Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

There certainly is a lot of noisy swirl of late around the escalating fight between Google and some traditional media companies over content online.

The loudest voice in this fight has clearly been News Corp. (NWS) kingpin Rupert Murdoch, who seemingly has not met a television interviewer of late he did not regale with tales of Google’s nefariousness.

Part of what he is saying is surely justified–it’s definitely a crisis for the news business.

And, in Murdoch’s mind, the blame should largely fall on Google, which he believes is profiting from the expensively-created content of others that it is not paying for to such a warped and massive degree that it makes a mockery of fair use.

In Silicon Valley style, Google defends itself by saying it sends valuable Web traffic to News Corp. and other sites, so a thank-you note is really the proper response.

That is definitely not in the mail from Murdoch, who has threatened to “de-index” at least some of his content assets–which are not insubstantial–from the now inevitable crawlers sent out by the search giant.

These are, of course, vintage tactics from the Global Media Mogul Playbook: Causing a public hubbub and spooking perceived enemies by threatening drastic action and implying dire consequences, while simultaneously dealmaking behind the scenes.

Trying mightily to make the stakes more dramatic, News Corp. has pulled Microsoft (MSFT) into the fray as a possible white knight–if you live long enough, you do see it all–for publishers.

Under that scenario, the software giant would fork over some sum of money to get News Corp. and perhaps from other key content companies, such as Associated Press, exclusively and prominently featured on its Bing search site.

The reward, presumably, would be increased searching on Bing for the stuff consumers could now not find on Google (GOOG).

BoomTown reported earlier this week that, in fact, Microsoft was unlikely to hand over any kind of king’s ransom to publishers.

As I wrote:

While a spate of reports has Microsoft execs girding the globe offering gobs of cash to content companies to block Google and favor its Bing search service, sources close to the situation caution that it is extremely unlikely that the software giant would pay giant sums for that pricey privilege, which many inside the company think will not help it gain much search share.

“While there is a lot of mutual interest, it’s doubtful Microsoft is going to pay to ‘rent’ a corpus of content that it does not own,” said one source close to the situation. “The economics are not there for anyone.”

In other words, this wrestling match is not about whether Google or Microsoft will serve up links to content online, but about how much–or not at all–they are willing to pay for doing so.

So, what’s really happening here? Here are five possibilities to consider, each of which is true in part:

1.) Murdoch really means it

In this scenario, Murdoch, as well as others like AP’s Tom Curley, truly believe that Google–like that creepy salt-seeking alien from “Star Trek”–is sucking the life out of the media industry by making bank off their news content, but not giving back nearly enough in return.

Of course, a lot of these companies have willingly done distribution deals with Google over the years.

But now, they don’t like it, since the increasing money being made by Google, even as their own revenues have suffered, has developed into a growing problem.

Which is simply this: There is a lot more money to be made in searching for content than in making it.

This realization has to shake content czars like Murdoch to the core, but it is indeed the situation they find themselves in.

Murdoch makes a fair point in that journalism costs money to make and it used to have a solid economic system under it, until Google and others on the Web disaggregated it wholly.

Thus, online aggregators become “tapeworms,” as The Wall Street Journal’s Managing Editor Robert Thomson quipped.

He also, on a recent panel at the Web 2.0 conference, said to Google’s front page head–Marissa Mayer–that she “unintentionally encourages promiscuity.”

Ouch. That remark, which was was quite striking if you were there to see Thomson say it, said volumes more.

(Full disclosure: News Corp. owns Dow Jones, which owns this site.)

2.) Murdoch really means to create a lot of confusion, in order to shake down Google

Well, it would not be the first time he and many others of his ilk have used public sharp elbows and saber rattling to get what they want.

Except, in this case, the algorithm experts over at Google know precisely–down to the tenth decimal–how much linking to News Corp. makes for them.

And, it is not much, especially when looking at the vast sea of data Google serves up.

Its money-making is widely dissipated, from searches for vacation information to mapping to car-buying to health. While news-finding definitely is part of the mix, it is not at the center of the Borg.

Ironically–and oddly left out of this debate–it is Yahoo (YHOO) that has a lot of power in this arena, with massive content sites that shoot traffic all over the Web (including to this site).

But, what Google cannot and never can quantify–although I have seen Co-Founder Larry Page try once or twice–is the impact of public perception on the company, which has slowly morphed from being a benign, brightly-colored digital, librarian-like helper to a scary, answer-to-no-one, evil-doing monster.

Their growing influence over what people see and do not see on the Web is palpably frightening to publishers, advertisers and anyone who wants to be digitally discovered.

Bad luck for Google: Creating and then attacking boogeymen is a Murdoch talent bar none.

3.) Murdoch really means to create a lot of confusion, in order to shake down Microsoft

Also obvious is the full-scale obsession Microsoft has with Google. While its execs try to hide it, the panic over the success of Google has been tough on the once dominant tech company, which has struggled in the Internet arena.

