[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Yes. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adam Quirk, Wreck Salvage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Awards don't mean a goddamn thing. They're stupid. They're all stupid. It's beyond me that we feel the need to set aside a night to give out these jagoff bowling trophies so all these people can pat each other on the back about how much money they're making boring the piss out of half the world. Jerry Seinfeld http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_OqvUbBNA4 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Ah. Sorry, I didn't realize simple statements like that in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary was sufficient. My bad. I am the King of England. - Dave On 7/24/07, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Meade Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 1:05 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone On 7/24/07, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:john%40podtech.net wrote: Not true Kent. I responded immediately to Lan and what was said shall remain private. It is over and we fully respect CC and producers work. I think what you keep failing to understand, John, is that your issue WITH LAN is over your issue WITH THE COMMUNITY as to how it ended is NOT. You can't wash away one with the other, and you cant pretend they are the same and expect the community to buy it. Saying the reason we didn't have to pay Lan what he asked after we stole his stuff is private isn't going to relieve concerns by content producers as to if PodTech respects the true ownership of the content. Why would we as content producers ever choose to trust such a company with our work ever again? Your issue with Lan may be over, but your issue with the community is not ... and your constant refusal to understand the difference between the two is not painting PodTech in the best of lights. If you want the issue with the community to be over, you're going to have to a) stop confusing the two and b) talk to the community about the issue that remains. Moving discussions off list and outside the view of the community isn't going to help you do that. trust me, you don't know the whole story sounds like a load of crap to me ... either Lan owned the image or he didn't. You've acknowledged that he did. And happily for you Lan has let you off the hook but PodTech has yet to address THE COMMUNITY as to why it felt it didn't have to pay Lan what he asked even after he negotiated down from his first invoice. - Dave -- http://www.DavidMeade.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links -- http://www.DavidMeade.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kent, We are not shitting on the creative commons. We are proponents of it. A mistake was made plain and simple. Sorry about misspelling your name I know it's Kent not Ken. http://podtech.wordpress.com/2007/07/24/vloggies-event-making-it-open-are-videobloggers-better-off-one-year-later/ Seems like you don't know my name is Kent. Should I refer to you as Joh? :) -Kent
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Well, drat, and here I was all proud to learn (way after the fact) to learn that I got a Vloggie (which goes to show how much importance I attached to this - I didn't even know anything of mine was in the running). I guess we can do The People's Vlog Awards or some such. If we want to. I obviously didn't get to the Vloggies, but it seems to me that a lot of fun and constructive conversations were had just hanging out at other videoblogging events, without worrying about who was more recognized than anybody else. How about Florence (you know, the place in Italy)? I may be able to organize something there if anyone's interested... -- best regards, Deirdré Straughan living travelling in Italy (and other Countries Beginning with I) www.beginningwithi.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RE: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Ken, Last year the Vloggies was a PodTech event designed to bring together artists and video developers. You remember Ken because you were part of the growing group trying to make a living while developing kick ass content. We invested heavily in that and brought in sponsors who wanted to be part of the ecosystem. Today new sponsors are coming in to the industry and the existing advertisers continue to sponsor (fund) shows and video development across all networks. I'm proud of all the energy and industry momentum that was a result of PodTech's investment in the Vloggies. Is the industry better off than it was a year ago?? A lot of videobloggers are much better off this year than last year as the result of everyones creative work. The sponsors *are* recognizing it with dollars. This is the result of hard work by the industry not by one company but everyone involved in pioneering videoblogging - from the founding group to vloggercon to Vloggies to Pixelodeon. In between many companies have been formed and new producers are joining and participating on a global scale. I see this as a great thing. In fact new organizations like the Association of Downloadable Media are forming to promote new advertising models around video and audio. The industry is growing and viable business models are developing. That being said I'm very much looking at the Vloggies as an open industry event. PodTech isn't trying to exploit this event or try a 'land grab' as you say. I'm exploring and having conversations with partners about the format of the Vloggies this year. Although we trademarked the term we are happy to work with any group with ideas to make it open like we did last year. We are in business to make money and do the right thing to grow with the industry. As a company we do make good business decisions and make some mistakes. Yeah a photo was accidentally used and some people didn't get their Vloggies on time - our bad but not intentional. If more great content can continue to come out from video pros (on PodTech or other network and sites) and more advertisers continue to accelerate their sponsorship and advertising efforts then I'm happy and the mistakes don't seem that bad. At the end of the day we are all part of a growing ecosystem and the goal of PodTech and the Vloggies is working with our peers in this ecosystem. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 11:19 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone Off-list? If you want to engage my professional services, contact my agents. Barrett Garese at UTA. If you want to talk about the Vloggies, let's talk about the Vloggies here in public. I support an open awards show that is owned by no company. I think that Trademarking Vloggies gives your company too much control. The Oscars are owned by the film industry, and the Emmys are owned by the TV industry. There were several sponsors last year, don't they also have as much right to the mark of the Vloggies as PodTech? Oh but you have more rights don't you? Because the person that came up with the idea, the person that organized it and made it a success was on your dime... The person that was just let go, right after the Trademark was filed... By landgrabbing Vloggies, you are trying to own an industry, which is unconscionable. You guys are smart, you're just caught in a lot of bad decisions. You should donate that mark to the Creative Commons, or EFF, or create a new non-profit that will run the awards. That would be the right thing to do, and might start repairing the PR nightmare you guys are experiencing right now. -Kent, askaninja.