheck. If you expect hyper-inflation the last thing you'd want to do is pay off your mortgage–as long as you were sure you'd keep your job.

You expect housing to rebound. If housing prices bounce back, having a mortgage boosts your equity even faster than the market lifts the price of your house. Say you have a $500,000 house with a $400,000 mortgage. Over the next five years, assume the price rises to $600,000. Your home has appreciated by 20%, but your equity has doubled, from $100,000 to $200,000. It's the magic formula that minted millionaires by the bushel during the real estate bubble.

The problem is, while inflation and a housing rebound may seem likely sooner or later, they're no sure thing.  Deflation has ruled the Japanese economy for two decades and real estate is still drastically below its peak in 1990. It's a long shot to happen here, but would you bet the house on it, if you had the choice?

So why did I do it? The logical explanation is that I had enough risk in my portfolio, and as for the low-risk portion of my money, it made no sense  to borrow at 3.0% after taxes and invest it at 2.2% in, say, Treasuries.  That would be acting like a very dumb hedge fund.

But there's a less rational reason too. Like a lot of post-crisis Americans, I've had it with debt. I don't want to be beholden to a bank and in an uncertain world I'd rather not have the certain obligation of a mortgage payment every month.

I asked Meir Statman, a behavioral finance professor at Santa Clara University about this caution, expecting a lecture about “availability bias,” or the exaggerated  fear of a bad event simply because it is fresh in memory. (Financial writer Jim Grant calls the current financial version of availability bias “2008 on the brain.”)  Instead, I was relieved to hear Statman admit that he'd paid off his mortgage too. “Maybe you could earn a higher return by arbitraging the difference between your mortgage and the stock market,” he said. “But you have to ask yourself what your money is really for,” he said. “Personally, it gives me satisfaction to know that I own the four walls around me.  Satisfaction and peace of mind are a kind of return, too.” Yes, they are.

More on MoneyWatch:

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO -- The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation -- and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free, or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing," says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,'" says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to "up their game," Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. "Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping -- in person and online -- and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or another," says Yarrow, calling discounts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities -- ways to do something special and define yourself -- rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of comparisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," ''discounted" or "reduced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations," says author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price. ... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smart phones, which retailers initially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a reality check inside a store, says Poundstone, author of The Myth of Fair Value and other books.

All this is part of businesses "systematically" removing barriers that might prevent people from making impulsive purchases, says David Bell, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he says, is charging a membership fee -- think of warehouse club memberships or Amazon.com's flat annual shipping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell says. "But if I'm encountering Amazon Prime or a situation like Walmart is doing -- all shipping for free -- people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend -- to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regularly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 extra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he says.

To avoid being taken in, research the product, especially in the case of items like mattresses or appliances, where the variations among models are almost infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given features are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something really valuable," says Robert Schindler, a marketing professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO » The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation -- and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession, stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free offers or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing," says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chairwoman and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,'" says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to "up their game," Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. "Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping -- in person and online -- and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or another," says Yarrow, calling discounts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities -- ways to do something special and define yourself -- rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well, too. There are still plenty of comparisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," "discounted" or "reduced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations," says author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price. ... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smart phones, which retailers initially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a reality check inside a store, says Poundstone, author of "The Myth of Fair Value" and other books.

All this is part of businesses "systematically" removing barriers that might prevent people from making impulsive purchases, says David Bell, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he says, is charging a membership fee -- think of warehouse club memberships or Amazon.com's flat annual shipping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell says. "But if I'm encountering Amazon Prime or a situation like Walmart is doing -- all shipping for free -- people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend -- to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regularly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 extra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he says.

To avoid being taken in, research the product itself, especially in the case of items like mattresses or appliances, where the variations among models are almost infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given features are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something really valuable," says Robert Schindler, a marketing professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Trying to compare mattress prices can make you feel like, well, going to the mattress, as salespeople and mattress makers cajole dollars out of you. Here, a woman tries out a mattress on display at the Sears retail store in Burbank, Calif.

SAN FRANCISCO » The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation -- and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession, stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free offers or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing," says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chairwoman and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,'" says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to "up their game," Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. "Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping -- in person and online -- and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or another," says Yarrow, calling discounts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities -- ways to do something special and define yourself -- rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well, too. There are still plenty of comparisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," "discounted" or "reduced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations," says author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price. ... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smart phones, which retailers initially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a reality check inside a store, says Poundstone, author of "The Myth of Fair Value" and other books.

All this is part of businesses "systematically" removing barriers that might prevent people from making impulsive purchases, says David Bell, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he says, is charging a membership fee -- think of warehouse club memberships or Amazon.com's flat annual shipping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell says. "But if I'm encountering Amazon Prime or a situation like Walmart is doing -- all shipping for free -- people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend -- to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regularly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 extra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he says.

To avoid being taken in, research the product itself, especially in the case of items like mattresses or appliances, where the variations among models are almost infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given features are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something really valuable," says Robert Schindler, a marketing professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

Subscribe to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser:

Monday-Sunday

1 Year - $180.96

6 Months - $90.48

3 Months - $45.24

Home delivery prices for Oahu Only. Please call customer service at (808) 538-6397 for Neighbor Island and mail subscriptions. For Weekend Subscription Rates Click Here

COMMENTING ETIQUETTE: To encourage open exchange of ideas in the staradvertiser.com community, we ask that you post with aloha, follow our guidelines and respect your fellow posters. Don't say anything you wouldn't want your mother to read. More on etiquette...

Let's keep comments:

Civil. Smart. On-topic.

Free from profanity.

All participants must register an account with Disqus. It's simple, takes seconds and will keep the comments free of trolls, cranks, and drive-by commenters.

As a community site, we ask that the community help by using the "Flag" link on each post if they feel a comment has violated these rules. You can also use the "Like" button to indicate your approval of a particular comment.

Important! There is no "Dislike" option, and that is NOT the purpose of the "Flag" link. Flagged posts are reviewed for their adherence to the above principles.

Return to Top

Posted November 21, 2010 at midnight

SAN FRANCISCO -- The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

Associated Press files

From free shipping from Wal-Mart to Sears stores open on Thanksgiving, the battle for holiday shoppers' dollars has begun in earnest.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation -- and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free, or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing," says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,' " says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to "up their game," Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. "Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping -- in person and online -- and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or another," says Yarrow, calling discounts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities -- ways to do something special and define yourself -- rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of comparisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," ''discounted" or "reduced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations," says author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price. ... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smart phones, which retailers initially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a reality check inside a store, says Poundstone, author of "The Myth of Fair Value" and other books.

All this is part of businesses "systematically" removing barriers that might prevent people from making impulsive purchases, says David Bell, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he says, is charging a membership fee -- think of warehouse club memberships or Amazon.com's flat annual shipping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell says. "But if I'm encountering Amazon Prime or a situation like Walmart is doing -- all shipping for free -- people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend -- to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regularly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 extra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he says.

To avoid being taken in, research the product itself, especially in the case of items like mattresses or appliances, where the variations among models are almost infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given features are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something really valuable," says Robert Schindler, a marketing professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey.

"If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

Ways to streamline holiday shopping

Consumer stress levels tend to rise when the holiday shopping season hits. So any advantage a shopper can get before embarking on a shopping foray, from payment options and budgeting considerations to shopping time management, can help take the edge off the experience.

Several websites offer a variety of useful holiday shopping and purchasing advice. Here are a few that are worthwhile:

Consumers Union: Contains useful holiday shopping insights on catalog and online buying, and payment options. consumersunion.org/tips/tips-holiday.htm

Everything Christmas: Article offers 10 tips to avoid holiday shopping line-up. everythingchristmas.com/story/tipsavoidline.html

National Foundation for Credit Counseling: Features guidelines to help keep holiday shopping stress free. nfcc.org/consumer_tools/consumertips/ consumertips_07.cfm

Federal Trade Commission: Offers quick tips on wise budget shopping during the holiday season. ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt082.shtm

Kiplinger.com: Features 10 topics that focus on holiday spending, budgeting and planning ahead, with additional links to related shopping insights. kiplinger.com/features/archives/2006/11/10tips.html

Return to Top

No amateur tennis player would walk onto the court thinking he could beat the likes of Roger Federer, yet individual investors enter the stock market thinking they can beat an unknown opponent -- who could be Goldman Sachs.

That is one of the many “mental mistakes” that investors make, according to Meir Statman, a Santa Clara University finance professor and author of the new book “What Investors Really Want.”

Statman is an authority in behavioral finance, which he defines as “finance with normal people in it — sometimes normal smart and sometimes normal stupid. Standard finance is finance with rational people in it.”

His book is full of anecdotes that try to explain things such as why so many people fell for Bernie Madoff. His running theme is that ordinary investors cannot get a better risk-adjusted return than they can in low-cost index funds, yet they continue to try.

The reason: People want more from investments than a decent return. They might want their investments to convey status (owning a hedge fund means I have substantial means), to be socially responsible (I don't want to support tobacco or nuclear power), to stick it to the tax man or to provide the thrill of winning.

That's all well and good, as long as people realize it. Here are excerpts of an interview with Statman about his philosophy:

Q: You pound the drum for index funds. Is that because you think the markets are efficient and therefore unbeatable over the long-term?

A: The market is not efficient. It's crazy, but the fact that it's crazy doesn't make you a psychiatrist. It's crazy like a wild animal. You wouldn't want to go against a wild lion because it's crazy. It's crazy in ways you cannot understand and cannot forecast.

People in behavioral finance and standard finance come to the same conclusion — don't try to beat the market. Whether it is rational, as people in standard finance say, or crazy, as I say, don't try it. Continued...

Reader Comments »

View reader comments (0) » Comment on this story »

Practically speaking, individual investors should treat the market as unbeatable and realize that when they try to beat it because it is inefficient, they are likely to injure themselves, rather than gain at the expense of another.

Q: Do you think pros can beat the market?

A: Yes, they can. But it's still a zero-sum game. If some people win, it means that some people lose relative to what they can get by being in an index fund. People above average tend to be the professionals and people below average tend to be individuals.

You might say that individuals can beat the market by hiring a professional, but after paying all the expenses of the money manager, they are losing.

Q: What are some of the biggest mistakes investors make?

A: The biggest mistake is not understanding the nature of the game.

People really think that playing the market is like playing tennis against a wall, instead of an opponent with potentially more skills and smarts. ...

If everyone who listened to Jim Cramer buys the stock, the price will go up and it won't be the bargain it was when he suggested it.

Q: What about other mistakes?

A: Another big one is availability errors. If your friends who go to Las Vegas always tell you when they win but never tell you when they lose, you are left with the impression it is easy to win. Because mutual funds always advertise their winners and never their losers, it seems like there are many winners. Continued...

Reader Comments »

View reader comments (0) » Comment on this story »

Hindsight is also a big thing. It gives you false confidence in your ability to tell the future. When people look back at 2007, they can look at all the signs that pointed to the market's collapse and think they should have predicted it. ... Hindsight fools you into thinking visibility is good.

Q: Should investors buy nothing but index funds?

A: People should be clear what it is they want. If they want the highest ratio of return to risk, index funds are the way. If they want to be socially responsible, buy a socially responsible mutual fund.

If they have hope of being a winner, look for a winning mutual fund or manager, but don't try to tell me you are maximizing return to risk. You are doing it because you like the game. ...

It's like buying a car. If you want a reliable car at a decent price, buy a Honda. If you want one that also has status and better leather, buy an Acura. If ... you really want to impress people, buy a Jaguar or Bentley. If you want to be socially responsible, buy a Prius. ... But if you buy a Mercedes and tell me it's high quality, I can tell you, according to Consumer Reports, that the repair record of Mercedes-Benz is inferior. You are lying to yourself or me, or you are ignorant or, in all likelihood, a combination of the three.

If you want to gamble, don't gamble the tuition money.

As long as you keep it cheap, the ratio of fantasy to cost is fair. If you buy a lottery ticket or use 5 percent of your money as play money it's fine, just don't put your retirement money in that.

(E-mail Kathleen Pender at kpender(at)sfchronicle.com. For more stories, visit scrippsnews.com.)

SCRIPPS HOWARD NEWS SERVICE

Scripps Media Center 1090 Vermont Ave. N.W. Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. USA 20005 Continued...

Reader Comments »

View reader comments (0) » Comment on this story »

GENERAL LINE: 1.202.408.1484 FAX: 1.202.408.2062

SHNS Products | SHNS Schedule | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Reader Comments »

View reader comments (0) » Comment on this story »

San Francisco Chronicle

No amateur tennis player would walk onto the court thinking he could beat the likes of Roger Federer, yet individual investors enter the stock market thinking they can beat an unknown opponent -- who could be Goldman Sachs.

That is one of the many “mental mistakes” that investors make, according to Meir Statman, a Santa Clara University finance professor and author of the new book “What Investors Really Want.”

Statman is an authority in behavioral finance, which he defines as “finance with normal people in it — sometimes normal smart and sometimes normal stupid. Standard finance is finance with rational people in it.”

His book is full of anecdotes that try to explain things such as why so many people fell for Bernie Madoff. His running theme is that ordinary investors cannot get a better risk-adjusted return than they can in low-cost index funds, yet they continue to try.

The reason: People want more from investments than a decent return. They might want their investments to convey status (owning a hedge fund means I have substantial means), to be socially responsible (I don't want to support tobacco or nuclear power), to stick it to the tax man or to provide the thrill of winning.