Worse still, Google rakes in the dough, while Microsoft, um, does not.

Finally, this year, Microsoft has created–with no small amount of much-needed innovation–Bing, a laudable effort that is starting to show some traction.

While it still has a very small market share in comparison to Google–by a factor of seven to one–it’s definitely got some momentum going.

And, after much turmoil, Microsoft finally did a deft and relatively inexpensive deal to join with Yahoo in a search and advertising partnership to give them both more heft, which will surely help matters.

More importantly, one of the ways Bing has differentiated itself is via product innovations and intense focus on search niches, such as health.

In this topic area, for example, Bing has struck a not-expensive content licensing arrangement with the Mayo Clinic, in order to better feature content.

This is smart business and offers consumers something better and different.

But, overpaying big media publishers for the same thing, even if they de-indexed Google at the same time, is not, unless it is for really niche things like special financial information.

And, even then, there are so many other sources of information out there, it would not take Google long to mount a similar offering, even in the face of some kind of OPEC of News consortium.

Even more–how much do consumers love OPECs of any kind? Not much!

Sources at Microsoft agree:

“If it was everyone, that might become interesting. But even that has issues, since Microsoft is not interested in having exclusive news for a temporary period of time by overpaying for it. It’s essentially a marketing expense, and there are a lot better ways to spend that money to win market share than giving it to publishers.”

Lastly, Microsoft has been to the Murdoch party before too, having been part of talks to fold News Corp.-owned social networking site MySpace into Yahoo, had Microsoft prevailed in its attempt to acquire it.

Microsoft missed that pricey bullet and might be more inclined to grow Bing the old-fashioned way–via innovation, marketing and product improvements, rather than just using up too much of its energy trying to mess with Google.

4.) A deal will be made

My not-too-surprising prediction is that, in the end, News Corp. and others will probably strike some kind of lesser deal with Microsoft–although it will tout the heck out of it–while taking some of its content behind a pay wall and, thereby, de-indexing it from Google.

More damaging would be if AP, which actually provides the most used news content online, removes its links completely from Google, because–unlike the premium content from other publishers–this is the bread and butter of consumer usage of content.

As to promotional material or links to its television shows and movies from publishers like News Corp.? Well, it would seem the most self-destructive form of pique to remove those links from any of the top search engines.

That said, even if it really pissed me off for publishers to do so, I would probably switch to another search engine to find information on “Glee” forced to. That’s how much I love those singing kids and Jane Lynch!

Finally, Murdoch has threatened also to challenge the fair use doctrine–which allows others to use copyrighted content within limits, as Google and many others do (such as this site too).

While some think that is a bridge too far, that might be his best argument of all. Why should Google make a fortune on the content of others, even if only listing it? Doesn’t the sheer volume of what the search giant vacuums up make its use of fair use as a defense pretty ridiculous?

You can be sure Murdoch has his many lawyers and lobbyists all over this one, as does Google.

5.) The truth is out there

In perhaps his most strident television interview with his Sky News Australia service (which you can see below on–oh, the irony–on Google’s YouTube), Murdoch said about those who used Google to find News Corp. content:

“They don’t suddenly become loyal readers of our content. We’d rather have fewer people coming to our Web site but paying.”

That really is the honest truth in all this hubbub: Murdoch and other publishers have to find a way to get a some pool of dedicated online readers to pay enough to be able to then provide them with content that will keep them coming back for more.

That’s a business that Google truly cannot help or hinder, really.

And, more to the point, it is also a business that Rupert Murdoch does seem to know a thing or two about.

Microsoft CFO Chris Liddell (pictured here) is leaving the software giant at the end of the year and will be replaced by longtime Microsoft finance exec Peter Klein.

A Microsoft (MSFT) spokesman said Liddell wants to pursue jobs beyond his finance role outside the company.

Liddell, 51, arrived at Microsoft in 2005 and many of his years at the company have been tough ones financially due to the weak economy. It was up to Liddell to deliver the bad news at quarterly earnings calls.

Still, BoomTown always enjoyed his adorkable New Zealand accent, even when he was talking econalypse 24/7, as well as about layoffs and cost cutting.

One post from last spring, for example, was titled: “Glum Chris at the Recessiondome.”

Klein (pictured here), 47, has been at Microsoft since early 2002 and currently serves as CFO of its Business Division, which is one of the company’s largest units.

Here is the official press release:

For Release 2 p.m. PST

Nov. 24, 2009

Microsoft Announces Chief Financial Officer Transition

Chris Liddell to leave Microsoft Dec. 31; Peter Klein assuming CFO role.

REDMOND, Wash.–Nov. 24, 2009–Microsoft Corp. today announced that Chris Liddell will be leaving the company at the end of 2009, and named Peter Klein as the company’s new chief financial officer.