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kent, Email me if you'd like to get involved and we can chat off list John From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 6:08 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone Well, great. So what are you going to do with the Vloggies this year John? -K --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, John Furrier john@ wrote: Kent, You're not sure. In fact you're way off base. Trademarks are first use and the filing was part of many others like the BlogHaus and other events. It had nothing to do with Irina being a full time employee. Irina is an awesome person and is doing great work in videoblogging. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
developing kick ass content. We invested heavily in that and brought in sponsors who wanted to be part of the ecosystem. Today new sponsors are coming in to the industry and the existing advertisers continue to sponsor (fund) shows and video development across all networks. I'm proud of all the energy and industry momentum that was a result of PodTech's investment in the Vloggies. Is the industry better off than it was a year ago?? A lot of videobloggers are much better off this year than last year as the result of everyones creative work. The sponsors *are* recognizing it with dollars. This is the result of hard work by the industry not by one company but everyone involved in pioneering videoblogging - from the founding group to vloggercon to Vloggies to Pixelodeon. In between many companies have been formed and new producers are joining and participating on a global scale. I see this as a great thing. In fact new organizations like the Association of Downloadable Media are forming to promote new advertising models around video and audio. The industry is growing and viable business models are developing. That being said I'm very much looking at the Vloggies as an open industry event. PodTech isn't trying to exploit this event or try a 'land grab' as you say. I'm exploring and having conversations with partners about the format of the Vloggies this year. Although we trademarked the term we are happy to work with any group with ideas to make it open like we did last year. We are in business to make money and do the right thing to grow with the industry. As a company we do make good business decisions and make some mistakes. Yeah a photo was accidentally used and some people didn't get their Vloggies on time - our bad but not intentional. If more great content can continue to come out from video pros (on PodTech or other network and sites) and more advertisers continue to accelerate their sponsorship and advertising efforts then I'm happy and the mistakes don't seem that bad. At the end of the day we are all part of a growing ecosystem and the goal of PodTech and the Vloggies is working with our peers in this ecosystem. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 11:19 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone Off-list? If you want to engage my professional services, contact my agents. Barrett Garese at UTA. If you want to talk about the Vloggies, let's talk about the Vloggies here in public. I support an open awards show that is owned by no company. I think that Trademarking Vloggies gives your company too much control. The Oscars are owned by the film industry, and the Emmys are owned by the TV industry. There were several sponsors last year, don't they also have as much right to the mark of the Vloggies as PodTech? Oh but you have more rights don't you? Because the person that came up with the idea, the person that organized it and made it a success was on your dime... The person that was just let go, right after the Trademark was filed... By landgrabbing Vloggies, you are trying to own an industry, which is unconscionable. You guys are smart, you're just caught in a lot of bad decisions. You should donate that mark to the Creative Commons, or EFF, or create a new non-profit that will run the awards. That would be the right thing to do, and might start repairing the PR nightmare you guys are experiencing right now. -Kent, askaninja.com --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kent, Email me if you'd like to get involved and we can chat off list John From:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 6:08 PM To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone Well, great. So what are you going to do with the Vloggies this year John? -K --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, John Furrier john@ wrote: Kent, You're not sure. In fact you're way off base. Trademarks are first use and the filing was part of many others like the BlogHaus and other events. It had nothing to do with Irina being a full time employee. Irina is an awesome person and is doing great work in videoblogging. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Deirdre Straughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about Florence (you know, the place in Italy)? I may be able to organize something there if anyone's interested... vlog awards in florence?! y'all buried the lede. all winners to stay in a villa in fiesole. ci veddiamo dopo. daniel, pouringdown.tv
RE: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Thanks Ron. I'm happy to talk about stuff publically but as you said some stuff is handled in private. I am a big believer in net neutrality. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Watson Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 9:57 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone This is the reason that corporations don't like a net neutral internet. You want to know why Net Neutrality is going to go away? This is the reason. I don't really have much to say bad or good about podtech, but the way this whole thing with Lan Irina is going down must be extremely uncomfortable for Podtech, as a corporation. Corporations don't do this stuff, and when they do, they don't do it well. They're too big and they're too slow to interact in the manner that people act on the internet. Transparency is an anathema to a corporation. And, please, don't think that this is directed solely at Podtech, it is just a tangible example. John wants to do this off list because that's how business is done. Business is done in private, the details of the deals are kept out of the public eye. It's much easier to handle there. Lawyers and courts are a fact of life for corporate business. Conducting business in daylight in public is a serious problem because the end result cannot be predicted. There are no procedural rules in this environment, and it's impossible to know how the dialogue will ebb and flow. In court, or on the phone in private, it's much easier to control the situation. The possibilities are finite. On a list like this they are not. Press releases, commercial ads, and such are one way communication. Information delivered from on high, in one direction, with the full faith and credit of, say, the NYT, is hard to counter as a single person. It's much easier to get what you want when you can't be called out in public by a smart, passionate person or persons. Now Podtech is not really the kind of Corporation that I have problems with... yet. They are more akin to us than to Sony, which is why they are on this list and are participating as best they can. I understand that some people don't like the blanket condemnation that my gripes against 'the corporation' sound like, but it's very hard to come up with language that effectively communicates the nuances between big giant corporations and small ones, and besides, the only thing stopping small corporations from becoming large ones is the amount of money they make. Once they hit critical mass and get the power to flood the world with their message and to legislate and lawyer their will without serious challenge, they become the target of my arguments. So what am I saying here? I'm just saying that Corporations should not be looked at as artificial people. They should not be writing our laws. They should not be filtering our news. They should not be electing our public officials. Corporations should be able to do business, and should have the limited liability to protect them from unforeseen mistakes and consequences of their business, but they should still be responsible for malfeasance. Incorporating should protect a company from mistakes and unintended consequences, but it should not be a get out of jail free card, as it is today. Net Neutrality is our equalizer. We, regular old people can have just as shiny an image, just as wide a reach, and just as clean a path to reach people as a big giant corporation. They structural advantages of entities with an equivalent GDP of small European countries is mitigated, as much as it can be. It sets up a near meritocracy, which is a good thing. Much better than a plutocracy. Anyway, John, Robert, I commend you for trying to get in front of things on this list, but you're in dangerous waters. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't. This list is the ultimate in responsibility for a corporation, and could do you worlds of good within the community that is driving your business. It also can bite, very hard, as I'm sure you're feeling right now. For those of you on the list, take a look at how things are working. This is the power of net neutrality. We're on a level playing field, information is democratized or a 'free market' for those of you with that persuasion. If we're not careful, it's going to go away. The sway and power of the passionate and enlightened people on this list will go away because nobody will have the patience to wait for the 'transaction' of information. The same holds true of our videoblogs and video podcasts, but even moreso, because of the large size of the files. If we want to participate - to do shows, to check the PodTechs, the Heavy.coms, Magnify.nets, and such, to have a say in the development of the digital commons, please stick your neck out for net neutrality. I guess I'll quit now. Cheers, Ron Watson http://k9disc.blip.tv http://k9disc.com http://pawsitivevybe.com/vlog http
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com , John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ken, Please learn my name. It's sloppy and disrespectful. Kent. Nichols. Co-Creator of AskANinja.com. Last year the Vloggies was a PodTech event designed to bring together artists and video developers. You remember Ken because you were part of the growing group trying to make a living while developing kick ass content. We invested heavily in that and brought in sponsors who wanted to be part of the ecosystem. Today new sponsors are coming in to the industry and the existing advertisers continue to sponsor (fund) shows and video development across all networks. I'm proud of all the energy and industry momentum that was a result of PodTech's investment in the Vloggies. Great, how many new advertisers have you and your company brought to the table? Now take Scoble off the table. I agree all ad dollars flowing in the industry is a good thing. But it's going to take years and years and a lot of hard work by countless people to move advertising into online video. But I fail to see the direct result of the your investment in the Vloggies doing that. Is the industry better off than it was a year ago?? A lot of videobloggers are much better off this year than last year as the result of everyones creative work. The sponsors *are* recognizing it with dollars. This is the result of hard work by the industry not by one company but everyone involved in pioneering videoblogging - from the founding group to vloggercon to Vloggies to Pixelodeon. In between many companies have been formed and new producers are joining and participating on a global scale. I see this as a great thing. In fact new organizations like the Association of Downloadable Media are forming to promote new advertising models around video and audio. The industry is growing and viable business models are developing. I sent a message to the ADM, and received no response. I spoke to a few members and they said they were at a meeting a few months ago and the were surprised that they had joined this group and the announcement caught them off guard. Having a single meeting and throwing up a web site isn't making a coalition. That being said I'm very much looking at the Vloggies as an open industry event. PodTech isn't trying to exploit this event or try a 'land grab' as you say. I'm exploring and having conversations with partners about the format of the Vloggies this year. Although we trademarked the term we are happy to work with any group with ideas to make it open like we did last year. Great. Form a non-profit with board members from various companies and give the trademark to that non-profit. We are in business to make money and do the right thing to grow with the industry. As a company we do make good business decisions and make some mistakes. Yeah a photo was accidentally used and some people didn't get their Vloggies on time - our bad but not intentional. If more great content can continue to come out from video pros (on PodTech or other network and sites) and more advertisers continue to accelerate their sponsorship and advertising efforts then I'm happy and the mistakes don't seem that bad. At the end of the day we are all part of a growing ecosystem and the goal of PodTech and the Vloggies is working with our peers in this ecosystem. These mistakes don't seem that bad to you because you are the one that made them. Shitting all over creative commons, and then claiming it wasn't about the money is ludicrous. Undermining the sense of community in this industry by trying to own the awards show is the height of arrogance and lameness. John, I'm begging you to form a non-profit. Let the awards live there. It will happen with or without you, and it may as well be with you and your trademark. -- Kent Nichols http://askaninja.com http://askaninja.com/ http://hopeisemo.com http://hopeisemo.