RE: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image?
You told me on the phone that you did not want to negotiate. At least that's how I remember hearing it. Sorry if I heard wrong. You told me specifically that PodTech was not in position to negotiate. The problem is I'm getting in between you and John Furrier. John's mom died this week which is causing problems figuring out where things are. I'll get him to answer you. Regarding photo prices, I talked with photographers who work for Associated Press, Business Week and other magazines. I agree that we dropped the ball. No excuses there, but I wasn't involved back then and am trying to clean up a mess and having trouble getting it cleaned up because of John's mom's death. Robert Scoble ### From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lan Bui Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:51 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image? Robert, thank you for finally coming out and saying something for PodTech to the community. First, I must say that your statement: He believes his work is worth that and believes that there isn't room for negotiation on this issue. Is a lie. One of the points in my blog post was that I wanted, at minimum, to be contacted to negotiate. In the last couple days I did negotiate down a lot less than $3000 and even sent an updated invoice for it. So how is this not negotiating on the issue? Remember we talked about this on the phone, so I'm not sure why you left that out. PodTech had the chance to ask to purchase a license to use the photograph before it was used, at which time they would be able to set the terms. That didn't happen. Now that they have used the photograph already, who should set the terms? I gave PodTech over a month to respond to my terms and they didn't. When it was just me that was involved PodTech didn't care. When others started to blog about it and it was giving them a bad name, then PodTech started to care. Remember, that blog post was up for about a month before others started take notice to it. So PodTech showed to me they don't care about me, they only care about their image in the public eye. Next, I am not Thomas Hawk. Wait... Thomas Hawk? I will be the professional and not discuss the prices that PodTech pays him. Remember Robert, you told me how much PodTech pays him and that reinforced my price even more! You also said: It was easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the community who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos that were snapped at our events for free I was not contacted... so how could there be a mistake regarding permission? I also never gave (if you meant sent in to PodTech) any photographs that this one could be mistaken for. You also said: it's easy to miss the copyright on Flickr Come on, that argument is weak. Putting something in the same place on every page on flickr makes it very easy to not miss. You said: I asked several professional photographers, the average fee was $300. and 3x what most professionals in the marketplace charge for this kind of work Please don't lie again. The $300 price point is for stock photography. I even asked John where you guys got $300 from and he said that is standard for a stock photograph. If there is a photograph with Casey McKinnon holding Vloggies in a stock photography book somewhere I would love to see it. The photograph that was chosen was chosen because it had great value. It is not stock photography and I am not a stock photographer. Ok, lastly. Lets say I accepted $1000. Wow that sounds like a lot of money to many people that aren't making money from their creative work. Well this issue is not about me making money. It is about setting a precedent. If we allow companies to steal work and only pay a standard small fee when they are discovered, what is the incentive for them not steal again? Is that what other companies should learn from this? Just take now and deal with it later if it ever comes up. And don't worry, it still won't cost more than if we paid up front. To anyone else reading this: I hope this clarifies and corrects Roberts post. -Lan www.LanBui.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com , Robert Scoble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's what happened. An employee made a mistake. We recognize that a mistake was made. It was easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the community who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos that were snapped at our events for free and it's easy to miss the copyright on Flickr. Thomas Hawk, for instance, takes lots of photos at our events and gives them to us for free since he's appreciative for the community work we do. We asked around what a photo like the one that we used by Lan Bui was worth. I asked several professional photographers, the average fee was $300. Lan was not commissioned to
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image?
You see? Again. I'm sorry if you didn't read my last post - it was quite long, as usual. But for the good of your company, you *have* to stop this we're the wronged party and Lan is the bad guy, misleading you tack. And you have to stop saying things like it's easy to miss the copyright on Flickr. And generally stop putting yourselves in the position of the wronged party. It's not playing well. We've all been trying to tell you that and you're not listening. And saying Lan wants $3000 as if that's going to make everybody gasp in horror is not going to work, now, either. $300 is a stock image price. Not a price for an image as specific as that you used. And if Lan was somebody you did not know - a powerful industry photographer who had taken an image of a celebrity holding Oscars, which you'd used to advertise your commercial venture - you would pay a *MASSIVE* penalty for using it without permission. That's the accepted rules of the game. Find 'em and Read 'em. If I go onto Adobe Stock Images now, I can download a royalty free STOCK image at A4 (roughly US Letter) size for £339.00 - that's just under $700. That's for a stock image. I don't know who these photographers were that you spoke to, or how much they knew about the contents of the image you used... but as far as I'm concerned, they're just wrong. As for Lan being unwilling to negotiate... it doesn't sound like you've done much talking, frankly. We hear nothing from you, and all we hear from Lan is that he's been waiting 3 months. Have you really *tried* to negotiate. Or are you so convinced that his price is outrageous that you're just getting angry (wrongly, i think) and standing your ground? If you're offering $300 and no more, that's not really negotiating either. Think about it. Come on - I'll say it again: I like Podtech. You're good for the community and you're paying great people to make stuff. But just maybe try to see things from an outsider's perspective. This is costing you $$$ in PR. And not doing those people who produce vlogs for you much good either. They should be able to be very proud to be sponsored by Podtech. And the longer it goes on, the more expensive it gets for you. Rupert On 30 Jun 2007, at 04:25, Robert Scoble wrote: Here's what happened. An employee made a mistake. We recognize that a mistake was made. It was easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the community who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos that were snapped at our events for free and it's easy to miss the copyright on Flickr. Thomas Hawk, for instance, takes lots of photos at our events and gives them to us for free since he's appreciative for the community work we do. We asked around what a photo like the one that we used by Lan Bui was worth. I asked several professional photographers, the average fee was $300. Lan was not commissioned to take photos and an employee made a mistake by using a photo and not making sure we had the rights to use it before using it. But Lan wants $3,000. We have offered Lan something between those two prices which we feel is fair ($1,000 is the price I saw offered by PodTech CEO John Furrier, which is more than 3x what most professionals in the marketplace charge for this kind of work). Lan wants $3,000. He believes his work is worth that and believes that there isn't room for negotiation on this issue. So we're at an impass. I'm personally sorry for the whole way this thing has been handled, though, and still would like to find a way to get the two parties to reach closure on this problem. I do want to make sure Lan gets compensated properly for his intellectual property, but we want to reach a fair price and one that's based on what professionals expect. Robert Scoble ### From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Meiser Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 1:58 P To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image? Well... I'm glad people haven't resorted to name calling. Got to say, while I love podtech I'm a little disapointed at their response. The accussations about lan presenting a one sided story... is it his responsibility to present both sides? Is that even possible? And Scoble's negative conjecture about loosing money on the vloggies... is an unecissary and unwarranted resentful remark toward the whole community which reflects poorly on podtech. It is perhaps the thing that disturbs me most about this. Very disapointing. As for bringing up deaths in related people's families... very unforetunate remark. I don't know what other side to the story there is... The facts are this... Podtech used lan's photo... mistakes happen... noone here holds a grudge... but they've had more then enough time to resolve it and haven't. There's no need to drag the whole thing through the
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image?
