Chennai, Aug 1 Short for third generation, this technology marks a quantum jump in mobile services.
3G technology helps users quickly access a range of multimedia services, including video telephony, e-commerce and television, on mobile devices like handsets, smart phones and palm-tops.
Networks supporting 3G would have the potential to support data transfer speeds of up to 3 Mbps while the average 2G networks allow for 144 Kbps. Simply put, it means that a song in MP3 format of 3 minutes’ duration would take 15 seconds to download over a 3G network but would take 8 minutes over existing networks.
In the near future, mobility will become a fundamental aspect of many services. We would expect high-speed access to the internet, entertainment, information and electronic commerce services wherever we are — not just at our desktop computers.
While GSM-based cellular operators will use WCDMA technology, CDMA operators will offer 3G services using EVDO. In India, 3G technology can play a dual role.
In urban India, there is a spectrum crunch and 3G can treble voice capacity and can solve the spectrum issue.
For rural India, 3G will be a boon for e-governance and specific applications for farmers, fishermen and small traders.
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
ADR picking up in internet and e-commerce law
ADR is particularly desirable in the context of e-commerce, because a lot of internet transactions involve relatively small amounts of money — even when they’re business-to-business transactions — which means litigation is not very useful. In theory, ADR solves geographical issues, reduces cost, and enables a speedier resolution.
For businesses, confidentiality is an important plus, as it keeps problems with their site, security system, etc. out of the media.
It also reduces a lot of the uncertainty inherent in going to court.
“The courts sometimes have not displayed a good understanding of e-commerce from a consumer perspective,” says Philippa Lawson, director of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic.
“Because it often involves people in multiple jurisdictions, litigation [in internet disputes] is often very difficult. Where do you sue people? So alternative dispute resolution is useful,” says Erdle.
Of particular use are online dispute resolution programs, or ODR, says Erdle, which are a relatively new phenomenon in internet commerce.
For example, in 1999, eBay Inc., the operators of an online auction and shopping web site, introduced an online mediation program provided by SquareTrade, which attempted to resolve disputes between buyers and sellers. The idea was that the complaining party filled out a form identifying the other party to the transaction, what the problem was, and what they would like to happen.
Then SquareTrade contacted the second party through an automatically generated e-mail, and created a “case page” to which it and both parties had access. Then the buyer and seller contacted each other directly through the case page and negotiated online.
If they failed to reach an agreement, SquareTrade would select a mediator from its roster, who would look at the materials on the case page and attempt to facilitate a resolution. Users had nothing to lose by filing a complaint, as the process was free if they settled without the services of a mediator.
“I think online businesses in particular will learn that there is an advantage in having systems in place that create or improve trust in their system,” says Erdle.
“I just think that they will benefit in the marketplace. I think eBay already has benefited from its efforts to try to prevent ripoffs and to police its own system and to resolve disputes.
“As they learn how to do that more effectively, that will improve and that it will spread further. So I think there will be more.”
As another example, Cybersettle Inc. is an American ODR company operating in the field of insurance. It has used a blind bidding system, where the parties agree ahead of time if the offers fall within a certain range the dispute will end by splitting the difference. When the offers are far apart, the machine can keep the offers secret and negotiations can continue.
The dispute resolution mechanism for the domain-name resolution system, the uniform domain-name dispute resolution policy, offers another well-known and effective example, this time of an arbitration-based ADR system for settling online disputes.
“The reason the domain name system works is that everybody who registers a domain name has to agree to this process up front,” says Erdle. “Otherwise . . . you’d never get people to voluntarily do it if there was a dispute.”
A business-to-business online marketplace could adopt that model and, as part of its terms and conditions, impose a mandatory mediation/arbitration system that would be fairly effective, says Erdle, as could online networking sites such as Second Life or Facebook.
“They have different systems in place now, but they could certainly establish, if they wanted, a mandatory arbitration system, and it would be entirely internal to that world, but it would prevent what happens now if somebody has a dispute on Second Life with another participant.”
Online dispute resolution systems continue to change rapidly as the price of the software drops, he says, and to incorporate newer technologies, such as video conferencing.
“The systems that are in place now are showing people what works well, what doesn’t work so well. Those systems I think will be refined over time to make them more effective.
For businesses, confidentiality is an important plus, as it keeps problems with their site, security system, etc. out of the media.
It also reduces a lot of the uncertainty inherent in going to court.
“The courts sometimes have not displayed a good understanding of e-commerce from a consumer perspective,” says Philippa Lawson, director of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic.
“Because it often involves people in multiple jurisdictions, litigation [in internet disputes] is often very difficult. Where do you sue people? So alternative dispute resolution is useful,” says Erdle.
Of particular use are online dispute resolution programs, or ODR, says Erdle, which are a relatively new phenomenon in internet commerce.
For example, in 1999, eBay Inc., the operators of an online auction and shopping web site, introduced an online mediation program provided by SquareTrade, which attempted to resolve disputes between buyers and sellers. The idea was that the complaining party filled out a form identifying the other party to the transaction, what the problem was, and what they would like to happen.
