Editor’s note: Anthony J. Lombardi practices patent litigation and patent prosecution at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. He also provides counseling to clients on prelitigation strategy, portfolio development, patent monetization, and licensing activities.

A clear legal standard for determining patent-eligible subject matter remains elusive. On Friday, the Federal Circuit, in CLS Bank International v. Alice Corporation, ruled that an invention involving software for a computerized trading platform does not constitute patent‑eligible subject matter. The decision — which spanned 135 pages — by a 10-member en banc panel of the Court included seven separate opinions, but not the clarity many had hoped for.

Alice’s computerized trading platform patents were at issue in the case. Those patents describe a process for two parties to exchange obligations, such as stock trades, which are then settled by a trusted third party.

The focus of the legal proceedings was Alice’s patent claims. Positioned at the end of a patent, claims are numbered sentences that define the scope of protection afforded by the patent. Among other requirements, the subject matter of a claim must comply with section 101 of the patent laws.

Section 101 defines patent-eligible subject matter and reads: “Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.”

Alice asserted a variety of its patent claims in the case, including claims written in method, system and computer-readable-media claim formats. However, Alice’s asserted claims generally share the same underlying premise — that of software for exchanging obligations between parties through a computerized trading platform and using a third party to handle settlement of the exchanges.

What Guidance Did the Court Provide for Software Patents?

A majority (seven of the 10 members) of the Court concluded that Alice’s method and media claims are not directed to patent-eligible subject matter. The Court split 5-5, however, on Alice’s system claims. A split means the lower district court’s ruling, which found Alice’s system claims patent-ineligible, stands. A majority (eight of the 10 members) also agreed that Alice’s method, media, and system claims should rise or fall together when determining patent eligibility.

The majority consensus ends there. A majority of the Court, however, failed to reach agreement on the reasoning behind these conclusions.

Judge Lourie, in an opinion joined by four judges (Judges Dyk, Prost, Reyna and Wallach), found all of Alice’s asserted claims drawn to patent-ineligible abstract ideas.

In his view, Alice’s method claims are directed to nothing more than the abstract idea of reducing settlement risk by effecting trades through a third-party intermediary. This, he said, is a “disembodied” concept without any real-world application. Computer-related aspects of the claims — including steps for creating records to store data, using a computer to adjust and maintain those records, and reconciling those records at the end of a trading day — in his opinion failed to add anything of substance that would save the claims.

Judge Lourie similarly grouped Alice’s media and system claims in the same boat with Alice’s method claims. He characterized the media claims — although defining physical storage media — as nothing more than the same underlying method of reducing settlement risk “in the guise of a device.”

He then questioned whether structures found in the system claims—including “a computer” and “a data storage unit” — could justify a different approach for those claims. In his opinion, they did not. He reasoned that the computer-related limitations failed to provide any “meaningful distinction” from the computer-related limitations found in the method claims.

In a separate opinion, Chief Judge Rader said he would have found the system claims patent eligible. Three judges (Judges Linn, Moore, and O’Malley) joined in that part of his opinion. In Chief Judge Rader’s view, the issue was “whether a claim includes meaningful limitations restricting it to an application, rather than merely an abstract idea.”

Applying that rationale, he reasoned that the structural limitations in Alice’s system claims (e.g. limitations drawn to “a computer” and “a data storage unit”) brought those claims into the realm of patent-eligible subject matter. However, in the remainder of his opinion (which only Judge O’Malley joined), Chief Judge Rader concluded that Alice’s method and media claims are patent-ineligible abstract ideas.

Judges Linn and O’Malley, in a separate opinion, said they would have also found Alice’s method and media claims patent-eligible for the same reasons expressed in Chief Judge Rader’s opinion regarding Alice’s system claims. Additionally, they noted that several technology companies, in amicus (friend-of-the–court) briefs, expressed concern about what they viewed as widespread proliferation and aggressive enforcement of low-quality software patents. In responding to that concern, Judges Linn and O’Malley said Congress, and not the courts, is the proper avenue for developing special rules for software patents. For example, they speculated that Congress could limit the term of software patents or devise rules for limiting their scope.

Judge Moore, in a separate opinion (in which Chief Judge Rader and Judges Linn and O’Malley joined), said she would have found the system claims drawn to patent-eligible subject matter. She also wrote that the uncertainty in court decisions over this issue is “causing a free fall in the patent system.” If all of Alice’s claims are not patent-eligible, she conjectured that “this case is the death of hundreds of thousands of patents, including all business-method, financial-system, and software patents as well as many computer implemented and telecommunications patents.”

