An offer from Facebook that can't be refused

Facebook offers Rs 1.34 cr package to Allahabad engineering student

Social networking giant Facebook has hired an engineering student here for a fat annual pay package of Rs 1.34 crore, one of the biggest offers made to alumnus of any technical institution of the country.

According to P Chakravarti, Director of the Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology (MNNIT), a B.Tech student from the institute, who has requested that his name be withheld for "security reasons", received a letter on March 27 from Facebook confirming his appointment and the annual pay package on offer was stated to be $262,500 (around Rs 1.34 crore).

Interestingly, the MNNIT Director said the recruitment process began with a mail from Facebook "in October last year which was followed by nine rounds of telephonic interviews" before he was finally selected for the plush job which would require the student, who hails from Kanpur, to move to Menlo Park in California after finishing his software engineering course at the institute.

"Many students from our institute have bagged lucrative jobs. We have knowledge of at least 30 of our alumni getting selected with packages of more than Rs 10 lakh from companies like Microsoft, Amazon, Adobe etc", Chakravarti said.

"However, this one has been unprecedented and we are sure that no other student from any of the other institutions in the city or the more than two dozen National Institutes of Technology across the country has so far been offered such an awesome pay package", he added.

Read More

Mark Zuckerberg can be sacked any time, says new Facebook rule

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, along with his three top lieutenants, will get about $2 million in just salaries and bonuses, but cannot work on creating a rival to the social networking giant.

This has been disclosed in Facebook's amended registration document for its upcoming IPO, filed with the US market regulator Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) last night.

As per Zuckerberg's employment agreement with Facebook, his job can be terminated "at any time for any reason or no reason", either by him or by the company.

Besides, the company's employment agreement does not allow Zuckerberg to "assist any person or entity in competing with the Company, in preparing to compete with the Company or in hiring any employees or consultants of the Company."

Similar clauses apply to Chief Operating Officer (COO) Sheryl Sandberg, Chief Financial Officer (CFO) David Ebersman and Vice President (Engineering) Mike Schroepfer, for the period these people are rendering their services to Facebook.

The agreements are silent on whether these people, including Zuckerberg, can help create a rival of Facebook after leaving the company.

In addition to in-cash salary and bonus, the pay package of the top four Facebook executives includes millions of dollars in form of stock options, performance pay and other payments.

Besides, the value of shares owned by Zuckerberg and many others at the company could also make them billionaires after the listing of Facebook, which is currently in the process of its $five billion IPO (Initial Public Offer).

The company said that Zuckerberg, as President and CEO, would get $500,000 of base salary and up to 45% of this amount as bonus every year. While the basic wage would be paid in two equal payments a month, he can "over-achieve" the bonus target pursuant to the company's bonus plan.

Sandberg and Ebersman would get an annual base salary of $300,000 each, while the same for Schroepfer would be $275,000. All the three executives would be entitled for a bonus payment of up to 45% of their base earnings.

The collective base salary and bonus of the four executives stand at $1.99 million (about Rs 10 crore).

In addition to generally common no-conflict obligations, Zuckerberg cannot bring with him to Facebook, or disclose to any person associated with the company, any confidential or proprietary information belonging to any former employer or any other third party.

Noting that his job at Facebook was not any specific period time, the agreement says that the employment would be on an "at will" basis, meaning that either Zuckerberg or Facebook can terminate the employment at any time for any reason or no reason.

While the job duties, title, compensation and benefits, as well as the company’s personnel policies and procedures, might change from time to time, the 'at will' nature of Zuckerberg's employment can be changed only after a written agreement approved by the Facebook board.

The employment agreement of Sheryl Sandberg also carries an 'at-will' clause.

Facebook has said that Sandberg's role can be adjusted from time to time, as the company was a rapidly growing and changing organisation.

However, her "duties and responsibilities always will be at least commensurate with those duties and responsibilities normally associated with and appropriate for someone in the position of COO".

Beyond her role at Facebook, she has been allowed to deliver lectures, fulfill speaking engagements and teach at educational institutions, as long as such activities do not materially interfere or conflict with her role at the company.

While Sandberg's business expenses would be reimbursed by Facebook, a similar clause is not there in the employment agreement of Zuckerberg.

Upon her termination from Facebook, Sandberg cannot poach on any of the company's employees or consultants for a period of 24 months.

As per the agreement, she cannot "either directly or indirectly solicit, induce, recruit or encourage any of the company’s employees or consultants to terminate their relationship with the Company, or attempt to solicit, induce, recruit, encourage or take away employees or consultants of the company, either for myself or for any other person or entity."

Besides, she cannot use any confidential information to negatively influence any of Facebook's clients or customers, or to work in favour of any rival business.

Source

Read More

Facebook: How to know anyone has unfriended you

Breaking up just got harder to do: How to tell if anyone has 'unfriended' you on Facebook

A new browser add-on alerts Facebook users the instant that someone on their friends list 'unfriends' them - cutting off their link on the social network.