On 6/30/07, Lan Bui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PodTech had the chance to ask to purchase a license to use the photograph before it was used, at which time they would be able to set the terms. That didn't happen. Now that they have used the photograph already, who should set the terms? This to me is the bottom line. If a company wants to negotiate the price for a creative work, their only opportunity to do so is before they use it. Trying to say ah well we'll give you X after it's already been used without permission is not only unfair ... its probably not a very strong legal position. (IMNAL) If a company is going to use photos from flickr they should know how to look for the license icon on a flickr page. If they fail to do so its not the photograph owners fault. Lastly I'm having a hard time accepting the implied well anyone else would have just given us the photo because we're oh-so-loved and do so much for everyone angle .. even if thats true, saying it out loud kinda ruins it. :-P PodTech: Stop thinking of this as trying to pay what YOU feel the photo is worth (your opportunity to do that was before you used the photo), and start thinking of this as paying Lan for infringing on his copyright ... surely that is something you can understand is worth more than a stock photo (even if you cant for some reason understand that this photo is as well). - Dave -- http://www.DavidMeade.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] First in the Apple Store for an iPhone
Someone did a live video stream via mogulus in Soho, NYC: http://iphonelaunch.tv/ On 6/30/07, Len Edgerly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Man oh man this was fun. I ended up being first in line when I showed up at the Cambridge, Mass., Apple store at 3 a.m. today. Here's the video I shot when the grate went up and the police waved us in at 6 pm: http://lenchronicles.blogspot.com/2007/06/entering-iphone-gates-of-paradise.html --Len Edgerly http://LenEdgerly.com Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image?
Robert, I'm sorry about the miscommunication on negotiation. I only come to you now because you offered yourself, I never thought you were one to make executive decisions at PodTech (correct me if I'm wrong). I know John is someone that can make executive decisions. I know how hard it must be for him to deal with his mother death. It is a horrible time for me to be asking anything of him. I keep posting to the group in reply to posts, but I want to talk to John when he is ready; or talk to someone else that can make decisions for PodTech. -Lan www.LanBui.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robert Scoble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You told me on the phone that you did not want to negotiate. At least that's how I remember hearing it. Sorry if I heard wrong. You told me specifically that PodTech was not in position to negotiate. The problem is I'm getting in between you and John Furrier. John's mom died this week which is causing problems figuring out where things are. I'll get him to answer you. Regarding photo prices, I talked with photographers who work for Associated Press, Business Week and other magazines. I agree that we dropped the ball. No excuses there, but I wasn't involved back then and am trying to clean up a mess and having trouble getting it cleaned up because of John's mom's death. Robert Scoble ### From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lan Bui Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:51 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image? Robert, thank you for finally coming out and saying something for PodTech to the community. First, I must say that your statement: He believes his work is worth that and believes that there isn't room for negotiation on this issue. Is a lie. One of the points in my blog post was that I wanted, at minimum, to be contacted to negotiate. In the last couple days I did negotiate down a lot less than $3000 and even sent an updated invoice for it. So how is this not negotiating on the issue? Remember we talked about this on the phone, so I'm not sure why you left that out. PodTech had the chance to ask to purchase a license to use the photograph before it was used, at which time they would be able to set the terms. That didn't happen. Now that they have used the photograph already, who should set the terms? I gave PodTech over a month to respond to my terms and they didn't. When it was just me that was involved PodTech didn't care. When others started to blog about it and it was giving them a bad name, then PodTech started to care. Remember, that blog post was up for about a month before others started take notice to it. So PodTech showed to me they don't care about me, they only care about their image in the public eye. Next, I am not Thomas Hawk. Wait... Thomas Hawk? I will be the professional and not discuss the prices that PodTech pays him. Remember Robert, you told me how much PodTech pays him and that reinforced my price even more! You also said: It was easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the community who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos that were snapped at our events for free I was not contacted... so how could there be a mistake regarding permission? I also never gave (if you meant sent in to PodTech) any photographs that this one could be mistaken for. You also said: it's easy to miss the copyright on Flickr Come on, that argument is weak. Putting something in the same place on every page on flickr makes it very easy to not miss. You said: I asked several professional photographers, the average fee was $300. and 3x what most professionals in the marketplace charge for this kind of work Please don't lie again. The $300 price point is for stock photography. I even asked John where you guys got $300 from and he said that is standard for a stock photograph. If there is a photograph with Casey McKinnon holding Vloggies in a stock photography book somewhere I would love to see it. The photograph that was chosen was chosen because it had great value. It is not stock photography and I am not a stock photographer. Ok, lastly. Lets say I accepted $1000. Wow that sounds like a lot of money to many people that aren't making money from their creative work. Well this issue is not about me making money. It is about setting a precedent. If we allow companies to steal work and only pay a standard small fee when they are discovered, what is the incentive for them not steal again? Is that what other companies should learn from this? Just take now and deal with it later if it ever comes up. And don't worry, it still won't cost more than if we paid up front. To anyone else reading this: I hope this clarifies and corrects Roberts post. -Lan www.LanBui.com ---