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RE: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Kent, We are not shitting on the creative commons. We are proponents of it. A mistake was made plain and simple. Sorry about misspelling your name I know it's Kent not Ken. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:39 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com , John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ken, Please learn my name. It's sloppy and disrespectful. Kent. Nichols. Co-Creator of AskANinja.com. Last year the Vloggies was a PodTech event designed to bring together artists and video developers. You remember Ken because you were part of the growing group trying to make a living while developing kick ass content. We invested heavily in that and brought in sponsors who wanted to be part of the ecosystem. Today new sponsors are coming in to the industry and the existing advertisers continue to sponsor (fund) shows and video development across all networks. I'm proud of all the energy and industry momentum that was a result of PodTech's investment in the Vloggies. Great, how many new advertisers have you and your company brought to the table? Now take Scoble off the table. I agree all ad dollars flowing in the industry is a good thing. But it's going to take years and years and a lot of hard work by countless people to move advertising into online video. But I fail to see the direct result of the your investment in the Vloggies doing that. Is the industry better off than it was a year ago?? A lot of videobloggers are much better off this year than last year as the result of everyones creative work. The sponsors *are* recognizing it with dollars. This is the result of hard work by the industry not by one company but everyone involved in pioneering videoblogging - from the founding group to vloggercon to Vloggies to Pixelodeon. In between many companies have been formed and new producers are joining and participating on a global scale. I see this as a great thing. In fact new organizations like the Association of Downloadable Media are forming to promote new advertising models around video and audio. The industry is growing and viable business models are developing. I sent a message to the ADM, and received no response. I spoke to a few members and they said they were at a meeting a few months ago and the were surprised that they had joined this group and the announcement caught them off guard. Having a single meeting and throwing up a web site isn't making a coalition. That being said I'm very much looking at the Vloggies as an open industry event. PodTech isn't trying to exploit this event or try a 'land grab' as you say. I'm exploring and having conversations with partners about the format of the Vloggies this year. Although we trademarked the term we are happy to work with any group with ideas to make it open like we did last year. Great. Form a non-profit with board members from various companies and give the trademark to that non-profit. We are in business to make money and do the right thing to grow with the industry. As a company we do make good business decisions and make some mistakes. Yeah a photo was accidentally used and some people didn't get their Vloggies on time - our bad but not intentional. If more great content can continue to come out from video pros (on PodTech or other network and sites) and more advertisers continue to accelerate their sponsorship and advertising efforts then I'm happy and the mistakes don't seem that bad. At the end of the day we are all part of a growing ecosystem and the goal of PodTech and the Vloggies is working with our peers in this ecosystem. These mistakes don't seem that bad to you because you are the one that made them. Shitting all over creative commons, and then claiming it wasn't about the money is ludicrous. Undermining the sense of community in this industry by trying to own the awards show is the height of arrogance and lameness. John, I'm begging you to form a non-profit. Let the awards live there. It will happen with or without you, and it may as well be with you and your trademark. -- Kent Nichols http://askaninja.com http://askaninja.com/ http://hopeisemo.com http://hopeisemo.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Registering as a Community Mark is an alternative worth a look. http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2006/01/14/the-case-for-community-marks/ -eddie On 7/24/07, Kent Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John, I'm begging you to form a non-profit. Let the awards live there. It will happen with or without you, and it may as well be with you and your trademark. -- Kent Nichols http://askaninja.com http://askaninja.com/ http://hopeisemo.com http://hopeisemo.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
That Community Mark article was great. Im not sure there is any legal reality in it though, which may make it slightly pointless. Creative Commons harneses existing legal system and cncepts about intellectual property, to build a system which should be compatible with existing legal system, courts, the idea of contracts, etc. I dont know if the same could be done with trademarks, if it can be done then its probably by building on the existing trademark laws. So a community could create and use something as a trademark, and could give other some additional rights to use the trademark, subject to certain terms. But unlike copyright, there are additional burdens on the trademark 'owner' to use it or lose it, so if the legal requirements to 'protect' the trademark are incompatible with the vision of allowing some community reuse, there will be a problem, so Im not sure it would work. This and other things leads me to believe that in practical terms, at this stage having a non-profit looking after the trademark, rather than relying on a new concept in mark protection that has no legal basis, is the safer approach. Its a bit like trying to be legally sound with the concept of 'a community', if the community is not a recognised legal entity, then its a set of individuals who could fall out at some point and each claim to be the legitimate community. So you put a proper entity together, but it costs time money. I suppose there may be another way to handle the trademark thing without needing an entity to formally registering trademarks. You can start using something as a mark, create some human-readable rules for community use of the mark, and not do anything more formal. If someone else tries to register that mark later, you can try get get the application rejected, based on existing widespread use of the mark by yourselves. (As far as I remember, you can put TM on stuff without formally registering it, its the registered R symbol that you cant use unless you have the trademark officially registered.) Categories of use are another complication. The same marks can be registered and used by different people/entities if they are in different categories of use and dont fall foul of any of the rules about being deliberately misleading. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Codel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Registering as a Community Mark is an alternative worth a look. http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2006/01/14/the-case-for-community-marks/ -eddie On 7/24/07, Kent Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John, I'm begging you to form a non-profit. Let the awards live there. It will happen with or without you, and it may as well be with you and your trademark. -- Kent Nichols http://askaninja.com http://askaninja.com/ http://hopeisemo.com http://hopeisemo.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Short version of what I was getting at is that putting CM at the end of something may not achieve anything (other than awareness of the issue), wheras putting TM is probably better than nothing and offers at least some potential recourse later if someone else tries to 'steal' the mark. I mean I guess its ok to just invent and use something like the 'Copy Left' symbol because thats about giving away rights, but the Community Mark idea is not about declaring no rights reserved, just changing the balance, and that requires something with a legal basis , equivalent to how creative commons is made real, in my opinion. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That Community Mark article was great. Im not sure there is any legal reality in it though, which may make it slightly pointless. Creative Commons harneses existing legal system and cncepts about intellectual property, to build a system which should be compatible with existing legal system, courts, the idea of contracts, etc. I dont know if the same could be done with trademarks, if it can be done then its probably by building on the existing trademark laws. So a community could create and use something as a trademark, and could give other some additional rights to use the trademark, subject to certain terms. But unlike copyright, there are additional burdens on the trademark 'owner' to use it or lose it, so if the legal requirements to 'protect' the trademark are incompatible with the vision of allowing some community reuse, there will be a problem, so Im not sure it would work. This and other things leads me to believe that in practical terms, at this stage having a non-profit looking after the trademark, rather than relying on a new concept in mark protection that has no legal basis, is the safer approach. Its a bit like trying to be legally sound with the concept of 'a community', if the community is not a recognised legal entity, then its a set of individuals who could fall out at some point and each claim to be the legitimate community. So you put a proper entity together, but it costs time money. I suppose there may be another way to handle the trademark thing without needing an entity to formally registering trademarks. You can start using something as a mark, create some human-readable rules for community use of the mark, and not do anything more formal. If someone else tries to register that mark later, you can try get get the application rejected, based on existing widespread use of the mark by yourselves. (As far as I remember, you can put TM on stuff without formally registering it, its the registered R symbol that you cant use unless you have the trademark officially registered.) Categories of use are another complication. The same marks can be registered and used by different people/entities if they are in different categories of use and dont fall foul of any of the rules about being deliberately misleading. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Codel eddie@ wrote: Registering as a Community Mark is an alternative worth a look. http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2006/01/14/the-case-for-community-marks/ -eddie On 7/24/07, Kent Nichols digitalfilmmaker@ wrote: John, I'm begging you to form a non-profit. Let the awards live there. It will happen with or without you, and it may as well be with you and your trademark. -- Kent Nichols http://askaninja.com http://askaninja.com/ http://hopeisemo.com http://hopeisemo.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Not to fully rehash the Lan situation, but we all make mistakes. Mistakes are human, it's how we handle mistakes that determines our character. When the mistake was brought to your attention, and an invoice was presented, you ignored/didn't pay it. If you truly believed in CC, you would have acknowledged the mistake, paid Lan's reasonable invoice (and it was quite reasonable), and then made a donation to CC on top of that. Instead you paid Lan a fee he did not agree to and he bittersweetly donated it to CC, to which you hastily agreed to donate when you saw public opinion was against you. If a small company like PodTech, who is actually aware of CC, doesn't really respect or understand CC, then how are we as creators going to ever get larger companies to understand it? The same goes with this Trademark issue. You trademarked it because you see value there. Value for your company. Not for the industry, not for the community, but for you. Great for you. Yippee. But it leaves the community in a lurch. Create a non-profit, give the trademark to it, and let's move on. -Kent, askaninja.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kent, We are not shitting on the creative commons. We are proponents of it. A mistake was made plain and simple. Sorry about misspelling your name I know it's Kent not Ken. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:39 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com , John Furrier john@ wrote: Ken, Please learn my name. It's sloppy and disrespectful. Kent. Nichols. Co-Creator of AskANinja.com. Last year the Vloggies was a PodTech event designed to bring together artists and video developers. You remember Ken because you were part of the growing group trying to make a living while developing kick ass content. We invested heavily in that and brought in sponsors who wanted to be part of the ecosystem. Today new sponsors are coming in to the industry and the existing advertisers continue to sponsor (fund) shows and video development across all networks. I'm proud of all the energy and industry momentum that was a result of PodTech's investment in the Vloggies. Great, how many new advertisers have you and your company brought to the table? Now take Scoble off the table. I agree all ad dollars flowing in the industry is a good thing. But it's going to take years and years and a lot of hard work by countless people to move advertising into online video. But I fail to see the direct result of the your investment in the Vloggies doing that. Is the industry better off than it was a year ago?? A lot of videobloggers are much better off this year than last year as the result of everyones creative work. The sponsors *are* recognizing it with dollars. This is the result of hard work by the industry not by one company but everyone involved in pioneering videoblogging - from the founding group to vloggercon to Vloggies to Pixelodeon. In between many companies have been formed and new producers are joining and participating on a global scale. I see this as a great thing. In fact new organizations like the Association of Downloadable Media are forming to promote new advertising models around video and audio. The industry is growing and viable business models are developing. I sent a message to the ADM, and received no response. I spoke to a few members and they said they were at a meeting a few months ago and the were surprised that they had joined this group and the announcement caught them off guard. Having a single meeting and throwing up a web site isn't making a coalition. That being said I'm very much looking at the Vloggies as an open industry event. PodTech isn't trying to exploit this event or try a 'land grab' as you say. I'm exploring and having conversations with partners about the format of the Vloggies this year. Although we trademarked the term we are happy to work with any group with ideas to make it open like we did last year. Great. Form a non-profit with board members from various companies and give the trademark to that non-profit. We are in business to make money and do the right thing to grow with the industry. As a company we do make good business decisions and make some mistakes. Yeah a photo was accidentally used and some people didn't get their Vloggies on time - our bad but not intentional. If more great content can continue to come out from video pros (on PodTech or other network and sites) and more advertisers continue to accelerate their sponsorship and advertising efforts then I'm happy and the mistakes don't seem that bad. At the end
RE: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Not true Kent. I responded immediately to Lan and what was said shall remain private. It is over and we fully respect CC and producers work. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:51 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone Not to fully rehash the Lan situation, but we all make mistakes. Mistakes are human, it's how we handle mistakes that determines our character. When the mistake was brought to your attention, and an invoice was presented, you ignored/didn't pay it. If you truly believed in CC, you would have acknowledged the mistake, paid Lan's reasonable invoice (and it was quite reasonable), and then made a donation to CC on top of that. Instead you paid Lan a fee he did not agree to and he bittersweetly donated it to CC, to which you hastily agreed to donate when you saw public opinion was against you. If a small company like PodTech, who is actually aware of CC, doesn't really respect or understand CC, then how are we as creators going to ever get larger companies to understand it? The same goes with this Trademark issue. You trademarked it because you see value there. Value for your company. Not for the industry, not for the community, but for you. Great for you. Yippee. But it leaves the community in a lurch. Create a non-profit, give the trademark to it, and let's move on. -Kent, askaninja.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kent, We are not shitting on the creative commons. We are proponents of it. A mistake was made plain and simple. Sorry about misspelling your name I know it's Kent not Ken. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:39 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com , John Furrier john@ wrote: Ken, Please learn my name. It's sloppy and disrespectful. Kent. Nichols. Co-Creator of AskANinja.com. Last year the Vloggies was a PodTech event designed to bring together artists and video developers. You remember Ken because you were part of the growing group trying to make a living while developing kick ass content. We invested heavily in that and brought in sponsors who wanted to be part of the ecosystem. Today new sponsors are coming in to the industry and the existing advertisers continue to sponsor (fund) shows and video development across all networks. I'm proud of all the energy and industry momentum that was a result of PodTech's investment in the Vloggies. Great, how many new advertisers have you and your company brought to the table? Now take Scoble off the table. I agree all ad dollars flowing in the industry is a good thing. But it's going to take years and years and a lot of hard work by countless people to move advertising into online video. But I fail to see the direct result of the your investment in the Vloggies doing that. Is the industry better off than it was a year ago?? A lot of videobloggers are much better off this year than last year as the result of everyones creative work. The sponsors *are* recognizing it with dollars. This is the result of hard work by the industry not by one company but everyone involved in pioneering videoblogging - from the founding group to vloggercon to Vloggies to Pixelodeon. In between many companies have been formed and new producers are joining and participating on a global scale. I see this as a great thing. In fact new organizations like the Association of Downloadable Media are forming to promote new advertising models around video and audio. The industry is growing and viable business models are developing. I sent a message to the ADM, and received no response. I spoke to a few members and they said they were at a meeting a few months ago and the were surprised that they had joined this group and the announcement caught them off guard. Having a single meeting and throwing up a web site isn't making a coalition. That being said I'm very much looking at the Vloggies as an open industry event. PodTech isn't trying to exploit this event or try a 'land grab' as you say. I'm exploring and having conversations with partners about the format of the Vloggies this year. Although we trademarked the term we are happy to work with any group with ideas to make it open like we did last year. Great. Form a non-profit with board members from