It also alerts users when someone rejects or ignores a friend request.

The script, called Unfriend Finder, is free, and has been a huge hit worldwide.

Unfriend Finder has been downloaded 44 million times.

It can be installed in almost any internet browser. Users see a red counter in their menu bar which comes up '-1' the second someone unfriends them - a dig at Facebook's logo for adding friends, which is a '+1'.

The news will horrify many Facebook users.

Facebook itself does not alert people when you click to 'unfriend' them, and it's become normal for people to do so stealthily.

It's a crucial 'get-out' clause from friendships that have grown apart - and useful when relationships go bad.

Many users also accept friend requests to be polite, then quietly 'unfriend' the people later if they're not close.

Unfriend Finder's page says, 'Unfriends are people who were previously your friend but have either deactivated their account or have removed you from their friend list.'

'Unfriend Finder will also tell you people you have requested friendship with and who has declined your friend request.'

'Unfriend Finder makes identifying unfriends easy by displaying a red counter in the menubar with the amount of unfriends you have.'

The script works in browsers such as Chrome, Firefox and Internet Explorer, and can be downloaded for free from the official site.

There are Facebook apps that also offer the same functionality, but apps that offer such functions have been a hotbed of spam in the past.

Several apps for smartphones such as Frienemy for Android also offer this functionality - but many cost money, and none offer the simplicity of watching directly in your internet browser.

Unfriend Finder is prone to bouts of down time, though, users say - if Facebook changes its website code, the script will no longer work, and Facebook does so quite frequently.

Read More

Google, Facebook oppose web control in Delhi HC

Internet giants Google and Facebook told the Delhi High Court on Monday that it is not possible for companies to block offensive content that appears on their websites, in a case that has stoked fears about censorship in the world's largest democracy.

Google and Facebook are among 21 companies that have been asked to develop a mechanism to block objectionable material, after a private petitioner took the websites to court over images deemed offensive to Hindus, Muslims and Christians.

At the heart of the dispute is a law passed last year in the country that makes companies responsible for user content posted on their websites, requiring them to take it down within 36 hours in case of a complaint.

The case was originally filed in a lower court, but the companies have appealed to the Delhi High Court, challenging the lower court's ruling asking them to take down some content.

"The search engine only takes you till the website. What happens after that is beyond a search engine's control," Neeraj Kishan Kaul, a lawyer for Google's Indian unit, told a packed High Court hearing on Monday.

"If you use blocks, which is very easy for people to say, you will inadvertently block other things as well. For example: the word 'sex'. Even a government document like a voter ID list or a passport has the word 'sex'," he added.

Siddharth Luthra, a lawyer for Facebook told the court it was not possible for the social network to "single out" any individual on the basis of religion or views and said the users should be held responsible for content they post.

Less than a tenth of India's 1.2 billion population have access to Internet although its 100-odd million users make it the third biggest Internet market after China and the United States. Internet users in India are seen nearly tripling to 300 million over the next three years.

Despite the new rules to block offensive content, India's Internet access is still largely free unlike the tight controls in neighbouring China.

Civil rights groups have opposed the new laws. But politicians say that posting offensive images in the socially conservative country with a history of violence between religious groups presents a danger to the public as Internet use grows.

The high court will resume hearing the case on Thursday, Justice Suresh Kait said. The judge was last week quoted by local media warning the websites of China-style controls if they did not create a means to curb material seen as offensive.

Read More

Indian govt sanctions prosecution of Google, Facebook over objectionable material

New Delhi: A day after Delhi high court warned social websites to devise mechanism to check and remove objectionable content or face action like in China, there was more trouble for them.

The government on Friday told a Delhi trial court that there is sufficient material to proceed against 21 social networking sites for offences of promoting enmity between classes and causing prejudice to national integration.

"The sanctioning authority has personally gone through the entire records and materials produced before him and after considering and examining the same, he is satisfied that there is sufficient material to proceed against the accused persons under section 153-A, 153-B and 295-A of the IPC," the Centre said in its report placed before Metropolitan Magistrate Sudesh Kumar.

The list includes Facebook, Google, Yahoo and Microsoft.

The matter will now come up for hearing on March 13 and the court has directed the accused to appear in person on the next date.

The two-page report was placed after the court directed ministry of external affairs (MEA) to get the summons served on over ten foreign-based companies. The summons were issued on December 23 last but they remained unserved.

The court had on December 23 issued summons to 21 social netorking websites for allegedly committing offences of criminal conspiracy, sale of obscene books and sale of obscene objects to young persons.

It had said prima facie the accused companies were liable to be summoned for promoting enemity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class, but it could not summon them without having prior sanction of central or state government or the district magistrate.