In a separate opinion, Judge Newman shared the majority view that all of the claims stand or fall together. She would have found Alice’s system, method and media claims patent‑eligible based on the plain language of section 101.

Chief Judge Rader offered an additional opinion captioned “Additional Reflections.” There, he emphasized that the Court should focus on the language of section 101 and indicated it is unlikely that innovation is promoted by the subjective standards for evaluating patent eligibility expressed in the panel’s opinions.

What’s Next for Software Patents?

The Federal Circuit has ruled, but the dividing line between patent-eligible software and patent-ineligible abstract ideas has not come into focus. Some may say the landscape remains in a similar state as it was before the Federal Circuit’s decision: some software claims might rise to the level of patent-eligible subject matter and others may not.

The CLS Bank case is likely to undergo Supreme Court review. The Supreme Court may view the Federal Circuit’s fractured decision as an opportunity to consider software patenting again. Whether a clear dividing line will emerge remains to be seen.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

Square has made another key hire today—Demetrios J. Marantis will be leading the company’s international government, regulatory, and policy work. Marantis most recently served in President Barack Obama’s Cabinet as the Acting United States Trade Representative, and was The U.S.’s chief trade negotiator.

“Square is already having a meaningful impact on local economies in the US and Canada,” said co-founder and CEO Jack Dorsey. “Demetrios’ invaluable experience will help Square provide powerful business tools to local entrepreneurs around the world.”

Marantis, who is a lawyer, first served in the White House as the Deputy United States Trade Representative, where he was responsible for US trade negotiations and enforcement in Asia and Africa.  In March 2013, Marantis assumed the duties of Acting United States Trade Representative. Before joining the Administration, Marantis served as Chief International Trade Counsel for the Senate Finance Committee, where he advised Congress on trade and economic issues.

It looks like he’ll be working on international and regulatory issue for Square. The company recently expanded to Canada, its first market outside the US. Square says that gross payment volume over the first six months is 90% higher per capita than it was in the US at the equivalent point in time.

Last week, Square announced that Alex Petrov, a former PayPal exec, joined as Vice President of Partnerships. Previously, Square brought on a new global business lead from Google.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

Mozilla was keen to talk up the 3.0 version of its Firefox OS simulator back in March, but didn’t have much to share about when eager developers could start fiddling with it. Thankfully for HTML5 buffs, that six-week quiet period is over — the team just announced on the official Mozilla Hacks blog that the newly updated simulator is now available to download.

All of the features that appeared in the preview release are accounted for — think support for rotating displays and a mock geolocation API for testing location-aware apps — but the simulator suite has been polished a bit since we last saw it. Most of those tweaks are housekeeping changes: the size of the download has been reduced, which has led to snappier boot times, and the simulator now supports common OS shortcuts like Cmd + Q to shut down, but the simulator has also been updated to run newer versions of Firefox OS and the Gaia user interface layer.

With that said, prospective Firefox OS developers will probably use one simulator feature more than any other: the ability to push work-in-progress applications to connected test devices. Mozilla and its hardware partners Huawei, LG, and ZTE (who showed off its first FFOS device at Mobile World Congress) have been pointing to device launches in Brazil, Colombia, Hungary, Mexico, Poland, Serbia, Spain and Venezuela later this year, but the quality of the experiences found on those phones will ultimately determine whether or not Firefox OS flops.

Even so, strong early sales of Firefox OS developer devices may point to a promising official launch for the first set of consumer-facing phones later this year. Just look at Spanish hardware OEM startup Geeksphone — it began selling its Keon and Peak reference devices for $119 and $194, respectively, late last month, and the company was forced to limit the number of handsets sold that on launch day so the 20-person team could keep up with shipping.

That’s a promising start especially for a company as young as Geeksphones, but there’s no question that Firefox OS is going to face some serious competition in its launch markets. Android powers a staggering number of cheap smartphones, and Nokia has refocused its efforts to build low-cost devices based both on Windows Phone and the aging Series 40 OS. Meanwhile, persistent rumors of a low-cost iPhone continue to make the rounds — Firefox OS seemed like a novel option for new and adventurous smartphone owners when I first played with it, but we’ll have to see how the rest of the industry responds.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

In light of the AP’s high-profile Twitter hacking and a vicious domestic bombing, Americans have not let fear derail privacy legislation. Just this week, the Senate advanced an anti-email snooping law and the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is reportedly on its way to the grave. It appears that the burden of proof has shifted to proponents of government surveillance, and they’ve been conspicuously silent about how spying will keep Americans safe.

