Mediaboss Marketing

JAIPUR: The image showing pacer Jasprit Bumrah conceding a no-ball in Champions trophy Finals against Pakistan used as traffic awareness may fetch accolades and appreciation to Jaipur traffic police, but pacer Bumrah was not happy. Following bowlers response the Jaipur police not only clarified that their intent was not to hurt the pacer's sentiments, but they had also removed all the sign boards erected at various points in the city on Saturday. Claiming that their intent was not to hurt the sentiments, the police on Saturday removed the posters showing Bumrah over-stepping the line during Champions trophy Final. This all started on Friday evening when the death overs bowling specialist voicing his disappointment tweeted, "Well done Jaipur traffic police this shows how much respect you get after giving your best for the country." He hurled another bouncer when he tweeted, "But don't worry I won't make fun of the mistakes which you guys make at your work .because I believe humans can make mistakes." Soon after these tweets senior police officers of Jaipur police commissionerate had a meeting and decided not to use the word "apology" but to respond to bowler's resentment in positive manner. After his tweet, Jaipur traffic police tweeted, "Dear Jasprit Bumrah, our intent was not to hurt your sentiments or the sentiments of millions of cricket fans. We only intended to create more awareness about traffic rules. You are a youth icon & an inspiration for all of us." This did not ended here as commissioner of police, Sanjay Agarwal asked his men to remove all the posters relating to the campaign on traffic awareness depicting Bumrah conceding a no-ball from the city. "Our intent was certainly not to disrespect the celebrated Indian cricket bowler. In the campaign the subject was crossing the line. We have clarified the same on Jaipur traffic police twitter handle. Yes the posters were removed."

Excerpt from:
Police ducks Bumrah's bouncers on social networking; remove no-ball poster - Times of India

Mumbai-based social networking platform VoxWeb Pvt. Ltd has raised $1 million (Rs 6.45 crore) in its third round of external funding from a clutch of unnamed individual investors.

According to the company, the new capital will be deployed to strengthen its backend technology infrastructure, besides adding innovative and engaging front-end features. It will also deploy a part of the money to scale up marketing efforts and increase its user base.

VoxWeb was founded in June 2014 by IIT Kanpur alumnus Yash Mishra, who had worked as an analyst with JP Morgan.

With its unique voice-augmented photo technology, the company is focussed on designing and developing refreshingly new products to add a new dimension to social media consumption around the world. We believe the new round of funding will further hasten scaling up up of operations, said Mishra.

In December 2015, the company had raised $350,000 from an unnamed investor. Subsequently, in August the same year, it had raised seed funding of $100,000 from CitrusPay co-founder Jitendra Gupta.

The flagship product of the company, speaking pictures, allows users to capture and share moments through photographs with voice-over options. At present, it is available both on iOS and Android platforms. It also facilitates creating selfies that can speak upon touching, called Voxies. The design patent for the same was filed in the US.

The company claims to have a user base of over half a million.

Other recent deals in the social networking segment include a Rs 1-crore fundraising effort by networking app Nodd last November. Former Just Dial Ltd chief technology officer Sandipan Chattopadhyay and IKYA Global associate partner Jaison Jose, among others were the investors.

The app-based networking platform helps individuals to discover and meet like-minded people through curated experiences, data analytics, experiences and algorithms.

November also saw social networking app Pulse, which enables users to stay connected with their college and school communities, raising $500,000 from venture and growth capital fund SAIF Partners.

Like this report? Sign up for ourdaily newsletterto get our top reports.

VoxWeb, a social networking app that allows users to attach an 11-second audio clip to any image, has raised $350,000 (Rs 2.3 crore) in funding...

VoxWeb, a social networking app that allows users to attach a 11-second audio clip to any image, has secured seed funding of $100,000 from CitrusPay...

Hindi social networking platform ShabdaNagari.in, which is operated by Kanpur-based Trident Analytical Solutions Pvt. Ltd, has raised an undisclosed amount in bridge funding from ah!...

Read the rest here:
Social networking platform VoxWeb raises $1 mn VCCircle - VCCircle

U.S. Supreme Court

Posted Jun 19, 2017 09:18 am CDT

By Debra Cassens Weiss

Shutterstock

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down a North Carolina law that makes it a felony for a registered sex offender to access social networking websites that can be used by children.

The law, which bans sexual offenders from using websites like Facebook and Twitter, violates the First Amendment, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion (PDF). His opinion was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

The law was challenged by Lester Packingham of Durham, who pleaded guilty in 2002 to taking indecent liberties with a 13-year-old girl when he was a 21-year-old college student.

Packingham was convicted of violating the ban because of his Facebook post declaring Praise be to GOD, WOW! Thanks Jesus! to celebrate dismissal of a traffic ticket.