“Chris and his finance team have accomplished a great deal over the past four and a half years. The team is deep and strong, and has an excellent record of building value for our shareholders,” said Steve Ballmer, Microsoft chief executive officer. “Peter brings great finance and operations expertise and a deep understanding of the company, and I am looking forward to a smooth transition that continues our commitment to cost containment and finance excellence.”

In the past fiscal year, Microsoft reduced costs by $3 billion compared with its original plan, and returned $14 billion to shareholders through dividends and stock buy-back.

Klein, 47, joined Microsoft in February 2002 and currently serves as CFO of Microsoft’s Business Division, overseeing all financial strategy, management and reporting for the $18.9 billion business with 7,800 full-time employees. Previously, Klein served three years as CFO of Microsoft’s Server and Tools Business.

“My time at Microsoft has been an outstanding experience, and I am delighted to be leaving the company in such great shape,” Liddell said. “We have built a world-class finance team and established strong internal accountability. Microsoft is coming out of the economic downturn with not only great product momentum but also strong discipline around costs and a focus on driving shareholder value.”

Liddell, 51, joined Microsoft in May 2005 after serving as CFO at International Paper Co., and chief executive officer of Carter Holt Harvey Ltd., then New Zealand’s second-largest listed company. He said he is looking at a number of opportunities that will expand his career beyond being a CFO.

Liddell will continue at Microsoft working closely with Klein through Dec. 31, to ensure a smooth transition.

Before joining Microsoft, Klein spent 13 years in corporate finance, primarily in the communications and technology sectors: McCaw Cellular Communications; Orca Bay Capital, a private equity firm; and several startups, including HomeGrocer.com, where as vice president and treasurer he helped lead an IPO and subsequent acquisition by Webvan.

“I’m honored to take on the role of Microsoft CFO. I’ve learned a lot working with Chris, and I’m excited about the opportunities ahead for Microsoft,” said Klein. “We have an incredible pipeline of products, we have strong financial and operational accountability, and we are well-positioned for growth as the economy recovers.”

Klein holds a bachelor’s degree from Yale University and an MBA from the University of Washington. Outside of work, he is an avid sports fan and serves on the board of NPower Seattle, a nonprofit organization dedicated to enhancing the effectiveness of nonprofit service providers through technology. He and his wife have two sons.

Yet another goofy Silicon Valley name did not prevent Asana–the workplace productivity software start-up founded by former Facebookers Dustin Moskovitz and Justin Rosenstein–from nabbing $9 million in funding from Benchmark Capital and Andreessen Horowitz.

The round, which was announced today, will be used to turbocharge Asana and its small team, who are aiming at the very dull and unexciting but very large and problematic workplace collaboration and communications software market.

In Sanskrit, “asana” means “sitting down” and refers to strong but relaxed postures in yoga–so presumably, Moskovitz and Rosenstein are trying to help frustrated workers achieve a digital form of nirvana.

Former Facebooker Matt Cohler, now at Benchmark, will have a seat on the Asana board. Asana had previously raised just over $1 million in an angel round, which included a spate of Silicon Valley bigwigs.

In an interview today, Rosenstein said that solving the “friction of communications” in the workplace by innovating via “information transparency” was Asana’s goal.

But, said Rosenstein, “We are not taking existing tools and porting it over the to Web…but rethinking how people can productively work together.”

He added: “We want to change the way you manage information and how you keep everyone on the same page…there are tons of misses here everyday in the workplace and it is death by 1,000 cuts.”

Moskovitz said he was always trying to solve such issues at Facebook, the social networking site he co-founded and where he once was CTO.

Ticking off a variety of workplace collaboration tools he employed, including some newer Web-based ones such as Yammer, Moskovitz said, “We could not find any easy solution, because there is not any one that answers all your issues.”

The pair said they had working product that was being used internally at the company, but would not say when one would be released publicly.

Finding one would obviously be a magic bullet, said Benchmark’s Cohler.

“This is a really big existing problem that no one has solved,” he said.

Here’s the press release:

Asana Announces $9 Million in Funding from Benchmark Capital and Andreessen-Horowitz

11/24/2009

The challenge of groups of people working together effectively is fundamental to human endeavor, but the state of the art falls far short of real efficiency. Despite advances like email and wikis, the friction and overhead of communication remain acutely painful to organizations large and small. Group leaders spend an enormous portion of their time trying to keep everyone on the same page, and knowledge workers struggle daily with inadequate, disparate tools to wrangle the information they need to do their jobs.

The technical hurdles to building the right system to address these problems are immense, and the design challenges subtle and complex. The Asana team has thought deeply about these problems for many years, in leadership roles at some of the world’s best software companies. We are undertaking an ambitious project to tackle them with a vision that reimagines the way people manage information, to speed up knowledge work and communication by an order of magnitude. This is not another enterprise application suite, nor is it an ajaxification of existing desktop software concepts; it is a new kind of software product, built for the Web from the ground up, with a focus on speed, collaboration, and ease of use.