[videoblogging] problems submitting Feedburner feed to iTunes, for String Theory video-podcast (Blip.tv = video host)
I'm doing some video-blogging tests for the Strings '07 conference (annual String Theory conference @Madrid, Spain): http://strings07.blogspot.com I've been in touch with the organizers, they are excited about increased exposure over video-blogs, iPod/iTunes/AppleTV/iPhone. String Theory has been getting a lot of press (mostly critical), so they could use a publicity boost. Information videos over iPod/ AppleTViPhone (Science public outreach) could be a solution. It's also great exposure for Blip.tv Problem is, my submission to iTunes Store of the Feedburner feed is not going thru: 1) submssion on Wed afternoon went OK (your podcast has been submitted, we will contact you at [EMAIL PROTECTED]) however, didn't get an acknowledgement email from Apple iTunes like I usually do. I didn't get an approval within 24 hrs (typical turnaround for me, never had an issue until now) 2) re-submission on Thu afternoon ( Fri) gave errors iTunes Store 5002 error. Now, it's An error occurred. The iTunes Store could not process your request, please try again later I used Feeburner's Troubleshootize (Podmedic Feedmedic), everything looks OK I even tried creating another Blogger blog http://strings2007.blogspot.com ..same thing. When I submit a Feedburner feed for one of my existing iTunes video-podcast, i get Feed already submitted. Someone else is having the same problem as me: http://forums.feedburner.com/viewtopic.php?t=14659 I'm frustrated like him, I've had to hold off any further video- posts. The Blip.tv TV show player is holding me thru, in the meantime. Is this an iTunes Store issue? Possibly due to the heightened activity for the June 29 iPhone release? I remember there was an iTunes Store snafu, due to heavy traffic after a recent Apple iPod release. TIA, for any help/suggestions. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image?
Quirk, you an iconoclastic shitstirrer :) I haven't seen much vitriol. Given the occasional time this group's really lynched people (particularly corporations), I think everybody's been quite nice. Apart from one silly link to some shitty blog, everyone else has just been saying, 'Yo, What's going on? Why aren't you paying up? Why aren't you talking?'. And I think Lan's handled it really calmly, especially given that Podtech have appeared to imply that he's being dishonest with us somehow. Copyright is silly, yeah - IP is pretty silly, but at least it allows individuals to be paid for stuff they make. Since that's the way it has to be to avoid people being exploited (like having a Union for creativity), Creative Commons is just an attempt to do it all a bit more intelligently. And in my mind, your song being recorded and played by someone else is as different from someone composing and recording your face as a single image as it is from you being an actor in or director of a film or an author of text. Each have different authorship rights. Casey wasn't performing a creative work, and i assume she signed a release for Lan allowing him to use the image he took of her? Whether Podtech needed to contact or reward her somehow for being the face of their competition campaign is another matter. You wouldn't just be able to use, say, Kate Moss's face on an ad for a cosmetics product competition without her permission. But if you did, the photographer would also get paid. You said that if you put stuff online, you don't own it any more than you own the rainbow over your house... But this isn't really about ownership, is it? It's about someone getting someone else to do their work for them for free. Yeah, I don't particularly care about the copyright of my Twittervlog films, and I'm not using them to make a living - I'm happy for people to use them however - but if, say, Nokia used one of my films as a background for an N93 competition without asking, and i found out long after it was over, and i'd received no benefit from it in terms of links, attribution, new viewers and connecting with new people, i probably would not be totally cool with that. I'd say that they were cheeky c***s. (I hate starring out words, but I suppose I have to star out this one). If they'd used a *commercial* film of mine - something i'd created in order to be able to buy myself food, and not paid me for it, I'd feel even more strongly. I'd effectively be working for them for free, and even a small amount of money makes a much bigger difference to an individual than it does to a corporation. Anyway, that's what I think. Not that you'll ever read it, probably. Have a nice trip. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 29 Jun 2007, at 19:45, Adam Quirk, Wreck Salvage wrote: I've been surprised by all the vitriol. I'd have thought that Podtech would have built up a couple brownie points with y'all by now, what with their paying you real money, and hosting awards shows for us all to circle- jerk at. Maybe the lesson here is to get paid First? Once you put something online, you don't own it anymore than you can claim to own a rainbow hovering above your house. It's in the public consciousness, part of the firehose of experiences that we all consume, transitory experiences. I think especially in this case since it's a digital photo of Casey McKinnon, if anyone has a claim to some money it would be her. If someone else made a recording of a song I was playing, and royalties were to be paid for that recording, I'd likely be the one to receive them. But I wouldn't demand them. Something just sits wrong with me when I hear about people billing other people for services that they weren't hired to provide. Creative Commons is pretty silly, not as silly as traditional copyright, but pretty silly. I'm heading out of town now so I won't be able to respond to any shit slung my way for a while :) P.S. Lan, you're a badass photog, I'm glad I found your work via this mess. -Adam [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] TRUFFA A DANNO DEI MALTI PSICHIATRICI A PARMA PER 100000 EURO
