>> tech companies including apple and google joint forces urging president obama to protect your data. we will take you to the front lines to ensure your safety while also protecting your privacy. emily: i'm emily chang and this is "bloomberg west". google and twitter make up. google can now see your tweets. we will tell you what the partnership means. mark zuckerberg facing backlash. i will introduce you to the coalition accusing facebook of being misleading.

i will also speak to the guy who designed a new campus. more ahead on "bloomberg west". first of breaking news. etsy is out with its first earnings report. shares are plummeting. currency values may hurt buying behavior outside the united states. i have had a bumpy ride since the ipo a month ago. shares have lost a lot of value. they are down 30% from a $30 high on april 16. on top of all this they have been hit by a lawsuit. i bring in leslie picker to being in the numbers. what is the take away today? it seems surprising. reporter: the rule of thumb is when you have an ipo, make sure you have one quarter of earnings in the bag. that is not what at the -- etsy did here. revenue came in almost exactly where analysts were estimating.

this is something for a company that has already been overvalued relative to peers, missing first-quarter earnings is not a good sign. emily: how big a problem is the currency issue? reporter: it's interesting because during ipo they said it is not a big deal for them on the revenue side, because most of the products are denominated in dollars. it is more an impact on the expenses. so i think it is a surprise to look at earnings and fx as cited being a big cause for the weakness demonstrating in the quarter. they did highlight the currency that could impact their earnings as the euro and the pound. that has been -- seen some fluctuations. it isn't a surprise from that perspective. however, it was not highlighted as a big part of their business historically. emily: what about this concern about counterfeit goods? 2 million counterfeit lawyer items that -- or items that

infringe on copyright. this is supposed to be a site for handmade and vintage goods. i do not going to be etsy anymore? reporter: great question. why are we seeing brands pop up at all, let alone things like chanel earrings for $19? it is a big issue as far as combating this idea of scaling business while maintaining the handmade egos. emily: if only $19. i would be there all the time. thank you for breaking it down. naturally developing story. apple, google twitter facebook . a few of the tech giants telling the white house to keep its hands off our data. more than 140 companies experts, and activist groups are asking the president to eject a that would limit encryption or give them a backdoor to product. law-enforcement agencies are not immune.

it would prevent them from getting information they need to protect us. so where's the line between what is public and private? cryptography research president is here with me. we also have a senior adviser and a former cio -- cia officer. you actually signed this letter that would publish today, why did you sign it and what do you want from the president? guest: yes, i did. what i'm looking for is for strong internet security. i think it has caused economic growth. it has allowed us to do so many things in cryptography and it is a fundamental part of providing internet security. i don't want it to be weakened. i think that's going backwards. we need to move forwards to protect data from criminal foreign governments and even our own government. emily: paul, what exactly is

weakening the data are providing a backdoor actually means? why would the government want these companies to introduce vulnerabilities into their systems? doesn't i mean everybody else could get into? -- in as well? guest: this theory is you can put a god key that could read everybody's data. but the problem is how do you control that, how do you make it so the policies work with all the different foreign governments that will immediately want access? in practice, it does not work. but there is this sort of hint that something might be possible that is very tantalizing, if you are in law-enforcement. emily: is it possible? guest: nine practice, no. emily: brian, i want to ask you what does law-enforcement want? i'm assuming they don't want systems to be more vulnerable than companies can make them. guest: as a former intelligence

and law enforcement officer, i will tell you, cops and spies always won every technological advantage they can get. and we want them to write -- want that. we want them to do everything they can to protect us. if you can ask jim kobe what he wants, he would say i want a neutral judicial observer to have the ability to direct companies to decrypt communications once we get the appropriate warrant. in the past that has not been a huge problem, because the providers microsoft google etc., would always be able to decrypt communications. we had moved into a world where the state-of-the-art is going to be provided themselves and they do not have the keys, then this becomes very frightening to law-enforcement intelligence. they are afraid that guys can make them -- bad guys can make

them go dark. there would be no procedure to get the key. emily: you mentioned the head of the fbi who has made the point that we need to protect privacy but also we need to protect innocent people. do we have the capability to break did the doors anyway why do they need a backdoor? guest: adore isadore. what they are -- adore is adore. they might want to have cameras in your house is or having government mandated vulnerabilities in your crypto products. that would give people who held the keys a great deal more power. the practical consequence would be that there will be lots of other countries that will not put this kind of law in place. it's probably unconstitutional in the u.s. anyway. even if hypothetically it was constitutional. the people you care about will find other methods for doing data protection. but it leaves you with a great