Then SquareTrade contacted the second party through an automatically generated e-mail, and created a “case page” to which it and both parties had access. Then the buyer and seller contacted each other directly through the case page and negotiated online.
If they failed to reach an agreement, SquareTrade would select a mediator from its roster, who would look at the materials on the case page and attempt to facilitate a resolution. Users had nothing to lose by filing a complaint, as the process was free if they settled without the services of a mediator.
“I think online businesses in particular will learn that there is an advantage in having systems in place that create or improve trust in their system,” says Erdle.
“I just think that they will benefit in the marketplace. I think eBay already has benefited from its efforts to try to prevent ripoffs and to police its own system and to resolve disputes.
“As they learn how to do that more effectively, that will improve and that it will spread further. So I think there will be more.”
As another example, Cybersettle Inc. is an American ODR company operating in the field of insurance. It has used a blind bidding system, where the parties agree ahead of time if the offers fall within a certain range the dispute will end by splitting the difference. When the offers are far apart, the machine can keep the offers secret and negotiations can continue.
The dispute resolution mechanism for the domain-name resolution system, the uniform domain-name dispute resolution policy, offers another well-known and effective example, this time of an arbitration-based ADR system for settling online disputes.
“The reason the domain name system works is that everybody who registers a domain name has to agree to this process up front,” says Erdle. “Otherwise . . . you’d never get people to voluntarily do it if there was a dispute.”
A business-to-business online marketplace could adopt that model and, as part of its terms and conditions, impose a mandatory mediation/arbitration system that would be fairly effective, says Erdle, as could online networking sites such as Second Life or Facebook.
“They have different systems in place now, but they could certainly establish, if they wanted, a mandatory arbitration system, and it would be entirely internal to that world, but it would prevent what happens now if somebody has a dispute on Second Life with another participant.”
Online dispute resolution systems continue to change rapidly as the price of the software drops, he says, and to incorporate newer technologies, such as video conferencing.
“The systems that are in place now are showing people what works well, what doesn’t work so well. Those systems I think will be refined over time to make them more effective.
Stanley Korshak to Launch E-Commerce
Stanley Korshak, the independent luxury emporium here, plans to begin selling merchandise on its Web site in October, owner Crawford Brock said.
“There are a lot of challenges,” Brock acknowledged. “You have to take the pictures, do the updates, the fulfillment. You have to give it the same level of service as our stores.”
The site will initially feature handbags, jewelry and cosmetics — merchandise that is not sized. Eventually, it might offer clothing as well.
“I think it could be as big as we are,” said Brock, estimating the company’s annual sales at $44 million. “We’re going to treat it like another store with the same level of service.”
The Internet business will be managed from the mezzanine of the Shak, a women’s contemporary boutique located across the courtyard from the main store. The space formerly housed a department of young men’s clothing and denim that wasn’t profitable.
Sales associates are already using the Web to e-mail pictures of merchandise to customers, Brock said, so it was logical to hire a developer to expand the store’s Web site beyond branding and information.
“There are a lot of challenges,” Brock acknowledged. “You have to take the pictures, do the updates, the fulfillment. You have to give it the same level of service as our stores.”
The site will initially feature handbags, jewelry and cosmetics — merchandise that is not sized. Eventually, it might offer clothing as well.
“I think it could be as big as we are,” said Brock, estimating the company’s annual sales at $44 million. “We’re going to treat it like another store with the same level of service.”
The Internet business will be managed from the mezzanine of the Shak, a women’s contemporary boutique located across the courtyard from the main store. The space formerly housed a department of young men’s clothing and denim that wasn’t profitable.
Sales associates are already using the Web to e-mail pictures of merchandise to customers, Brock said, so it was logical to hire a developer to expand the store’s Web site beyond branding and information.
Gartner: 90% of Ecommerce Sites Will Use SaaS by 2013
Even with the benefits from e-commerce SaaS solutions, commitment to upgrading e-commerce Web sites appears to outpace commitment to the SaaS model for e-commerce during the next couple of years. Gartner analysts believe several factors are contributing to this trend:
- SaaS e-commerce may not be appropriate for some Web sites, and may not provide a differentiated experience — Because the SaaS model has a low barrier to entry, some organizations feel that competitors can sign up quickly and easily with the same SaaS e-commerce provider, and deliver an equal online customer experience. However, organizations that are challenged in their e-commerce IT capabilities (such as lack of budget for people, hardware and software), and organizations that can have e-commerce capabilities without having to obtain hardware and software, find SaaS e-commerce appealing.
- Current SaaS e-commerce offerings can’t support business-to-business (B2B) — All SaaS e-commerce vendors support B2C online selling; however, for vendors with B2B requirements (such as quoting, proposal generation, lead management and purchase order payment processes), or for organizations that sell into a multilevel network of partners, SaaS e-commerce offerings won't be able to meet the necessary requirements.
- Concern about the impact of SaaS e-commerce on the total IT portfolio —Organizations are often concerned about the management of a mixed-application environment (SaaS and non-SaaS applications). Many IT people fear that they'll be held responsible for site outages or performance issues when they actually have no control over the SaaS e-commerce application or its operating environment, and can control only part of the systems that contribute to the overall customer experience.