oh so should he be re-instated? On 6/29/07, Patrick Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone: On 6/29/07, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] jay.dedman%40gmail.com wrote: On 6/29/07, talento sprecato [EMAIL PROTECTED]talento_sprecato%40yahoo.it wrote: Salve ragazzi a Parma è successa una cosa gravissima 100.000 EURO SOTTRATTI AI MALATI PSICHICI DA APRTE DELL' AUSL ecco il video ( un pò montato male ed in bassisisma qualità ma se andate oltre i primi secondi ed ascoltate la signora magari vi resta qualcosa ..) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTRDhc1D4AU im assuming this is spam. member gone. Actually Jay I just went to the page he posted just for grins. Turns out he just does on YouTube what most of us do via other means - VLOG. JFYI Cheers :D -- Pat Cook Denver, Colorado BLOGS PODCASTS - AS MY WACKED OUT WORLD TURNS - http://pchamster.livejournal.com/ PAT'S REAL DEAL VIDEO BLOG - http://patsrealdeal.livejournal.com/ PAT'S HEALTH MEDICAL WONDERS VIDEOCAST - http://patshealthmedicalwondersvideocast.blogspot.com/ YOUTUBE CHANNEL - http://www.youtube.com/amwowttv/ THE PAT COOK SHOW - http://www.livevideo.com/thepcshow THE PAT COOK SHOW (Blogger Page) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/ THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/ -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] TRUFFA A DANNO DEI MALTI PSICHIATRICI A PARMA PER 100000 EURO
Just for a gas, I put it through Babel Fish. You may be surprised to learn that it translates as: SWINDLE TO DAMAGE OF THE PSYCHIATRIC MALTI TO PARMA FOR 10 EURO Blank boys to Parma the most serious what has succeeded one 100,000 SICK EURO EMBEZZLED TO PSYCHICAL FROM APRTE OF THE AUSL here the video (a Pò mounted badly and in bassisisma quality but if gone beyond the first second ones and listened to the mrs. you even remains something.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTRDhc1D4AU I want that they see all to it, that all understand with which lightness to the paini high game of who is taken to us cannot be defended... Thanks ah... you warning that not control never this account you contact to me to [EMAIL PROTECTED] cocci On 29 Jun 2007, at 15:23, Jay dedman wrote: On 6/29/07, talento sprecato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Salve ragazzi a Parma è successa una cosa gravissima 100.000 EURO SOTTRATTI AI MALATI PSICHICI DA APRTE DELL' AUSL ecco il video ( un pò montato male ed in bassisisma qualità ma se andate oltre i primi secondi ed ascoltate la signora magari vi resta qualcosa ..) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTRDhc1D4AU im assuming this is spam. member gone. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com Come out this Saturday: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/205532/ Check out the latest project: http://politicalvideo.org 500 hours of George Bush speeches!! Search, download, remix!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Fee, Fined, Foe, Friend, I sense the end of free-e-dom (or dumb)
Okay bad attempt at humor. Permits and insurance came up in this or another group. Catch 22 or intentional ambiguity? Protectionist fears? Good read here http://www.thepomoblog.com/papers/pomo3.htm This makes the grey area a lot grayer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_spelling_diff\ erences#Miscellaneous_spelling_differences . You want to vlog and have similar protections afforded a journalist? Better register as a Company (business license), get production insurance, be recognized by MSM and/or peers as a video blog journalist (vloggournalist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_journalism ? Have I coined yet another term? I claim all rights, here and now to vloggournalist (TM) and vlogournalist(TM), I am rich biatch!) Avoid the hassles and go at it like a individual could mean forfeiting protections. Another cog or piece in the puzzle of what constitutes first amendment rights. What say you my fellow Bill O'Rightsies http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/funddocs/billeng.htm http://www.nytimes.com/ http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/nyregion/29camera.html?ei=5090en=711\ 35caff6fefe6aex=1340769600partner=rssuserlandemc=rsspagewanted=print\ June 29, 2007 City May Seek Permit and Insurance for Many Kinds of Public Photography By RAY RIVERA Some tourists, amateur photographers, even would-be filmmakers hoping to make it big on YouTube could soon be forced to obtain a city permit and $1 million in liability insurance before taking pictures or filming on city property, including sidewalks. ... would require any group of two or more people who want to use a camera in a single public location for more than a half hour to get a city permit and insurance. ... requirements would apply to any group of five or more people who plan to use a tripod in a public location for more than 10 minutes... the rules were not intended to apply to families on vacation or amateur filmmakers or photographers. ... Under the rules, the two or more people would not actually have to be filming, but could simply be holding an ordinary camera and talking to each other. The rules are intended to set standards for professional filmmakers and photographers While the permitting scheme does not distinguish between commercial and other types of filming, we anticipate that these rules will have minimal, if any, impact on tourists and recreational photographers, including those that use tripods, ... The permits would be free and applications could be obtained online, Ms. Cho said. The draft rules say the office could take up to 30 days to issue a permit, but Ms. Cho said she expected that most would be issued within 24 hours In May 2005, Rakesh Sharma, an Indian documentary filmmaker, was using a hand-held video camera in Midtown Manhattan when he was detained for several hours and questioned by police. According to a lawsuit, Mr. Sharma sought information about how permits were granted and who was required to have one but found there were no written guidelines. Nonetheless, the film office told him he was required to have a permit, but when he applied, the office refused to grant him one and would not give him a written explanation of its refusal. As part of a settlement reached in April, the film office agreed to establish written rules for issuing permits. Mr. Sharma could not be reached for comment yesterday. Mr. Dunn said most of the new rules were reasonable. Notably, someone using a hand-held video camera, as Mr. Sharma was doing, would no longer have to get a permit. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image?