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Actions speak louder than words. Until you create a neutral non-profit to house that mark, you're all words. -K, askaninja.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true Kent. I responded immediately to Lan and what was said shall remain private. It is over and we fully respect CC and producers work. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:51 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone Not to fully rehash the Lan situation, but we all make mistakes. Mistakes are human, it's how we handle mistakes that determines our character. When the mistake was brought to your attention, and an invoice was presented, you ignored/didn't pay it. If you truly believed in CC, you would have acknowledged the mistake, paid Lan's reasonable invoice (and it was quite reasonable), and then made a donation to CC on top of that. Instead you paid Lan a fee he did not agree to and he bittersweetly donated it to CC, to which you hastily agreed to donate when you saw public opinion was against you. If a small company like PodTech, who is actually aware of CC, doesn't really respect or understand CC, then how are we as creators going to ever get larger companies to understand it? The same goes with this Trademark issue. You trademarked it because you see value there. Value for your company. Not for the industry, not for the community, but for you. Great for you. Yippee. But it leaves the community in a lurch. Create a non-profit, give the trademark to it, and let's move on. -Kent, askaninja.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, John Furrier john@ wrote: Kent, We are not shitting on the creative commons. We are proponents of it. A mistake was made plain and simple. Sorry about misspelling your name I know it's Kent not Ken. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:39 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com , John Furrier john@ wrote: Ken, Please learn my name. It's sloppy and disrespectful. Kent. Nichols. Co-Creator of AskANinja.com. Last year the Vloggies was a PodTech event designed to bring together artists and video developers. You remember Ken because you were part of the growing group trying to make a living while developing kick ass content. We invested heavily in that and brought in sponsors who wanted to be part of the ecosystem. Today new sponsors are coming in to the industry and the existing advertisers continue to sponsor (fund) shows and video development across all networks. I'm proud of all the energy and industry momentum that was a result of PodTech's investment in the Vloggies. Great, how many new advertisers have you and your company brought to the table? Now take Scoble off the table. I agree all ad dollars flowing in the industry is a good thing. But it's going to take years and years and a lot of hard work by countless people to move advertising into online video. But I fail to see the direct result of the your investment in the Vloggies doing that. Is the industry better off than it was a year ago?? A lot of videobloggers are much better off this year than last year as the result of everyones creative work. The sponsors *are* recognizing it with dollars. This is the result of hard work by the industry not by one company but everyone involved in pioneering videoblogging - from the founding group to vloggercon to Vloggies to Pixelodeon. In between many companies have been formed and new producers are joining and participating on a global scale. I see this as a great thing. In fact new organizations like the Association of Downloadable Media are forming to promote new advertising models around video and audio. The industry is growing and viable business models are developing. I sent a message to the ADM, and received no response. I spoke to a few members and they said they were at a meeting a few months ago and the were surprised that they had joined this group and the announcement caught them off guard. Having a single meeting and throwing up a web site isn't making a coalition. That being said I'm very much looking at the Vloggies as an open industry event. PodTech isn't trying to exploit this event or try
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
On 7/24/07, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not true Kent. I responded immediately to Lan and what was said shall remain private. It is over and we fully respect CC and producers work. I think what you keep failing to understand, John, is that your issue WITH LAN is over your issue WITH THE COMMUNITY as to how it ended is NOT. You can't wash away one with the other, and you cant pretend they are the same and expect the community to buy it. Saying the reason we didn't have to pay Lan what he asked after we stole his stuff is private isn't going to relieve concerns by content producers as to if PodTech respects the true ownership of the content. Why would we as content producers ever choose to trust such a company with our work ever again? Your issue with Lan may be over, but your issue with the community is not ... and your constant refusal to understand the difference between the two is not painting PodTech in the best of lights. If you want the issue with the community to be over, you're going to have to a) stop confusing the two and b) talk to the community about the issue that remains. Moving discussions off list and outside the view of the community isn't going to help you do that. trust me, you don't know the whole story sounds like a load of crap to me ... either Lan owned the image or he didn't. You've acknowledged that he did. And happily for you Lan has let you off the hook but PodTech has yet to address THE COMMUNITY as to why it felt it didn't have to pay Lan what he asked even after he negotiated down from his first invoice. - Dave -- http://www.DavidMeade.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Hi Folks...thought I'd chime in here. The Vloggies were a great thing, and I hope that they continue. I was proud to be a part of them, and Irina and Podtech worked very hard on this project. The team at Podtech put time and resources into it, and I don't know if their investment was ever really appreciated. It's as if a good deed never goes unpunished. Sure, there may have been organizational problems, seems to have been problems getting enough statuettes, but the idea to recognize the great work being done online is admirable. And it is ok with me if Podtech owns the trademark. It's their show, and award. That doesn't take the value of it away. There are many award shows that are owned by production companies...a few off the top of my head, the World Music Awards, the American Music Awards (Dick Clark Productions). The Emmies are trademarked by the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, as the Oscars are owned by the Motion Picture Academy. And trademarked. It was a real pleasure to work with Irina last year co-hosting the event, and with John Furrier and the rest of the team at Podtech. They created something really beautiful, and I would hate to see it go away. And if you want to engage my professional services, please contact