Two Bills

CISPA, which gives immunity to Internet companies for sharing sensitive data with law enforcement, will reportedly not be taken up for a vote in the Senate. “We’re not taking [CISPA] up,” a representative from the Senate’s Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation told US News, “Staff and senators are divvying up the issues and the key provisions everyone agrees would need to be handled if we’re going to strengthen cybersecurity. They’ll be drafting separate bills.”

After wavering support from Facebook and other high-profile Internet companies, the White House threatened to veto the bill over privacy concerns, most likely related to ambiguous definitions of what constitutes a cyber “threat” and how agencies would be kept honest.

ECPA Reform – The 1970′s law that permits security agencies to access emails opened or older than 180 days, is on its way to a privacy upgrade. Designed before users kept their email indefinitely in the cloud (i.e. Gmail), a few high-level privacy breaches, including the unearthing of General David Petraeus’s romantic affair, have created overwhelming demand to overhaul the antiquated law. Today, an amendment to require a warrant before reading emails was voted on by voice, which means there wasn’t even enough opposition among the Judiciary committee members for a debate.

Staff members inside the House of Representatives, where the bill will go if it passes the senate, tell me that there also isn’t much opposition to the reforms on their side of Congress, and that a bill by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (CrunchGov Grade: A) could very well be combined with the Senate’s version for a streamlined change (yes, occasionally things are efficient in Congress).

Why Not?

Even after the AP’s Twitter account was hacked to spread a rumor about an explosion at the White House and two American men successfully detonated bombs at the Boston Marathon, there’s no reason to believe that either CISPA or ECPA  would have kept Americans safer.

Even Barack Obama’s freak-everyone-out op-ed last year urging cyber security legislation couldn’t muster more than hypotheticals,

“Last month I convened an emergency meeting of my cabinet and top homeland security, intelligence and defense officials…Unknown hackers, perhaps a world away, had inserted malicious software into the computer networks of private-sector companies that operate most of our transportation, water and other critical infrastructure systems. Fortunately, last month’s scenario was just a simulation,” he wrote, in a largely unconvincing imaginary example to prove why we needed enhanced surveillance.

As for the Boston bombers duo, American and Russian authorities had already been following the brothers. At any level, it appears to be an internal slip up, which neither data from their email nor facebook pages would have helped prevent.

On the other hand, privacy advocates have had some very tangible close calls. It appears the least liked government agency in the country, the Internal Revenue Service, was spying on the emails of suspected tax dodgers.

While I’m not convinced email and social media privacy necessarily outweigh very real terrorist threats, the burden is on the government to prove it needs a bigger spy glass. Ironically, if the government wants the American people to be more supportive of surveillance, they’ll need to be more transparent.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

Google chairman Eric Schmidt today denied that there is any tension between his company and Samsung, the world’s biggest handset maker and the biggest OEM partner for Google’s Android mobile OS. “They have hundreds of millions of phones coming out on Android and I don’t think you will see much of a change there,” he said of the Korean handset maker, during an interview at the D:Dive Into Mobile conference. “Obviously we want to see competition but the Samsung relationship has turned out to be a defining one.”

During the last Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, there were reports, citing sources close to the matter, that Samsung’s size and “heft” were worrying Google. “We spend lots of time with Samsung and I can confirm that this is not correct,” Schmidt said today.

While Google played down its presence at in Barcelona in February compared to years before (no Schmidt, no Android stand, no pins), Samsung was near-ubiquitous, including stands in many of the exhibition halls and even in the subway station near the venue.

Schmidt’s comments came in the context of other questions about Android competitors, including the one now owned by Google itself, Motorola. On this he was predictably confident, but also realistic:

“Motorola has a new set of products I’ve seen that are phenomenal, but they are in a tough space… [but] what you see in this next generation of technology is very impressive,” he said.

Nevertheless, with companies like HTC struggling for critical mass on the platform, and more OEMs looking for ways of differentiating themselves with customized launchers (like Facebook Home) or forking altogether (as in the case of the Kindle Fire tablet from Amazon, or many “Android” handsets in Asia), there remains a question about how those Android handset makers who are not Samsung will eventually make decent margins on their hardware businesses.

When there’s a will, there’s a way, seemed to be Schmidt’s mantra.