hi everybody, I've been lurking on this thread and watching this whole thing develop. I thought I might add my 2¢... Is US$3k unreasonable for this photo? We on this list don't know. I'm not in the field, but my wife is a commercial illustrator and I assume the markets work similarly. The price for usage is based on many factors that we don't have the specifics for. Mr. Bui isn't selling the photo, he's selling usage rights. Generally prices are negotiated around size of reproduction, exclusivity, distribution (how many eyeballs will see it), how many times it can be used, it what regions it can be used, etc, etc. We don't have any of these specifics so it's very hard to make a judgment on whether or not the price is reasonable. IMHO if what Mr. Bui is selling is the right to use this photo 1 time non-exclusively on this printed banner at the conference then 3k seems high to me. But, as he said, it's been used so he is now in the more powerful negotiating position. Having said that it would probably be best for everyone to resolve it using a mediator that knows the market and have both parties agree to abide by whatever price this mediator comes up with. Good luck to everyone involved :) On 6/30/07, Lan Bui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Robert, I'm sorry about the miscommunication on negotiation. I only come to you now because you offered yourself, I never thought you were one to make executive decisions at PodTech (correct me if I'm wrong). I know John is someone that can make executive decisions. I know how hard it must be for him to deal with his mother death. It is a horrible time for me to be asking anything of him. I keep posting to the group in reply to posts, but I want to talk to John when he is ready; or talk to someone else that can make decisions for PodTech. -Lan www.LanBui.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robert Scoble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You told me on the phone that you did not want to negotiate. At least that's how I remember hearing it. Sorry if I heard wrong. You told me specifically that PodTech was not in position to negotiate. The problem is I'm getting in between you and John Furrier. John's mom died this week which is causing problems figuring out where things are. I'll get him to answer you. Regarding photo prices, I talked with photographers who work for Associated Press, Business Week and other magazines. I agree that we dropped the ball. No excuses there, but I wasn't involved back then and am trying to clean up a mess and having trouble getting it cleaned up because of John's mom's death. Robert Scoble ### From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lan Bui Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:51 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image? Robert, thank you for finally coming out and saying something for PodTech to the community. First, I must say that your statement: He believes his work is worth that and believes that there isn't room for negotiation on this issue. Is a lie. One of the points in my blog post was that I wanted, at minimum, to be contacted to negotiate. In the last couple days I did negotiate down a lot less than $3000 and even sent an updated invoice for it. So how is this not negotiating on the issue? Remember we talked about this on the phone, so I'm not sure why you left that out. PodTech had the chance to ask to purchase a license to use the photograph before it was used, at which time they would be able to set the terms. That didn't happen. Now that they have used the photograph already, who should set the terms? I gave PodTech over a month to respond to my terms and they didn't. When it was just me that was involved PodTech didn't care. When others started to blog about it and it was giving them a bad name, then PodTech started to care. Remember, that blog post was up for about a month before others started take notice to it. So PodTech showed to me they don't care about me, they only care about their image in the public eye. Next, I am not Thomas Hawk. Wait... Thomas Hawk? I will be the professional and not discuss the prices that PodTech pays him. Remember Robert, you told me how much PodTech pays him and that reinforced my price even more! You also said: It was easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the community who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos that were snapped at our events for free I was not contacted... so how could there be a mistake regarding permission? I also never gave (if you meant sent in to PodTech) any photographs that this one could be mistaken for. You also said: it's easy to miss the copyright on Flickr Come on, that argument is weak. Putting something in the same place on
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image?
Howdy T. Whild, $3k isn't absurd, especially not for a professional photographer. Mostly it depends on what the photo is being licensced for, and what the photog has historically charged. In this case it looks like it was for a one-off or atleast very limited run banner... and I personally agree with you that it seems a little high. Unforetuneatly when the photo is used without permission then I think it's the photog's call. There fundamentally can't be negotiation after the fact. This is why maybe if Podtech and Lan can't agree what I would suggest is they both agree to have some party they both trust be the arbitrater. There's plenty of great people in this space they both know and can trust. -Mike On 6/30/07, T. Whid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi everybody, I've been lurking on this thread and watching this whole thing develop. I thought I might add my 2¢... Is US$3k unreasonable for this photo? We on this list don't know. I'm not in the field, but my wife is a commercial illustrator and I assume the markets work similarly. The price for usage is based on many factors that we don't have the specifics for. Mr. Bui isn't selling the photo, he's selling usage rights. Generally prices are negotiated around size of reproduction, exclusivity, distribution (how many eyeballs will see it), how many times it can be used, it what regions it can be used, etc, etc. We don't have any of these specifics so it's very hard to make a judgment on whether or not the price is reasonable. IMHO if what Mr. Bui is selling is the right to use this photo 1 time non-exclusively on this printed banner at the conference then 3k seems high to me. But, as he said, it's been used so he is now in the more powerful negotiating position. Having said that it would probably be best for everyone to resolve it using a mediator that knows the market and have both parties agree to abide by whatever price this mediator comes up with. Good luck to everyone involved :) On 6/30/07, Lan Bui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Robert, I'm sorry about the miscommunication on negotiation. I only come to you now because you offered yourself, I never thought you were one to make executive decisions at PodTech (correct me if I'm wrong). I know John is someone that can make executive decisions. I know how hard it must be for him to deal with his mother death. It is a horrible time for me to be asking anything of him. I keep posting to the group in reply to posts, but I want to talk to John when he is ready; or talk to someone else that can make decisions for PodTech. -Lan www.LanBui.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robert Scoble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You told me on the phone that you did not want to negotiate. At least that's how I remember hearing it. Sorry if I heard wrong. You told me specifically that PodTech was not in position to negotiate. The problem is I'm getting in between you and John Furrier. John's mom died this week which is causing problems figuring out where things are. I'll get him to answer you. Regarding photo prices, I talked with photographers who work for Associated Press, Business Week and other magazines. I agree that we dropped the ball. No excuses there, but I wasn't involved back then and am trying to clean up a mess and having trouble getting it cleaned up because of John's mom's death. Robert Scoble ### From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lan Bui Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:51 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image? Robert, thank you for finally coming out and saying something for PodTech to the community. First, I must say that your statement: He believes his work is worth that and believes that there isn't room for negotiation on this issue. Is a lie. One of the points in my blog post was that I wanted, at minimum, to be contacted to negotiate. In the last couple days I did negotiate down a lot less than $3000 and even sent an updated invoice for it. So how is this not negotiating on the issue? Remember we talked about this on the phone, so I'm not sure why you left that out. PodTech had the chance to ask to purchase a license to use the photograph before it was used, at which time they would be able to set the terms. That didn't happen. Now that they have used the photograph already, who should set the terms? I gave PodTech over a month to respond to my terms and they didn't. When it was just me that was involved PodTech didn't care. When others started to blog about it and it was giving them a bad name, then PodTech started to care. Remember, that blog post was up for about a month before others started take notice to it. So
[videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image?
