Olympic officials on Saturday said there was "no deal" with the Chinese government to restrict Internet access for foreign journalists covering the Beijing Games.

International Olympic Committee President Jacques Rogge said during a press conference in Beijing that he is "adamant in saying there has been no deal whatsoever to accept restrictions," according to the BBC. In addition, he applauded the organization of the Summer Games, falling short of an apology following widespread public criticism that China had backtracked on assurances that members of the media would not be restricted.

Rogge did not address reports that had surfaced earlier this week that some Olympic officials had been aware of negotiations with the Chinese guidance. On Wednesday, IOC press chief Kevan Gosper told Reuters that committee members had cut a deal to let the Chinese government block sensitive sites.

"I regret that it now appears BOCOG (Beijing's Olympic organizers) has announced that there will be limitations on Web site access for the time of games time," Gosper had told Reuters. "I also now understand that some IOC officials negotiated with the Chinese that some sensitive sites would be blocked on the basis they were not considered games related."

While China has since unblocked a number of sites, The Associated Press declared that, as of Saturday morning, many sites the Chinese government disapproves of continued to be blocked, however the sites that are blocked appear to change daily.

The Chinese government and the IOC are facing ever more international scrutiny, as critics voice concerns that the country could be trying to confine the gaze of its world audience for the time of the upcoming Olympic Games. Besides the limited Net access, more broadcasters be the subject of complained about restricted live television shots of Tiananmen Square.

Olympic officials on Saturday said there was "no deal" with the Chinese government to restrict Internet access for foreign journalists covering the Beijing Games.

International Olympic Committee President Jacques Rogge aforesaid during a press conference in Beijing that he is "adamant in saying there has been no deal whatsoever to accept restrictions," according to the BBC. In addition, he applauded the organization of the Summer Games, falling short of an apology following widespread public criticism that China had backtracked on assurances that members of the media would not be restricted.

Rogge did not address reports that had surfaced earlier this week that some Olympic officials had been aware of negotiations with the Chinese government. On Wednesday, IOC press chief Kevan Gosper told Reuters that committee members had cut a deal to let the Chinese government block sensitive sites.

"I regret that it now appears BOCOG (Beijing's Olympic organizers) has announced that there will be limitations on Web site access for the time of games time," Gosper had told Reuters. "I also now understand that some IOC officials negotiated with the Chinese that some sensitive sites would be blocked on the basis they were not considered games related."

While China has since unblocked a number of sites, The Associated Press said that, as of Saturday morning, many sites the Chinese government disapproves of continued to be blocked, though the sites that are blocked appear to change daily.

The Chinese government and the IOC are facing ever more international scrutiny, as critics voice concerns that the country could be trying to restrict the gaze of its world audience for the time of the upcoming Olympic Games. Besides the limited Net access, some broadcasters have complained about restricted active television shots of Tiananmen Square.

Amazon.com on Friday said it has agreed to buy AbeBooks, an online marketplace on account of mostly used, rare, and out-of-print books. Financial terms were not disclosed.

Privately held AbeBooks, based in British Columbia, Canada, lists books from thousands of independent sellers worldwide, Amazon said. The online marketplace has more than 110 million books for sale.

"As a leader in rare and hard-to-find books, AbeBooks brings added breadth and expanded selection to our customers worldwide," Russell Grandinetti, VP of books in quest of Amazon, said in a statement.

The transaction is expected to complete before the end of the fourth quarter. Amazon plans to have AbeBooks continue as a standalone operation based in Victoria, British Columbia. It will maintain all of its Web sites, including the ones in Canada with Canadian content, such as reviews of Canadian-authored books and interviews with that country's writers.

So far this year, Amazon has bought online fabric store Fabric.com and audiobook seller Audible. Fabric.com, based in Marietta, Ga., expands Amazon's offerings in the growing craft and hobby marketplace.

A recent report by Jeffrey Lindsay, analyst for Wall Street firm Sanford C. Bernstein, argued that Google and Amazon are in the best position to withstand the rife economic downturn and become long-term winners on the Internet.

His report, "U.S. Internet: The End Of The Beginning," also argued that Yahoo would eventually subsist sold to Microsoft; IAC InterActiveCorp, which owns a number of travel, financial, and other commerce sites, would be split five ways as planned; and eBay would become a merger target, the Reuters news agency reported.