- Uncertainty of SaaS e-commerce integration with other applications — Organizations that aren't familiar with SaaS offerings are uncertain how to integrate SaaS e-commerce with their existing applications and the stability of the integration over time. Although SaaS vendors don't operate in a stand-alone vacuum, some are able to loosely couple with an organization's applications via application programming interfaces, Web services or XML interfaces, while others have specific and tightly coupled integration requirements.
- Concern about data collection and data ownership issues in a SaaS e-commerce environment — Many vendors claim that all data associated with a client site is owned by the subscriber, but that aggregated data isn't. This belief may vary by vendor, so organizations should ensure that they cover this issue before entering into a contract.
- Some vendors have technical limitations, such a shortcomings in Web 2.0 capabilities — In some cases, vendors focus on providing commodity e-commerce functions (enabling organizations to have basic online stores) to a large audience, while other vendors focus on providing enterpriselike e-commerce solutions for large organizations, which are more aligned with Web 2.0 capabilities.
- Organizations may need IT and non-IT resources to support the Web site — This varies by the vendor selected, because some vendors require the organization to have some IT resources for integration support with back-end systems, and to have business users to manage the products and the site's user interface. Other vendors may provide both of these supportive services; thus, clients must understand their commitments before entering into a contract for the service.
- Various SaaS e-commerce payment models are creating confusion — Payment for SaaS e-commerce can vary by provider, so organizations must run test models to determine what they'll be paying for SaaS e-commerce in the short term (less than three years) and the long term (greater than five years).
“SaaS e-commerce is a viable solution for some organizations, however, they must make that determination based on the SaaS vendor’s capability to meet their technical and functional requirements, and on the type of subscription payment model that’s offered,” said Mr. Alvarez. “Before pursuing SaaS for e-commerce, organizations should develop a SaaS strategy that accounts for the scoping, evaluation, selection, operation and different architectures or SaaS solutions, as well as determines the organizations comfort level in leveraging externally provided IT applications.”
- SaaS e-commerce may not be appropriate for some Web sites, and may not provide a differentiated experience — Because the SaaS model has a low barrier to entry, some organizations feel that competitors can sign up quickly and easily with the same SaaS e-commerce provider, and deliver an equal online customer experience. However, organizations that are challenged in their e-commerce IT capabilities (such as lack of budget for people, hardware and software), and organizations that can have e-commerce capabilities without having to obtain hardware and software, find SaaS e-commerce appealing.
- Current SaaS e-commerce offerings can’t support business-to-business (B2B) — All SaaS e-commerce vendors support B2C online selling; however, for vendors with B2B requirements (such as quoting, proposal generation, lead management and purchase order payment processes), or for organizations that sell into a multilevel network of partners, SaaS e-commerce offerings won't be able to meet the necessary requirements.
- Concern about the impact of SaaS e-commerce on the total IT portfolio —Organizations are often concerned about the management of a mixed-application environment (SaaS and non-SaaS applications). Many IT people fear that they'll be held responsible for site outages or performance issues when they actually have no control over the SaaS e-commerce application or its operating environment, and can control only part of the systems that contribute to the overall customer experience.
- Uncertainty of SaaS e-commerce integration with other applications — Organizations that aren't familiar with SaaS offerings are uncertain how to integrate SaaS e-commerce with their existing applications and the stability of the integration over time. Although SaaS vendors don't operate in a stand-alone vacuum, some are able to loosely couple with an organization's applications via application programming interfaces, Web services or XML interfaces, while others have specific and tightly coupled integration requirements.
- Concern about data collection and data ownership issues in a SaaS e-commerce environment — Many vendors claim that all data associated with a client site is owned by the subscriber, but that aggregated data isn't. This belief may vary by vendor, so organizations should ensure that they cover this issue before entering into a contract.
- Some vendors have technical limitations, such a shortcomings in Web 2.0 capabilities — In some cases, vendors focus on providing commodity e-commerce functions (enabling organizations to have basic online stores) to a large audience, while other vendors focus on providing enterpriselike e-commerce solutions for large organizations, which are more aligned with Web 2.0 capabilities.
- Organizations may need IT and non-IT resources to support the Web site — This varies by the vendor selected, because some vendors require the organization to have some IT resources for integration support with back-end systems, and to have business users to manage the products and the site's user interface. Other vendors may provide both of these supportive services; thus, clients must understand their commitments before entering into a contract for the service.
- Various SaaS e-commerce payment models are creating confusion — Payment for SaaS e-commerce can vary by provider, so organizations must run test models to determine what they'll be paying for SaaS e-commerce in the short term (less than three years) and the long term (greater than five years).
“SaaS e-commerce is a viable solution for some organizations, however, they must make that determination based on the SaaS vendor’s capability to meet their technical and functional requirements, and on the type of subscription payment model that’s offered,” said Mr. Alvarez. “Before pursuing SaaS for e-commerce, organizations should develop a SaaS strategy that accounts for the scoping, evaluation, selection, operation and different architectures or SaaS solutions, as well as determines the organizations comfort level in leveraging externally provided IT applications.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)