To help us build the company, we’re bringing in Benchmark Capital and Andreessen-Horowitz. The partners at these firms bring a tremendous amount of experience building companies and helping entrepreneurs reach their goals. Benchmark is leading the $9 million round of funding, and Matt Cohler, with whom we already have a close, trusting relationship, will have a seat on the board. Andreessen-Horowitz is the only other VC firm participating, and we’ve already started enjoying the benefits of Marc’s and Ben’s great wisdom.

We plan to use the funding most immediately for growing our team. We’re currently mobilizing a group of world-class peers, and looking for passionate engineers and UI designers to join us. We need people to help us tackle some of the hardest software engineering and computer science problems, including developing a ground-breaking programming system that decimates the time required to build a web application end-to-end.

“When you look at the sheer talent, vision and ability to execute that Dustin and Justin demonstrated at Facebook and Google, you know something big can happen here. In addition to being two of the world’s best engineers in their own right, they have an extraordinary ability to rally teams around a vision like very few people can, and they are putting together a world-class team of people at Asana. This is a company with limitless potential.” –Matt Cohler, general partner, Benchmark Capital

While it might be a dream of publishers–hard hit by the digital tsunami and blaming Google for the crisis–Microsoft is not likely to fork over the big bucks they’d need for exclusive indexing of their content.

“Microsoft isn’t the monopoly guy anymore,” joked one source close to ongoing talks between Microsoft and publishers, especially News Corp. (NWS) and Associated Press. “So, it’s not going to be the bank for publishers.”

While a spate of reports has Microsoft (MSFT) execs girding the globe offering gobs of cash to content companies to block Google (GOOG) and favor its Bing search service, sources close to the situation caution that it is extremely unlikely that the software giant would pay giant sums for that pricey privilege, which many inside the company think will not help it gain much search share.

“While there is a lot of mutual interest, it’s doubtful Microsoft is going to pay to ‘rent’ a corpus of content that it does not own,” said one source close to the situation. “The economics are not there for anyone.”

Nonetheless, that has not stopped AP and News Corp. from aggressive public agitating recently about how their content has been treated online, accusing Google of a wide range of crimes against them and threatening to “de-index” their content from the search giant.

For example, News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch–who has been on what seems like a televised campaign against the search giant–accused Google of pilfering stories from his publishing properties.

Presumably, by yanking Google’s access to them and offering them to Microsoft, balance will be restored in The Force.

Except, not so fast, since such a deal would end up costing Microsoft a fortune, which is why several sources said its execs don’t seem to be keen on doing that without getting a lot in return.

The swirl of chatter about it, these sources said, is coming from publishers–who initiated the very early-stage talks–who are keen on playing Microsoft and Google against each other in hopes the warring tech titans will loosen their fat wallets to battle each other.

News Corp., for instance, has been looking for ways to replace the three-year, $900 million (or less) Google/MySpace search deal that expires next year. The publisher has been talking to Microsoft about some sort of exclusivity since this summer, but News Corp. executives also say they’re happy to work with Google if Google is willing to pay up. But what would either company really be buying?

Another source used YouTube as an example of Google getting a mass of videos, when it paid $1.65 billion in 2006 for the online video company.

“That made sense, since Google got all that content to use,” said the source. “But it is hard to see publishers getting the advertising economics and revenue they want from Microsoft for lending their content out, even exclusively.”

Still a third source noted that the only way such a deal could be envisioned by Microsoft is if a majority of publishers was able to band together to block Google from indexing their sites.

“If it was everyone, that might become interesting,” said the source. “But even that has issues, since Microsoft is not interested in having exclusive news for a temporary period of time by overpaying for it.”

Added the source, noting how much money Microsoft has lost in its online efforts so far:

“It’s essentially a marketing expense, and there are a lot better ways to spend that money to win market share than giving it to publishers.”

(Full disclosure: News Corp. owns Dow Jones, which owns this site.)

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Greg Nelson (pictured here), who has had the thankless job of running MSN for Microsoft, has left that position and been given the even more thankless task of running the integration of the complex search and online advertising partnership struck by the software giant and Yahoo.

Microsoft (MSFT) sent out an internal email to staff about the move for the GM of MSN’s Global Media Group, which has already taken place.

MSN U.S. head Scott Moore is now reporting directly to MSN Corporate VP Erik Jorgensen. So will Brett Wayn, who has been working under Nelson on international coordination and who has taken over MSN’s international business on an interim basis.

Nelson’s counterpart at Yahoo (YHOO), according to sources, will be Mark Morrissey (pictured here), who is currently SVP of Products at the Internet giant.

The pair will have their hands full in what will ultimately be a two-year effort, sources estimate, to try to improve their competitive edge against Google (GOOG) in the search arena.