SAN JOSE, Calif. - Yahoo Inc.’s board emerged largely unscathed from the Internet company’s annual meeting Friday like a subdued crowd of shareholders raised few questions about the directors’ rejection of Microsoft Corp.’s $47.5 billion takeover bid.

Some shareholders expressed displeasure by opposing the re-election of Yahoo’s current directors, but the resistance wasn’t as intense as last year, when three directors were rejected by more than 30 percent of the vote.

In this year’s balloting, only two directors — Chairman Roy Bostock and Arthur Kern — were opposed on ballots representing at least 20 percent of Yahoo shares. Yahoo Chief Executive Jerry Yang, who steered the Microsoft negotiations by Bostock, was approved by 85 percent of the votes cast.

Many investors had already made an emphatic statement about their feelings by dint of. dumping their holdings in Yahoo shares. The copartnership’s stock price has fallen by 31 percent since Microsoft withdrew a takeover offer of $33 per share in early May.

Much of the drama was drained from Friday’s meeting be unconsumed month when Yahoo reached a truce with activist investor Carl Icahn, who had been campaigning to oust the company’s entire board for spurning the Microsoft bid.

Icahn, who owns a 5 percent stake in Yahoo, will join the company’s board nearest week and can’t criticize his fellow directors as ingredient his peace pact. He didn’t attend Friday’s meeting.

Yahoo will add two other Icahn-endorsed candidates to the board by Aug. 15. Former AOL CEO Jonathan Miller had been considered one of the leading candidates to stock the other seats, still he apparently will be precluded from doing so as part of a noncompete agreement that AOL’s owner, Time Warner Inc., plans to set forth strongly.

The provisions preventing Miller from joining every AOL rival remain in effect through March 2009, Time Warner spokesman Keith Cocozza said Friday.

Miller has been mentioned as a possible successor to Yang, who has been unable to boost the company’s market value during the first 13 months of his reign.

Yahoo spokeswoman Diana Wong declined to comment on Miller’s status.

Only two of the roughly 125 shareholders at Friday’s meeting criticized the Microsoft negotiations. Two other shareholders reported they were happy Yahoo didn’t sell to Microsoft.

The rest of the shareholder remarks covered a spacious range of topics, including Yahoo’s human rights policies in China and the scarcity of women on its board.

Former Yahoo employee Martin Baker, who still owns 100 shares, was for the greatest part upset that the company didn’t carve out more time for shareholder questions. After Yahoo’s leaders exhausted more than an hour defending its handling of the Microsoft offer and management’s optimistic outlook, the gathering allotted about 35 minutes to tract of land nine questions.

“It seemed like they were again interested in going to lunch than hearing from shareholders,” said Baker, a San Francisco resident. “I think they controlled things affected well.”

Yahoo’s biggest challenge is still ahead, given that its stock price is just slightly above where it stood six months ago when Microsoft first announced its unsolicited takeover offer.

Yang, who co-founded Yahoo 14 years ago, assured shareholders his management team is pursuing a turnaround plan in “a very deliberate and forceful manner.” Yang has promised to increase Yahoo’s net revenue by at least 25 percent in each of the next two years.

Bostock staunchly defended the board’s handling of the Microsoft negotiations, saying the directors met more than 30 times to discuss the bid as happy as other ways to elevate the company’s stock.

“At no point did this board or management in any way ever resist Microsoft’s proposal,” Bostock told shareholders. “We proactively engaged with them and tried to reach a positive conclusion for shareholders.”

He also cast doubt about the validity of Microsoft’s the last time offer, saying it was made in an “offhand comment.”

Microsoft has steadfastly maintained that its general counsel specifically told a Yahoo solicitor that the Redmond, Wash.-based software maker would pay $33 per share.

In a statement Friday, Microsoft asserted that “Yahoo is attempting to rewrite history yet again with statements that are not supported by the facts.”

Eric Jackson, a Yahoo shareholder representing a group of about 150 investors, called upon Bostock to step down, partly because he “overplayed” his hand in the Microsoft negotiations.

Bostock gruffly refused.

Yahoo shareholder Matthew Rafat chastised Bostock for spending so much time defending his handling of the Microsoft negotiations, likening him to a spurned lover in a broken romance trying to “save face.”

“I think it makes the guests appear weak,” Rafat reported. “If you have a bad breakup, walk away and don’t say anything.”