Kennedy said the North Carolina ban on social media use is unprecedented in the scope of First Amendment speech it burdens.

With one broad stroke, Kennedy said, North Carolinas law bars registered sex offenders from accessing news websites, checking help wanted ads, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge.

While in the past there may have been difficulty in identifying the most important places (in a spatial sense) for the exchange of views, today the answer is clear. It is cyberspace, Kennedy wrote.

Kennedy said his opinion should not be interpreted to bar states from enacting more specific laws, such as laws banning sex offenders from contacting a minor or using a website to gather information about a minor.

Justice Samuel Anthony Alito Jr. concurred in the judgment in an opinion joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Clarence Thomas. Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate in the case.

Alito said he agreed the law violated the free speech clause because of its extraordinary breadth. But Alito said he couldnt join the majority opinion because of its undisciplined dicta. The court is unable to resist musings that seem to equate the entirety of the internet with public streets and parks.

The majoritys language could leave the states largely powerless to restrict even the most dangerous sexual predators from visiting any internet sites, including, for example, teenage dating sites and sites designed to permit minors to discuss personal problems with the peers, Alito wrote.

Updated at 10 a.m. with additional information

Read the original post:
Supreme Court strikes down law banning sex offenders from using social networking websites - ABA Journal

[co-author: Adi Kamdar - Summer Associate]

The internet has become so essential to American public discourse that saying so is almost trite now. Members of Congress regularly use social media to engage with constituents. The President has turned Twitter into one of his primary modes of communication. It was only a matter of time before the U.S. Supreme Court got its turn to sing the praises of social media.

In Packingham v. North Carolina, the Supreme Court unanimously struck down a North Carolina criminal law that made it a felony for registered sex offenders to access social networking and other websites. In doing so, however, the Court took a stepperhaps a bigger step than some intendedtoward guaranteeing a constitutional right under the First Amendment to access the internet.

Packingham involved a 2008 North Carolina statute that made it a felony for a registered sex offender to access a commercial social networking website that is known to allow minors. The law defined a commercial social networking website with four requirements: (1) the operator of the website had to earn revenue through fees or advertisements; (2) the website had to allow for social introductions between people; (3) the website must allow users to create widely available personal profiles or pages; and (4) the site must give users a mechanism of communicating with each other, such as through a chat room or message board. Though the law carved out a few exceptions, it created a broad enough stick that the state of North Carolina had already prosecuted over a thousand people for violating it.

Nearly a decade after Packingham was convicted for a sex crime and registered as a sex offender, he posted on Facebook about how excited he was to have gotten a traffic ticket dismissed. A member of the local law enforcement noticed the post, and the state charged Packingham with violating the North Carolina law without alleging he had contacted a minor or committed any other illicit acts on the internet. The trial court denied Packinghams First Amendment challenge to the statute, and he was ultimately convicted for violating the statute. North Carolinas intermediate Court of Appeals agreed with Packingham and struck down the statute. But the North Carolina Supreme Court reversed, finding the law to be carefully tailored to avoid violating the freedom of speech.

In an 8-0 decision, the Supreme Court on June 19 reversed the North Carolina Supreme Court and struck down the North Carolina law as unconstitutional.

Writing for five justices, Justice Anthony Kennedy kicked off his opinion with an analogy. Within First Amendment law, there is a basic rule that a street or a park is a quintessential forum for the exercise of speech. And what is the equivalent forum of today? The answer is clear, Justice Kennedy put forward: It is cyberspace. . . . and social media in particular.

The majority spent a good portion of its opinion highlighting the centrality of the internet to First Amendment activities and modern life. It noted that websites like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter collectively have billions of users, each of whom engages in multiple First Amendment-protected activities: debating religion and politics, sharing photographs, advertising and finding jobs, and reaching out to elected officials. Justice Kennedy went on to describe the Cyber Age as a revolution of historic proportions, acknowledging what lawyers working in this field have taken to heart: courts must be conscious that what they say today might be obsolete tomorrow.

The majority held that the North Carolina statute impermissibly burdened more speech than necessary in order to further its purposethe protection of children against recidivist sexual predators. Even though the Packingham majority acknowledged that North Carolinas goal was extremely important, it also found that the laws prohibitions were unprecedented in scope and thus could not stand. Social media sites allow for the communication of ideas and knowledge; they are the modern public square. Cutting individuals off from these important spaces prevents them from exercising their First Amendment rights. Furthermore, convicted criminals might receive legitimate benefits from these means for access to the world of ideas, in particular if they seek to reform and to pursue lawful and rewarding lives.