BoomTown’s title for the relationship: A Couple of White Geek Guys Sitting Around Arguing!

The role includes coordinating a massive shift of engineering talent from Yahoo to Microsoft, making sure ad systems are copacetic and most of all, smoothing over what is likely to be a number of bumps in the partnership.

To help make the frustrations less frustrating, there is a $50 million annual payment to Yahoo by Microsoft for three years, for unspecified “transition and implementation costs.”

At least 400 Yahoo employees will be hired by Microsoft, which will also provide funds for retention packages to keep 150 more Yahoos motivated during the transition.

The “Definitive Agreement” between the Silicon Valley company and the Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft, which had been slated to be signed by Oct. 27, 2009, is about to be completed.

Then, as soon as regulatory approvals are in place, it will be showtime for Nelson and Morrissey.

Yesterday, BoomTown wrote about AOL’s efforts–including hiring investment bankers–to sell its ICQ instant-messaging unit.

But that’s probably not going to be the end of the shedding of assets at the online site.

In fact, according to sources inside and outside AOL, one of the next candidates for sale could be its MapQuest online map service.

Purchasers of the service that provides mapping and directions, sources said, are likely to be other mapping giants, especially Microsoft (MSFT).

But it is not clear if the software giant or anyone would fork over a huge sum of money for MapQuest.

That would include the $1.1 billion in stock that AOL paid for MapQuest in 1999.

AOL is set to spin itself off in less than a month from corporate owner Time Warner (TWX), and sources said selling off peripheral properties is part of becoming a smaller, more focused company.

MapQuest, like AOL’s Bebo social networking site, fits this description.

While it does have widespread distribution across the Web, reaching over 40 million users monthly, MapQuest lags well behind aggressive efforts being pushed by both Microsoft and Google (GOOG).

AOL has hired a pair of New York investment bankers, Morgan Stanley and Allen & Co., to manage the sale of its ICQ instant-messaging unit.

Sources familiar with the situation said interest in buying the asset from two major non-U.S. companies prompted execs at the online service to put a process in place for a deal that will likely occur after AOL becomes an independent company in December.

AOL is set to spin itself off in less than a month from corporate owner Time Warner (TWX), and sources said selling off peripheral properties likes ICQ is part of becoming a smaller, more focused company.

Sources added that AOL now wants about $300 million for the property.

ICQ, which was once of the most explosive online communications tools, has lagged since AOL bought its popular software for $287 million in 1998, with another $125 million in earnouts for the team then. It was part of an Tel Aviv, Israel, start-up called Mirabilis.

While ICQ has about 40 million to 50 million unique monthly visitors and is the No. 1 messaging service in Germany, Russia, Ukraine, Israel and other small countries, its has less traction in the U.S. than bigger rival services from Microsoft (MSFT), Yahoo (YHOO) and Google (GOOG). In addition, Facebook and Twitter have also become major players in the status-update space.

AOL’s AIM service, in contrast, is quite strong, typically clocking as one of the top instant-messaging properties.

Said one source about the sale of ICQ, which is still based in Israel with about 100 employees and is moderately profitable: “AOL now has to be asking the hard questions.”

Those hard questions include massive layoffs, which BoomTown reported last week will take place soon. AOL then formally acknowledged the cuts, noting in a regulatory filing that Time Warner would take a $200 million charge for them.

Other AOL properties are also likely to be getting the once-over for sale, including its Bebo social networking site, which AOL bought for $850 million in 2008. But that is not imminent.

Yahoo and Microsoft are poised to finally sign the definitive agreement that will govern the complex and far-reaching search and online advertising partnership they struck in late July, said sources close to the situation.

If all goes well, the various Microsoft and Yahoo execs–who have been ferreted away over the last weeks, busy dotting all the i’s and crossing all the t’s in the massive document–could even turn in their deal homework to their bosses for signature by the end of the week.

Yahoo (YHOO) officials declined to comment, while Microsoft (MSFT) has not gotten back to BoomTown as yet.

In any case, getting the definitive agreement in place is critical to making the high-profile MicroHoo deal a reality and, of course, getting the anti-Google (GOOG) party started.

So when the pair blew through a deadline to complete it in late October, there were eyebrows raised all over Wall Street and Silicon Valley.

When Yahoo filed an 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August, it noted that the “Definitive Agreement” between the Silicon Valley Internet company and the Redmond, Wash., software giant needs to be sketched out by Oct. 27, 2009.

But it is a monster document, which is why MicroHoo did not complete it in time. After that whiff, Yahoo said as much in another filing with the SEC:

“The Letter Agreement specified that the parties would execute definitive agreements by October 27, 2009, but given the complex nature of the transaction, there remain some details to be finalized.”

Added Microsoft similarly:

“We have made good progress in finalizing the definitive agreements. Given the complex nature of this transaction there remain some issues that need some additional clarity and definitive details.”