“Those smartphone makers are capitalists,” he said. “I’m pretty sure they will all be making money. If you tell me there is a billion consumer opportunity people will make money on that, [just] in different ways.”

One way might be with aggressive pricing across a wide range devices.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

Editor’s note: Maria Rocio Paniagua currently works at Flit, a PR firm that helps products, projects and events launch in Mexico. Follow her on Twitter @lachinous.

“When the geeks go marching in, good stuff can happen, but if everyone joins in, real change can take place.” That’s what the hackers and team behind Codeando México, a civil innovation platform where government and organizations publish projects, thought when they launched the #app115 challenge, an app competition that aimed to prove that great code can be very inexpensive if motivated by the right reasons.

What motivated them? A couple of weeks ago, the Mexican House of Representatives announced that they were planning to pay $9.3 million to have an app developed. The app would work on mobile devices and would monitor what went on in the sessions: bills, context, statements and media analysis. According to one of Mexico’s most widely read newspapers, they had hired a company called Pulso Legislativo (a company that allegedly has questionable relations with current and former legislators from the party in power) and had agreed to 32 monthly payments of about $290,000.

The cost caused outrage, because it appeared to be another case of fund misuse by the government. The team from Codeando México wrote a blog post breaking down the figure: “It is more money than what the three most active VCs funds invested in Mexican startups in 2011 and 2012. It is buying a taco for 11,500,000 mexicans, it is paying the annual scholarship support for 306,667 students or broadband access for a year for 17,500 families. It is what a team of developers would charge you to develop Angry Birds 77 times…you get the point by now.”

According to Oscar Mendoza, the analysis director of Pulso Legislativo, the company didn’t develop a native app; instead they were offering a private service through a web app that provided reports from and analysis of Congressional sessions — information that the legislators already had. Mendoza said they had distributed 550 access keys; however, a head count quickly showed that many legislators had no knowledge of the contract or app.

“Together we can go beyond angry tweeting, towards fixing the world on a Saturday night over some tequilas.”

A journalist named Arturo Aguilar launched a petition on Change.org, which almost immediately received more than 1,900 signatures. As a result, the House ended up suspending the contract. Still, people from Pulso Legislativo said they’d continue providing their service until someone from the legal department of the House announces the official cancellation of the contract.

The Challenge

The guys from Codeando México teamed up with Intangible – a project started by Fede Casas and Jorge Soto that helps entrepreneurs develop their businesses, polish their code, and grow in their market space for up to six months – to walk the talk. They launched the #app115 challenge that invited hackers to take action: “Create an awesome, simple and useful open source Congress app for the Mexican citizens, make some money out of it and show how technology can bridge the gap between citizens and their representatives,” Codeando México wrote in its post. “Together we can go beyond angry tweeting, towards fixing the world on a Saturday night over some tequilas.”

Winners would receive an iPad mini and a symbolic prize amount of $9,300. How did they come up with that figure? “We wanted to make it 10,000 times cheaper,” says Casas.

Soto contacted Yeshua Sanyasi, one of the parliament assistants from a smaller party, to try to get what they were doing noticed by the Congress. They succeeded and set April 4 as the date for app proposals — just 10 days after they had launched the competition. In all, 173 individuals registered to participate, and five apps were presented. Some were built by teams, but most were developed by guys working by themselves.

The Trip To Congress

I was invited by one of the organizers to watch the presentations and met the participants at the Intangible offices. They were nervous — some of them wore suits, which is very unlike their usual attire — and they were discussing what they thought the event was going to be like. When we arrived at Congress, we went through security and waited an additional 15 minutes while they prepared the room. The hackers used this time to check their apps, take pictures and give interviews.

As soon as we entered the main room, we were greeted by a lawyer and a couple of legislators, one of whom quickly added that this project had been “well received by the Congress” and that they should expect “good representation.” Fifteen minutes before the presentation was to begin, the room was still empty, except for participants, curious onlookers  and supporters. Five minutes before, there was around 25 legislators, aids and onlookers. The grandson of the syndicate leader that was very publicly thrown in jail a couple a weeks ago arrived to loudly say hello to everyone and talk about the apps that were live.

We started half an hour late with an audience of around 50 legislators and aids. They introduced the presidium, which was made up of representatives from the party that organized the event and people from the Science and Tech Secretariat. Rodolfo Wilhemy, founder of Codeando México, gave a short speech. He had told me earlier that he wanted to ask for formal support for the hacker community, demanding the creation of a fund and a pipeline of contracts for similar projects. “It will be a white glove slap,” he said. Intangible’s Soto then said a few words, thanking the presidium for the opportunity and finally introduced the participants.