Make a mistake and own it? Priceless! My opinion and thoughts (for what that's worth) I missed a lot in this thread. Not likely I will be able to catch up either. So if I am repeating someone else's input it is truly a case of like minds thinking. Robert, you are a stand up guy. No doubt and big props to you. Lan, understand how you feel and do not find fault with your position. To quote Rodney King ... oh never mind. $300 is too low (considering this is after the fact) and $3000 is too high considering the limited use of the image and it's purpose. (Podtech may be a business, but we should lead by example too, we are suppose to be in this boat together). Solution (and certainly not the only): vlogger legal defense fund! How to do this? Podtech ponies up $1000.00 total which pays Lan $600.00 (double the lowest possible PRE use negotiated license fee) and opens a legal defense fund for video bloggers using the remaining $400 for the creation of this funds cost and a initial deposit. Lan can (if he chooses) donate any amount he sees fit to this fund. Seems like a nice way to make nice. I know that this means that guidelines, rules and a bunch of other stuff might need to be put into effect. Then again, this group seems to me at least, to be capable of expressing opinion that can be used to gauge under what circumstances funds would be disbursed. If a fund is set up, I would like to be the third person to contribute. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robert Scoble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You told me on the phone that you did not want to negotiate. At least that's how I remember hearing it. Sorry if I heard wrong. You told me specifically that PodTech was not in position to negotiate. The problem is I'm getting in between you and John Furrier. John's mom died this week which is causing problems figuring out where things are. I'll get him to answer you. Regarding photo prices, I talked with photographers who work for Associated Press, Business Week and other magazines. I agree that we dropped the ball. No excuses there, but I wasn't involved back then and am trying to clean up a mess and having trouble getting it cleaned up because of John's mom's death. Robert Scoble ### From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lan Bui Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:51 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image? Robert, thank you for finally coming out and saying something for PodTech to the community. First, I must say that your statement: He believes his work is worth that and believes that there isn't room for negotiation on this issue. Is a lie. One of the points in my blog post was that I wanted, at minimum, to be contacted to negotiate. In the last couple days I did negotiate down a lot less than $3000 and even sent an updated invoice for it. So how is this not negotiating on the issue? Remember we talked about this on the phone, so I'm not sure why you left that out. PodTech had the chance to ask to purchase a license to use the photograph before it was used, at which time they would be able to set the terms. That didn't happen. Now that they have used the photograph already, who should set the terms? I gave PodTech over a month to respond to my terms and they didn't. When it was just me that was involved PodTech didn't care. When others started to blog about it and it was giving them a bad name, then PodTech started to care. Remember, that blog post was up for about a month before others started take notice to it. So PodTech showed to me they don't care about me, they only care about their image in the public eye. Next, I am not Thomas Hawk. Wait... Thomas Hawk? I will be the professional and not discuss the prices that PodTech pays him. Remember Robert, you told me how much PodTech pays him and that reinforced my price even more! You also said: It was easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the community who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos that were snapped at our events for free I was not contacted... so how could there be a mistake regarding permission? I also never gave (if you meant sent in to PodTech) any photographs that this one could be mistaken for. You also said: it's easy to miss the copyright on Flickr Come on, that argument is weak. Putting something in the same place on every page on flickr makes it very easy to not miss. You said: I asked several professional photographers, the average fee was $300. and 3x what most professionals in the marketplace charge for this kind of work Please don't lie again. The $300 price point is for stock photography. I even asked John where you guys got $300 from and he said that is standard for a stock photograph. If there is a photograph with Casey McKinnon
Re: [videoblogging] First in the Apple Store for an iPhone
What a riot. Jan On 6/30/07, randulo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone did a live video stream via mogulus in Soho, NYC: http://iphonelaunch.tv/ On 6/30/07, Len Edgerly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Man oh man this was fun. I ended up being first in line when I showed up at the Cambridge, Mass., Apple store at 3 a.m. today. Here's the video I shot when the grate went up and the police waved us in at 6 pm: http://lenchronicles.blogspot.com/2007/06/entering-iphone-gates-of-paradise.html --Len Edgerly http://LenEdgerly.com Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links -- The Faux Press - better than real http://fauxpress.blogspot.com http://wburg.tv http://twitter.com/fauxpress aim=janofsound air=862.221.5280 skype=janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Blogger now has RSS 2.0 with enclosures
So the Blogger guys are working on letting you upload video from your blogger post to Google video. They have also just added RSS feeds with enclosures. Read here: http://bloggerindraft.blogspot.com/2007/06/enclosures-and-video-podcasting.html All this is in testing mode, so access it all here: https://draft.blogger.com/draft leave comments where things seems screwy. Jay -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com Come out this Saturday: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/205532/ Check out the latest project: http://politicalvideo.org 500 hours of George Bush speeches!! Search, download, remix!!