Nonetheless, both companies have consistently said that they would be able to close this deal by early 2010.

Yahoo and Microsoft had already done a pretty hefty binding-agreement letter (here is a picture of Yahoo’s CEO Carol Bartz and Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer holding it, in fact).

Also key: Getting approval for the deal from regulators in Washington, D.C., which, sources said, also seems to be on track.

With little opposition, Yahoo and Microsoft policy types have been chipping away on regulatory issues with federal regulators in Washington.

And, several sources said, those government approvals are now nearing completion at the Justice Department, even though the Federal Trade Commission might still ask for more assurances on privacy issues related to online advertising and consumer data.

International regulatory approval is another story, especially in Europe, which could further delay the implementation of the partnership, since it is unlikely the pair would move forward without clearance globally.

When that is done, the real game begins, as MicroHoo faces its the much more critical Tim Gunn acid test for the deal:

Making it work.

When in San Diego recently, BoomTown paid a visit to Qualcomm and its Chairman and CEO, Paul Jacobs, to talk about a new “smartbook” device the wireless-technology company unveiled last week.

Well, sort of–while I got a gander at a prototype, the real one is not actually set to debut until the 2010 Consumer Electronics Show in January, where Jacobs will deliver his first keynote address.

There, he will show off what is essentially a combination of a smartphone and a netbook using wireless technology and an always-on capability, an attempt to push yet another innovative device type onto the market.

It will use Qualcomm’s Snapdragon chip, and the first ones will be made by Lenovo and offered by AT&T (T)–to try to get the device widely used by consumers.

Smartbooks will be videocentric and have a Linux-based user interface, a keyboard and a range of popular widget applications, such as email and Facebook.

Obviously, this will be a competitive market and, really, Apple (AAPL), with its upcoming tablet computer, is also pushing into this mobile-phone-that-ate-computers space.

Moving into new markets has been important for Jacobs and Qualcomm (QCOM), which recently gave fiscal-year forecasts under Wall Street expectations and has had a rocky time in recent quarters.

Along with the econalypse, the company has attributed this to the decline in handsets with CDMA wireless technology, which Qualcomm pioneered.

Here’s my interview with Jacobs about smartbooks, as well as augmented reality and the company’s new FLO TV device, coming out soon. Plus, a wireless bandaid!:

]]> http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091116/qualcomms-ceo-paul-jacobs-talks-about-smartbooks-and-more/feed/ 2 http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091111/from-the-department-of-oh-no-she-didnt-whitman-defends-ebays-skype-debacle/ http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091111/from-the-department-of-oh-no-she-didnt-whitman-defends-ebays-skype-debacle/#comments Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:30:19 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=20516

If spinning is an intense political skill, former eBay CEO Meg Whitman is doing her very best at trying to create a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.

As Om Malik reports on GigaOm, Whitman–who is trying to nab the Republican gubernatorial nomination in California–told a radio interviewer recently that “actually I think Skype will prove to be a good acquisition for eBay.”

Well, good if you mean the $2.6 billion purchase of the Internet telephony company that never worked as Whitman had effusively promised in 2005.

She noted then: “By combining the two leading e-commerce franchises, eBay and PayPal, with the leader in Internet voice communications, we will create an extraordinarily powerful environment for business on the Net.”

That fabulous-sounding synergy did not happen, of course, eventually causing new eBay (EBAY) management to sell a huge chunk of Skype to an investor group.

Best of all, that sale included an ugly and expensive legal fight over software technology licensing issues with its co-founders, Niklas Zennström and Janus Friis, given that Whitman neglected in the competitive bidding to secure them properly.

That resulted in Zennström and Friis forcing eBay to include them just last week in the deal for a big chunk of Skype in exchange for those rights.

As the sick political joke goes: Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

Nonetheless, Whitman has not let the facts get in the way of a good story!

She kind of had to, I guess, responding to an allegation by one of her rivals in the race, tech entrepreneur Steve Poizner, who has tried to chip away at her blue-chip business reputation by attacking the Skype deal.

Whitman was right to defend a lot of other great acquisitions she made as leader at eBay, such as PayPal; and she can be, as she said in the interview, “proud of my tenure at eBay.”

She should be, given that she was key to building a huge and profitable company that is a clear Silicon Valley Internet icon. While eBay did start to creak near the end of her decade-long stint there, many of Whitman’s accomplishments are nonetheless impressive.

But not all of them and definitely not the Skype buy, so she might want to stop making laughable declarations like this one in the interview:

“You probably read that the company just sold about two-thirds of the interest in Skype to an investor group, kept a portion, and got almost all the money back, and I think Skype will be very effective.”

Well, maybe so, but only because new management had to do clean-up and pay-up for her error, and new owners in charge of Skype could possibly better take advantage of what most consider a terrific property.

So, in the end, Whitman might be right.

