http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/eu-launches-preliminary-antitrust-probe-for-google/

Now that Microsoft’s browser selection story story is all but settled, it looks like the European Union is gearing up for a new antitrust probe, with its crosshairs aimed generally in Google’s direction. According to the search giant’s Senior Competition Counsel Julia Holtz (via its European Public Policy Blog), complaints from three European internet companies — legal search group EJustice.fr, price comparison site Foundem.co.uk, and German-based Microsoft subsidiary Ciao.de — have prompted the European Commission to launch a preliminary, fact-finding probe. The charges? Anticompetitive practices stemming from unfair downranking of its competitors in search results. Google denies any wrongdoing, while adding ,”we are also the first to admit that our search is not perfect, but it’s a very hard computer science problem to crack.” The Microsoft connection seems particularly notable to Google; Holtz reiterates that the company had a good relationship with Ciao until the Redmond company picked it up in 2008 — “we started receiving complaints about our standard terms and conditions.” Like we said, at this point it’s just a fact-finding probe that could end up going nowhere, but seriously, Google’s lawyers cannot seem to get a break these days.

The very fact they are doing the probe indicates that they don’t believe that Google has the right to provide the service they’d like. They they can’t use just any ranking algorithm they please. It must be neutral with regard to competitors. They may as well be suggesting that Coke and Pepsi should be advertising for each other. Google’s service, Google’s servers, Google’s prerogative. If you don’t like their ranking algo… don’t use it. It’s FREE anyway! Go use Yahoo, Bing or Start Page.

It’s just pathetic. Perhaps those companies should provide a better product and allow it to speak for them rather than looking to artificially expose themselves by using the guns of government.

http://arstechnica.com/...

Although the Obama administration is indicating that it will be more aggressive about enforcing antitrust regulations, the European Union has been pursuing high-profile cases for years, having levied a large fine against Microsoft back in 2004, and hitting the software giant again last year. The latest target of the EU’s Competition group is the chipmaker Intel and, this morning, the EU announced that it too would face a hefty fine: slightly over €1 billion, which comes in just shy of $1.5 billion. Intel is already promising to appeal but, in the meantime, it’s going to have to drop over half a year of its current profits into a bank account in case its appeal fails.

The full decision, which is over 500 pages long, hasn’t yet been released to the public, but a summary of the EU’s case is available. It focuses primarily on the company’s pricing practices during the years 2002-2005, when Intel was facing growing competition from AMD in the desktop and server space. The EU authorities also cite an instance of similar practices in the notebook space in 2007, a time when that market was rising in prominence.

Read More…

From the Telegraph UK:

A European Union directive, which Britain was instrumental in devising, comes into force which will require all internet service providers to retain information on email traffic, visits to web sites and telephone calls made over the internet, for 12 months.

Police and the security services will be able to access the information to combat crime and terrorism.

Hundreds of public bodies and quangos, including local councils, will also be able to access the data to investigate flytipping and other less serious crimes.

It was previously thought that only the large companies would be required to take part, covering 95 per cent of Britain’s internet usage, but a Home Office spokesman has confirmed it will be applied “across the board” to even the smallest company.

Privacy campaigners say the move to force telecoms companies to store the data is the first step towards the controversial central database at the heart of the Home Office’s Intercept Modernisation Programme, which will gather far more detailed information on Britain’s online activities.

Simon Davies, director of Privacy International, said: “I don’t think people are aware of the implications of this move. It means that everything we do online or on the phone will be known to the authorities.

“They are using this to produce probably the world’s most comprehensive surveillance system.

“This is a disgraceful example of the covert influence that Brussels has across our freedoms and liberties. The entire episode has been marked by a litany of secret dealings, vicious political games and a complete absence of transparency.”

Phil Noble of privacy group NO2ID, said: “This is the kind of technology that the Stasi would have dreamed of.

Read More…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…

Drivers face having their every move tracked by a ‘spy in the car’ black box.

The system will constantly check a vehicle’s speed – making cameras redundant – and allow for pay-as-you-go tolls.

The £36million EU project is partly funded by the UK Government and backed by car makers and the telecoms industry.

It will be unveiled later this year with a view to its integration into future cars. Manufacturers suggest this could be as early as 2013.

Vehicles fitted with the system will emit a constant ‘heartbeat’ pulse revealing their location, speed and direction of travel.

EU officials believe the technology will significantly reduce road accidents, congestion and carbon emissions.

Engineers say the system will be able to track cars to within a yard, making it significantly more accurate than existing satellite navigation technology.

Experts say the system will link up easily with the pay-as-you-drive road tolls being backed by the Government.

The system allows cars to ‘talk’ to one another and to roads wired up to the system. A communication device behind the dashboard transmits the car’s location every half a second.

The messages are transmitted through mobile and wireless networks, as well as on short-range microwave or infrared routes. Vehicles will be able to warn each other if they are on collision course.

I have a hard time believing that the government or those companies contracted to provide this technology could get it to actually do half of what they claim. I do believe that no matter what they end up with it will be used to harm the people of Europe. Big Brother just keeps on trudging along over there.

Now taking bets on how long they look into doing that in the United States. Yes we have Massachusetts and I believe Washington looking to tax people based on miles driven but this EU program is far more serious.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/…

THE Home Office has quietly adopted a new plan to allow police across Britain routinely to hack into people’s personal computers without a warrant.

The move, which follows a decision by the European Union’s council of ministers in Brussels, has angered civil liberties groups and opposition MPs. They described it as a sinister extension of the surveillance state which drives “a coach and horses” through privacy laws.

The hacking is known as “remote searching”. It allows police or MI5 officers who may be hundreds of miles away to examine covertly the hard drive of someone’s PC at his home, office or hotel room.

Material gathered in this way includes the content of all e-mails, web-browsing habits and instant messaging.

Under the Brussels edict, police across the EU have been given the green light to expand the implementation of a rarely used power involving warrantless intrusive surveillance of private property. The strategy will allow French, German and other EU forces to ask British officers to hack into someone’s UK computer and pass over any material gleaned.

A remote search can be granted if a senior officer says he “believes” that it is “proportionate” and necessary to prevent or detect serious crime — defined as any offence attracting a jail sentence of more than three years.

Possibility of being abused? 99.9999%