I’ll have to admit that this is the first Christmas shopping season where I’ve yet to complete my shopping – been way too busy and there’s been way too many gadgets that I’ve wanted for myself. With that said, it looks like BradsDeals.com and Yahoo! Shopping are trying to find a way to make the next 60 (or so) days of this shopping season and beyond that much easier for all of us online shoppers.

BradsDeals.com, the leading website for shopping deals and advice, and Yahoo! Shopping, the #1 comparison shopping site are expanding their commitment to providing consumers with the best deals this holiday season. This year they are building upon their successful partnership on with “60 Days of Deals!” where each day through January 5, 2011, Yahoo! Shopping, Yahoo! Deals and BradsDeals.com will showcase one exclusive offer from a major retailer.

“Our editorial team (at BradsDeal.com) is tracking sales and coupons for the season’s must-have items at nearly 1500 retailers. A ‘BradsDeal’ is what happens when we match one of those valuable coupons with a deeply-discounted sale item.”

With Yahoo! Shopping involved, over 20 million people have access to these 1500+ deals. Take the hint, don’t be lazy and check it all out. I know that I will.

[ Links: BradsDeals.com, Yahoo! Shopping ]

While Magic Jack’s cheap VoIP dongle generally works rather well, Broadbandreports.com’s forums are occasionally littered with complaints about the company’s business practices, be it it for little things like a website hit counter that used to artificially inflate their trial participant count (since fixed), or misleading marketing practices (like saying today is the last day of a free trial promotion, every single day). Users generally overlook these problems for one reason: the service is dirt cheap, and works.

Like many companies, Magic Jack also likes burying things in their fine print and terms of service. Among them, the company includes language that requires users engage in binding arbitration – a process that usually ends with the consumer losing, since the arbitration company works for the corporation being complained about. For most of the decade, the courts have repeatedly told companies that this language isn’t legal, but that hasn’t stopped it from being included in TOS anyway.

Back in 2008, gadget and culture blog Boing Boing ran a rather simple post highlighting some of Magic Jack’s more dubious practices, including their bogus free trial user counter, their use of behavioral ad technology, and their inclusion of arbitration language in their terms of service. Magic Jack didn’t like the post very much apparently, because they wound up suing Boing Boing for defamation. Unfortunately for Magic Jack, all of Boing Boing’s claims were true, and Magic Jack has been forced to pay the website $50,000:

We had no idea that it would file a baseless lawsuit to try and shut me up, that CEO Dan Borislow would offer to buy our silence after disparaging his own lawyers, or that MagicJack would ultimately face legal consequences for trying to intimidate critics. . . At several points in the process, we could have taken a check and walked away: as it is, the award doesn’t quite cover our costs. But we don’t like being bullied, and we wanted the chance to tell anyone else threatened by this company what to expect.

According to Boing Boing, Magic Jack’s suit claimed the blog’s post subjected the VoIP outfit to “hate, ridicule and obloquy.” The site claims MagicJack CEO Dan Borislow contacted them once he learned of the tenuous nature of his case in California court, agreed to a settlement, and then subsequently backed out. Once forced to settle, Magic Jack then demanded that the settlement dollar total be kept confidential. Boing Boing, unsurprisingly, didn’t think that was a good idea:

We offered not to publish the amount of this settlement if Borislow would donate $25,000 to charity. MagicJack, however, offered to pay our entire legal bill only if we’d agree to keep the whole dispute confidential; when we refused, Borislow wrote that he would ‘see us in court.’ Nonetheless, we’re happy with the outcome. The irony for MagicJack is that the proceedings are public record, so the silence it sought was effectively worthless.

Of course the lesson learned is that in the Internet age, the harder a company works to stifle criticism, the more attention that criticism gets. The better path is perhaps to listen to what your customers are saying about your business practices, and change them where possible if you value your customers.

Boing Boing has posted all legal documents pertinent to the case for those interested.

Link to the original article…

The article makes no mention of publicly available financial reports from broadband providers like Time Warner Cable that prove that at the same time their profits on broadband service are increasing, the company s costs to provide the service continue to decline, along with the dollar amounts they spend to maintain and expand that network to meet demand.

Dampier also notes how the Journal misidentifies Rep. Eric Massa (who is pushing for laws protecting consumers from over-charging) and omits the potential conflict of interest in ISPs pushing for high overages while at the same time crafting massive new Internet video empires. While the Journal does note that the average user consumes just 15 GB a month (that number is even less, according to a recent Cisco study) it omits just how low many of these proposed caps have been (Frontier thinks 5 GB a month is reasonable for an entire household).

The Journal also also helps the industry make caps sound more reasonable by measuring them in e-mails sent, an annoying and silly metric used by ISP marketing departments. Most importantly though, the Journal helps sell the idea that a shift from flat-rate pricing to the industry’s version of metered billing (not to be confused with pure per byte billing) is both necessary and inevitable. In reality, it’s neither, and the metered billing models we’ve seen proposed by carriers so far are little more than price hikes disguised as altruism and fairness.

It doesn’t inspire fresh confidence in the American press when a consumer covers the full scope of the metered billing discussion far better than the nation’s supposed top business paper and its corral of staff writers.

Link to the original article…