That's all well and good, as long as people realize it. Here are excerpts of an interview with Statman about his philosophy:

Q: You pound the drum for index funds. Is that because you think the markets are efficient and therefore unbeatable over the long-term?

A: The market is not efficient. It's crazy, but the fact that it's crazy doesn't make you a psychiatrist. It's crazy like a wild animal. You wouldn't want to go against a wild lion because it's crazy. It's crazy in ways you cannot understand and cannot forecast.

People in behavioral finance and standard finance come to the same conclusion — don't try to beat the market. Whether it is rational, as people in standard finance say, or crazy, as I say, don't try it.

Practically speaking, individual investors should treat the market as unbeatable and realize that when they try to beat it because it is inefficient, they are likely to injure themselves, rather than gain at the expense of another.

Q: Do you think pros can beat the market?

A: Yes, they can. But it's still a zero-sum game. If some people win, it means that some people lose relative to what they can get by being in an index fund. People above average tend to be the professionals and people below average tend to be individuals.

You might say that individuals can beat the market by hiring a professional, but after paying all the expenses of the money manager, they are losing.

Q: What are some of the biggest mistakes investors make?

A: The biggest mistake is not understanding the nature of the game.

People really think that playing the market is like playing tennis against a wall, instead of an opponent with potentially more skills and smarts. ...

If everyone who listened to Jim Cramer buys the stock, the price will go up and it won't be the bargain it was when he suggested it.

Q: What about other mistakes?

A: Another big one is availability errors. If your friends who go to Las Vegas always tell you when they win but never tell you when they lose, you are left with the impression it is easy to win. Because mutual funds always advertise their winners and never their losers, it seems like there are many winners.

Hindsight is also a big thing. It gives you false confidence in your ability to tell the future. When people look back at 2007, they can look at all the signs that pointed to the market's collapse and think they should have predicted it. ... Hindsight fools you into thinking visibility is good.

Q: Should investors buy nothing but index funds?

A: People should be clear what it is they want. If they want the highest ratio of return to risk, index funds are the way. If they want to be socially responsible, buy a socially responsible mutual fund.

If they have hope of being a winner, look for a winning mutual fund or manager, but don't try to tell me you are maximizing return to risk. You are doing it because you like the game. ...

It's like buying a car. If you want a reliable car at a decent price, buy a Honda. If you want one that also has status and better leather, buy an Acura. If ... you really want to impress people, buy a Jaguar or Bentley. If you want to be socially responsible, buy a Prius. ... But if you buy a Mercedes and tell me it's high quality, I can tell you, according to Consumer Reports, that the repair record of Mercedes-Benz is inferior. You are lying to yourself or me, or you are ignorant or, in all likelihood, a combination of the three.

If you want to gamble, don't gamble the tuition money.

As long as you keep it cheap, the ratio of fantasy to cost is fair. If you buy a lottery ticket or use 5 percent of your money as play money it's fine, just don't put your retirement money in that.

(E-mail Kathleen Pender at kpender(at)sfchronicle.com. For more stories, visit scrippsnews.com.)

SCRIPPS HOWARD NEWS SERVICE

Scripps Media Center 1090 Vermont Ave. N.W. Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. USA 20005

GENERAL LINE: 1.202.408.1484 FAX: 1.202.408.2062

SHNS Products | SHNS Schedule | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Reader Comments »

View reader comments (0) » Comment on this story »

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO — The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation — and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? “Free.”

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free, or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

“Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing,” says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

“What I hear is ‘free,' ” says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. “For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work.”

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to “up their game,” Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. “Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out.”

In addition to “free” and “limited” offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount “clubs,” all kinds of coupons and “private” short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking “inside” deals to “friends and family.”

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping — in person and online — and never letting down your guard.

“We are going to get the discount one way or another,” says Yarrow, calling discounts “standard” in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities — ways to do something special and define yourself — rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of comparisons with “regular” prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise “new,” “discounted” or “reduced” prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

“The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations,” says author William Poundstone. “We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price.... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast.”

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO - The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation - and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one- free , or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing," says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,' " says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to "up their game," Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. "Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping - in person and online - and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or another," says Yarrow, calling discounts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities - ways to do something special and define yourself - rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of comparisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," ''discounted" or "reduced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations," says author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price. ... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smart phones, which retailers initially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a reality check inside a store, says Poundstone, author of "The Myth of Fair Value" and other books.

All this is part of businesses "systematically" removing barriers that might prevent people from making impulsive purchases, says David Bell, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he says, is charging a membership fee - think of warehouse club memberships or Amazon.com's flat annual shipping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell says. "But if I'm encountering Amazon Prime or a situation like Walmart is doing - all shipping for free - people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend - to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regularly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 extra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he says.

To avoid being taken in, research the product itself, especially in the case of items like mattresses or appliances, where the variations among models are almost infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given features are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something really valuable," says Robert Schindler, a marketing professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey.

"If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

--------------------

Ways to streamline holiday shopping

Consumer stress levels tend to rise when the holiday shopping season hits. So any advantage a shopper can get before embarking on a shopping foray, from payment options and budgeting considerations to shopping time management, can help take the edge off the experience.

Several websites offer a variety of useful holiday shopping and purchasing advice. Here are a few that are worthwhile:

Consumers Union: Contains useful holiday shopping insights on catalog and online buying, and payment options. consumersunion.org/tips/tips-holiday.htm

Everything Christmas: Article offers 10 tips to avoid holiday shopping line-up. everythingchristmas.com/story/tipsavoidline.html

National Foundation for Credit Counseling: Features guidelines to help keep holiday shopping stress free. nfcc.org/consumer_tools/consumertips/consumertips_07.cfm

Federal Trade Commission: Offers quick tips on wise budget shopping during the holiday season. ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt082.shtm

Kiplinger.com: Features 10 topics that focus on holiday spending, budgeting and planning ahead, with additional links to related shopping insights. kiplinger.com/features/archives/2006/11/10tips.html

- McClatchy-Tribune News Service

--------------------

Copyright © 2010 The Commercial Appeal, Memphis, TN

Return to Top

Venkatesh Mannar at a Salt Mine - Microntrient Initiative

Ottawa, Canada based Micronutrient Initiative's (MI) President Venkatesh Mannar received this year's Nokia Health Award.

As a part of the prestigious Tech Awards 2010 awarded annually by The Tech Museum with Applied Materials and Santa Clara University for his work to fortify salt with iodine and iron, Ottawa, Canada based Micronutrient Initiative's (MI) President Venkatesh Mannar received this year's Nokia Health Award.

Double Fortified Salt (DFS)

MI's Double Fortified Salt (DFS) was recognized for its ease in use, value proposition and the possibility of potentially reaching and helping billions of people. The Canadian International Development Agency that also funded the research into double fortified salt, in collaboration with the World Bank, is Micronutrient Initiative's primary funder.

“I am so pleased to be honored with this prestigious award. It is a great honor and boost and hopefully we will get more funding for our initiative,” said sixty one year old Mannar, who comes from a family of salt millers in the Tuticorin district in Tamil Nadu where his cousins and their children still run a salt mill.

“This recognition will help us gain resources and momentum to spread Double Fortified Salt around the world. Many venture capitalists and others from the technology sector in the Bay Area wishing to get involved with philanthropy came to meet me,”said Mannar at the awards gathering in San Jose, California.

Double Fortified Salt delivers small but vital daily amounts of iodine and iron at a very low cost to vulnerable populations.

“When I returned to work in my father's salt mill in the mid 1970s after doing my masters in Chemical Engineering in the US, my father said that salt fortification will become very important to combat malnutrition in the years to come," said Mannar

"To have succeeded in salt fortification is like fulfilling my dad's dream,” added Mannar. “One has to not only understand the health benefits that fortified salt provides to the marginalized communities and the chemistry behind the process, but also the business of the salt industry to convince the millers to make an investment for the fortification initiatives.”

Read on

Mineral Iodine is critical for brain development and iron is important for mental and physical ability. Prior to Mannar's work, iron could not be added to iodized salt because the properties in the two nutrients when combined canceled each other out.

“While fortifying the salt with essential minerals, we had to also keep in mind that color and taste could not be compromised and explain to the millers agreeing for salt fortification that besides the social good, their investment will pay off due to its value proposition to the users,” said Mannar.

According to the MI Site, Mannar worked for more than 15 years with colleagues at the Micronutrient Initiative and with University of Toronto Food Engineer Dr. Levente Diosady to develop a method to retain the life-enhancing properties of the minerals when combined.

Poor diets can cause severe iodine and iron deficits, with devastating repercussions on brain development, and result in maternal and child mortality in at risk populations. These deficiencies reduce individual and national productivity, resulting in serious economic consequences.

India's Burden

“India has the highest-40% of the world's burden of malnutrition and MI's maximum resources are dedicated in India. Our office in India has a higher staff than the head office in Ottawa,” said Mannar. “We work with the central government and many state governments in India to provide Vitamin A supplements. We also have field staff that work directly with government officials to strengthen their hands. Our most significant contribution in India has been expansion of Vitamin A supplementation.”

Besides Vitamin A supplements, some of the other priorities of MI in India include increase in coverage of iodized salt, expansion of wheat flour fortification programs and initiatives for addressing anemia in children through Integrated Child Development Scheme and the Targeted Public Distribution Scheme; and commencing of a rice fortification program-that is yet to pick steam.

Use of salt makes it an ideal source to deliver nutrients regularly. Double-Fortified Salt (DFS) protects 3.6 million children daily in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. Studies have confirmed DFS's potential to benefit more than a billion people, improve health and productivity, and promote healthy brain development.

“We have had very good results of the lozenges fortified with Vitamin A, iron, and other nutrients, often called nutri-candies, to protect children in Bihar. We have good relations with the state government and we are expanding to other states such as Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat,” says Mannar “We provide advocacy, support and technical advice but the central and state governments have the ownership for capacity building. The greatest pitfall in India is weak capacity. States like Uttar Pradesh are countries in themselves and though we get good co operation from various stakeholders, weak capacity is holding back the reach.”

Double Fortified Salt is being used on a daily basis in school meal programs in Tamil Nadu, benefiting three million school children. MI supported the installation of a double fortified salt (DFS) manufacturing facility at the Tamil Nadu Salt Corporation (TNSC) plant, and currently provides two tons of iron premix every month as free subsidy to TNSC that produces 300 tons of double fortified salt, catering to over 3.6 million school children. MI's global premix production facility has moved from Canada to Mumbai to expand, as global demand grows.

MI in collaboration with the World Food Program in Rajasthan facilitated small-scale salt producers to organize into associations to help increase their capacity to iodize their product.

The non profit has developed a number of innovative products in India to address anemia in children and women. The need is for the Indian government to build capacity to help the products reach the people.

“Mahatma Gandhi used salt because of its universal reach to free a nation, I hope my work can help people lead healthy lives,” adds Mannar.

Resources:

Copyright Shalini Narang. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

Return to Top

At long last, Silicon Valley -- the world's technological epicenter -- is getting a wireless network that promises superfast Internet connections for people using mobile gadgets.

Two networks, in fact.

WiMax, a so-called 4G (for fourth-generation) wireless service partly bankrolled by Intel and Google, and a similar network from Verizon, are set to be launched in the Bay Area by the end of the year. They promise to let consumers download video, Web pages or e-mail at least three to six times quicker than existing mobile wireless networks. Moreover, unlike Wi-Fi hot spots, which have limited reach, 4G networks typically cover large areas.

With WiMax starting in 63 other markets across the country over the past two years, being stuck in the technological slow lane has been aggravating for many in Silicon Valley, and the services are likely to spark an array of imaginative new Internet-based applications from local businesses.

Peter Jarich of the market research firm Current Analysis, for instance, envisioned that these new networks would allow car GPS systems to be quickly and regularly updated with new maps, for instance. And that could just be the start, he added, since it is hard to imagine every possibility until the technology is in hand. "We didn't really see this whole application boom in mobile phones until the iPhone came out."

Alan Weissberger, a retired Santa Clara University electrical engineering professor who has closely tracked efforts to get a 4G network in the Bay Area, noted that two competing services will be better for users.

"If you are a consumer, wouldn't it be great not to be locked into Sprint or Verizon, but to have a choice between the two?" he said.

Verizon says its Bay Area coverage will at least include San Jose, Sunnyvale, Cupertino, Palo Alto, San Mateo, Redwood City, San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley, Fremont, Hayward, Walnut Creek, Concord, Lafayette and Orinda, as well as the region's three major airports.

The coverage area for WiMax, offered by Sprint and a company called Clearwire, is less clear. "We will generally cover the San Francisco Bay Area," said Sprint spokeswoman Stephanie Vinge-Walsh. That will include San Francisco, San Jose and probably Oakland, she noted, adding that after the service's debut, "we will continue to expand these networks."

Monthly costs for the WiMax service usually range from $55 to $80, depending on the level of service, while the cost of using Verizon's network will be announced when it launches.

With the speedier networks, Silicon Valley's mobile hordes will be able to more quickly gain access to video and other information on the go, said Chris Nicoll, a research fellow at the Yankee Group, a technology consulting firm. As a result, he said, "you should see some productivity improvements."

"This will be a great tool for our region's entrepreneurs and innovators, in addition to local residents," added Michelle McGurk, spokesman for San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed.