deal of risk for ordinary consumers, people who might not be the government's favorite people but who have unpopular opinions but are detected. emily: interesting that amazon did not find his letter. do you know why? i know edward snowden has been more criminal of -- critical of amazons technology saying it is not good enough. guest: i don't know why amazon did not sign it. i know people on the team, my company uses amazon's services. i looked at their security. i think it is good. i don't think it is because they have weaker crypto. emily: obviously they have made it clear this is what they want. but how big is this impact? guest: i've given you the law-enforcement intelligence perspective, putting on my privacy lawyer hat and former white house official hat,

sometimes our national leaders have to look beyond just a short-term technological advantage for law enforcement intelligence. and look at not just privacy and civil liberties, but also the competitiveness of american companies overseas and need to get the trust back of customers around the world. i think it's too early to tell what the impact will be if this letter succeeds. but i will say this. although i'm in favor of the letter i don't think we should view this as a cost free decision. if life force and intelligence agencies lose the ability to decrypt communications from real bad guys there probably will be a tax and -- attacking and threats. what i think national leadership should do is put the big picture into the perspective, agree with the letter but be straight with the american people that this can do some damage. emily: brian cunningham, along

with their code cofounder and crib dr. feet research -- cryptography research president. we will continue to follow this letter and see what impact it has. today in cybercrime news, the u.s. government charging six chinese citizens with stealing mobile phone technology and sharing it with aging. here's what allegedly went down. two chinese researchers met at usc and went on to with -- work at us-based companies. there, they took valuable code and designs for wireless signal filters and conspired with officials at china's state-run university to re-create technology at home. the espionage charge could mean 15 years in prison for the people accused. this case is being prosecuted by the u.s. attorney's office here in central scope. -- san francisco. trouble is rooting for one of the mark zuckerberg tech projects. over 60 organizations are asking

for changes to internet.org. after this quick break. plus, distracted driving hits new levels. a surprising number of smartphone users use facetime and to drive. ♪

emily: a story we are watching. a potential challenge to yahoos plan to exit -- exit its stake in alibaba. the irs is considering changes

in its rules for spinoffs of trades or businesses. back in impact yahoos plans to hold a tax-free spinoff. it is seen as a critical step for ceo marissa mayer who is under pressure from investors to find way to cut taxes. this has sent yahoos shares down seven and a half percent. the backlash against internet.org is mounting. over 60 different organizations across 28 countries signed a letter to mark zuckerberg criticizing the free program that gives simple internet access to people in the developing world. it is up and running in 11 countries, but advocacy groups have demanded precision -- issues, citing the neutrality and privacy. joining me is advocacy director josh leedy. his organization wrote that letter to mark zuckerberg. i want to start with you. why is this backlash against internet.org gaining momentum right now? >> we are at a very critical

moment at the fight for internet neutrality and to protect privacy and peoples security online. we had a big victory on net neutrality in the u.s. a lot of fighting going on in india and elsewhere around the world right now. by paying attention to this issue and realizing that facebook is expanding job is countries -- expanding to all of these countries, that net neutrality is important. even if you are just having developing internet access, people need access to the full internet, not just part of it. there outraged -- they are outraged by what they see internet.org doing. emily: i spoke to mark zuckerberg in december about this. i asked him about calling it internet.org and whether that was a genuine term for the organization. take a listen to what he had to say. mark: if we were primarily focused on profits, the most

reasonable thing for us to do is just focus on the first of billion people who are using the product. the world is not set up equally. the first billion people using facebook have way more money than the rest of the world combined. from a business perspective, it actually doesn't make a huge amount of sense for us to put the emphasis that we are right now. emily: this is a business he made it clear. so should this be called a.org? if they are not giving access to the entire internet? guest: that's a good question. the big question is should it have the word internet? is access to a handful of cherry picked internet connected services. this has come up many times among advocates that maybe we shouldn't call this internet.org whatsoever. maybe it should be facebook.net or internet connected services.org. emily: his face that the internet with facebook?

guest: what facebook is saying is this should be a gateway drug to the internet, and if you look at some of the basic services in the u.s. we get for free, like 911 calls, this is something as essential to people's lives as that according to thunderbird. that is how he equates it. -- according to mark zuckerberg. that is how he equates it. contact others in times of need. let's start there and maybe one day be people will realize what potential the internet has and actually become internet users. emily: another criticism is is the internet more essential than food and water? i asked mark zuckerberg about this question mentioning bill gates who has criticized the internet everywhere projects by other companies. take a look. mark: bill and i had a few conversations about this and other things we have worked on together.