App Presentations 

Most teams used the site Curul 501 to obtain the Congressional information with which to populate their apps — partly because the site was at the top of the suggested links in the challenge, and partly because the web page from the Congress is horrible. Of the five apps presented, two were developed for iOS (Diputados and Congreso) and the rest for Android (Mi Congreso, Senado de la República and Actividad en San Lázaro). Each participant had five minutes to pitch their demos. Four of the apps were already in the respective app stores, so the audience could download them and follow the demos.

There was time for questions after each presentation, which is when things got even more interesting. A few of the Congressional representatives had a hard time containing their frustration about the Diputados app, particularly when the group showcased Karma, the app’s ranking feature. It works like this: every bill introduced gives a representative 10 points; every attendance awards three points; and every absence subtracts 20 points. One of the representatives in the audience took the mic and said he thought it was “unfair to be graded.” Another one jumped at this, adding that he had been missing that particular morning  because “he was looking at roads.”

It’s clear that this app’s feature was disruptive, having been called unfair and criticized so much. Representatives do have other obligations aside from being in sessions, but there has never been a truly open ranking system where Mexicans can see what their representatives are up to.

Diputados, developed by a workshop from Queretaro and presented by Arturo Jamaicas, was chosen as the winner; Mi Congreso (an app entirely developed by Eduardo Blancas by a 20-year-old hacker on his free time from school) was the runner-up. On the spot, the organizing team got Juan Pablo Adame, the Congressional representative in charge of the digital agenda, to agree to this project.

While the $93 million-dollar deal was dismantled, Codeando México still has a long road ahead. Remember, Pulso Legislativo plans to keep taking advantage of the bureaucratic process until its contract is canceled — probably in the hopes that the public forgets and lets it go. And although Codeando México managed to hold this competition, there is no official pipeline for the government to pursue further contacts like this one to help engage independent hackers and workshops. If they manage to create that in the next few months, they’ll truly be taking down the Mexican mafia in the best possible way.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

In the first interview since her husband’s death, Laurene Powell Jobs dedicated her sizable platform to advancing immigration reform, while remaining notably tight-lipped about the private life of the late Steve Jobs. We’ve included highlights (with context) from her interview with Rock Center host, Brian Williams.

On Steve Jobs: “Pretty Cool” Legacy

BRIAN WILLIAMS: It’s another way of saying we’re left with a world of really cool stuff. I always wanted to know what it was like to be a Kennedy and drive to Kennedy Airport; and what it’s like to be you at a light and watch ten people cross, and the only thing they have in common are white ear buds. What’s that like?

LAURENE POWELL JOBS: It’s pretty cool.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: (LAUGHS) It’s pretty cool. I mean, that changed our world.

LAURENE POWELL JOBS: Yeah. To do what you wanna do, to leave a mark– in a way that you think is important and lasting, that’s a life well lived.

On Immigration Reform

Powell Jobs has been a vocal advocate of immigration reform, partnering with director Davis Guggenheim (Waiting For Superman, An Inconvenient Truth) on a documentary highlighting the struggles of talented, patriotic American youth who have been denied entrance into the military and college, because they are undocumented immigrants. To add public pressure for Congress to pass a bill that provides a pathway to citizenship for children of immigrants who came to America illegally, the film (trailer below) is accompanied by a grassroots campaign and website.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Climb into the minds of our viewers watching you guys on Friday night. So help us process this. How are we supposed to feel about their parents, who did do something bad? This is ill-gotten gains, because the first entry into this country was wrong. How are we supposed to feel about the bureaucracy we would now have to have just to hand Social Security numbers to our Marine, our civil engineer?

LAURENE JOBS POWELL: Yes. It’s understandable that people are conflicted about this. And, yes, the parents broke the law. And so I think that’s why Congress is trying to find a way to make amends. So have them pay a penalty, have them pay back taxes. Have them wait for two decades in order to have the chance to have citizenship. I mean, there are penalties that can be brought out. But then you have someone like Senator Marco Rubio who said, you know, “I understand why these parents came.” You know, if you are in desperate poverty, if you are struggling, if you would do anything in the world to get a better life for your kids, who are we to say — to judge you so harshly?

BRIAN WILLIAMS:…what about the argument that not everyone will succeed and prosper? Some people are trying to game the system; some will be a constant draw, a drain on the American economy. This won’t be all net net positive.