But Tracy Rosenberg, executive director of the Oakland-based Media Alliance, worried that the poor might not be able to afford 4G, and said she hoped the services contracts aren't peppered with onerous provisions.

Weissberger also cautioned that the networks wouldn't be very useful if their coverage leaves out large portions of the Bay Area and if access is not easy with some mobile devices. Moreover, he worries that WiMax customers may run into service problems, since Clearwire -- which installed the network's equipment -- is in a severe financial bind.

The Kirkland, Wash., company warned in a Nov. 4 regulatory filing that it may hit a cash squeeze as soon as mid-2011, and warned that its losses raised "substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern."

But Jonathan Atkin, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets, believes Sprint -- which owns most of Clearwire -- will rescue the firm by investing more money or buying it, because through their 4G partnership "the two companies are pretty much joined at the hip."

Clearwire -- which in 2008 launched its first wireless network in Baltimore after getting a $500 million infusion from Google and $1 billion from Intel -- isn't likely to go out of business anytime soon, added Julie Coppernoll, Intel's director of marketing for WiMax.

Noting that Intel has pumped at least $2 billion into WiMax-related technology over the years, she said, "there are enough people who are invested in the success of it that at the end of the day it's likely to all work out."

Contact Steve Johnson at sjohnson@mercurynews.com or 408-920-5043.

Copyright © 2010 San Jose Mercury News

Return to Top

The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation - and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free, or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing," says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,'" says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to "up their game," Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. "Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping - in person and online - and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or another," says Yarrow, calling discounts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities - ways to do something special and define yourself - rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of comparisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," "discounted" or "reduced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations," says author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price.... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smart phones, which retailers initially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a reality check inside a store, says Poundstone, author of "The Myth of Fair Value" and other books.

All this is part of businesses "systematically" removing barriers that might prevent people from making impulsive purchases, says David Bell, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he says, is charging a membership fee - think of warehouse club memberships or Amazon.com's flat annual shipping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell says. "But if I'm encountering Amazon Prime or a situation like Walmart is doing - all shipping for free - people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend - to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regularly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 extra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he says.

To avoid being taken in, research the product itself, especially in the case of items like mattresses or appliances, where the variations among models are almost infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given features are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something really valuable," says Robert Schindler, a marketing professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

Return to Top

The complaint objects to Google's automated e-mail scans and delivery of advertisements without compensating e-mail senders.

Attorneys representing Texas resident Keith Dunbar on Wednesday filed

a lawsuit against Google alleging that Gmail violates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986.

The lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue more frequently noted for patent infringement complaints. The issue in this particular case is the way that Gmail scans the content of e-mail messages to serve targeted ads.

More Smb Insights

White Papers

Get more from your new iPhone; InformationWeek's Mitch Wagner showsyou how to master the keyboard, clipboard, Spotlight search, and morefeatures of the new iPhone 3.0 software.

The complaint objects to Gmail's use of information in e-mail messages sent to Gmail accounts by those who don't use Gmail.

"Google intercepts and uses the information from non-Gmail account holders without regard to the privacy or proprietary nature of the information," the complaint states. "As result of Google's actions intercepting non-Gmail account holders' e-mail, Google obtains a monetary benefit without the consent of the Class members and without compensation to them."

This is not a new objection and isn't ikely to trouble Google's legal department much. Eric Goldman, associate professor of law at Santa Clara University School of Law, characterizes the complaint as an "are-you-kidding-me? lawsuit" on

his blog.

"[T]he topic was

exhaustively debated when Gmail first publicly launched in 2004," said Goldman in an e-mail. "There were numerous calls on government agencies to investigate Google, and Cal. Sen. Figueroa proposed anti-Gmail legislation in the California legislature. Frankly, after all the furor died down a half-decade ago, I had assumed everyone had moved on long ago."

"We haven't received a formal complaint and can't comment on specifics," a Google spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement. "To be clear though, Gmail -- like most Web mail providers -- uses automatic scanning to fight against spam and viruses. We use similar technology to show advertisements that help keep our services free. This is how Gmail has always worked."

Google pre-emptively addressed the issues raised in the complaint in its

Gmail privacy policy. The company acknowledges that while it has heard concerns that Gmail may compromise the privacy of those sending messages to Gmail users, such worries arise from a misunderstanding of how Gmail works.

"Using Gmail does not violate the privacy of senders since no one other than the recipient is allowed to read their e-mail messages, and no one but the recipient sees targeted ads and related information," the company states in its Gmail privacy policy.

Google argues that e-mail recipients have the right to view e-mail messages using the service of their choosing and that on the Internet senders are not required to consent to automated scanning, which every e-mail provider does, for security purposes if nothing else.

Register today for Enterprise Connect, which offers the most in-depth information on enterprise communications. It happens in Orlando, Fla., Feb. 28 to March 3. Find out more.

Return to Top

NASA is preparing to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread that could help answer astrobiology¹s fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe. The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch today.

Moffett Field, Ca - infoZine - O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA¹s first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite. O/OREOS also will use NASA¹s first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth¹s atmosphere less than 25 years after completing its mission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation¹s Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska and the range is conducting final launch preparations. The U.S. Air Force has announced that the rocket could launch at any time during a 90-minute launch window beginning at 5:24 p.m. PST on Nov. 19, 2010.

A computer-generated image of the O/OREOS nanosatellite.

Image Credit: NASA Ames. Click image for full-resolution

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

"We are excited to have this opportunity to demonstrate the utility of these very small spacecraft in space for NASA's science missions," said Bruce Yost, O/OREOS mission manager at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif. "We¹re hoping to demonstrate NASA¹s ability to build complex nanosatellites like O/OREOS that can meet the needs of scientists with big ideas and lofty goals."

Spacecraft operators could make contact with O/OREOS as soon as 12.5 hours after launch. O/OREOS will conduct experiments, which will last up to six months, autonomously or after receiving a command from the Santa Clara ground station. Once the experiments begin, O/OREOS will relay data daily to mission managers, engineers and project scientists for further analysis. Spacecraft operators say the nanosatellite is scheduled to transmit mission data for a year.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or ³feed,² and grow three sets of microbes. The SESLO experiment measures the microbes¹ population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in 'micro environments' to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light

absorption.

The Small Spacecraft Division at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif., manages the O/OREOS payload and mission operations supported by staff and students from Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

As with NASA's previous small satellite missions, such as the GeneSat-1 and PharmaSat, Santa Clara University invites amateur radio operators around the world to tune in to the satellite's broadcast.

Related NASA Link

To view the launch via webcast, visit:

Return to Top

In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing itsission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

"With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or "feed," and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in "micro environments" to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption. (ANI)

Return to Top

Washington, Nov 20 : In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing its

mission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

"With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found

in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or "feed," and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in "micro environments" to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption.

Return to Top

From ANI

Washington, Nov 20: In an attempt to answer astrobiology’s fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to OrbitalStresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Forcefour-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA’s first CubeSat todemonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completelyindependent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA’s first propellant-less mechanism on ascientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as itre-enters Earth’s atmosphere less than 25 years after completing itsmission.

“Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative wayto extend and enhance scientists’ opportunities to conduct research inlow Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International SpaceStation or space shuttle investigations,” said Pascale Ehrenfreund,O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at GeorgeWashington University.

“With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives.”

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska AerospaceCorporation’s Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and therange is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA’s Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads,including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms’ responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly foundin salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or “feed,” and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes’ population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in “micro environments” to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption.

Return to Top

Washington, Nov. 20 -- In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to OrbitalStresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Forcefour-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat todemonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completelyindependent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on ascientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as itre-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing itsmission.

'Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative wayto extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research inlow Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International SpaceStation or space shuttle investigations,' said Pascale Ehrenfreund,O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at GeorgeWashington University.

'With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives.'

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska AerospaceCorporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and therange is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads,including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly foundin salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or 'feed,' and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in 'micro environments' to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption. Published by HT Syndication with permission from Asian News International. For any query with respect to this article or any other content requirement, please contact Editor at htsyndication@hindustantimes.com

Copyright © 2010 Hindustan Times

Return to Top

No amateur tennis player would walk onto the court thinking he could beat the likes of Roger Federer, yet individual investors enter the stock market thinking they can beat an unknown opponent — who could be Goldman Sachs.

That is one of the many “mental mistakes” that investors make, according to Meir Statman, a Santa Clara University finance professor and author of the new book “What Investors Really Want.”

His running theme is that ordinary investors cannot get a better risk-adjusted return than they can in low-cost index funds, yet they continue to try. Here are excerpts of an interview with Statman about his philosophy:

Q: You pound the drum for index funds. Is that because you think the markets are efficient and therefore unbeatable over the long-term?

A: The market is not efficient. It's crazy, but the fact that it's crazy doesn't make you a psychiatrist. It's crazy in ways you cannot understand and cannot forecast.

Practically speaking, individual investors should treat the market as unbeatable and realize that when they try to beat it because it is inefficient, they are likely to injure themselves, rather than gain at the expense of another.

Q: Do you think pros can beat the market?

A: Yes, they can. But it's still a zero-sum game. If some people win, it means that some people lose relative to what they can get by being in an index fund. People above average tend to be the professionals and people below average tend to be individuals.

You might say that individuals can beat the market by hiring a professional, but after paying all the expenses of the money manager, they are losing.

Q: What are some of the biggest mistakes investors make?

A: The biggest mistake is not understanding the nature of the game.

People really think that playing the market is like playing tennis against a wall, instead of an opponent with potentially more skills and smarts. ...

If everyone who listened to Jim Cramer buys the stock, the price will go up and it won't be the bargain it was when he suggested it.

Return to Top

Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 3:56pm PST

Jon Olson intended a music career when he entered college but a talent with numbers led him into a long financial career at Intel and Xilinx.

Jon Olson went to Indiana University thinking he might major in music. Turns out, he wasn't so good at the saxophone.

Numbers were another story — and that has been good news for Xilinx Inc.

Olson, who went on to obtain an accounting degree from Indiana and an MBA from Santa Clara University, became chief financial officer at Xilinx six years ago. In that time he has helped lead the chip maker to higher profits despite the downturn in the economy.

The self-effacing Olson said he sees his role as a “financial compass,” building a rock-solid balance sheet, maintaining strong ...

Create an account and gain access to our Premium content *

The Business Gold Rewards Card® from American Express OPEN

Save up to $120 on a one-year subscription to The Business Journals.

Start spending on the Business Gold Rewards Card from American Express OPEN and receive a $120 statement credit. It's good toward a year-long subscription, including free unlimited access to premium online content, 24/7.

Eligibility, other terms, restrictions apply.

Related Company News Olson's success at Xilinx doesn't go by the numbers alone M/A-COM doubles staff and expands presence in valley Silicon Valley's CFOs of the Year honored Stellar Solutions CEO enters hall of fame Verismo raises $17M from Intel Capital, others Related Industry News Former Ford exec driven to success at next-wave car maker Olson's success at Xilinx doesn't go by the numbers alone Ahmed successful at tackling Array Networks Inc.'s twists and turns Blade Network Technologies' sharp growth brought IBM buyout ahead of IPO Kitagawa's emphasis on people makes a big impact at Gaia

Discover which companies are leading their industries in San Jose. Directly from the Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal, take advantage of valuable data, including sales figures, staff sizes and more. Get the inside track on local firms and their performance trends and discover why they make the Top 25 list.

Xilinx Inc.: 360 contacts Intel Corp.: 1885 contacts

Return to Top

SANTA CLARA, CA (KGO) -- There are hopeful signs of job creation in Silicon Valley. An analysis released Friday by the California Employment Development Department indicates that 4,000 manufacturing jobs have been created in the past year -- Oct. 2010 vs. Oct. 2009 -- in the San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara region. The biggest gains were in the computer and electronics sectors.

Solar Junction, a small private manufacturing company in San Jose, is a prime example. It just more than doubled its plant from 25,000 to 55,000 square feet, and it plans to add 85 permanent, full-time jobs on top of the 35 already on the payroll. Solar Junction makes high-efficiency solar cells that are incorporated into concentrated photo-voltaic arrays for large-scale energy production.

Jim Weldon, CEO of Solar Junction, says the time is right to expand the company and hire additional staff because he senses an economic turn-around. The solar industry, however, could face challenges ahead as federal stimulus programs end and other incentives may be eliminated as Washington policymakers tackle the growing deficit.

Most companies hold off hiring until they know for sure the economy has rebounded.

"Waiting in that sense is a little more dangerous from that standpoint, so we go more by leading trends than we would go by actually seeing that we have absolute evidence of it," said Weldon.

Despite that, Weldon says he is committed to creating jobs in the U.S., instead of sending the work offshore. The company is private and is funded by venture capital firm investments.

Other solar companies concur with Weldon and his company's outlook. Mark Mitchell, senior vice president and general manager of Serious Energy in Santa Clara, says there is a demand for a new generation of energy management technology to help companies reduce costs and boost efficiency. It recently installed a new energy management system, known as a micro-grid, at Santa Clara University. Such systems are able to manage a portfolio of alternative fuels, such as solar, biodiesel, wind and fuel cells. The Serious Energy system is installed at 14 buildings on the university campus. Mitchell said that the return on investment can run from one to three years.