And it might not even matter. In a recent poll, Whitman has pulled far ahead of ex-Congressman Tom Campbell, with 34 percent support from Republican primary voters compared to 13 percent for Campbell. Poizner clocks in third at six percent.

]]> http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091111/from-the-department-of-oh-no-she-didnt-whitman-defends-ebays-skype-debacle/feed/ 1 http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091111/apple-uses-switchers-ad-to-keeping-smacking-windows-7/ http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091111/apple-uses-switchers-ad-to-keeping-smacking-windows-7/#comments Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:03:13 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=20498

While sales of Windows 7 are doing well–especially compared to the Vista, the previous operating system, according to many reports–Apple (AAPL) is continuing to slap the Microsoft (MSFT) operating system software around.

There was a bunch of unusually mean-spirited “Get a Mac” ads right when Windows 7 was released in late October, all of which stressed consumers dying to switch to Apple when faced with the prospect of upgrading their Microsoft software.

Now there is a name for them: “PC Switchers.”

It sounds a little naughty.

The ads, which began appearing a week ago, are now widespread–once again taking over the New York Times Web front page, as well as over at Wired.

Apple needs to be aggressive, of course, as it tries to chip away at Microsoft’s PC hegemony, which remains largely intact. Stressing consumer satisfaction is a natural weapon, of course.

Thanks to MacDailyNews for uploading the advertising to its channel on YouTube; you also can see the new video embedded here:

]]> http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091111/apple-uses-switchers-ad-to-keeping-smacking-windows-7/feed/ 10 http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091110/the-judge-was-wrong-realnetworks-realdvd-appeal-document/ http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091110/the-judge-was-wrong-realnetworks-realdvd-appeal-document/#comments Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:48:40 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=20484

RealNetworks just lobbed its appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals in the case revolving around its DVD-copying software, RealDVD.

A U.S. District judge issued a preliminary injunction against RealNetworks (RNWK) in August to stop sales, and renewed it in October.

In a typical Hollywood move, the Motion Picture Association of America said the software, which allows copying of DVDs, violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

In the appeal, RealNetworks said the judge was using the wrong law, that the software was not causing damage to the studios and that the technology is in the public interest and constitutes fair use.

“The District Court committed multiple legal errors in granting Appellees’ motions for preliminary injuction,” reads the appeal.

But, check out the whole appeal and below it, a video interview with RealNetworks CEO Rob Glaser that BoomTown did when RealDVD was launched a little over a year ago:

RealDVD Appeal

]]> http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091110/the-judge-was-wrong-realnetworks-realdvd-appeal-document/feed/ 0 http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091106/all-is-forgiven-its-a-clean-slate-says-andreessen-about-lawsuit-mad-skype-co-founders/ http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091106/all-is-forgiven-its-a-clean-slate-says-andreessen-about-lawsuit-mad-skype-co-founders/#comments Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:28:48 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=20364

Silicon Valley legend and now VC Marc Andreessen was making the interview rounds after the settlement between the litigation-addled co-founders of Skype and all the various people they were suing was announced this morning.

He has been tight-lipped until now, due to the morass of lawsuits.

But, as Andreessen told BoomTown in a phone interview about the aggressive legal tactics of Niklas Zennström and Janus Friis that resulted in them finally seizing a stake in the Internet telephony giant by suing him and many other Silicon Valley players:

“We did not take it personally. It’s a clean sheet of paper.”

Well, it is actually a torn, stained and very worn out piece of paper, due to all the various machinations, but bygones!

Andreessen–who knows a thing or two about legal tussles, if you recall Netscape-Microsoft (MSFT)–said the real point is that it is time to focus on the business of Skype rather than fighting over who controls Skype.

“It’s really good to have everyone lined up and rowing in the same direction. We have to capitalize on the opportunity, because Skype is poised for a new wave of growth,” said Andreessen. “They have an amazing head of steam, because the logical way for voice and video communications to be conducted will be over the Web.”

Thus, Zennström and Friis now join the winning buyout group, Silver Lake Partners, Andreessen Horowitz and the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, along with eBay, in owning Skype.

But Index Ventures, which was in, is–as Heidi Klum might say–out!

Under the terms of the agreement, Niklas Zennström and Janus Friis will take a 14 percent stake in the company they founded and then sold to eBay (EBAY), which will include an undisclosed investment by them.

I reported yesterday that the total was 13 percent–10 percent for the rights to key Skype technology held by the co-founders and the option to invest $83 million for three percent more.

In exchange, the pair will give Skype software essential to its operation and drop their various lawsuits against eBay and Skype’s buyers.

As for Zennström and Friis’s egregious use of the courts to grab their 14 percent stake in Skype, litigation they waged after losing their bid to buy Skype back from eBay, Andreessen was being very politic.

“We love working with aggressive founders and are in favor of founders being involved in their companies,” he said. “Great founders are not known for being shy and reserved. Look at Bill Gates. It’s not a question of personality, but of accomplishment.”