Writing for three members of the Court, Justice Samuel Alito concurred in the conclusion that the North Carolina law was overbroad and thus unconstitutional, but was hesitant to support the majoritys undisciplined . . . musings that seem to equate the entirety of the internet with public streets and parks. After all, Justice Alitos concurrence notes, there are clear distinctions between parks and cyberspace: from differences in the ability for parents to monitor their children, to differences in the amount of anonymity each space offers. And Justice Alito expressed concern that some may read the majoritys broad language as a prohibition on any and all attempts to pass laws addressing child sexual exploitation online or other efforts to regulate access to the internet.

At root, Justice Alitos concurrence took issue with the improper tailoring of the North Carolina law. Its vague language would prevent registered sex offenders from accessing, for example, Amazon, The Washington Post or WebMD. By categorically blocking access to these sites, the North Carolina law goes well beyond its intended means and runs afoul of the First Amendment.

The Courts Packingham decision is one of the first cases to seriously hint at the idea that access to online forums of expression is a protected right. Heavily relying on an amicus brief by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Justice Kennedys opinion highlights the importance of the internet as a marketplace of ideas, and its central role in promoting associational rights of persons in a free society. The Packingham decision casts serious doubt on the constitutionality of state and federal statutes, regulations and interpretations, which may impose broad limitations on access to the internet, particularly where the restriction is based on a persons continuing status or in the absence of an adjudication. Packingham may ultimately prove to be a powerful doctrinal weapon that internet-based companies can wield against laws and regulations that limit access to their services.

An important question that Packingham leaves unanswered, however, is what level of constitutional scrutiny applies to content-neutral regulations affecting access to the modern internet. All eight justices agreed that the North Carolina statute, given its overbreadth, would fail under any level of scrutiny under First Amendment jurisprudence. But the majoritys opinion gives little guidance for lawmakers that want to take steps to deter online predation on what type of statute would withstand a First Amendment challenge.

Read the original:
Supreme Court Declares First Amendment Interest in Access to Social Networks - JD Supra (press release)

Peek at this

Social networking is here to stay. There seems to be a constant competition between Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter for the top spot in the socializing game. However, these are not the only social networking sites.

In fact, many of the smaller platforms are gaining in popularity due to the lack of ads, more minimalistic design, and user preference for something new and different. One of the newest kids on the social networking block, is Peek.

Peek is a little bit like Periscope. Its a new iOS app that live-streaming with friends and family. Peek allows you to go live from where you are, and stalk places.

Its like a hyperlocal version of Periscope, but a bit more private. You can only go live from exactly where you are. Unlike Instagram, you cannot tag yourself at a specific location to increase your visibility and reach.

You have no followers, no friend requests, and no likes.

All people will see is the content of your live stream, with the location underneath. Its a stripped-down, bare-bones, minimalistic, version of Periscope and people are raving about the simplicity and the content.

Content without pressure for likes, followers, and fans.

Peek gives you the ability to peek at different locations, places, cultures, and venues, from your home.

There really isnt a catch. Peek is completely free but it does come with a few rules. Peek reserves the right to block racists, homophobics, xenophobics, sexists, and extremist views, but they are cool with nudity.

You may get flagged for it by other users, but they dont strictly prohibit nudity.

After downloading the app, you will be asked to login with your Facebook credentials and turn on location settings (so the app knows you are where you say you are, geographically). Once youre logged in with Facebook, youll be able to see everyone who has gone live recently and youll have the ability to go live as well.

If you click on your profile, at the top right of the screen, youll be able to see how many people have stalked you (watched your video).

This is helpful for checking out places like airports, concert venues, and other popular locations like restaurants you may not be familiar with, before you check them out for yourself.

This also gives techies and business people the ability to check out venues, get virtual walk-throughs on setups (depending on the content of other Peek users) and live stream content from conference centers and meetings for themselves.

Peek gives you the ability to see a variety of live-streaming locations and people, without the pressure of collecting followers.

Also, Peek allows you to delete a video youve posted in case you change your mind about your video (although if anyone was watching the live-feed they will have seen every minute of your content, so please keep that in mind).

As buzzworthy as Peek is right now, will it last, or will it go the way of Peach, Ello, and Blab? Maybe Peek will have staying power given their no rules, no-cost platform.

Peach was founded by Dom Hofmann, one of the co-founders of Vine (which was later acquired by Twitter), so it was no novice to the social media game, and yet it couldnt manage to make a big splash.

The same can be said of Ello.

Ello was intended to be an ad-free version, reminiscent of Facebook, but it still wasnt able to garner enough followers to make it a big name in social networking. Blab, on the other hand, had a very Periscope-y like feel to it.

But again couldnt make the leap into the big time.

Peek certainly has gained a great deal of excitement and attention from the tech community, and has the possibility to become a fan-favorite platform. What do you think, will Peek be the next big thing, or will it fizzle out like the previous live video social networking platforms?

Read more from the original source:
A Peek into the next live video social networking platform - The American Genius