"It's not just photo-voltaics, but it might be a Bloom box or other technologies... wind, for example... that could be used in a portfolio to deliver the local power necessary to run on a free and sustainable basis off the grid," said Mitchell.

"If you can optimize your air conditioning system or your lighting system with more smarts than what you have today, which is a simple control problem, not a hardware installation problem, then it makes huge financial sense," said serious energy engineer Agustin Fonts.

Job creation for now is only a trickle, but there's hope that it will grow into a trend, and it has city leaders saying, even on an overcast winter day, they're beginning to see rays of hope.

Return to Top

Washington, Nov 19 (ANI): In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing itsission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

"With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or "feed," and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in "micro environments" to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption. (ANI)

Return to Top

« Ministers of the Law |
Main November 19, 2010 Anti-Catholicism from Catholics?   I would like to follow up on Rob's earlier post of today ( Worst op-ed of the year ) regarding anti-Catholic opinion publishing. It strikes me that one can find a type of anti-Catholicism or anti-Church attitude among some members of the Church, too. How can that be? For example, Professor Lisa Fullam posted yesterday at dotCommonweal [ HERE ] a contribution entitled “Marriage Becoming Obsolete” which served as her commentary on the recent Pew Research Center survey report suggesting that 39% of Americans consider that the institution of marriage—be it civil or sacramental or both—is becoming obsolete. I will not offer my thoughts on the Pew conclusions today, but I do address the personal points made by Professor Fullam. She has previously been the subject of discussions by other members of the Mirror of Justice company. [ HERE and HERE ] For those who do not know her or unfamiliar with her, she is an associate professor of moral theology at the Jesuit School of Theology of Santa Clara University in Berkeley (JSTSCUB). Amongst the courses she teaches are fundamental moral theology and sexual ethics. In her commentary on the Pew Research Center report to which I have referred, she makes some startling assertions that, if they were not made by someone who is a ranked faculty member at an institution that prepares candidates for ministry in the Roman Catholic Church, could readily be classified as uniformed, perhaps even anti-Catholic. Although the JSTSCUB states that it “discharges its apostolic commitments by means of its critical fidelity to the Roman Catholic tradition,” it seems that Professor Fullam's commitments which might be critical of Roman Catholic teachings stray from being faithful to them. Perhaps I am mistaken in this claim, but then I recall what she says in her recent posting. She begins by relying on a statement by one of the Pew researchers that “there are several ways to have a successful family life, and more people accept them.” Well, the fact that some noticeable group accepts alternatives to norms that are made by intelligent persons taking stock of the intelligible reality does not make these “ways... [which] more people accept” normative or moral or consistent with the Church's teachings. Professor Fullam gets on board of a project to rethink “the Church's pastoral strategy on matters including same-sex marriage and cohabitation.” As she states, the Church's views on these two topics are, in her estimation, “sub-optimal”, but she does not explain why this is the case. She does acknowledge that the Church teaches that marriage is ordained to two objectives: the loving union of the couple—presumably constituted by one man and one woman—and the procreation of children. She further contends, however, that only the first objective is necessary. Moreover, she believes that the union of the couple is “prioritize[d].” While she believes that children are a great good, she further opines that they are “not necessary to the sacramentality of the bond.” She attempts to justify these positions by making reference to Pope Pius XI. While she does not specify any particular written source authored by this pope, it is likely that she has in mind his 1930 encyclical letter Casti Connubii . But her reading of Pius XI regarding the priority of the loving union of the couple does not accord with what he actually said in this encyclical. As Pope Pius XI stated, This sacredness of marriage which is intimately connected with religion and all that is holy, arises from the divine origin we have just mentioned, from its purpose which is the begetting and education of children for God, and the binding of man and wife to God through Christian love and mutual support; and finally it arises from the very nature of wedlock, whose institution is to be sought for in the farseeing Providence of God, whereby it is the means of transmitting life, thus making the parents the ministers, as it were, of the Divine Omnipotence. In the end, her posting is not really intended as an exercise in “critical fidelity to the Roman Catholic tradition.” Rather, her intention is to provide for the coming of an ecclesiastical embracing of same-sex marriage. As she says, “So where people see same-sex couples loving each other deeply, raising children lovingly, and the USCCB describing even civil recognition of those unions as a ‘multifaceted threat to the very fabric of society,' what are people to think we believe about marriage?” She contends that such relationships “should be supported and encouraged.” By whom? Well, by the Church! But she believes that the Church's leadership does not understand how same-sex relationships are the equivalent of heterosexual unions. In her estimation, the bishops replace her understanding of the righteousness of same-sex unions with “gross and untrue insults.”      But she offers a kind and gentle response to these “insults.” Her rejoinder is for “a new, pastorally sensitive theology of marriage, one that recognizes the importance and the beauty of the institution, that takes sexual orientation seriously, and that strives to support fallible and striving human beings in our attempts to become more loving.” Well, that is quite a proposal! But it is not a Catholic one. Rather, it is tragic, misinformed, and anti-Catholic. It is tragic and misinformed because Professor Fullam assumes that any disagreement with her support of the normativity and righteousness of same-sex relations must necessarily be “gross and untrue insults.” But, they are not. To disagree with someone with different views on any subject—including same-sex marriage—is precisely that, to disagree—a disagreement that is based on intelligence comprehending and intelligible world. The nature of disagreement is to enter a debate with reasoned analysis and objective commentary supported by factual analyses. She fails to take stock of the inexorable, ontological differences between same-sex and opposite-sex relationships; moreover, she passes over the incapacity of same-sex couples to procreate without artificial reproductive technologies being utilized. So, to disagree is not to demean; to debate is not to insult; to contradict with objective reasoning is not to marginalize or unjustly discriminate. In addition, her proposal is anti-Catholic because she does not explicate why the Church's teachings about marriage versus same-sex unions are wrong. She only states that they are wrong by labeling the Church's teachings as “gross and untrue insults” because they do not accord with her view—a view that would substitute sound and intelligible argument with subjectivism, relativism, and exaggerated autonomy.   RJA sj   Posted by Robert John Araujo, SJ on November 19, 2010 at 09:03 PM in Araujo, Robert | Permalink TrackBack TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515a9a69e20133f6217517970b Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Anti-Catholicism from Catholics? : Comments You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post. Post a comment Name: Email Address: URL: Remember personal info? Comments:

Return to Top

Kamala Harris (7)

Steve Cooley (8)

Subjects:

Legislature (1680)

Places:

Los Angeles (611)

California (1513)

As Steve Cooley and Kamala Harris sweat out the ballot counting to determine California's next attorney general, perhaps no one is more anxious than advocates for medical marijuana shops.

Within the state medical marijuana industry, Cooley, the Los Angeles County district attorney and a Republican, is widely perceived as pot persona non grata.

It isn't just Cooley's aggressive prosecutions of alleged abuses in Los Angeles dispensaries that stir medical marijuana activists. There are also his persistent declarations that he considers medical pot dispensaries to be illegal retail sales outlets.

Harris, San Francisco's district attorney and a Democrat, held a slim lead in an ongoing ballot count that has been flip-flopping since election night. Semi-official results from the secretary of state's office showed that, as of Friday noon EST, Harris led Cooley 45.9 percent to 45.5 percent, a slim margin of almost 30,000 votes.

The outcome -- due by Dec. 3 -- could determine how the state prosecutes medical marijuana cases and how the next attorney general will interpret guidelines for medical marijuana transactions approved by the Legislature in 2003.

"It certainly does make a difference," said Santa Clara University law professor Gerald Uelmen.

Should Cooley win, Uelman said, "I think (marijuana) prosecutions are likely to be mounted by the attorney general's office rather than local prosecutors, especially in counties that are friendly to medical marijuana."

Though pot prosecution wasn't a major issue for either campaign, Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group for people using medical marijuana, set up an anti-Cooley website. It declared: "The attorney general's race is, without a doubt, the most important ... for medical marijuana patients in California."

Both candidates opposed Proposition 19, the initiative to legalize marijuana for recreational use.

But Harris said she personally knew people "who have benefited" from medical marijuana, while Cooley praised a proposed ban on dispensaries in Los Angeles County and efforts by the city of Los Angeles to rein in its medical pot trade.

"Communities throughout the nation are waiting to see how we handle storefronts illegally pushing pot," he said.

Cooley argues that pot shops violate state medical marijuana laws, which define dispensaries as members-only nonprofits run by medical marijuana patients.

Harris' campaign manager, Brian Brokaw, said Harris "supports the legal use of medicinal marijuana but thinks California needs to bring consistent standards about ownership and operations of dispensaries."

Dale Gieringer, California director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said "it could be a nasty couple of years" for medical marijuana purveyors if Cooley is elected.

Gieringer said Cooley's tough-on-pot profile may have been a reaction to Los Angeles City Council demands for an answer to the city's pot shop boom.

Last year, Cooley charged the operator of a Culver City dispensary with illegal marijuana sales, transportation and money laundering, alleging it was pocketing $400,000 a month. This year, he successfully prosecuted marijuana grow houses for dispensaries.

"If Steve Cooley gets in, marijuana is illegal, period," said Omar Figueroa, a Sebastopol attorney specializing in marijuana law.

Yet Figueroa isn't convinced the pot industry should celebrate if Harris is elected. He said she increased the rate of pot prosecutions over her predecessor as district attorney, Terrence Hallinan.

"I don't think she is the golden child," he said.

(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, http://www.scrippsnews.com.)

Return to Top

The complaint objects to Google's automated e-mail scans and delivery of advertisements without compensating e-mail senders.

Attorneys representing Texas resident Keith Dunbar on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against Google alleging that Gmail violates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986.

The lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue more frequently noted for patent infringement complaints. The issue in this particular case is the way that Gmail scans the content of e-mail messages to serve targeted ads.

More Smb Insights

White Papers

Sponsored by:

Office 2010 is Microsoft's latest major software release, and it is packed full of features including Web application versions of Office apps, PowerPoint Broadcast, enhancements to Outlook's message management and overall user interface improvements.

The complaint objects to Gmail's use of information in e-mail messages sent to Gmail accounts by those who don't use Gmail.

"Google intercepts and uses the information from non-Gmail account holders without regard to the privacy or proprietary nature of the information," the complaint states. "As result of Google's actions intercepting non-Gmail account holders' e-mail, Google obtains a monetary benefit without the consent of the Class members and without compensation to them."

This is not a new objection and isn't ikely to trouble Google's legal department much. Eric Goldman, associate professor of law at Santa Clara University School of Law, characterizes the complaint as an "are-you-kidding-me? lawsuit" on his blog.

"[T]he topic was exhaustively debated when Gmail first publicly launched in 2004," said Goldman in an e-mail. "There were numerous calls on government agencies to investigate Google, and Cal. Sen. Figueroa proposed anti-Gmail legislation in the California legislature. Frankly, after all the furor died down a half-decade ago, I had assumed everyone had moved on long ago."

"We haven't received a formal complaint and can't comment on specifics," a Google spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement. "To be clear though, Gmail -- like most Web mail providers -- uses automatic scanning to fight against spam and viruses. We use similar technology to show advertisements that help keep our services free. This is how Gmail has always worked."

Google pre-emptively addressed the issues raised in the complaint in its Gmail privacy policy. The company acknowledges that while it has heard concerns that Gmail may compromise the privacy of those sending messages to Gmail users, such worries arise from a misunderstanding of how Gmail works.

"Using Gmail does not violate the privacy of senders since no one other than the recipient is allowed to read their e-mail messages, and no one but the recipient sees targeted ads and related information," the company states in its Gmail privacy policy.

Google argues that e-mail recipients have the right to view e-mail messages using the service of their choosing and that on the Internet senders are not required to consent to automated scanning, which every e-mail provider does, for security purposes if nothing else.

Register today for Enterprise Connect, which offers the most in-depth information on enterprise communications. It happens in Orlando, Fla., Feb. 28 to March 3. Find out more.

Return to Top

Attorneys representing Texas resident Keith Dunbar on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against Google alleging that Gmail violates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986.

The lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue more frequently noted for patent infringement complaints. The issue in this particular case is the way that Gmail scans the content of e-mail messages to serve targeted ads.

The complaint objects to Gmail's use of information in e-mail messages sent to Gmail accounts by those who don't use Gmail.

"Google intercepts and uses the information from non-Gmail account holders without regard to the privacy or proprietary nature of the information," the complaint states. "As result of Google's actions intercepting non-Gmail account holders' e-mail, Google obtains a monetary benefit without the consent of the Class members and without compensation to them."

This is not a new objection and isn't ikely to trouble Google's legal department much. Eric Goldman, associate professor of law at Santa Clara University School of Law, characterizes the complaint as an "are-you-kidding-me? lawsuit" on his blog.

"[T]he topic was exhaustively debated when Gmail first publicly launched in 2004," said Goldman in an e-mail. "There were numerous calls on government agencies to investigate Google, and Cal. Sen. Figueroa proposed anti-Gmail legislation in the California legislature. Frankly, after all the furor died down a half-decade ago, I had assumed everyone had moved on long ago."

"We haven't received a formal complaint and can't comment on specifics," a Google spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement. "To be clear though, Gmail -- like most Web mail providers -- uses automatic scanning to fight against spam and viruses. We use similar technology to show advertisements that help keep our services free. This is how Gmail has always worked."