the reality is people need a lot of things in order to have good lives. health is certainly extremely important. we have done a number of things that facebook to help improve global health and in the area. but the reality is it is not either/or. emily: is facebook putting the internet before food and before water? what do you want him to do instead? guest: i don't think facebook is doing that. i agree with mark zuckerberg, it is a false dichotomy to say the internet is not as important as food or water. that is a bit of a distraction. but the focus here is on the fact that the internet is important, it is essential in people's lives, and we are need -- we need to make sure we are not creating a hierarchy with different types of internet. where people who cannot afford

it gets scrapped. the reality is a lot of people won't ever be able to afford expensive data plans. we think that there are a few things facebook can do that would help alleviate these issues. first off, provide access to the full internet. there are models out there and suggestions that facebook can provide low data cap for the -- for free that can allow people to access all services. if they want more they can pay for regular data plans. other things they can do is protect privacy and security for users accessing the internet through their app. emily: there is a question whether the services are encrypted. thank you both for joining us. we will be watching to see how mark zuckerberg was on. in today's edition of drive, a new survey commissioned by at&t finds that smartphone users are doing a whole lot more than texting while driving. seven out of 10 users are on the

phone. but four out of 10 are on social media. what's more, 10% of people actually video chat while driving. about the statistics the marketing team says i don't even have words for that. but there is a disconnect here. according to aaa, more than 84% of able say it is totable -- totally acceptable -- unacceptable to text and drive. that's what most people think. samsung is expanding its footprint in silicon valley. a new flagship building. i sit down with the man behind the architecture. ♪

emily: it's time now for the daily bite. one number that tells a whole lot. today's number is 9000. that is the number of tweets per second that twitters so-called fire hose sprays into the ether.

it is at the heart of a rekindled partnership between google and twitter. starting today, google incorporates real-time content from twitter into search results. based on a similar deal, but it felt her in 2011 for a handful of possible reasons. but they appear to make up -- to have made up. twitter responding, google, we are feeling lucky. they got perhaps this deal could be the key to boosting tweets outside of the traditional fee. there is a building spree happening in silicon valley. tech companies from facebook to amazon, google to adobe are expanding footprint, each one with a more sprawling and green and glassy building than the next. one is building a home away from home. that is samsung. it is almost finished with a new 1.1 million square-foot office which has caused $300 million to build.

let's take a virtual tour with the man behind the project. his firm has designed buildings for amazon and microsoft and many more. what is different or special about samsung project? different than all the other things he designed? guest: i think it is really pushing where the technology companies are going, becoming more urban. more relevant to the employees. and more connected. this is a tall building, up against the sidewalk. it is next to two rail stations. it is about the energy happening outside the building as much as it is inside the building. inside, there is great connectedness, vertical gardens, it's a great place to work. that it's also different than a lot of things that are happening in the degree to which it is an urban place. emily: i know you are on the project from the beginning. how much time thought, and

money and some put into the project -- did they spare no expense? guest: no, they were very careful with their money. just like most clients are. it was not throwing money at all. they put a lot of thought into it. emily: give me an idea of some sort of a debate you had. when you were conceptualizing this. where they said, we want to go more this way than that way. guest: well, was it to be a tall building, do we bring it to the sidewalk deemphasized parking? those were issues they thought about. they were very interested to know what their future employees were like and how this can be aware that attracts them, keeps them there, and importantly becomes a very innovative place. emily: talent and retention very important. is the tech industry redesigning the traditional off -- office?

are you seeing things they're putting into their opposites offices that other traditional companies are adopting? guest: very much so. the change in what work is and how work is happening is causing this. there is a lot of experimentation going on with a lot of companies. they're looking at how we can get work done and how we can be more productive. it is a time of tremendous change and experimentation. emily: how is samsung different than working with amazon or microsoft? guest: every company is unique in its culture. it is an international company and its headquarter is in korea. it is fascinating to work with people of those cultures. how does the culture of their society impact work, and how did they become a culture of both americans and many different diverse people working in the same facility? emily: when will it be done? guest: it will be done this fall. emily: looking forward to seeing

it. he designed the new samsung building in silicon valley. thank you for joining us. and thank you for watching this edition of "bloomberg west". that is it today from san francisco. ♪

mark: i mark halperin. john: and i'm john halloween. with all due respect hillary clinton, it's great to hear your voice. she speaks. after 40,000 minutes, hillary clinton looked at the press today in cedar falls, iowa. she gave answers. there's no time to spare. let's go toward big while of hillary answers. number one, her state department e-mails. the state department propose they would all come out at once in january. today, federal judge said no, they have to com