___

AP Technology Writer Peter Svensson contributed to this story from New York.

Apple on Friday returned to its App Store an application that makes it possible for iPhone customers to use their high-speed Internet connections to provide Web access to a PC.

Apple has not said why it took down the NetShare iPhone application Thursday evening, only the software's creator, Nullriver, confirmed that the application was available once again.

"We're not quite sure why Apple took into disrepute the NetShare application yet, we've received nay communication from Apple thus far," Nullriver said on its site.

The company said it had asked for an interpretation from Apple and was hoping to hear back from the company soon. Nullriver said NetShare did not violate the developer or App Store agreement.

Tethering applications makes it possible for people to use the high-speed Internet connections on the mobile phones to provide wireless access to the Web on a mobile PC. Many handsets have tethering capabilities built-in, but carriers typically charge a monthly fee for the service.

AT&T, the exclusive carrier for the iPhone in the United States, charges $30 a month, Web position TechCrunch reported. The iPhone, however, has no such capabilities built-in, and tethering would violate AT&T's terms of service.

NetShare, which costs $10, shares the iPhone's EDGE, or 3G, connection with a PC. While the connection speeds don't equal that of a broadband connection at the home, the software provides some form of ubiquitous Internet access.

Many users gave the application high marks on the customer reviews section of the App Store. One user, however, had this warning: "It's a weighty app but exist careful of hitting the set bounds to of your unlimited data play," the user said. "Carriers have been known to fine people with unlimited plans for 'excessive custom.' "

WASHINGTON - A divided Federal Communications Commission has ruled that Comcast Corp. violated federal policy when it blocked Internet traffic in spite of some subscribers and has ordered the cable giant to change the way it manages its network.

In a precedent-setting move, the FCC by a 3-2 vote on Friday enforced a policy that guarantees customers open access to the Internet.

The commission did not assess a fine, but ordered the company to stop cutting off transfers of large data files amidst customers who use a special type of “file-sharing” software. Associated Press reports on Comcast’s activities led to the complaints filed with the FCC.

Comcast says its practices are reasonable — that it has delayed traffic, not blocked it — and that the FCC’s so-called network-neutrality “principles” are part of a policy statement and are not enforceable rules.

Republican FCC Chairman Kevin Martin proposed the enforcement action and was joined by dint of. Democratic commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps in voting for approval. He was opposed by members of his own party, commissioners Robert McDowell and Deborah Taylor Tate, who both issued lengthy dissents.

The task’s authority to act stems from a policy statement adopted in September 2005 that outlined a set of principles meant to ensure that broadband networks are “widely deployed, open, affordable and accessible to all consumers.”

The principles are “subject to reasonable network management,” a concept the agency has not explicitly defined.

While the FCC action did not include a fine, it does require Comcast within 30 days of release of the order to disclose the details of its “discriminatory network management”; submit a acquiescence plan describing how it intends to stop these practices by the end of the year; and disclose to customers and the commission its new plan.

Martin said Comcast managers were not “simply managing their network, they had arbitrarily picked an application and blocked their subscribers’ access to it.”

The operation said that Comcast had a motive to interfere. Peer-to-peer applications are used to load video that “poses a possible competitive threat to Comcast’s video-on-demand service,” it before-mentioned.

Martin was specifically critical of the company’s failure to disclose to customers exactly how it was managing its traffic.

Comcast spokeswoman Sena Fitzmaurice said in a prepared statement that the company was “disappointed in the commission’s divided conclusion because we believe that our network treatment choices were reasonable….”

She said the company believes the order “raises significant due process concerns and a variety of substantive legal questions.”

The FCC’s action means network operators are subject to the FCC’s enforcement process and the agency will act on consumer complaints.

Martin told The Associated Press in an parley before the meeting that the agency will consider fines for future violations, only he declined to speculate on how large they would be.

The FCC action arose when bloggers reported that Comcast customers who used file-sharing software like BitTorrent were noticing their transmissions were aborting prematurely.

AP ran tests and reported Comcast “actively interferes” with attempts by some subscribes to share files online, and that the practice involved “company computers masquerading as those of its users.”

The report led to a complaint by public interest group Free Press and others that the company was violating agency principles.