Google pre-emptively addressed the issues raised in the complaint in its Gmail privacy policy. The company acknowledges that while it has heard concerns that Gmail may compromise the privacy of those sending messages to Gmail users, such worries arise from a misunderstanding of how Gmail works.

"Using Gmail does not violate the privacy of senders since no one other than the recipient is allowed to read their e-mail messages, and no one but the recipient sees targeted ads and related information," the company states in its Gmail privacy policy.

Google argues that e-mail recipients have the right to view e-mail messages using the service of their choosing and that on the Internet senders are not required to consent to automated scanning, which every e-mail provider does, for security purposes if nothing else.

Return to Top

Attorneys representing Texas resident Keith Dunbar on Wednesday filed alleging that Gmail violates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986.

The lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue more frequently noted for patent infringement complaints. The issue in this particular case is the way that Gmail scans the content of e-mail messages to serve targeted ads.

The complaint objects to Gmail's use of information in e-mail messages sent to Gmail accounts by those who don't use Gmail.

"Google intercepts and uses the information from non-Gmail account holders without regard to the privacy or proprietary nature of the information," the complaint states. "As result of Google's actions intercepting non-Gmail account holders' e-mail, Google obtains a monetary benefit without the consent of the Class members and without compensation to them."

This is not a new objection and isn't ikely to trouble Google's legal department much. Eric Goldman, associate professor of law at Santa Clara University School of Law, characterizes the complaint as an "are-you-kidding-me? lawsuit" on .

"[T]he topic was exhaustively debated when Gmail first publicly launched in 2004," said Goldman in an e-mail. "There were numerous calls on government agencies to investigate Google, and Cal. Sen. Figueroa proposed anti-Gmail legislation in the California legislature. Frankly, after all the furor died down a half-decade ago, I had assumed everyone had moved on long ago."

"We haven't received a formal complaint and can't comment on specifics," a Google spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement. "To be clear though, Gmail -- like most Web mail providers -- uses automatic scanning to fight against spam and viruses. We use similar technology to show advertisements that help keep our services free. This is how Gmail has always worked."

Google pre-emptively addressed the issues raised in the complaint in its . The company acknowledges that while it has heard concerns that Gmail may compromise the privacy of those sending messages to Gmail users, such worries arise from a misunderstanding of how Gmail works.

"Using Gmail does not violate the privacy of senders since no one other than the recipient is allowed to read their e-mail messages, and no one but the recipient sees targeted ads and related information," the company states in its Gmail privacy policy.

Google argues that e-mail recipients have the right to view e-mail messages using the service of their choosing and that on the Internet senders are not required to consent to automated scanning, which every e-mail provider does, for security purposes if nothing else.

Copyright © 2010 CMP Media LLC

Return to Top

A graduate course in theology will be
offered in San Francisco beginning Feb. 1,
accommodating Catholic school teachers
and others seeking to advance their careers
and filling a void created in 2009 when the
University of San Francisco ended its master's
program in theology.

The new program – beginning with a
single, 14-week course in the spring semester
but broadening thereafter – is being offered
by the Jesuit School of Theology-Santa
Clara University as part of its “Theology
After Hours,” or flexible course offering.
The program is launching with a course titled
“Spirituality and Ministry,” taught by William
Dohar, director of the graduate program in
Theology and Ministry at the Jesuit School of
Theology of Santa Clara University.

Last spring, USF announced it was discontinuing
its master's degree program in theology
to concentrate its resources on undergraduate
theology and religious studies. At the time,
there was demand for only three courses, each
with an average of six students. The Jesuit-run
university pledged to work with the Jesuits'
Santa Clara University and the Jesuit School
of Theology, as well as the Archdiocese of San
Francisco, to keep the program alive – and find
a venue within San Francisco.

The course will be taught at St Agnes
Church, 1025 Masonic Ave. “Spirituality and
Ministry” will be offered Tuesdays, 6-9 p.m.
“It's one Jesuit institution handing the baton
to another,” Dohar said.

The Archdiocese in part wanted a graduate
course available in San Francisco to accommodate
San Franciscans.

“I am grateful to all involved for making
this opportunity available for our local
Church,” said Msgr. James Tarantino, Vicar
for Administration and Moderator of the
Curia. “Due to time and availability, many
of our teachers and catechists find it difficult
to further their education in the area of
theology. The course offerings will make a
huge difference for those who are interested
in enhancing their degrees for the benefit of
their students. This kind of collaboration is
another great example to our local society of
the strength and richness of the Church here
in the Archdiocese of San Francisco.”

Catholic school teachers can move up the
salary scale if they earn a master's degree in
theology, said Janet Suzio, assistant superintendent
for Faith Formation and Religious
Instruction at the Archdiocese of San
Francisco. As a practical matter, Suzio, who
has a master's degree in Catholic educational
leadership, said she should have the degree
herself given her job – adult faith formation
– and she will be enrolling.

“We hope teachers will take advantage of
this as a continuing form of faith formation,”
said Suzio. The first course, in “Spirituality
and Ministry,” said Suzio, should give students
“a deeper sense of faith,” and hopefully
they will be able to apply it to their practical
life, and bring it to the classroom.

The ultimate beneficiaries of a graduate
theology program, she said, are school
children, and it dovetails with her efforts as
an assistant superintendent. “We teach adults
how to model the faith,” she said. She added
that teachers will be given an “incentive
grant” with a 50 percent tuition break.

Specific course offerings for summer and
fall are still being discussed, said Dohar, but
it is expected they will include an introduction
to theology, a history of Catholicism, fundamentals
in moral theology and the Psalms.

The degree the students work to earn is
the Master of Theological Studies, which,
Dohar said, combines a broad understanding
of the Catholic theological vision with liturgy,
history, spirituality and ethics.

He added that while he is offering the
first course in the San Francisco program,
several Jesuit scholars and lay faculty at Jesuit
School of Theology Berkeley campus as well
as the Santa Clara University main campus
are interested in the “Theology After Hours”
option in San Francisco.

Dohar said the master's course “is an
ideal program for persons engaged in ministry
or seeking theological enrichment and a
rewarding exploration of their faith.” He said
students “become theologically literate in the
scriptures, doctoral history and the ethical
consequences of that doctrine. Students also
learn a theology of ministry for service in a
changing Church and world.”

Ideally, added Souza, the program at St.
Agnes will have a core group of some 20
students studying for a master's degree.
For more information, visit the course
website at scu.edu/jst/academics/theologyafterhours
or e-mail admissions@jstb.edu

Return to Top

IT IS INDEED. AND A SPOKESPERSON TOLD ME LAST QUARTER THE COMPANY HIRED ABOUT 1500 PEOPLE AND THE SPREE RAMPED UP YET ANOTHER NOTCH. GOOD NEWS IS TRAVELING FAST. THIS WOMAN ISN'T WASTING NIM APPLYING FOR ONE OF THE MORE THAN 2000 JOB OPENINGS. HE'S BEEN OUT OF WORK SINCE JUNE, WITH A BACKGROUND IN ENGINEERING AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT. LOOKING AT FIELD POSITIONS I MAY HAVE SOME QUALIFICATIONS EXPERIENCE TO OFFER. THE WORLD'S DOMINANT SEARCH ENGINE ISSUED THIS STATEMENT TO ABC 7. GOOGLE IS HIRING ACROSS THE BOARD WITH A FOCUS IN SALES, AND ENGINEERING. AND IS IN A WAR WITH FACEBOOK, TWITTER AND OTHERS ANNOUNCED A 10% PAY RAISE AND BONUSES FOR 23,000 EMPLOYEES. FOR ENGINEERS, ESPECIALLY, THE BIDDING WARS ARE BACK. THIS RECRUITMENT VIDEO EMPHASIZES A STIMULATING, FUN WORK ENVIRONMENT WITH PERKS. YOU HAVE YOGA AND PILATES. I LOVE MASSAGES. LET ME MENTION THE FOOD. IT'S GREAT. THE EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SAYS ENGINEERS ARE AMONG THE FASTEST GROWING OCCUPATIONS AND THE 10 YEAR PROJECTED GROWTH IS 25% TO 45%DEPENDING ON EXPERTISE. WE VERIFIED THAT THERE IS A DEMAND FOR ENGINEERING AND IT'S ALL OVER THE BAY AREA. REALLY. THIS ECONOMY RECOVERS FROM RECESSION, HE AND OTHERS HOPE GOOGLE'S HIRING ANNOUNCEMENT HAS A TRIPLE AFFECT. WE NEED MORE INDUSTRY LEADERS TO INJECT CONFIDENCE INTO THE MARKET. THE DEMAND IS GREAT FOR THE ECONOMY. THAT IS BECAUSE THESE GR-PAYING JOB WAS A MULTIPLYER AFFECT WHEN SALARIES ARE SPREAD OUT, WHETHER SHOPPING OR REMODELING OR EATING OUT OO. THANK YOU. AND FROM TECH JOBS TO MANUFACTURING ONES, THEY'RE ON THE RISE IN SILICON VALLEY. 4100 OF THEM CREATED IN THE PAST YEAR ALONE. DAVID LOUIE SHOWS US WHO ELSE IS HIRING. THE ECONOMY HAS TURNED AROUND IN SAN JOSE. THE MAYOR CHUCK READ IS EXPRESSING OPTIMISM. SO ARE LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT ARE EXPANDING AND HIRING. JIM WELD ONIS CEO OF SOLAR JUNCTION. HE'S GOING TO ADD 85 PEOPLE. MOST PEOPLE HOLD OFF HIRING UNTIL THEY KNOW THE ECONOMY REBOUNDED. WAITING IN THAT SENSE IS A LITTLE MORE DANGEROUS FROM THAT STANDPOINT SO. WE GO MORE BY MEETING TRENDS THAN WE'D GO BY, YOU KNOW, SEEING THAT WE HAVE EVIDENCE OF IT. HE WANTS TO CREATE JOBS NOT OVERSEAS. MARK MITCHELL SENSES A TURN AROUND, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER AT SIRIUS ENERGY. HIS COMPANY INSTALLED A SYSTEM AT SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY. AND IT CAN MANAGE AN ARRAY OF NALT TIFF SOURCES. THIS IS AND COULD WITH WIND TO DELIVER LOCAL POWERNESS TROY RUN A FREE AND SUSTAINABLE BASIS OFF THE GRID. TAX CREDITS MAY NOT LAST, SOLAR COMPANIES SAY RETURN ON INVESTMENT WILL GROW THEIR PRODUCT SAELTS. 50 IF YOU CAN ULTRAMIZ YOUR CONDITIONING OR LIGHTING SYSTEM WITH MORE SMARTS THAN HAVE YOU TODAY, WHICH IS A SIMPLE CONTROL, THEN IT MAKES, YOU KNOW, HUGE FINANCIAL SENSE.

Return to Top

SAN FRANCISCO — The words seem straightforward enough: special, reduced, exclusive, value. And they're more familiar than ever, now that it's hip to compare discounts and deals, now that parsimony is a point of pride.

But the language retailers use to describe prices and promotions leaves lots of room for interpretation — and manipulation. And in the wake of the recession stores are using this lingo to reframe how shoppers think.

The most dangerous word of all? "Free."

Whether it's free shipping, buy-one-get-one-free, or a free gift card if you buy something, nothing is free if you must spend money to receive it. Even so, retailers know you won't see it that way.

"Customers love the idea of getting something for nothing, and it's shocking to me how much they're willing to spend to get that something for nothing," says Kit Yarrow, psychology department chair and marketing professor at Golden Gate University in San Francisco.

Most people probably realize, if they stop to think about it, that the retailer will shift the cost somehow. But most people don't stop to think.

"What I hear is 'free,' " says Ed McQuarrie, an associate dean and marketing professor at Santa Clara University's business school in California. "For me to construct the total shipping plus stated price now versus then, this discount versus everything, all I have to calculate, that's a lot of work."

After the recession gave shoppers new confidence they will find bargains, retailers had to "up their game," Yarrow says.

Stores are doing that by bringing to prices the same kind of emotional freight that advertising and branding have long carried, she says. "Retailers have to get that heart rate up to get the wallet out, and there's nothing like the fear of missing out."

In addition to "free" and "limited" offers, retailers are using Facebook, Twitter and e-mail to promote discount "clubs," all kinds of coupons and "private" short-term online sales that customers must sign up to enter. Stores are also hawking "inside" deals to "friends and family."

Don't fall for it. You can know a deal is good only if you know what items normally cost. And you can do that only by comparison shopping — in person and online — and never letting down your guard.

"We are going to get the discount one way or another," says Yarrow, calling discounts "standard" in the wake of the dramatic price cuts of late 2008.

Marketers want you to see purchase decisions now as opportunities — ways to do something special and define yourself — rather than rational choices, Yarrow says.

But all the traditional ploys are alive and well too. There are still plenty of comparisons with "regular" prices that businesses need only charge for a short time to be able to advertise "new," ''discounted" or "reduced" prices, even if the cut is only a matter of pennies.

"The way that we react to prices is really a lot like the way we react to other physical sensations," says author William Poundstone. "We have no inner price sense, that this is the right price.... Instead, we're very sensitive to contrast."

Even people with smartphones, which retailers initially saw as a grave threat, rarely use the dozens of apps that would let them do a reality check inside a store, says Poundstone, author of "The Myth of Fair Value" and other books.

All this is part of businesses "systematically" removing barriers that might prevent people from making impulsive purchases, says David Bell, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who focuses on prices. Almost as effective as giving things away, he says, is charging a membership fee — think of warehouse club memberships or Amazon.com's flat annual shipping charge.