The department of information technology, in its report, granted saction to proceed against the 21 companies for allegedly promoting enmity between classes and causing prejudice to national integration.

The report said, "The documents and contents therein are in the nature to instigate enimity between different groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language and doing acts prejudicial to the maintainance of harmony...."

It said the contents were provocative and were prejudicial to national integration.

The report said in view of the documents and confirmation of availability of such contents on the website/ search engines as reported by station house officer of Tughlak Road police station, the sanctioning authority, Government of India, was satisfied that such content was violative of the provisions of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules 2011.

It said after due application of "judicious mind", it was found appropriate to grant sanction under section 196 of CrPC to proceed against the accused persons in the aforesaid complaint keeping in view national harmony, integration and national interest.

The report said that they had held four meetings with the representatives of social networking sites and search engines Google, Facebook, Yahoo and Microsoft.

"The availability of objectionable content on their websites and their search results through the search engine was brought to their knowledge. The objectionable and defamatory content was also shown to them and they were requested to take appropriate action in the public interest, national harmony and integration....," it said.

The report said even in August last year, the availability of similar content on such websites was brought to the notice of the Department of Information Technology.

Meanwhile, the court on Friday issued directions to the MEA after the counsel appearing for Facebook India said over ten out of the 21 companies were foreign based and the court would have to issue process to serve the summons to them.

The magistrate directed the MEA to get the summons served saying, "Let the process (to serve the summons) to (foreign based) accused be sent through MEA as per the process."

The court's order came after advocate Shashi Tripathi, appearing for complainant Vinay Rai, said he would file a fresh list of addresses of these foreign-based sites in the court.

During the hearing, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Facebook India, sought adjournment for the day saying the matter is pending before the Delhi high court and the case file is also in the high court.

He said that one of the accused, who is chairman of the Facebook, is based in California in USA and the court will have to direct the MEA for serving summons on him.

The counsel for Google India Pvt Ltd also asked the court to adjourn the matter today. He said that summons issued to accused companies Orkut, Youtube and Blogspot have been mistakenly served at their premises here.

Some of the accused companies had also moved the high court against the summons issued to them.

The magistrate's December 23 order had come three days after another court in a civil case had restrained these sites including Facebook, Google and Youtube from webcasting any "anti-religious" or "anti-social" content promoting hatred or communal disharmony.

Read More

Strangers piece together novel on Facebook

Kolkata: The co-authors of this forthcoming book are strangers to one other, who are unaware whether the fiction they are penning would turn out to be a thriller, a comedy, a romantic novel or some other genre.

Started off as a creative experiment by advertising professional Emmanuel Upputuru, it allows anyone on social networking site Facebook to take the tale forward from where it was left by the last writer.

"The characters and the story remain frozen till a fellow netizen adds a passage or sentence. Then it is again surrendered to the next person who volunteers to come forward. All along, none of the authors know what will happen next," says Upputuru, national creative director of Publicis India.

The Delhi-based adman began by creating a page on Facebook 'People like you and me' in March and wrote the first three paragraphs of the unique book that he titled 'Once'.

He subsequently invited those on the site to use their distinct creativity by commenting on the post and be one of those myriad storytellers that takes the tale forward.

Attracting thousands of members as readers of the story, which is still being written, the idea became a superhit online. Around 30 people have already contributed to the story, with ten of them being regular writers.

Mostly strangers, some of the authors are even students and foreigners like the controversial British advertising legend Neil French.

Since every writer brings in his own perception, style and flavor into the story, which is set in Spain, the novel may turn out to be a thriller, a comedy or even a romantic love story as time progresses.

Upputuru says, "It's an experiment to see whether we can create something by people who don't even know each other. I am not trying to create the most well-written story. I am trying to create a story written by different people who are common men and not a Salman Rushdie or a Chetan Bhagat,"

However, there are a set of rules which one needs to follow to co-author the book.

"They should know the characters well, how they are growing, the locations and try and build on them while writing. They are not supposed to dwell outside unless they really feel there's merit in cutting away from the scene," says the adman.

To get more variety and colour in the story, every writer is allowed to post only once every five posts.

"Otherwise, it will become like any other book where one or two authors write the story," says Upputuru.

Describing his role as a "curator of the book", he says he too contributes at times but deletes any posts he finds inappropriate to the story, obscene or bad in taste.

"But I am not rude to anybody. I send a valid explanation for it with a suggestion," he says.

The idea behind the innovative experiment came to him one day when he was playing a game where he gave random sentences to his seven-year-old son who added next line.

"It was then I thought why can't we have a game like this on Facebook where one writer adds to what the other has already written," he says.

Expected to reach climax in next 3-4 months, the story will be published in a book form thereafter, where all those who have contributed to the book will be credited as co- authors.

Interestingly, even as there are thirty writers working on the same story, a writer's block still happens as there are phases when nobody contributes.

Read More