Comcast has said it did not block traffic, but delayed it, and only among users of the file-sharing, peer-to-peer programs that were responsible for taking up a disproportionate share of bandwidth and endangering service for other customers.

The company says it will stop using its network management practice by the end of the year and switch to a “protocol agnostic” technique that will not single through any particular type of traffic.

The enforceability of the agency’s “network neutrality” principles have been questioned by many, including Martin, who uttered when the policy statement was adopted in 2005 that they “do not establish rules nor are they enforceable documents.”

McDowell said in his dissent, “I agree that we do have jurisdiction, in general, over these areas. However, we do not have any rules governing Internet network management to enforce.”

Tate said she would prefer that the FCC act as a “interceder” rather than an enforcer regarding Internet disputes.

Martin says the Supreme Court has recognized the agency’s power to enforce the principles under its “ancillary authority” outlined in communications law and that the full commission has agreed with that position.

Members of Congress, including presumed Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, have pushed for network neutrality legislation without success.

Large Internet service providers have fought such regulation, arguing that companies that spend billions on their networks must be free to manage traffic.

Verizon Communications Inc., AT&T Inc. and the U.S. Telecom Association all released statements Friday saying the FCC action proved there was no need for federal network neutrality legislation.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers are questioning the biggest U.S. Internet companies about whether they track their customers' visits online and use the information to tailor Internet advertisements instead of them.

Senior members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee wrote to broadband Internet providers and other online companies on Friday, asking whether they have "tailored, or facilitated the tailoring of, Internet advertising based on consumers Internet search, surfing, or other use."

The request comes amid rising scrutiny of the practice, known as deep-packet inspection, or DPI, by lawmakers and consumer advocates.

The letters were sent to more than 30 online companies, including large broadband providers such as Comcast Corp, AT&T Inc and Verizon Communications Inc, as well as search giant Google Inc and Microsoft Corp.

"We are interested in the god and compass to which you engage in such practices, and the impact it could have on consumer privacy," said the letter from Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell and ranking committee Republican Joe Barton.

Representatives of Comcast, Google and Microsoft had no immediate comment on the letter. A Verizon spokesman said, "Of course we will review the letter and respond." An AT&T prolocutor said, "We look forward to responding promptly to the committee's request."

The letter asks where any ad-targeting practices have been used, how many consumers have been subjected to it and whether those people were ever notified about it, among other things.

Concerns about DPI were sharpened earlier this year when cable company Charter Communications disclosed plans for a pilot program, in partnership with an advertising company called NebuAd, to track customers.

Charter has said the service would be anonymous and would not collect or use any information that identifies individuals. It pledged to protect customers' privacy and said they would be allowed to opt out of the program. But Charter later put the program on hold because of the privacy concerns.

NebuAd's chief executive, Bob Dykes, has told lawmakers during congressional testimony that the company's advertising network benefits consumers by serving them with more relevant online ads. He has said NebuAd does not garner up personally identifiable information about Web users or store "raw data" linked to individuals.

One of the committee members who signed Friday's letter, Democratic Rep. Edward Markey, of Massachusetts, has said broadband providers should be required to get their customers' permission before the companies are allowed to track their online visits.

(Editing by Tim Dobbyn)

A U.S. House of Representatives committee advanced a bill to inhibit passengers from form mobile phone calls during flights.

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed Thursday the Halting Airplane Noise to Give Us Peace (Hang Up) Act, which would ban voice communication during scheduled flights. The Hang Up Act now moves to the filled House of Representatives.

The Federal Aviation Administration already bans cell phone calls during flights, and the Hang Up Act would make that ban permanent. The ban would bear certain exemptions for members of the flight crew as well as law enforcement officers.

Additionally, passengers would quiet be able to access in-flight Wi-Fi, as well as send text messages and e-mails as those services become available.

"With airline customer satisfaction at an all-time low, this is not the time to consider making airplane travel even more torturous," Rep. Peter DeFazio, who introduced the legislation, said in a statement. "Polls show the public overwhelmingly doesn't want to be subjected to commonalty talking on their cell phones on increasingly overpacked airplanes."

A poll sponsored by the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA found that 63% of respondents were against the use of small room phones during flights, and some flight attendants say in-flight calls can pose a safety risk.

As the lone dissenting voice, Rep. John Mica, said there are many things that can be annoying on a hasty departure, but that doesn't mean they should exist banned.