"Normally, I might say, 'I'm not going to buy those tennis balls until I need a new racket as well,'" Bell says. "But if I'm encountering Amazon Prime or a situation like Walmart is doing — all shipping for free — people are much more likely to make all sorts of small purchases."

The fees can make you feel obligated to spend — to get value for the "membership." Bell's research revealed that even people who shop regularly at warehouse clubs spend an average of $100 extra on the day they renew their membership.

"You see people trying to amortize," he says.

To avoid being taken in, research the product itself, especially in the case of items like mattresses or appliances, where the variations among models are almost infinite. Instead of comparing just prices, you should know why given features are important, which you most value and what models would work best for you.

"So if you get a discount on what you really want, you've gotten something really valuable," says Robert Schindler, a marketing professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey. "If it's not what you really want, how good a deal are you really getting?"

Return to Top

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howle used a spinning wire basket and ping pong-style lottery balls to choose the first eight members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Those members in turn will select the final six members of the commission by Dec. 31. The 14 member-commission is charged with drawing new state legislative and congressional districts by Aug. 15, in time for the 2012 elections.

Voters removed the responsibility for drawing legislative boundaries from the state Legislature by passing a 2008 ballot initiative. They expanded the commission's scope in this month's election by adding congressional districts.

Supporters of the independent commission hope it will lead to more competitive districts that will give all candidates a fair shot at winning, thus reducing the partisanship in Sacramento and in the congressional delegation California sends to Washington.

"That's what this is all about," Howle said. "It's about the people of California having the opportunity to draw the lines for their districts."

The eight people selected Thursday include three men and five women. Four are Asian, two are white, one is black and one is Hispanic. Five of the eight come from Northern California, the others from the southern part of the state.

By design,

three are Republicans, three are Democrats and two are from neither major party. The final panel must include five Democrats, five Republicans and four voters registered outside those parties.

"It seems like it's a very diverse group," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that helped devise the final selection procedure.

The eight were narrowed from an initial list of about 30,000 applicants.

Voters decided to switch to a citizens commission to draw legislative maps after state lawmakers for decades used the process to protect their own incumbents and their parties.

"It was really an incumbency-protection plan," said Angelo Ancheta, who teaches voting rights and election law at the Santa Clara University School of Law.

He was one of the applicants not chosen on Thursday, but hopes to be selected by the eight who were.

Previous gerrymandering of political boundaries has left the state with oddly shaped districts and little turnover between the parties. For instance, just one seat shifted between political parties during elections this month for 100 state legislative seats.

The independent commission will draw the maps for all 120 state Senate and Assembly districts, the state's 53 congressional districts and for the districts represented on the five-member Board of Equalization.

Opponents said the boundaries drawn by the commission will face an inevitable legal challenge.

The Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group for the poor and minorities based in Berkeley, noted that Asians are well represented on the initial panel, but other ethnic and geographic gaps will have to be filled with the selection of the final six members to have a proper balance. For instance, there were no representatives chosen from the population centers of Orange and San Diego counties and one from the Central Valley. The group says it plans to closely monitor the commission's work.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promoted the 2008 ballot measure after other efforts repeatedly failed to change the legislative redistricting process. Schwarzenegger has said more competitive districts could mean more moderate politicians will be elected, enabling more compromises than the partisan deadlock that so often thwarts change.

"Redistricting reform is one of the most important political reforms in the history of California," the governor said in a statement after the eight were chosen.

Incumbent politicians spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to defeat the commission initiatives.

Redistricting is required by law every 10 years after the U.S. Census is taken.

California is one of at least 13 states that created commissions to draw districts in time for the 2012 elections. Seven other states have advisory panels or backup commissions that take over only if the Legislature fails to draw its own maps.

Return to Top

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howle used a spinning wire basket and ping pong-style lottery balls to choose the first eight members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Those members in turn will select the final six members of the commission by Dec. 31. The 14 member-commission is charged with drawing new state legislative and congressional districts by Aug. 15, in time for the 2012 elections.

Voters removed the responsibility for drawing legislative boundaries from the state Legislature by passing a 2008 ballot initiative. They expanded the commission's scope in this month's election by adding congressional districts.

Supporters of the independent commission hope it will lead to more competitive districts that will give all candidates a fair shot at winning, thus reducing the partisanship in Sacramento and in the congressional delegation California sends to Washington.

"That's what this is all about," Howle said. "It's about the people of California having the opportunity to draw the lines for their districts."

The eight people selected Thursday include three men and five women. Four are Asian, two are white, one is black and one is Hispanic. Five of the eight come from Northern California, the others from the southern part of the state.

By design,

three are Republicans, three are Democrats and two are from neither major party. The final panel must include five Democrats, five Republicans and four voters registered outside those parties.

"It seems like it's a very diverse group," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that helped devise the final selection procedure.

The eight were narrowed from an initial list of about 30,000 applicants.

Voters decided to switch to a citizens commission to draw legislative maps after state lawmakers for decades used the process to protect their own incumbents and their parties.

"It was really an incumbency-protection plan," said Angelo Ancheta, who teaches voting rights and election law at the Santa Clara University School of Law.

He was one of the applicants not chosen on Thursday, but hopes to be selected by the eight who were.

Previous gerrymandering of political boundaries has left the state with oddly shaped districts and little turnover between the parties. For instance, just one seat shifted between political parties during elections this month for 100 state legislative seats.

The independent commission will draw the maps for all 120 state Senate and Assembly districts, the state's 53 congressional districts and for the districts represented on the five-member Board of Equalization.

Opponents said the boundaries drawn by the commission will face an inevitable legal challenge.

The Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group for the poor and minorities based in Berkeley, noted that Asians are well represented on the initial panel, but other ethnic and geographic gaps will have to be filled with the selection of the final six members to have a proper balance. For instance, there were no representatives chosen from the population centers of Orange and San Diego counties and one from the Central Valley. The group says it plans to closely monitor the commission's work.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promoted the 2008 ballot measure after other efforts repeatedly failed to change the legislative redistricting process. Schwarzenegger has said more competitive districts could mean more moderate politicians will be elected, enabling more compromises than the partisan deadlock that so often thwarts change.

"Redistricting reform is one of the most important political reforms in the history of California," the governor said in a statement after the eight were chosen.

Incumbent politicians spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to defeat the commission initiatives.

Redistricting is required by law every 10 years after the U.S. Census is taken.

California is one of at least 13 states that created commissions to draw districts in time for the 2012 elections. Seven other states have advisory panels or backup commissions that take over only if the Legislature fails to draw its own maps.

Return to Top

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howle used a spinning wire basket and ping pong-style lottery balls to choose the first eight members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Those members in turn will select the final six members of the commission by Dec. 31. The 14 member-commission is charged with drawing new state legislative and congressional districts by Aug. 15, in time for the 2012 elections.

Voters removed the responsibility for drawing legislative boundaries from the state Legislature by passing a 2008 ballot initiative. They expanded the commission's scope in this month's election by adding congressional districts.

Supporters of the independent commission hope it will lead to more competitive districts that will give all candidates a fair shot at winning, thus reducing the partisanship in Sacramento and in the congressional delegation California sends to Washington.

"That's what this is all about," Howle said. "It's about the people of California having the opportunity to draw the lines for their districts."

The eight people selected Thursday include three men and five women. Four are Asian, two are white, one is black and one is Hispanic. Five of the eight come from Northern California, the others from the southern part of the state.

By design, three are Republicans, three are Democrats and two are from neither major party. The final panel must include five Democrats, five Republicans and four voters registered outside those parties.

"It seems like it's a very diverse group," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that helped devise the final selection procedure.

The eight were narrowed from an initial list of about 30,000 applicants.

Voters decided to switch to a citizens commission to draw legislative maps after state lawmakers for decades used the process to protect their own incumbents and their parties.

"It was really an incumbency-protection plan," said Angelo Ancheta, who teaches voting rights and election law at the Santa Clara University School of Law.

He was one of the applicants not chosen on Thursday, but hopes to be selected by the eight who were.

Previous gerrymandering of political boundaries has left the state with oddly shaped districts and little turnover between the parties. For instance, just one seat shifted between political parties during elections this month for 100 state legislative seats.

The independent commission will draw the maps for all 120 state Senate and Assembly districts, the state's 53 congressional districts and for the districts represented on the five-member Board of Equalization.

Commissioners will be paid $300 a day plus expenses each time they meet. The Legislature and governor have allocated $4 million for the commission's work from the state's financially strapped general fund.

Opponents said the boundaries drawn by the commission will face an inevitable legal challenge.

The Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group for the poor and minorities based in Berkeley, noted that Asians are well represented on the initial panel, but other ethnic and geographic gaps will have to be filled with the selection of the final six members to have a proper balance. For instance, there were no representatives chosen from the population centers of Orange and San Diego counties and one from the Central Valley. The group says it plans to closely monitor the commission's work.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promoted the 2008 ballot measure after other efforts repeatedly failed to change the legislative redistricting process. Schwarzenegger has said more competitive districts could mean more moderate politicians will be elected, enabling more compromises than the partisan deadlock that so often thwarts change.

"Redistricting reform is one of the most important political reforms in the history of California," the governor said in a statement after the eight were chosen.

Incumbent politicians spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to defeat the commission initiatives.

Redistricting is required by law every 10 years after the U.S. Census is taken.

California is one of at least 13 states that created commissions to draw districts in time for the 2012 elections. Seven other states have advisory panels or backup commissions that take over only if the Legislature fails to draw its own maps.

Return to Top

One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howe displays one of the ping pong-style lottery balls to be used to select the first members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission before placing it in the wire basket for the drawing for the first eight commission members held in Sacramento, Calif., Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howle used a spinning wire basket and ping pong-style lottery balls to choose the first eight members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Those members in turn will select the final six members of the commission by Dec. 31. The 14 member-commission is charged with drawing new state legislative and congressional districts by Aug. 15, in time for the 2012 elections.

Voters removed the responsibility for drawing legislative boundaries from the state Legislature by passing a 2008 ballot initiative. They expanded the commission's scope in this month's election by adding congressional districts.

Supporters of the independent commission hope it will lead to more competitive districts that will give all candidates a fair shot at winning, thus reducing the partisanship in Sacramento and in the congressional delegation California sends to Washington.

"That's what this is all about," Howle said. "It's about the people of California having the opportunity to draw the lines for their districts."

The eight people selected Thursday include three men and five women. Four are Asian, two are white, one is black and one is Hispanic. Five of the eight come from Northern California, the others from the southern part of the state.

By design, three are Republicans, three are Democrats and two are from neither major party. The final panel must include five Democrats, five Republicans and four voters registered outside those parties.

"It seems like it's a very diverse group," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that helped devise the final selection procedure.

The eight were narrowed from an initial list of about 30,000 applicants.

Voters decided to switch to a citizens commission to draw legislative maps after state lawmakers for decades used the process to protect their own incumbents and their parties.

"It was really an incumbency-protection plan," said Angelo Ancheta, who teaches voting rights and election law at the Santa Clara University School of Law.

He was one of the applicants not chosen on Thursday, but hopes to be selected by the eight who were.

Previous gerrymandering of political boundaries has left the state with oddly shaped districts and little turnover between the parties. For instance, just one seat shifted between political parties during elections this month for 100 state legislative seats.

The independent commission will draw the maps for all 120 state Senate and Assembly districts, the state's 53 congressional districts and for the districts represented on the five-member Board of Equalization.

Opponents said the boundaries drawn by the commission will face an inevitable legal challenge.

The Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group for the poor and minorities based in Berkeley, noted that Asians are well represented on the initial panel, but other ethnic and geographic gaps will have to be filled with the selection of the final six members to have a proper balance. For instance, there were no representatives chosen from the population centers of Orange and San Diego counties and one from the Central Valley. The group says it plans to closely monitor the commission's work.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promoted the 2008 ballot measure after other efforts repeatedly failed to change the legislative redistricting process. Schwarzenegger has said more competitive districts could mean more moderate politicians will be elected, enabling more compromises than the partisan deadlock that so often thwarts change.

"Redistricting reform is one of the most important political reforms in the history of California," the governor said in a statement after the eight were chosen.

Incumbent politicians spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to defeat the commission initiatives.

Redistricting is required by law every 10 years after the U.S. Census is taken.

California is one of at least 13 states that created commissions to draw districts in time for the 2012 elections. Seven other states have advisory panels or backup commissions that take over only if the Legislature fails to draw its own maps.

Return to Top

Created: 11/18/2010 01:37:36 PM PST

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howle used a spinning wire basket and ping pong-style lottery balls to choose the first eight members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Those members in turn will select the final six members of the commission by Dec. 31. The 14 member-commission is charged with drawing new state legislative and congressional districts by Aug. 15, in time for the 2012 elections.

Voters removed the responsibility for drawing legislative boundaries from the state Legislature by passing a 2008 ballot initiative. They expanded the commission's scope in this month's election by adding congressional districts.

Supporters of the independent commission hope it will lead to more competitive districts that will give all candidates a fair shot at winning, thus reducing the partisanship in Sacramento and in the congressional delegation California sends to Washington.

"That's what this is all about," Howle said. "It's about the people of California having the opportunity to draw the lines for their districts."

