Saba Hamedy and Meg James, at the LA Times:

Hackers began releasing sensitive data after the studio’s security breach became public on Nov. 24. The group, calling itself Guardians of Peace, has released data including thousands of pages of emails from studio chiefs, salaries of top executives, and Social Security numbers of 47,000 current and former employees.

Many are warning of the intellectual property fallout of hacks like this. And that could, indeed, lose companies much potential revenue. But the more serious liability here is failure to secure employee information. I anticipate we’ll see many similar class actions unless companies get serious about security.

In case you thought I was becoming a Facebook fanboy, let me just say that this celeb crap is something Zuck will be adding to his list of regrets within the year.

Granted, that’s probably a very short list, but this VIP thing is a distraction an a gimmick and it’s going nowhere.

And yes, I’m prepared to try some claim chowder if I’m wrong. I’m just pretty confident I’m not.

I predict Facebook will announce a custom Android launcher — a “home” screen.

Update April 4, 2013: I was right.

Steven Zeitchik of the LA Times:

To make the movie, [Randy] Moore wouldn’t print out script pages or shot sequences for the 25 days he was filming on Disney turf, instead keeping all the info on iPhones. This way, when actors and crew were looking down between takes, passersby just thought they were glancing at their messages.

The films plot, such as it is, sounds as intriguing as its method of creation.

If it does get a distribution deal, Disney will most likely brings its formidable legal resources to bear upon it, and they’ll most likely succeed.

But I predict that the company will trigger a Streisand effect, perhaps as much to the filmmaker’s detriment as anyone else’s (to the extent that he hopes to recoup his investment), that will drive people to seek out and, in the era of digital file sharing, inevitably find the film.

I predict it will be panned because it’s not “sexy” enough for the expectations Facebook raised, but that it will also be widely-used. It looks to me like one of those things people don’t know they want until a company offers it to them. I’m excited to give it a try later on and I’ll probably write up more thoughts on it later.

Josh Constine at TechCrunch:

There no big launch event yesterday because Facebook didn’t need one. In fact, it probably didn’t want one, considering it didn’t even notify bloggers like me as it usually does.

This isn’t going to end well. I predict that a backlash will build over the next couple of weeks, nothing dire, but familiar fare by now for Facebook. They should have come out with PR about the easy privacy controls they have implemented to allow seamless and secure photo uploading. Instead they tried to sneak it in on the weekend.

Updated: This is not true.

Angela Moscaritolo of PCMag.com reports:

In a statement, Google said it made the acquisition to “further diversify its already impressive portfolio of companies.” The Web giant did not elaborate about its motivation for the deal.

You don’t spent $400 million on something that isn’t strategically important to your business. I predict that Google WiFi will launch in 2013.

This one is worth watching. With regard to blogs and forums, particularly, there’s a strong analogy with letter-writing and other modes of communication with the “outside” that are typically allowed.

The plaintiffs, two registered California sex offenders, argue that prohibiting their anonymous speech online “even if it pertains to news, politics, and professional activity, and could not possibly be used to commit a crime” violates the First Amendment.

This looks similar to a case I wrote about in October, where a Nebraska federal court tossed a similar law in that state.

I don’t want sex offenders to have access to children online. But these measures do go too far. Maybe registered sex offenders should be required to access the internet via special software that, while it allows anonymity, prevents access to services and sites that reach children.

At the end of the day, the truth is that these laws apply to people who have otherwise served their time, who are “free” in the legal sense, and who no longer labor under the curtailed liberties of institutional imprisonment. That imprisonment is meant to punish them, but also to keep the public safe, to prevent them from moving through public crowds anonymously.

If we have released them from prison, allowing that physical anonymity once again, by what logic do we eliminate their digital anonymity?

I don’t have an answer, but I suspect the issue will reach the Supreme Court sooner rather than later.

Kathleen Kennedy, current Co-Chairman of Lucasfilm, will become President of Lucasfilm, reporting to Walt Disney Studios Chairman Alan Horn. Additionally she will serve as the brand manager for Star Wars, working directly with Disney’s global lines of business to build, further integrate, and maximize the value of this global franchise. Ms. Kennedy will serve as executive producer on new Star Wars feature films, with George Lucas serving as creative consultant. Star Wars Episode 7 is targeted for release in 2015, with more feature films expected to continue the Star Wars saga and grow the franchise well into the future.

I wasn’t a fan of Episodes I, II, or III, and this deal doesn’t increase my hope for some sort of redemption in future Star Wars films. I predict this will lead to a slow, painful death of the franchise in the eyes of geeks and comic store-guys who may have still held out that same hope.

I hope I’m wrong.

Ian Griffiths and Dan Milmo of The Guardian, quoting ” a contract seen by the Guardian,” presumably between Amazon and one of its UK publishing “partners”:

If the base price exceeds the base price … provided to a similar service then … the base price hereunder will be deemed to be equal to such lower price, effective as of the date such lower price comes into effect.

That’s a good deal, especially coupled with the recent ebooks settlement.

The US antitrust regime is focused on protecting consumer interests. That means that as long as Amazon’s book selection continues to rise and their prices continue to fall, they’re unlikely to see any problems on the competition law front.

That’s probably not good for consumers in the long-run, especially given Amazon’s DRM and control over your devices and library. I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict that Amazon will face some antitrust scrutiny of its own in the next year.