Re: [videoblogging]Live video of Dog Adoption
Hey all, I've been messing around with Mogulus and we are going to be attempting to broadcast an adoption of a dog that we will be then taking into our Performance Dog Rescue ( http:// performancerescues.blogspot.com ). If you'd care to tune in: http://mogulus.com/channels/watch/1245 Warning: Crashing FF happens... Our connection is very slow, 2 bars on a cel, so the vidoe will be bad... how bad? That'd be nice to know. Would appreciate any feedback. Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http://pawsitivevybe.com On Jun 30, 2007, at 11:30 AM, bordercollieaustralianshepherd wrote: Make a mistake and own it? Priceless! My opinion and thoughts (for what that's worth) I missed a lot in this thread. Not likely I will be able to catch up either. So if I am repeating someone else's input it is truly a case of like minds thinking. Robert, you are a stand up guy. No doubt and big props to you. Lan, understand how you feel and do not find fault with your position. To quote Rodney King ... oh never mind. $300 is too low (considering this is after the fact) and $3000 is too high considering the limited use of the image and it's purpose. (Podtech may be a business, but we should lead by example too, we are suppose to be in this boat together). Solution (and certainly not the only): vlogger legal defense fund! How to do this? Podtech ponies up $1000.00 total which pays Lan $600.00 (double the lowest possible PRE use negotiated license fee) and opens a legal defense fund for video bloggers using the remaining $400 for the creation of this funds cost and a initial deposit. Lan can (if he chooses) donate any amount he sees fit to this fund. Seems like a nice way to make nice. I know that this means that guidelines, rules and a bunch of other stuff might need to be put into effect. Then again, this group seems to me at least, to be capable of expressing opinion that can be used to gauge under what circumstances funds would be disbursed. If a fund is set up, I would like to be the third person to contribute. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robert Scoble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You told me on the phone that you did not want to negotiate. At least that's how I remember hearing it. Sorry if I heard wrong. You told me specifically that PodTech was not in position to negotiate. The problem is I'm getting in between you and John Furrier. John's mom died this week which is causing problems figuring out where things are. I'll get him to answer you. Regarding photo prices, I talked with photographers who work for Associated Press, Business Week and other magazines. I agree that we dropped the ball. No excuses there, but I wasn't involved back then and am trying to clean up a mess and having trouble getting it cleaned up because of John's mom's death. Robert Scoble ### From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lan Bui Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:51 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Hey PodTech - What's up with Lan's image? Robert, thank you for finally coming out and saying something for PodTech to the community. First, I must say that your statement: He believes his work is worth that and believes that there isn't room for negotiation on this issue. Is a lie. One of the points in my blog post was that I wanted, at minimum, to be contacted to negotiate. In the last couple days I did negotiate down a lot less than $3000 and even sent an updated invoice for it. So how is this not negotiating on the issue? Remember we talked about this on the phone, so I'm not sure why you left that out. PodTech had the chance to ask to purchase a license to use the photograph before it was used, at which time they would be able to set the terms. That didn't happen. Now that they have used the photograph already, who should set the terms? I gave PodTech over a month to respond to my terms and they didn't. When it was just me that was involved PodTech didn't care. When others started to blog about it and it was giving them a bad name, then PodTech started to care. Remember, that blog post was up for about a month before others started take notice to it. So PodTech showed to me they don't care about me, they only care about their image in the public eye. Next, I am not Thomas Hawk. Wait... Thomas Hawk? I will be the professional and not discuss the prices that PodTech pays him. Remember Robert, you told me how much PodTech pays him and that reinforced my price even more! You also said: It was easy to see how a mistake was made since usually people in the community who, when invited to an event we held usually give us photos that were snapped at our events for free I
[videoblogging] An open source package of plugins for Quicktime
Just saw this, wonder if anyone has played with it or looked at it. http://www.perian.org/index.html#detail Perian is a free, open source QuickTime component that adds native support for many popular video formats. It occurs to me that with one simple install could provide support in iTunes for DIVX and just about every other video format... making itunes and frontrow much more useful for media management and playback. Hmmm... A quick search reveals that this Democracy uses this package. Cool. -Mike mmeiser.com/blog mefeedia.com
[videoblogging] Pownce
If anybody has any Pownce invites, I'd love to have one :) Or, if you've given invites away, I'd like to hear about it. Interested to see how it'd fit with my consumption and sharing of vlogs. Twitter has totally changed how I consume media - it has taken over from RSS because I love the immediacy of it. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] TRUFFA A DANNO DEI MALTI PSICHIATRICI A PARMA PER 100000 EURO
Judging by the video, it's not spam, and it's a topic that would probably interest many in this group... if it was in English. -- best regards, Deirdré Straughan living travelling in Italy (and other Countries Beginning with I) www.beginningwithi.com Check out my latest blog post: Difficult Breastshttp://www.beginningwithi.com/aboutme/difficultbreasts.html Blogsigs.com http://www.blogsigs.com, Link your own blog posts. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] TRUFFA A DANNO DEI MALTI PSICHIATRICI A PARMA PER 100000 EURO
Judging by the video, it's not spam, and it's a topic that would probably interest many in this group... if it was in English. hey deirdre-- why dont you reach out to him. it was the first time he posted in a year...title had money in it...and he could see we speak english here so it would have been nice to have at least a little idea what he wanted. but if you can see what he wants or how we can help, this would not make his post seem like a big spam announcement. Jay On 6/29/07, talento sprecato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Salve ragazzi a Parma è successa una cosa gravissima 100.000 EURO SOTTRATTI AI MALATI PSICHICI DA APRTE DELL' AUSL ecco il video ( un pò montato male ed in bassisisma qualità ma se andate oltre i primi secondi ed ascoltate la signora magari vi resta qualcosa ..) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTRDhc1D4AU -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com Come out this Saturday: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/205532/ Check out the latest project: http://politicalvideo.org 500 hours of George Bush speeches!! Search, download, remix!!