The eight people selected Thursday include three men and five women. Four are Asian, two are white, one is black and one is Hispanic. Five of the eight come from Northern California, the others from the southern part of the state.

By design,

three are Republicans, three are Democrats and two are from neither major party. The final panel must include five Democrats, five Republicans and four voters registered outside those parties.

"It seems like it's a very diverse group," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that helped devise the final selection procedure.

The eight were narrowed from an initial list of about 30,000 applicants.

Voters decided to switch to a citizens commission to draw legislative maps after state lawmakers for decades used the process to protect their own incumbents and their parties.

"It was really an incumbency-protection plan," said Angelo Ancheta, who teaches voting rights and election law at the Santa Clara University School of Law.

He was one of the applicants not chosen on Thursday, but hopes to be selected by the eight who were.

Previous gerrymandering of political boundaries has left the state with oddly shaped districts and little turnover between the parties. For instance, just one seat shifted between political parties during elections this month for 100 state legislative seats.

The independent commission will draw the maps for all 120 state Senate and Assembly districts, the state's 53 congressional districts and for the districts represented on the five-member Board of Equalization.

Opponents said the boundaries drawn by the commission will face an inevitable legal challenge.

The Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group for the poor and minorities based in Berkeley, noted that Asians are well represented on the initial panel, but other ethnic and geographic gaps will have to be filled with the selection of the final six members to have a proper balance. For instance, there were no representatives chosen from the population centers of Orange and San Diego counties and one from the Central Valley. The group says it plans to closely monitor the commission's work.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promoted the 2008 ballot measure after other efforts repeatedly failed to change the legislative redistricting process. Schwarzenegger has said more competitive districts could mean more moderate politicians will be elected, enabling more compromises than the partisan deadlock that so often thwarts change.

"Redistricting reform is one of the most important political reforms in the history of California," the governor said in a statement after the eight were chosen.

Incumbent politicians spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to defeat the commission initiatives.

Redistricting is required by law every 10 years after the U.S. Census is taken.

California is one of at least 13 states that created commissions to draw districts in time for the 2012 elections. Seven other states have advisory panels or backup commissions that take over only if the Legislature fails to draw its own maps.

Return to Top

SACRAMENTO — One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howle used a spinning wire basket and ping pong-style lottery balls to choose the first eight members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Those members in turn will select the final six members of the commission by Dec. 31. The 14 member-commission is charged with drawing new state legislative and congressional districts by Aug. 15, in time for the 2012 elections.

Voters removed the responsibility for drawing legislative boundaries from the state Legislature by passing a 2008 ballot initiative. They expanded the commission's scope in this month's election by adding congressional districts. Supporters of the independent commission hope it will lead to more competitive districts that will give all candidates a fair shot at winning, thus reducing the partisanship in Sacramento and in the congressional delegation California sends to Washington.

“That's what this is all about,” Howle said. “It's about the people of California having the opportunity to draw the lines for their districts.”

The eight people selected Thursday include three men and five women. Four are Asian, two are white, one is black and one is Hispanic. Five of the eight come from Northern California, the others from the southern part of the state.

By design, three are Republicans, three are Democrats and two are from neither major party. The final panel must include five Democrats, five Republicans and four voters registered outside those parties.

“It seems like it's a very diverse group,” said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that helped devise the final selection procedure.

The eight were narrowed from an initial list of about 30,000 applicants.

Voters decided to switch to a citizens commission to draw legislative maps after state lawmakers for decades used the process to protect their own incumbents and their parties.

“It was really an incumbency-protection plan,” said Angelo Ancheta, who teaches voting rights and election law at the Santa Clara University School of Law.

He was one of the applicants not chosen on Thursday, but hopes to be selected by the eight who were.

Previous gerrymandering of political boundaries has left the state with oddly shaped districts and little turnover between the parties. For instance, just one seat shifted between political parties during elections this month for 100 state legislative seats.

The independent commission will draw the maps for all 120 state Senate and Assembly districts, the state's 53 congressional districts and for the districts represented on the five-member Board of Equalization.

Commissioners will be paid $300 a day plus expenses each time they meet. The Legislature and governor have allocated $4 million for the commission's work from the state's financially strapped general fund.

Opponents said the boundaries drawn by the commission will face an inevitable legal challenge.

The Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group for the poor and minorities based in Berkeley, noted that Asians are well represented on the initial panel, but other ethnic and geographic gaps will have to be filled with the selection of the final six members to have a proper balance. For instance, there were no representatives chosen from the population centers of Orange and San Diego counties and one from the Central Valley. The group says it plans to closely monitor the commission's work.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promoted the 2008 ballot measure after other efforts repeatedly failed to change the legislative redistricting process. Schwarzenegger has said more competitive districts could mean more moderate politicians will be elected, enabling more compromises than the partisan deadlock that so often thwarts change.

“Redistricting reform is one of the most important political reforms in the history of California,” the governor said in a statement after the eight were chosen.

Incumbent politicians spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to defeat the commission initiatives.

Redistricting is required by law every 10 years after the U.S. Census is taken.

California is one of at least 13 states that created commissions to draw districts in time for the 2012 elections. Seven other states have advisory panels or backup commissions that take over only if the Legislature fails to draw its own maps.

Return to Top

SACRAMENTO -- One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howle used a spinning wire basket and ping pong-style lottery balls to choose the first eight members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Those members in turn will select the final six members of the commission by Dec. 31. The 14 member-commission is charged with drawing new state legislative and congressional districts by Aug. 15, in time for the 2012 elections.

Voters removed the responsibility for drawing legislative boundaries from the state Legislature by passing a 2008 ballot initiative. They expanded the commission's scope in this month's election by adding congressional districts.

Supporters of the independent commission hope it will lead to more competitive districts that will give all candidates a fair shot at winning, thus reducing the partisanship in Sacramento and in the congressional delegation California sends to Washington.

"That's what this is all about," Howle said. "It's about the people of California having the opportunity to draw the lines for their districts."

The eight people selected Thursday include three men and five women. Four are Asian, two are white, one is black and one is Hispanic. Five of the eight come from Northern California, the others from the southern part of the state.

By

design, three are Republicans, three are Democrats and two are from neither major party. The final panel must include five Democrats, five Republicans and four voters registered outside those parties.

Three of the eight are from the Bay Area: Connie Galambos Malloy of Oakland, nonpartisan; Cynthia Dai of San Francisco, Democrat; and Elaine Kuo of Mountain View, Democrat.

"It seems like it's a very diverse group," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that helped devise the final selection procedure.

The eight were narrowed from an initial list of about 30,000 applicants.

Voters decided to switch to a citizens commission to draw legislative maps after state lawmakers for decades used the process to protect their own incumbents and their parties.

"It was really an incumbency-protection plan," said Angelo Ancheta, who teaches voting rights and election law at the Santa Clara University School of Law.

He was one of the applicants not chosen on Thursday, but hopes to be selected by the eight who were.

Previous gerrymandering of political boundaries has left the state with oddly shaped districts and little turnover between the parties. For instance, just one seat shifted between political parties during elections this month for 100 state legislative seats.

The independent commission will draw the maps for all 120 state Senate and Assembly districts, the state's 53 congressional districts and for the districts represented on the five-member Board of Equalization.

Commissioners will be paid $300 a day plus expenses each time they meet. The Legislature and governor have allocated $4 million for the commission's work from the state's financially strapped general fund.

Opponents said the boundaries drawn by the commission will face an inevitable legal challenge.

The Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group for the poor and minorities based in Berkeley, noted that Asians are well represented on the initial panel, but other ethnic and geographic gaps will have to be filled with the selection of the final six members to have a proper balance. For instance, there were no representatives chosen from the population centers of Orange and San Diego counties and one from the Central Valley. The group says it plans to closely monitor the commission's work.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promoted the 2008 ballot measure after other efforts repeatedly failed to change the legislative redistricting process. Schwarzenegger has said more competitive districts could mean more moderate politicians will be elected, enabling more compromises than the partisan deadlock that so often thwarts change.

"Redistricting reform is one of the most important political reforms in the history of California," the governor said in a statement after the eight were chosen.

Incumbent politicians spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to defeat the commission initiatives.

Redistricting is required by law every 10 years after the U.S. Census is taken.

California is one of at least 13 states that created commissions to draw districts in time for the 2012 elections. Seven other states have advisory panels or backup commissions that take over only if the Legislature fails to draw its own maps.

The Contra Costa Times contributed to this report.

Return to Top

SACRAMENTO — One of California's biggest political-reform efforts in decades took a major step Thursday after initial members of a redistricting commission were selected in a random drawing.

State Auditor Elaine Howle used a spinning wire basket and ping pong-style lottery balls to choose the first eight members of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Those members in turn will select the final six members of the commission by Dec. 31. The 14-member commission is charged with drawing new state legislative and congressional districts by Aug. 15, in time for the 2012 elections.

Voters removed the responsibility for drawing legislative boundaries from the state Legislature by passing a 2008 ballot initiative. They expanded the commission's scope in this month's election by adding congressional districts.

Supporters of the independent commission hope it will lead to more competitive districts that will give all candidates a fair shot at winning, thus reducing the partisanship in Sacramento and in the congressional delegation California sends to Washington.

"That's what this is all about," Howle said. "It's about the people of California having the opportunity to draw the lines for their districts."

The eight people selected Thursday include three men and five women. Four are Asian, two are white, one is black and one is Hispanic. Five of the eight come from Northern California, the others from the southern part of the state.

A 'very diverse' group

By design, three are Republicans, three are Democrats and two are from neither major party. The final panel must include five Democrats, five Republicans and four voters registered outside those parties.

"It seems like it's a very diverse group," said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, a nonprofit that helped devise the final selection procedure.

The eight were narrowed from an initial list of about 30,000 applicants.

Voters take powerfrom Legislature

Voters decided to switch to a citizens commission to draw legislative maps after state lawmakers for decades used the process to protect their own incumbents and their parties.

"It was really an incumbency-protection plan," said Angelo Ancheta, who teaches voting rights and election law at the Santa Clara University School of Law.

He was one of the applicants not chosen on Thursday, but hopes to be selected by the eight who were.

Previous gerrymandering of political boundaries has left the state with oddly shaped districts and little turnover between the parties. For instance, just one seat shifted between political parties during elections this month for 100 state legislative seats.

The independent commission will draw the maps for all 120 state Senate and Assembly districts, the state's 53 congressional districts and for the districts represented on the five-member Board of Equalization.

Commissioners will be paid $300 a day plus expenses each time they meet. The Legislature and governor have allocated $4 million for the commission's work from the state's financially strapped general fund.

Legal challenge in offing?

Opponents said the boundaries drawn by the commission will face an inevitable legal challenge.

The Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group for the poor and minorities based in Berkeley, noted that Asians are well represented on the initial panel, but other ethnic and geographic gaps will have to be filled with the selection of the final six members to have a proper balance. For instance, there were no representatives chosen from the population centers of Orange and San Diego counties and one from the Central Valley. The group says it plans to closely monitor the commission's work.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promoted the 2008 ballot measure after other efforts repeatedly failed to change the legislative redistricting process. Schwarzenegger has said more competitive districts could mean more moderate politicians will be elected, enabling more compromises than the partisan deadlock that so often thwarts change.

"Redistricting reform is one of the most important political reforms in the history of California," the governor said in a statement after the eight were chosen.

Incumbent politicians spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to defeat the commission initiatives.

Redistricting is required by law every 10 years after the U.S. Census is taken.

California is one of at least 13 states that created commissions to draw districts in time for the 2012 elections. Seven other states have advisory panels or backup commissions that take over only if the Legislature fails to draw its own maps.

Return to Top

MEDICAL POT INDUSTRY CLOSELY WATCHES CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL BALLOT COUNT

As Steve Cooley and Kamala Harris sweat out the ballot counting to determine California's next attorney general, perhaps no one is more anxious than advocates for medical marijuana shops.

Within the state medical marijuana industry, Cooley, the Los Angeles County district attorney, is widely perceived as pot persona non grata.

It isn't just Cooley's aggressive prosecutions of alleged abuses in Los Angeles dispensaries that stir medical marijuana activists. There are also his persistent declarations that he considers medical pot dispensaries to be illegal retail sales outlets.

Harris, San Francisco's district attorney, held a slim lead Wednesday in an ongoing ballot count that has been flip-flopping since election night.

The outcome - due by Dec. 3 - could determine how the state prosecutes medical marijuana cases and how the next attorney general will interpret guidelines for medical marijuana transactions approved by the Legislature in 2003.

"It certainly does make a difference," said Santa Clara University law professor Gerald Uelmen.

Should Cooley win, Uelman said, "I think ( marijuana ) prosecutions are likely to be mounted by the attorney general's office rather than local prosecutors, especially in counties that are friendly to medical marijuana."

Though pot prosecution wasn't a major issue for either campaign, Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group for people using medical marijuana, set up an anti-Cooley website. It declared: "The attorney general's race is, without a doubt, the most important ... for medical marijuana patients in California."

Both candidates opposed Proposition 19, the initiative to legalize marijuana for recreational use.

But Harris said she personally knew people "who have benefited" from medical marijuana - while Cooley praised a proposed ban on dispensaries in Los Angeles County and efforts by the city of Los Angeles to rein in its medical pot trade.

"Communities throughout the nation are waiting to see how we handle storefronts illegally pushing pot," he said.

Cooley argues that pot shops violate state medical marijuana laws, which define dispensaries as members-only nonprofits run by medical marijuana patients.