Noting that he had not worked with the pair before, Andreessen (pictured here) said, “We have a lot of respect for them. We think they’re geniuses.”

But, I queried, would he have used such tactics?

“It’s not a book club, it’s a super-serious, high-stakes game,” said Andreessen. “I don’t know; I’ve not been in the situation they’re in. If your goal in life is to avoid drama, this is probably the wrong industry for you.”

Perhaps, but I told him that I doubted even a battle-hardened entrepreneur like Andreessen would use the courts in such a manner to achieve business goals.

To each his own, said Andreessen!

“One of our investing mottos is that we invest in strength, not lack of weakness,” he said. “The question is how big is the opportunity.”

And, apparently, it is big enough to overlook all the drama that has gone on.

Andreessen said he expects to be more involved at Skype–which, with his $50 million investment, is the biggest deal in his $300 million fund–than other board members, noting different directors have different roles.

It’s a big board of 23, as I had previously reported. Zennström and Friis are each getting a seat.

“We are going to be helpful,” Andreessen said about his fund’s role at Skype. “We’re a company picker, looking for those that have the greatest potential.”

Andreessen, ever the diplomat, made sure to add that that also means doing business with Index, the member of his Skype consortium that departed as Friis and Zennström (pictured here) entered, due to stark tensions between the two sides.

“I have a lot of respect for [Index partners Danny Rimer and Mike Volpi] and expect to work with them a lot in the future,” said Andreessen. “In fact, I am talking to them today about two other deals.”

In other words, in Silicon Valley, the big wheel just keeps on turning.

]]> http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091106/all-is-forgiven-its-a-clean-slate-says-andreessen-about-lawsuit-mad-skype-co-founders/feed/ 2 http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091106/meet-drake-meeting-brizzly-a-spanking-new-atd-feature/ http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091106/meet-drake-meeting-brizzly-a-spanking-new-atd-feature/#comments Fri, 06 Nov 2009 08:03:48 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=20339

Today, All Things Digital debuts a new feature called “Almost Famous” in our Voices section.

No, it is not about Kate Hudson and nascent rock stars.

Well, you might meet geek rock stars to be.

Focused on innovative, interesting or just plain odd start-ups, we thought it was a good way for ATD readers to get a gander at some up-and-coming ideas and trends.

We cover start-ups, of course, on the site, but–given that we have a small staff that breaks a lot of big-company news–not on a regular time frame.

So, while we are no good at predicting what will work and what will not and who will make it and who will fail, every Friday, Drake Martinet will be paying a video interview visit with, asking some questions of and gleaning a few pertinent stats about a wide range of companies.

Here’s our first effort: Chris Wetherell, creator of Brizzly, a Web-based social media reader.

The San Francisco start-up, which just rolled out support for Twitter lists last night, is also just wrapping up a new $600,000 round of funding, according to Jason Shellen, CEO of Thing Labs, from which Brizzly sprang.

Brizzly had already raised $1.5 million from Polaris Venture Partners last year. Now it is getting more cash from investors such as Ron Conway to further its software and other efforts.

But don’t rely on BoomTown for info about Brizzly–check out Drake’s take.

]]> http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091106/meet-drake-meeting-brizzly-a-spanking-new-atd-feature/feed/ 0 http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091105/realnetworks-to-lay-off-four-percent-of-staff-today/ http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091105/realnetworks-to-lay-off-four-percent-of-staff-today/#comments Thu, 05 Nov 2009 08:34:22 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=20317

The Seattle area is going to get another jobless jolt today, with RealNetworks planning to lay off four percent of its workforce, sources said.

That’s a small number–just about 70 people out of its 1,700-person staff–but the move comes on the heels of layoffs of another 800 employees at nearby Microsoft yesterday.

The software giant has cut thousands of jobs over the last year, part of a move to eliminate 5,000 positions by mid-2010.

While the dismissals–which are likely to be announced by managers to affected RealNetworks (RNWK) employees sometime this morning–will be global, both companies are tech leaders with headquarters in the Pacific Northwest.

According to sources, the reasons for the layoffs at RealNetworks are, as was the case at Microsoft (MSFT), to realign the workforce after the recent economic downturn and to control costs.

But RealNetworks could also hire back some of the laid-off employees, as other parts of the company are expanding.

The company had signaled the possibility of staff cuts previously, but had not been specific.

The last staff cuts at the company, which makes digital media software and tools, were larger, about 130 employees sacked about a year ago.

RealNetworks announced better-than-expected third-quarter earnings last week, barely returning to profitability by cutting costs to make up for weaker revenue.

(Digital Daily’s John Paczkowski contributed to this report.)

]]> http://kara.allthingsd.com/20091105/realnetworks-to-lay-off-four-percent-of-staff-today/feed/ 0