Re: [videoblogging] TRUFFA A DANNO DEI MALTI PSICHIATRICI A PARMA PER 100000 EURO
Hey Jay, It's foreign so it must be spam right? That just soo American. Paul Knight On 30 Jun 2007, at 21:06, Jay dedman wrote: Judging by the video, it's not spam, and it's a topic that would probably interest many in this group... if it was in English. hey deirdre-- why dont you reach out to him. it was the first time he posted in a year...title had money in it...and he could see we speak english here so it would have been nice to have at least a little idea what he wanted. but if you can see what he wants or how we can help, this would not make his post seem like a big spam announcement. Jay On 6/29/07, talento sprecato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Salve ragazzi a Parma è successa una cosa gravissima 100.000 EURO SOTTRATTI AI MALATI PSICHICI DA APRTE DELL' AUSL ecco il video ( un pò montato male ed in bassisisma qualità ma se andate oltre i primi secondi ed ascoltate la signora magari vi resta qualcosa ..) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTRDhc1D4AU -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com Come out this Saturday: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/205532/ Check out the latest project: http://politicalvideo.org 500 hours of George Bush speeches!! Search, download, remix!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] TRUFFA A DANNO DEI MALTI PSICHIATRICI A PARMA PER 100000 EURO
paul, ouch! :( On 6/30/07, Paul Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Jay, It's foreign so it must be spam right? That just soo American. Paul Knight On 30 Jun 2007, at 21:06, Jay dedman wrote: Judging by the video, it's not spam, and it's a topic that would probably interest many in this group... if it was in English. hey deirdre-- why dont you reach out to him. it was the first time he posted in a year...title had money in it...and he could see we speak english here so it would have been nice to have at least a little idea what he wanted. but if you can see what he wants or how we can help, this would not make his post seem like a big spam announcement. Jay On 6/29/07, talento sprecato [EMAIL PROTECTED]talento_sprecato%40yahoo.it wrote: Salve ragazzi a Parma è successa una cosa gravissima 100.000 EURO SOTTRATTI AI MALATI PSICHICI DA APRTE DELL' AUSL ecco il video ( un pò montato male ed in bassisisma qualità ma se andate oltre i primi secondi ed ascoltate la signora magari vi resta qualcosa ..) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTRDhc1D4AU -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com Come out this Saturday: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/205532/ Check out the latest project: http://politicalvideo.org 500 hours of George Bush speeches!! Search, download, remix!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: TRUFFA A DANNO DEI MALTI PSICHIATRICI A PARMA PER 100000 EURO
I have no clue why you are on this whole anti-American kick but give it a rest Paul. It's becoming old and lame real fast. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Paul Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Jay, It's foreign so it must be spam right? That just soo American. Paul Knight On 30 Jun 2007, at 21:06, Jay dedman wrote: Judging by the video, it's not spam, and it's a topic that would probably interest many in this group... if it was in English. hey deirdre-- why dont you reach out to him. it was the first time he posted in a year...title had money in it...and he could see we speak english here so it would have been nice to have at least a little idea what he wanted. but if you can see what he wants or how we can help, this would not make his post seem like a big spam announcement. Jay On 6/29/07, talento sprecato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Salve ragazzi a Parma � successa una cosa gravissima 100.000 EURO SOTTRATTI AI MALATI PSICHICI DA APRTE DELL' AUSL ecco il video ( un p� montato male ed in bassisisma qualit� ma se andate oltre i primi secondi ed ascoltate la signora magari vi resta qualcosa ..) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTRDhc1D4AU -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com Come out this Saturday: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/205532/ Check out the latest project: http://politicalvideo.org 500 hours of George Bush speeches!! Search, download, remix!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: TRUFFA A DANNO DEI MALTI PSICHIATRICI A PARMA PER 100000 EURO
I like that the Brits are jealous. Come on guys can't anyone take a joke from Paul? (oh and I am joking above too) -Lan www.LanBui.com On Jun 30, 2007, at 2:29 PM, David Howell wrote: I have no clue why you are on this whole anti-American kick but give it a rest Paul. It's becoming old and lame real fast. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Paul Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Jay, It's foreign so it must be spam right? That just soo American. Paul Knight On 30 Jun 2007, at 21:06, Jay dedman wrote: Judging by the video, it's not spam, and it's a topic that would probably interest many in this group... if it was in English. hey deirdre-- why dont you reach out to him. it was the first time he posted in a year...title had money in it...and he could see we speak english here so it would have been nice to have at least a little idea what he wanted. but if you can see what he wants or how we can help, this would not make his post seem like a big spam announcement. Jay On 6/29/07, talento sprecato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Salve ragazzi a Parma � successa una cosa gravissima 100.000 EURO SOTTRATTI AI MALATI PSICHICI DA APRTE DELL' AUSL ecco il video ( un p� montato male ed in bassisisma qualit� ma se andate oltre i primi secondi ed ascoltate la signora magari vi resta qualcosa ..) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTRDhc1D4AU -- Here I am http://jaydedman.com Come out this Saturday: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/205532/ Check out the latest project: http://politicalvideo.org 500 hours of George Bush speeches!! Search, download, remix!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: First in the Apple Store for an iPhone
and a mention in the MSM. If news story paragraphs were movie credits, Len got top billing, Wozniak was a club bouncer. I just love getting new stuff, said retiree Len Edgerly, who arrived at 3 a.m. Friday to be first in line outside an Apple store in Cambridge, Mass. It's the best new thing that's come along in a long time. It's beautiful. Even Steve Wozniak, the ex-partner of Jobs, showed up at a Silicon Valley mall at 4 a.m. aboard his Segway scooter. He helped keep order in the line outside the Apple store. okay next paragraph, does on The other customers awarded the honorary first spot in line to Wozniak, who planned to buy two iPhones on Friday even though he remains an Apple employee and will get a free one from the company next month. He said the device would redefine cell phone design and use. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8Q2UGS80show_article=1 --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Len Edgerly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Man oh man this was fun. I ended up being first in line when I showed up at the Cambridge, Mass., Apple store at 3 a.m. today. Here's the video I shot when the grate went up and the police waved us in at 6 pm: http://lenchronicles.blogspot.com/2007/06/entering-iphone-gates-of-paradise.html --Len Edgerly http://LenEdgerly.com
[videoblogging] I feel like a thread crusher.
Hello...anybody home? http://www.designverb.com/2007/06/11/tunnel-house John, Mr Historic House repair guy?
[videoblogging] Do you have the power to motivate?
We are currently seeking a dynamic, upbeat person to do some ongoing video blogging in a paid, part time role. We are looking for someone who is personable, outgoing and can motivate people into taking an interest in our articles and make comments upon them. Here's things you need to know... - We will need a 1-2 minute sample of your work to help us decide if you're the right fit for us and visa versa - The setting can be any location of your choosing - It is important that you can be clearly seen and understood so be enthusiastic (but don't go overboard)! So here's what we want from you... - Go to this article http://connections.afroromance.com/Articles/149/view/why-the-race-card-is-still-being-played/ - Read the article and the comments made so far by our members - Record your sample - email it to video at chellaul dot com Your video should include a teaser introduction to the article and perhaps quote some of the more controversial comments. The object is not to read the article to our members...but to get them interested enough to want to read it for themselves on our site and make a comment on it. This will be an ongoing project with a similar theme throughout several articles. The main things you need to be are interesting, informative and challenging enough make people want to read more. The more natural and down to earth you appear the better. The style should be a relaxed commentary rather than a news report. If you have an opinion on the article that's fine too but please remember we are trying to obtain a response from our members by getting them to read and comment on the article. Samples need to be completed and returned via email to me at video at chellaul dot com by Friday 6th July (either as a link, or as an attachment no larger than 5MB). Good luck! Regards, HR Manager Chellaul Corporation