Harris' campaign manager, Brian Brokaw, said Wednesday that Harris "supports the legal use of medicinal marijuana but thinks California needs to bring consistent standards about ownership and operations of dispensaries."

Dale Gieringer, California director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said "it could be a nasty couple of years" for medical marijuana purveyors if Cooley is elected.

Gieringer said Cooley's tough-on-pot profile may have been a reaction to Los Angeles City Council demands for an answer to the city's pot shop boom.

Cooley jumped on the issue. Last year, he charged the operator of the Organica dispensary in Culver City with illegal marijuana sales, transportation and money laundering, alleging the pot shop was pocketing $400,000 a month. This year, he successfully prosecuted marijuana grow houses for dispensaries and won a no-contest plea from operators of a Granada Hills pot store charged with illegal cultivation and stealing electricity.

"If Steve Cooley gets in, marijuana is illegal, period," said Omar Figueroa, a Sebastopol attorney specializing in marijuana law.

Yet Figueroa isn't convinced the pot industry should celebrate if Harris is elected. He said she increased the rate of pot prosecutions over her predecessor as district attorney, Terrence Hallinan.

"I don't think she is the golden child," he said.

MAP posted-by: Richard Lake

Return to Top

MEDICAL POT INDUSTRY CLOSELY WATCHES CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL BALLOT COUNT

As Steve Cooley and Kamala Harris sweat out the ballot counting to determine California's next attorney general, perhaps no one is more anxious than advocates for medical marijuana shops.

Within the state medical marijuana industry, Cooley, the Los Angeles County district attorney, is widely perceived as pot persona non grata.

It isn't just Cooley's aggressive prosecutions of alleged abuses in Los Angeles dispensaries that stir medical marijuana activists. There are also his persistent declarations that he considers medical pot dispensaries to be illegal retail sales outlets.

Harris, San Francisco's district attorney, held a slim lead Wednesday in an ongoing ballot count that has been flip-flopping since election night.

The outcome - due by Dec. 3 - could determine how the state prosecutes medical marijuana cases and how the next attorney general will interpret guidelines for medical marijuana transactions approved by the Legislature in 2003.

"It certainly does make a difference," said Santa Clara University law professor Gerald Uelmen.

Should Cooley win, Uelman said, "I think ( marijuana ) prosecutions are likely to be mounted by the attorney general's office rather than local prosecutors, especially in counties that are friendly to medical marijuana."

Though pot prosecution wasn't a major issue for either campaign, Americans for Safe Access, an advocacy group for people using medical marijuana, set up an anti-Cooley website. It declared: "The attorney general's race is, without a doubt, the most important ... for medical marijuana patients in California."

Both candidates opposed Proposition 19, the initiative to legalize marijuana for recreational use.

But Harris said she personally knew people "who have benefited" from medical marijuana - while Cooley praised a proposed ban on dispensaries in Los Angeles County and efforts by the city of Los Angeles to rein in its medical pot trade.

"Communities throughout the nation are waiting to see how we handle storefronts illegally pushing pot," he said.

Cooley argues that pot shops violate state medical marijuana laws, which define dispensaries as members-only nonprofits run by medical marijuana patients.

Harris' campaign manager, Brian Brokaw, said Wednesday that Harris "supports the legal use of medicinal marijuana but thinks California needs to bring consistent standards about ownership and operations of dispensaries."

Dale Gieringer, California director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said "it could be a nasty couple of years" for medical marijuana purveyors if Cooley is elected.

Gieringer said Cooley's tough-on-pot profile may have been a reaction to Los Angeles City Council demands for an answer to the city's pot shop boom.

Cooley jumped on the issue. Last year, he charged the operator of the Organica dispensary in Culver City with illegal marijuana sales, transportation and money laundering, alleging the pot shop was pocketing $400,000 a month. This year, he successfully prosecuted marijuana grow houses for dispensaries and won a no-contest plea from operators of a Granada Hills pot store charged with illegal cultivation and stealing electricity.

"If Steve Cooley gets in, marijuana is illegal, period," said Omar Figueroa, a Sebastopol attorney specializing in marijuana law.

Yet Figueroa isn't convinced the pot industry should celebrate if Harris is elected. He said she increased the rate of pot prosecutions over her predecessor as district attorney, Terrence Hallinan.

"I don't think she is the golden child," he said.

MAP posted-by: Richard Lake

Return to Top

(National Aeronautics and Space Administration Documents and Publications/ContentWorks via COMTEX) -- Nov. 18, 2010 Rachel Hoover Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.

650-604-0643 rachel.hoover@nasa.gov RELEASE: 10-106AR NASA NANOSATELLITE STUDIES LIFE IN SPACE, DEMONSTRATES TECHNOLOGY MOFFETT FIELD, Calif. -- NASA is preparing to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread that could help answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe. The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite. O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing its mission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives." The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska and the range is conducting final launch preparations. The U.S. Air Force has announced that the rocket could launch at any time during a 90-minute launch window beginning at 5:24 p.m. PST on Nov. 19, 2010.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

"We are excited to have this opportunity to demonstrate the utility of these very small spacecraft in space for NASA's science missions," said Bruce Yost, O/OREOS mission manager at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif. "We're hoping to demonstrate NASA's ability to build complex nanosatellites like O/OREOS that can meet the needs of scientists with big ideas and lofty goals." Spacecraft operators could make contact with O/OREOS as soon as 12.5 hours after launch. O/OREOS will conduct experiments, which will last up to six months, autonomously or after receiving a command from the Santa Clara ground station. Once the experiments begin, O/OREOS will relay data daily to mission managers, engineers and project scientists for further analysis. Spacecraft operators say the nanosatellite is scheduled to transmit mission data for a year.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or feed, and grow three sets of microbes. The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in micro environments to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption.

The Small Spacecraft Division at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif., manages the O/OREOS payload and mission operations supported by staff and students from Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

As with NASA's previous small satellite missions, such as the GeneSat-1 and PharmaSat, Santa Clara University invites amateur radio operators around the world to tune in to the satellite's broadcast.

For more information and instructions about how to contact O/OREOS, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/missionpages/smallsats/ooreos/main To view the launch via webcast, visit: http://www.spaceflightnow.com/minotaur/stps26/status.html -end-

[ Back To Smart Grid Home's Homepage ]

Return to Top

MEDIA ADVISORY : M10-106

MOFFETT FIELD, Calif. -- NASA is preparing to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread that could help answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe. The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite. O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing its mission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "With O/OREOS we can analyse of the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska. The range is conducting final checkouts. The U.S. Air Force has announced that the rocket could launch at any time during a 90-minute launch window beginning at 5:24 p.m. PST on Nov. 19, 2010.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

"We are excited to have this opportunity to demonstrate the utility of these very small spacecraft in space for NASA's science missions," said Bruce Yost, O/OREOS mission manager at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif. "We're hoping to demonstrate NASA's ability to build complex nanosatellites like O/OREOS that can meet the needs of scientists with big ideas and lofty goals."

Spacecraft operators could make contact with O/OREOS as soon as 12.5 hours after launch. O/OREOS will conduct experiments, which will last up to six months, autonomously or after receiving a command from the Santa Clara ground station. Once the experiments begin, O/OREOS will relay data daily to mission managers, engineers and project scientists for further analysis. Spacecraft operators say the nanosatellite is scheduled to transmit mission data for a year.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or “feed,” and grow three sets of the microbes. The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy as well building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in “micro environments” to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption.

The Small Spacecraft Division at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif,, manages the O/OREOS payload and mission operations with the professional support of staff and students from Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

As with NASA's previous small satellite missions, such as the GeneSat-1 and PharmaSat, Santa Clara University invites amateur radio operators around the world to tune in to the satellite's broadcast.

For more information and instructions about how to contact O/OREOS, visit:

To view the launch via webcast, visit:

- end -

To receive Ames news releases via e-mail, send an e-mail with the word "subscribe" in the subject line to ames-releases-request@lists.arc.nasa.gov. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to the same address with "unsubscribe" in the subject line.

Return to Top

MOFFETT FIELD, Calif. -- NASA is preparing to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread that could help answer astrobiologys fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe. The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASAs first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite. O/OREOS also will use NASAs first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earths atmosphere less than 25 years after completing its mission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporations Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska and the range is conducting final launch preparations. The U.S. Air Force has announced that the rocket could launch at any time during a 90-minute launch window beginning at 5:24 p.m. PST on Nov. 19, 2010.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

"We are excited to have this opportunity to demonstrate the utility of these very small spacecraft in space for NASA's science missions," said Bruce Yost, O/OREOS mission manager at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif. "Were hoping to demonstrate NASAs ability to build complex nanosatellites like O/OREOS that can meet the needs of scientists with big ideas and lofty goals."

Spacecraft operators could make contact with O/OREOS as soon as 12.5 hours after launch. O/OREOS will conduct experiments, which will last up to six months, autonomously or after receiving a command from the Santa Clara ground station. Once the experiments begin, O/OREOS will relay data daily to mission managers, engineers and project scientists for further analysis. Spacecraft operators say the nanosatellite is scheduled to transmit mission data for a year.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or feed, and grow three sets of microbes. The SESLO experiment measures the microbes population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in micro environments to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption.

The Small Spacecraft Division at NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif., manages the O/OREOS payload and mission operations supported by staff and students from Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

As with NASA's previous small satellite missions, such as the GeneSat-1 and PharmaSat, Santa Clara University invites amateur radio operators around the world to tune in to the satellite's broadcast.

For more information and instructions about how to contact O/OREOS, visit:

To view the launch via webcast, visit:

Return to Top

Washington: In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing its mission.

“Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations,” said Pascale Ehrenfreund,

O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

“With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives.”

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or “feed,” and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in “micro environments” to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption.

Return to Top

In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing itsission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

"With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or "feed," and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in "micro environments" to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption. (ANI)

Return to Top

In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread. The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010. O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite. O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing itsission. "Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives." The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations. After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif. O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions. The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or "feed," and grow three sets of microbes. The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients. For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in "micro environments" to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption. (ANI)

Return to Top

Washington, Nov 19 : In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing its mission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund,

O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

"With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or "feed," and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in "micro environments" to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption.

Return to Top

In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a US Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on November 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing its

mission. "Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University. "With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives." The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or "feed," and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in "micro environments" to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption.

Return to Top

Get Space Science News headlines emailed to you daily.

Albuquerque Express

(ANI)

In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov. 19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing itsission.

"Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations," said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

"With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives."

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or "feed," and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in "micro environments" to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption. (ANI)

Return to Top

Washington, Nov 19 (ANI): In an attempt to answer astrobiology's fundamental questions about the origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe, NASA is getting ready to fly a small satellite about the size of a loaf of bread.

The nanosatellite, known as Organism/Organic Exposure to Orbital Stresses, or O/OREOS, is a secondary payload aboard a U.S. Air Force four-stage Minotaur IV rocket planned for launch on Nov.

19, 2010.

O/OREOS weighs approximately 12 pounds and is NASA's first CubeSat to demonstrate the capability to have two distinct, completely independent science experiments on a single autonomous satellite.

O/OREOS also will use NASA's first propellant-less mechanism on a scientific satellite to ensure it de-orbits and burns up as it re-enters Earth's atmosphere less than 25 years after completing itsission.

Secondary payload nanosatellites, like O/OREOS are an innovative way to extend and enhance scientists' opportunities to conduct research in low Earth orbit by providing an alternative to the International Space Station or space shuttle investigations, said Pascale Ehrenfreund, O/OREOS project scientist at the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

With O/OREOS we can analyze the stability of organics in the local space environment in real-time and test flight hardware that can be used for future payloads to address fundamental astrobiology objectives.

The Minotaur IV rocket is on the launch pad at the Alaska Aerospace Corporation's Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska, and the range is conducting final launch preparations.

After O/OREOS separates from the Minotaur IV rocket and successfully enters low Earth orbit at approximately 400 miles above Earth, it will activate and begin transmitting radio signals to ground control stations and spacecraft operators in the mission control center at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, Calif.

O/OREOS, the first technology demonstration mission of NASA's Astrobiology Small Payloads Program, contains two experiment payloads, including the Space Environment Survivability of Live Organisms (SESLO), which will characterize the growth, activity, health and ability of microorganisms to adapt to the stresses of the space environment, and the Space Environment Viability of Organics (SEVO), which will monitor the stability and changes in four classes of organic molecules as they are exposed to space conditions.

The SESLO payload will monitor biological organisms' responses as they are exposed to radiation and weightless conditions in space. The experiment is sealed and contains two types of microbes commonly found in salt ponds and soil in a dried and dormant state: Halorubrum chaoviatoris and Bacillus subtilis. After O/OREOS reaches orbit, the experiment will rehydrate, or feed, and grow three sets of microbes.

The SESLO experiment measures the microbes' population density and change in color while they consume the dyed liquid nutrients.

For the SEVO experiment, scientists selected molecules distributed throughout our galaxy, as well as building blocks of life. O/OREOS houses the organic samples in micro environments to mimic space and planetary conditions. The experiment will expose the organic compounds to radiation in the form of solar ultraviolet (UV) light, visible light, trapped-particle and cosmic radiation. Scientists will determine the stability of the molecules by studying the changes in UV, visible and near-infrared light absorption. (ANI)