There are two main strategies for marketing via a digital fashion. Firstly, pull digital marketing is where the consumer searches for data concerning goods and services by browsing the company’s information sources; this may include a website, pamphlets, or simply an old fashioned telephone call. Secondly, push digital marketing refers to the customer receiving information from a company. These messages are commonly sent to potential cliental through services such as Short Message Service (SMS), Really Simple Syndication (RSS), or perhaps cellular phone calls.

These digital marketing techniques are successful for a myriad of reasons. Pull, for example provides a low cost solution paired with the advantage of operating an affordable overhead. Additionally, pull technology has no restrictions in terms of file size, allowing thorough explanations of a product or service. Push enjoys the ability to personalize messages and monitor customers’ purchases. The push digital marketing style is also well known for having a robust conversation rate through newsgroups, RSS, and SMS.

However, nothing in the business world is free of failure risk, digital marketing is no exception. Both pull and push methods have their caveats. Pull marketing suffers from the inability to track visitors. Furthermore, there are no options of personalization, which is vital in keeping the customers’ interest over time. This damages chances of gaining return customers. Push technology suffers from several disadvantages. The push system requires knowledge of relevant delivery technology, Services such as SMS and RSS can easily be blocked by a potential patron. There have also been several spam laws enacted which often require the customers to opt in to the messages, defeating the whole idea of “pushing” the advertisements.

Gaming developer Storm8 has been sued for allegedly collecting phone numbers of iPhone users who downloaded the company’s popular games from the iTunes app store.

“The wireless telephone numbers of users’ phones are not used or necessary to play any of Storm8′s games, yet Storm8 has written the software for all its games in such a way that it automatically accesses, collects, and transmits the wireless telephone number of each iPhone user who downloads any Storm8 game,” states the lawsuit, filed on behalf of Lynwood, Wash. resident Michael Turner.

Turner alleges that Storm8′s surreptitious data collection violates the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, as well as California state laws. He is seeking class-action status.

In late August, news reports surfaced alleging that Storm8′s apps for the iPhone had a “phone home” feature that transmitted users’ wireless numbers to the company. Storm8 offers games like “Vampires Live,” “Zombies Live” and “Rockstars Live” through Apple’s iTunes apps store. The company responded to the reports by saying its system had a “bug,” but that it had since been fixed.

Turner alleges in his lawsuit that he downloaded Storm8′s games in July and August, after which the company “harvested his wireless telephone number without notifying him or obtaining his consent.”

Storm8 didn’t respond to Online Media Daily’s request for comment.

Turner’s lawyer, Michael Aschenbrener of KamberEdelson, says his client’s main objective is to ensure that Storm8 is barred from collecting private data in the future. Storm8 says that it no longer gathers wireless numbers, but Aschenbrener argues that promise isn’t sufficient to protect consumers. “A public admission is not the same as a legal representation or legal injunction,” he says.

One potential hurdle for Turner is that the section of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act that he alleges was violated appears to require proof not only that computers were unlawfully accessed, but also that they were damaged. Aschenbrener says that Storm8 caused damage because it “impaired the integrity of the data stored on a protected computer.”

But some legal experts are not convinced. Venkat Balasubramani of Seattle says that while Storm8 allegedly engaged in some questionable practices, there might not be a legal remedy — especially because the data collected isn’t as sensitive as other types of information, like social security numbers or bank accounts. “iPhone numbers are not necessarily confidential,” he says. “Many people just give them out.”

Plus, there’s more: Publishers installing Facebook share buttons can also get data back related to how many times that link has been shared, how many users have hit the thumbs-up “like” button or commented on shared versions of the story on Facebook, and how many people have clicked back to it through Facebook.

These Facebook “share” buttons had existed before, and the company said that more than 2 billion pieces of content are shared per week. But this is the first time that the counter and analytics have been available.

A post on the Facebook developer blog explains: “Anyone can add the Share button to their website with little to no technical experience, and style the button from a variety of options.” Accessing the analytics however, requires a bit more coding know-how.

This could spell bad news for Digg, as Facebook’s significantly bigger and more mainstream audience could make it a far more appealing choice for site owners that would prefer to display one prominent sharing button rather than two. As for Twitter, it doesn’t actually own the app that powers the “retweet” buttons. A move like this from Facebook, however, could push it to think a bit harder about a partnership or acquisition–or hasten progress on that “retweet API” it has in the works.

Related speculation: When are we going to see a “most-shared” ranking from Facebook? That’s when Digg’s execs would really have to start sweating.

The merger would give fourth-ranked carrier T-Mobile and third-largest Sprint a combined 78 million U.S. mobile customers and position the new entity as a more formidable competitor to Verizon Wireless and AT&T. At least one analyst welcomed the deal as beneficial to the entire wireless industry because it would mean less price competition.

“There’s just too many cooks in the kitchen in the U.S. wireless market right now, and the logical route to consolidation is a combination of Sprint and T-Mobile,” Craig Moffett, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. told Bloomberg. “This is an industry that is calling out for consolidation.”

But news of a possible T-Mobile-Sprint merger comes at a time when the government is looking broadly into competition in the wireless industry. The Federal Communications Commission last month began a formal inquiry into areas such as exclusive deals between handset makers and carriers, wireless billing practices and whether current conditions in the wireless market allow for new entrants.

The major carriers have opposed increased regulation in large part on the grounds that there’s already robust competition in the wireless market, with consumers have a choice of four or five providers in a given market. But the merger of two of the four biggest U.S. carriers would undercut that argument, leaving only three national operators.

Given the heightened scrutiny the wireless industry is already under in Washington, it doesn’t seem regulators or Congress would look favorably on such a deal that would further limit competition. So even if Wall Street is cheering the proposed match, don’t expect the deal to get a warm welcome in the capital if it comes to that.