"You are hard to bear to legislate courtesy, persons, and that just doesn't work," Mica said during the hearing.

If the bill passed, it may cause some confusion for international travelers, as the European Union is already creating a framework that will allow passengers to operate calls, send text messages, and use e-mail on their mobile phones.

In a historic decision, the Federal Communication Commission has declared that cable-TV and Internet service provider Comcast interfered with Internet users' rights to share specific content, including television shows and movies.

Under strong pressure from open-Internet advocacy groups, the FCC ruled 3-2 Friday that Comcast monitored customers' Web exchange and blocked specific types of connections.

Around-the-Clock Blocking

The FCC said its investigation and the findings of engineers confirmed complaints. Comcast, according to the FCC, delayed subscriber downloads and blocked uploads 24 hours a day, seven days a week, regardless of the amount of congestion on the network or how small the file.

Comcast has been under fire for some time for blocking peer-to-peer file sharing with BitTorrent software. The FCC said Comcast's reason was to block competition with its video-on-demand offering.

Comcast will not accept to pay a fine because the FCC had not previously provided direction to network operators on what constitutes reasonable management, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said.

But the company was ordered to have a compliance plan in place by the end of the year, refrain from any discriminatory practices, and notify subscribers of any future network actions.

Comcast Disappointed

Comcast declared it was disappointed with the FCC's decision because its network control was consistent with industry practices. A spokesperson said the FCC's order raises due-process concerns and a variety of legal questions.

The company insisted it does little management of P2P protocols and on a typical day there are an estimated nine billion P2P packets unaffected by network management. It also said about six to seven percent of Comcast subscribers use P2P on a weekly basis.

Comcast and other ISPs argue that they need to be allowed to manage their networks to avoid congestion and fight illegal file sharing. Comcast also said the FCC does not have the right to enforce an open Internet.

In a move to work with P2P companies, Comcast has announced a joint effort with BitTorrent, Pando Networks, and Vonage to work out any management issues. It also said it will participate in an industry P2P best-practices initiative.

A unaccustomed application enabling Apple's iPhone to share EDGE or 3G Internet connections with other wireless devices briefly appeared in Apple's App Store, only to be pulled minutes later.

The Netshare app by Nullriver is based on SOCKS — an Internet protocol that enables client-server applications to transparently employ the services of a network firewall. Netshare essentially converts any iPhone into a portable Wi-Fi hotspot, with all Wi-Fi-enabled devices able to share a broadband Internet connection wherever a cellular signal is available.

"We're trying to prevail upon ahold of Apple right now," said Nullriver spokesperson Maksim Rogov in some e-mail. "Until we hear from Apple, it's hard to say what the real reason is, because if it was AT&T, well, AT&T is not the iPhone service provider outside the U.S."

Not On AT&T's List

Wireless carriers are understandably not happy about programs such as Netshare because they allow users to bypass their cellular networks and avoid data-access fees.

"The iPhone is not intended to be used as a tethering device and we have no plans to offer separate tethering plans for it," said AT&T spokesperson Wes Warnock. "We offer LaptopConnect cards that you can use to access our wireless data network. Those cards offer typical download speeds as high as 1.7 Mbps."

Warnock noted that AT&T wireless provides tethered access for a monthly fee on smartphones from LG, Motorola, Nokia, RIM, Samsung and others, limit the iPhone is not on the carrier's list of supported devices. "For customers looking for a smartphone with tethering capability, we have many other options," Warnock said.

Developer Mystified

Some media outlets were quick to suggest that Nullriver had come under press when its Netshare product description was cleared from the Web site earlier today. But Nullriver says it is as mystified as everyone else as to why its application was pulled.

Nullriver says it is currently trying to get Netshare back on the App Store.

"Sorry to all the folks that couldn't get it in time," Rogov said. "We're hoping we'll get some feedback from Apple tomorrow. At the actual least, I would hope Apple will allow it in countries where the provider does permit tethering."

The fact that Netshare made even a brief appearance on the App Store surprised industry observers. To keep IT administrators from worrying all over rogue applications ending up on iPhones in enterprise environments, Apple had promised to thoroughly vet the applications it offers before making them available for download.

Given its newly come woes with its MobileMe subscription service, Apple has once again raised questions about how prepared it is to luckily market the iPhone worldwide. Apple did not proximately respond to a request for further information.