LAURENE POWELL JOBS: One of my favorite quotes is a lawmaker said, “I do not support any immigration policy that would have kept my grandparents out of the country.” And I think that’s a good rule. How about we agree upon what our common American values are, which is let’s make this a true land of opportunity. We’re also a land of rules and laws that should be enforced. Let’s fix this problem, and then let’s let people flourish.

Congress is slated to begin debate on a draft of comprehensive immigration reform, which will likely include provisions to allow undocumented youth a path to citizen, around mid-April.

Transcript excerpted from: “Rock Center With Brian Williams” on NBC News – Friday, April 12, 2013

[Image Credit: Wikimedia user Gobierno de Chile]

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

Foursquare, the social, location-based check-in app that has been pivoting into becoming a more of platform for local search, has finally closed its Series D round of funding. Foursquare tells TechCrunch that it is $41 million, led by Silver Lake Partners in the form of a multi-year loan from the Silver Lake Waterman growth debt fund; and convertible debt from existing investors Andreessen Horowitz, Union Square Ventures, O’Reilly AlphaTech Ventures, and Spark Capital. It takes the total raised in the company to an eye-watering $112.4 million.

The news was first reported by BusinessWeek, and puts to rest speculation that has been swirling for over a year about how the company needed to raise money to avoid running out of cash; and questions over whether it would be able to do so because of lingering skepticism about its business model.

Despite its size and reach — Foursquare’s user base at the end of 2012 was 30 million; and it powers location information in some 40,000 apps — the company reportedly pulled in only about $2 million of revenue last year. Meanwhile, its last raise in 2011 valued the company at $600 million.

Earlier this year, we reported that a D-Round that would have involved equity was potentially being done at a $700 million valuation, but that investors were hesitating because of worries of a too-high valuation. When I was researching a story on the company in March, I was assured by one reliable source that this latest round — the one announced today — would not be a down-round, with a valuation lower than $600 million it had in 2011. By opting for what BusinessWeek reports as a loan-and-debt deal with no immediate equity (the debt has the option of converting to equity in the future), that puts off the question of valuation for a while yet.

And it also somewhat puts off the question of whether Foursquare is an acquisition target.

In the meantime, CEO and founder Dennis Crowley and his team have been working hard to continue building up the business, both to create actual revenue streams, and also to counterbalance the fact that many have checked out of making check-ins. In February, Dennis Crowley told me Foursquare was seeing 5 million check-ins per day, but that’s also what the company said a year ago.

In addition to major app updates that put search front and center, and deals like the one with credit card companies American Express, MasterCard and Visa for member discounts for check-ins, Foursquare has been working hard to build bridges with handset makers, carriers and other content providers that could potentially result in commercial licensing deals.

Crowley’s trip to the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, spanning just a few days, saw him take in at least 30 meetings in that timeframe. Working with the old-school world of telecoms, though, is a long-term and long-odds game; this was not Crowley’s first year at the event.

Indeed, Crowley tells BusinessWeek that this round is about buying time for the company to play those long-odds out. “This allows us to get closer to being able to prove that there’s a real business here,” he said.

One area that looks like it will be getting more attention is advertising and marketing — specifically opening its platform to merchants to pay Foursquare to market themselves there. This is still a nascent part of the service — BusinessWeek points out that Foursquare “allows” only 50 large advertisers currently to buy ads. Some of the $41 million will be getting invested in a way to widen that pool, starting with bumping its sales staff up from 10 now to 40 by this summer.

“The biggest challenge is to take revenue-generating products that we launched in Q3 last year and take them out to the market,” Crowley told me in February. “The businesses using these are mostly national retailers [the 50 mentioned by BusinessWeek]. But we’ve got over 1 million merchants who have claimed their businesses on Foursquare, running specials and doing other things. What we want to do is take these tools used by the 50-100 national retailers and make them accessible to our 1 million merchants. Then you’ve got something really powerful.” These tools currently do not integrate with other point-of-sale systems, so that’s another area where the company might need to make some investments, too.

One thing we might expect is more of a Google-style approach to search marketing.

“If you look at what we’re doing in terms of harvesting intent from users, we have millions searching for things, and we’re helping them find places,” Crowley told me. “It doesn’t look that different from what google has done with AdWords. If you search for ‘Hawaiian vacation,’ Google shows you websites to get you there. And ‘Italian tasting menu’ will bring you a list of venues on Foursquare.”

