In their complaint, the Raffs make a pair of arguments. One concerns penalties and whitelists on the world’s largest search engine, issues we examined at length in a feature story late last year. But the other details an issue the media has largely ignored. The Raffs also argue that with its so-called Universal Search setup, Google is using its search engine monopoly – which controls an estimated 85 per cent of the global market – to unfairly favor its own services over those of its competitors.

“[It] allows Google to leverage its search engine monopoly into virtually any field it chooses. Wherever it does so, competitors will be harmed, new entrants will be discouraged, and innovation will inevitably be suppressed.”

With help from data compiled by market-research outfits HitWise and comScore, the filing makes the case that in the three years since the debut of Universal Search Google has used it to harm competitors in two separate markets: online mapping and price comparisons. In providing Google Maps and Google Product Search (formerly Froogle) with prime placement on its own search engine, the Raffs argue, Mountain View has exerted discriminatory market power to squeeze out the likes of MapQuest and Pricegrabber.

Google’s not commenting on initial sales of the Nexus One, which costs $179 if you sign up for a two-year contract with T-Mobile or $529 without a contract. But company officials, including Andy Rubin, who heads up Google’s smart phone efforts as its vice president of engineering, have acknowledged that the company needs to improve its customer service.
“We want people to have a positive experience,” said Carolyn Penner, a company spokeswoman. “We will continue to address any of the issues as quickly as possible.” The biggest complaint among users is access to the 3G high-speed data network offered by T-Mobile, Google’s only domestic carrier partner so far for the Nexus One. Customers started posting complaints about spotty 3G coverage on Google’s support forum Jan. 6, the day after the Nexus One went on sale. Several said they were unable to get 3G service in areas where either T-Mobile’s maps indicated they should or where they could get such service with previous phones.

“I’m at the point where I’m about to send this thing back,” read one post on the forum. “It ruins the whole experience if I can’t ever stay on 3G for more than a few seconds.” Penner said the 3G connection problem was affecting a “small” number of Nexus One users, but she declined to say how many or what proportion of them. Google doesn’t have a solution for the problem yet, she said.

But other complaints focused on the lack of service Google was providing for it. Google is attempting to pioneer a new way of selling smart phones; unlike the iPhone or other devices, which can be purchased in stores and directly from wireless service providers, the Nexus One is only available through Google’s Web site.

Caving in to wide spread complaints about the handsets initial $379 price tag, some T-Mobile users are now eligible to own the phone for $279.

Additionally, similar to Apple’s handling of the rapid price drop of the original iPhone, Google will be mailing out $100 rebate cheques to early adopters who opted to upgrade ahead of the announcement.

While it’s still uncertain who exactly is eligible for this particular upgrade, as apparently changes are being made on that end as well, overall it’s an interesting move from the folks over at Mountain View that we guess is more than a little related to the initial guesstimates of slow first week sales.

Now as it currently stands, the HTC-built, Google-branded handset will cost a mere $179 for those willing to sign a new 2-year contract, while an unlocked unit purchased directly from Google will remain at $529.

The scope of the recent attacks points to a complex operation. More than 30 companies were attacked simultaneously through an undiscovered software security hole. The incursions appear to have had the blessing of the Chinese government, if not its direct involvement. It is hard to imagine who else would be interested in the email accounts of political dissidents, which Google claims were targeted.
The concerted assault also bears similarities to one on 100 companies last year, according to security experts at iDefense. So it shouldn’t be dismissed as a one-off or rogue operation.

The amount of information and money at risk from such attacks is growing. An increasing percentage of many companies’ value comprises patents and trade secrets. The theft of physical goods is rarely life-threatening for their manufacturer. A software company, on the other hand, can be destroyed if its secret sauce is stolen.

Microsoft, for instance, has persistently complained about piracy of its software in China and elsewhere. But Google has gone a step further, squawking about a security breach that makes it look vulnerable. Other companies, and governments, have mostly kept quiet about this kind of trouble.
That may change, because Google’s problem is rapidly becoming everybody’s. The growth of cloud computing — where services such as email, spreadsheets and word processing are served online — increases the vulnerability of companies and governments to Internet-based attacks. Hillary Clinton’s State Department appears to be backing up Google’s complaint.

Western governments are heavily involved behind the scenes with tackling gaps in Internet security. But cyber-attacks that appear to be state-sponsored arguably call for a more public response as well. Clinton’s decision to point a finger openly at the Chinese government could just be the beginning

Nexus One has been plagued by consumer complaints including spotty 3G connectivity, a high early termination fee, poor customer support from Google and problems with the touchscreen.

“There are some aspects of the experience that Google didn’t think through as carefully as they should have,” says Charles Golvin, an analyst with Forrester Research. “This has implications for the store they have launched and their future ambitions for it. Google, clearly, has a lot of work ahead of it.”
Google introduced the Nexus One as the first device to be sold by the search company itself, rather than a manufacturing or carrier partner. The Nexus One, which runs Android 2.1, has been designed by HTC and works with T-Mobile’s network in the United States.

But contrary to initial speculation, the device isn’t free. It will retail for $180 with a 2-year contract with T-Mobile. An unlocked version is also available for $530 — a price similar to most other smartphones — and that version will work on other GSM phone networks worldwide as well as AT&T in the United States, although with some limitations.

The difference, though, is the Nexus One is available only through Google’s online store. Unlike with a Motorola Cliq or a HTC G1, users can’t walk into a T-Mobile store and buy the Nexus One.

They can’t even count on T-Mobile’s customer service representatives in store or the company’s phone support to solve their problems.

It’s a strategy that has backfired on Google. The company’s support forums are full of customer complaints around the Nexus and the company’s poor service.
“A lot of complaints and frustration that people are expressing would normally be handled by going back into the store or by calling the support help line,” says Golvin. “Having a physical location where you can take your phone back helps customers and Google seems to have underestimated that.”