BusinessWeek notes that by the end of the year, checking in at a particular location will get ads served relevant to that place — such as a brand of orange juice when you are at the supermarket. This could turn even more people off from checking in, though, unless there is a reward at the end of it.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg made headlines today on the announcement of his new technology lobby, FWD.us, that he formed with his powerful Silicon Valley friends. But, behind the starstruck stories of DC’s new power players, it should be noted that the technology industry already has a litany of lobbies, comprised of the same board members as FWD.us, who have been active in politics for years. Before everyone gets carried away, it’s worth understanding what tech money has gotten Silicon Valley already and what FWD.us will need to do to distinguish itself.

What Already Exists

The technology industry is handsomely represented in the halls of Congress. According to OpenSecrets, the industry’s lobbying coffers shoveled out $202 million in 2012, almost twice as much as in 2004 ($105M). Facebook even has its own Political Action Committee to fund specific candidates. And, to be sure, most major tech corporations have swanky DC diggs, where they throw elaborate champagne parties on rooftop decks (I have enjoyed their expensive appetizers many times).

In addition in-house teams, there are a number of similar independent lobby groups, including the Internet Association, Engine Advocacy, TechNet, The Consumer Electronics Association, and The Silicon Valley Leadership Group–to name a few. Yahoo CEO Marrissa Mayer, a member of Zuckberg’s FWD.us, also sits on the board of Technet.

Like the tech companies themselves, the varying lobbies disagree on thorny issues such as the Internet sales tax, which pits pro-taxation eBay against its digital rival, Amazon. But, there’s far more agreement than disagreement, especially on immigration reform.

Immigration Reform Has Advocates Far More Powerful Than The Tech Titans

FWD.us’s topic du jour is high-skilled immigration reform, which the entirety of the tech industry has been pushing for, for decades. As Zuckerberg echoed in his Washington Post OpEd, “To lead the world in this new economy, our workforce needs the most talented and hardest-working people. We need to train and attract the best.”

Yet, despite a full court press by the most of the industry, and (an arguably more powerful) ally in New York City Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, proponents of high-skilled immigration reform have yet to be successful. Last Winter, a bill, which aimed to expand high-skilled visas to more foreign-born science and engineering graduates of American universities, died largely because all the money in the world couldn’t get Democrats and Republicans to agree.

We held a debate between high-skilled immigration reform expert, Vivek Wadhwa and Congressman Gutierrez, for those readers who want to learn more about the disagreement over whether to prioritize high-skilled immigrants over their low-skilled counterparts.

Principled differences aside, the Latino-American population is now powerful enough to swing Presidential elections, so politicians want to take their concerns seriously (which President Obama pretty much admitted, in recorded off-the-record remarks).

As a result, this year, the 85,000 visa quota for high-skilled immigrants was maxed out in just 5 days. Evidently, tech, and its DC money, has limits.

Board Members Are Individuals First And Mostly Democrats

Despite what may seem like a unified front, the 30 all-stars have their own agenda. Most FWD.us members, like Google Chairman Eric Schmidt, are reliable Obama backers. According to OpenSecrets, the communications and electronics industry gave nearly twice as much to Democrats ($93M) as they did to Republicans ($55) in 2012.

As we’ve written about before, technologists’ aversion to conservatives is largely principled, and no amount of money or peer-pressure will convince them to back Republicans.

Other board members simply have their hands’ full with their own issues. Zynga’s CEO, Mark Pincus, will likely be lobbying for online gambling and can’t expend too much political capital on anything else.

FWD.us Could Be Different

The bright folks at FWD.us are no tourists of the political landscape. But, to distinguish themselves, they’ll need at least one of a few proof-points

1. Get the board members vocal in non-generic ways. Zuckerberg’s Washington Post OpEd was elegant and powerful, but it didn’t say anything new. In order for the message to get into the DC psyche, FWD.us members need to be the epicenter of bold, sticky ideas.
2. A viral campaign. FWD.us is smartly targeting Silicon Valley’s employees in a grassroots campaign, many of whome are personally impacted by immigration reform. Last Election, Ron Conway’s Sf.citi managed to score a win at the ballot box for a local tax measure by reaching out directly to the citizens of San Francisco. Bloomberg has his own immigration-themed social media campaign, The March For Innovation; it’s unclear whether FWD.us will compliment or compete with Bloomberg.
3. Nonpartisan cash. Most members are Democrats, but sometimes small-government Republicans are better on tech issues. I’d be impressed if FWD.us could get board members to contribute to someone like Congress’s resident tech guru and part-time Obama nemisis, House Oversight Chairman, Darrell Issa. In order for policymakers, especially Democrats, to take FWD.us seriously, they’ll need to believe the money isn’t already coming their way.

FWD.us could be a power player. But, the mere presence of fancy board members hasn’t proved they’re anything unique yet. We’ll keep you posted.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch

“The One isn’t just the best smartphone HTC has ever made — it can legitimately lay claim to being the best smartphone ever produced by anyone.” That’s GDGT’s Peter Rojas speaking about the HTC One. Rojas isn’t alone in this opinion. The HTC One is a phone nearly universally loved by the Internet. The display, the size, the build quality, even HTC’s Android skin is nearly, well, perfect.

But even a perfect phone might not save HTC.

HTC released its March revenue figures today: lowest quarterly net profit since the company started selling products under its own brand in 2006. Revenue fell 37% to NT$42.8 billion from NT$67.79 billion, ringing in below the company’s February guidance of NT$50 billion to NT$60 billion. And the stunning One is one of the primes reasons for the slump.

The HTC One was announced on February 19th, ahead of the handset onslaught from Mobile World Congress and the Samsung Galaxy S4 debut. We were instantly in love with the device, raving about the look at feel after playing with it for just a few minutes. HTC was back, we thought.

HTC has long made quality handsets. The One is not a stark departure from the company’s track record. The company’s tag line has long been quietly brilliant. And that properly described HTC. The company rarely touted its achievements like Apple or Samsung, preferring to let its products, as they say, do the talking.

Ever since the Windows Mobile days, HTC has churned out impressive kits. The Touch Diamond, Touch Pro, even the original Android handset, the G1, felt like something special. Made out plastic, sure, but put together in a way that felt solid and above its price point.

As Android matured, HTC keep producing top-tier devices. At the time, Nexus One, EVO 4G, and the Droid Incredible seemed to state that HTC was always going to be the top Android brand. HTC kept the course, perhaps to a fault, and in 2012, outing the original One phones in the One S, One X and One V. Yet again, these were very nice handsets, but failed to capture the same sort of attention as their predecessors, largely living in the shadow of Samsung’s more-widely available Galaxy S II & III phones.

Benedict Evans, telecoms and technology analyst at Enders Analysis, made a fantastic point speaking to The Guardian. “HTC has a scale problem. Last year at this time both it and Sony launched great new products, and they went nowhere. Everybody is saying that the HTC One looks nicer than the Samsung Galaxy S4, but without the marketing and sales and commission budget, it can’t reach enough people. Making lovely bits of hardware is a necessary, but insufficient, condition in this business. Now it’s getting into a vicious circle where it has to cut back its marketing budget to get its cashflow under control.”

HTC was paying attention, though. The ONE was going to be different. It packs the best of HTC’s design and engineering and hit the market well ahead of competitors. The HTC One was supposed to launch worldwide in the middle of March, just a month after its unveiling.

That didn’t happen. But this did.

While the HTC One suffered numerous delays caused by a short supply of parts, Samsung announced the Galaxy S4 on March 14th. If the ridiculous announcement is any indication, Samsung is going to throw everything behind its latest smartphone. Expect a massive media blitz as the Galaxy S4′s Q2 launch window approaches, likely downing out any paltry marketing planned for the HTC One.

HTC has never been good at marketing partly because for the longest time the company didn’t have to. HTC used to make white label handsets, allowing other brands, such as Verizon and AT&T, to slap their logo on the devices and sell at higher margin. Most of the memorable marketing campaigns for HTC devices have come from the carriers rather than HTC.

If HTC wants the One to sell like gangbusters — and after today’s financial news, they need it to do so — the company will need to elevate its marketing efforts to a completely new level.

The HTC One launches in the States on AT&T and Sprint on April 19th. It’s hitting T-Mobile (and maybe Verizon) later. On AT&T and Sprint, it’s priced right with the 16GB available for $199 on a two-year contract (it’s only $99 on Sprint for new customers). It’s the best Android device available right now and for the foreseeable future. I would take it over the Galaxy S4.

HTC likely threw its entire company behind the HTC One. Pick one up. Try it. Feel it. The phone is closer to perfect than any other phone previously made. However, a perfect product has never been a guarantee of success. Like Benedect Evans said to The Guardian, while the HTC One might be a collection of lovely bits of hardware, that’s not enough alone.

Article courtesy of TechCrunch