“Solving customer support issues is extremely important to us, because we want people to have a positive Nexus One experience,” says a Google spokesperson. “We are trying to be as open and transparent as possible through our online customer help forums.”

Many of the customer complaints are centered about the device’s inability to connect to T-Mobile’s 3G network. The Nexus One does not pick up the 3G network or keeps switching to the slower EDGE network, say some user”Google provides a subsidy for devices purchased with T-Mobile USA service. If a consumer cancels service after 14 days, Google recoups this subsidy in the form of an equipment recovery fee,” says the Google spokesperson.

“After 120 days, the equipment recovery fee will no longer apply. This is standard practice for third party resellers of T-Mobile and other operators, and you will find similar policies for other mobile service resellers. The T-Mobile early termination fee is separate and handled by T-Mobile.”

Despite the problems, Google can bounce back, says Golvin. Customer dissatisfaction is likely to be just a small speed bump in the road for Google’s mobile ambitions, he says.

Its post says that Google – whose name derives from the similarly spelled mathematical term for the number 10 to the 100th power – is generating a flood of queries but little response.

And Google’s evidently fielding only e-mail questions and promising replies in only a day or two.

Nexus owners apparently are also calling T-Mobile, which PCWorld says is sending them to HTC Corp. that made the device, which is sending them back to T-Mobile.

Google not only launched the phone on Tuesday but began selling them itself online. Typically, customers go to a cellular service provider and ask what phones they carry but Google wants to turn that process on its head.

Instead, PCWorld makes it look as though Google has left Nexus buyers scratching their heads.

The objections raised by a government-affiliated group called the China Written Works Copyright Society are the latest in the conflict between Google and copyright holders in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere over its ambitious effort to make more printed works available to a wider audience online.

They are the first public criticism of the project from China — a country usually under fire for its own problems with rampant piracy of copyright-protected material and other intellectual property.

Google has made digital copies of 10 million books in the past five years, generally through deals with large libraries to scan and index their collections. Google says the project is an invaluable chance for books to get more exposure.
Zhang Hongbo, deputy director of the Chinese group, which represents writers’ groups but is under the supervision of the national copyrights bureau, says his group found nearly 18,000 works by 570 Chinese authors had been scanned as of Sept. 1.

“Google’s digital library scanned those copyright-protected works without permission. This violates American copyright laws and international treaties,” Zhang told The Associated Press.

“This also violates the basic principle that they should ask permission from the authors first, pay to use them and then use them,” he said.
“We need to sit down and discuss this. How much I should be paid should come from discussions between Chinese authors and Google, not just an online announcement,” he said.

China says it is working hard to improve enforcement of its own stringent laws protecting copyrights and patents. But implementation at the local level is haphazard at best — peddlers hawk pirated U.S. best-sellers openly on Shanghai streets and in subway stations.

But piracy here does not justify violating rights elsewhere, said Ge Xianrong, dean of the library at Shanghai’s prestigious Fudan University.

“No doubt Google is wrong, and I think the government should do more to fight against all kinds of piracy,” Ge said. “It’s crucial to defend copyrights and get people to stop buying pirated works.”

The Federal Communications Commission is looking into complaints by AT&T that the Google Voice phone service blocks some calls within the United States to avoid a high connection fee.

The FCC sent an inquiry to Google today seeking information about the software’s functionality, its number of users and which companies with which it has partnered.

Google Voice gives users one number to ring all of their phones and a website to log call history and text messages. The service also provides free calls within the United States
“We take Apple at its word,” Genachowski said. “We’ll continue to monitor the specific issue and to monitor the marketplace.”

Does the FCC even have the authority to regulate whether Apple carries Google’s program or whether Google has to connect every call?

In a response to the former, Genachowski said, “We’ll tackle the authority issues when we get to that point.” The mentality is part of, as the new chairman called it, a “proactive FCC.”

The problem has since been fixed, likely thanks to a counterclaim from the Swedish site.

The Pirate Bay has proven immensely controversial for hosting links and descriptions to a massive amount of copyrighted material.

However, the site does not itself host any copies of films, record albums and software — that’s done by individuals over the BitTorrent protocol with applications like Azureus.

The United States has been accused of pressuring Swedish officials to crack down on the site.

Google is also a part of a number of copyright controversies stemming from its acquisition of YouTube and its library of infringing videos, as well as complaints over its Google Books project which makes digital copies of books from libraries
Those accused of copyright violations can file a response, but in the meantime, their content may be wiped offline.

Google’s Street View, which offers 360-degree views of streets around the world using photos taken by cruising Google vehicles, has already run into privacy complaints in other countries and activists have tried to halt the service in Japan.

Google said in a statement on Wednesday it would lower the cameras on its cars by 40 cm (16 inches) after complaints they were capturing images over fences in private homes.

But it said it would continue filming in Japan, where it has so far covered 12 cities.

“It is certainly a fact that there have been concerns,” said Yoshito Funabashi, a spokesman at Google’s Tokyo office. “We thought of what we can do as a company and tried to be responsible.”

Google said it has also blurred car number plates in the pictures, as it has done in Europe, but the new steps did not convince Japanese campaigners.

“They are just trying to get through at the technological level … The question is, can we allow for them to shoot (images) unselectively?” said Yasuhiko Tajima, a professor of constitutional law at Sophia University in Tokyo.

Britain’s privacy watchdog has rejected calls to shut Street View down there, where concerns have ranged from images such as someone throwing up outside a pub to media reports that a woman filed for divorce after her husband’s car was pictured outside another woman’s house. [ID:nLN970530]

Both Google Maps and a related mapping service, Google Earth, have also been criticized by some countries for providing images of sensitive