me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Kent Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Off-list? If you want to engage my professional services, contact my agents. Barrett Garese at UTA. If you want to talk about the Vloggies, let's talk about the Vloggies here in public. I support an open awards show that is owned by no company. I think that Trademarking Vloggies gives your company too much control. The Oscars are owned by the film industry, and the Emmys are owned by the TV industry. There were several sponsors last year, don't they also have as much right to the mark of the Vloggies as PodTech? Oh but you have more rights don't you? Because the person that came up with the idea, the person that organized it and made it a success was on your dime... The person that was just let go, right after the Trademark was filed... By landgrabbing Vloggies, you are trying to own an industry, which is unconscionable. You guys are smart, you're just caught in a lot of bad decisions. You should donate that mark to the Creative Commons, or EFF, or create a new non-profit that will run the awards. That would be the right thing to do, and might start repairing the PR nightmare you guys are experiencing right now. -Kent, askaninja.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Furrier john@ wrote: Kent, Email me if you'd like to get involved and we can chat off list John From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 6:08 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone Well, great. So what are you going to do with the Vloggies this year John? -K --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, John Furrier john@ wrote: Kent, You're not sure. In fact you're way off base. Trademarks are first use and the filing was part of many others like the BlogHaus and other events. It had nothing to do with Irina being a full time employee. Irina is an awesome person and is doing great work in videoblogging. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups\ .com] On Behalf Of Kent Nichols Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 2:48 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone Hmm. This is interesting... http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=docstate=lgs64d.2.1 PodTech filed for the Trademark on the Vloggies right before they fired Irina. A coincidence I'm sure... -K --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.commailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comma\ ilto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Robyn Tippins robyntippins@ wrote: So if Irina is gone, will there be no Vloggies this year? -- Robyn Tippins Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Daniel Mcvicar is still alive!! WOO HOO! I haven't heard from him ina long time.. anyway.. i still think Schlomo said it best.. GROUP HUG!! Just hug it out ..
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Awards don't mean a goddamn thing. They're stupid. They're all stupid. It's beyond me that we feel the need to set aside a night to give out these jagoff bowling trophies so all these people can pat each other on the back about how much money they're making boring the piss out of half the world. Jerry Seinfeld http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_OqvUbBNA4 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
perfect. On 7/24/07, Adam Quirk, Wreck Salvage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Awards don't mean a goddamn thing. They're stupid. They're all stupid. It's beyond me that we feel the need to set aside a night to give out these jagoff bowling trophies so all these people can pat each other on the back about how much money they're making boring the piss out of half the world. Jerry Seinfeld http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_OqvUbBNA4 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
yep, verdi is right! i was at a Spark PR bbq on June 15 2006 talking to shlomo and ted rheingold (dogster.com) and said man i'm tired of wearing tshirts and minimizer bras to all our events! i think i'll throw a goofy-ass awards show with a red carpet and fake paparazzi cuz we should all dress up at least once a year! should i call it Vloscars or Vloggies? and i'm gonna wear a super fancy-pants dress-- something like on Dynasty. there u go. On 7/24/07, Adam Quirk, Wreck Salvage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ye -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
No offense, but our Vloggy has meant a lot to us. In fact, it's the only positive regard we ever got from Freetime. It's also the only time that project ever got linked by anyone else's blogs. If we hadn't had that modicum of success in getting even the most rudimentary audience, I probably wouldn't have had the energy to go forward with Greentime. When you've already made it, awards are pretty pointless. When you're desperately trying to make a name for yourself, every bit of positive attention counts. -- Rhett. http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime http://www.weatherlight.com/greentime Awards don't mean a goddamn thing. They're stupid. They're all stupid. It's beyond me that we feel the need to set aside a night to give out these jagoff bowling trophies so all these people can pat each other on the back about how much money they're making boring the piss out of half the world. Jerry Seinfeld http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_OqvUbBNA4 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
I understand. From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Meade Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 1:05 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone On 7/24/07, John Furrier [EMAIL PROTECTED]mailto:john%40podtech.net wrote: Not true Kent. I responded immediately to Lan and what was said shall remain private. It is over and we fully respect CC and producers work. I think what you keep failing to understand, John, is that your issue WITH LAN is over your issue WITH THE COMMUNITY as to how it ended is NOT. You can't wash away one with the other, and you cant pretend they are the same and expect the community to buy it. Saying the reason we didn't have to pay Lan what he asked after we stole his stuff is private isn't going to relieve concerns by content producers as to if PodTech respects the true ownership of the content. Why would we as content producers ever choose to trust such a company with our work ever again? Your issue with Lan may be over, but your issue with the community is not ... and your constant refusal to understand the difference between the two is not painting PodTech in the best of lights. If you want the issue with the community to be over, you're going to have to a) stop confusing the two and b) talk to the community about the issue that remains. Moving discussions off list and outside the view of the community isn't going to help you do that. trust me, you don't know the whole story sounds like a load of crap to me ... either Lan owned the image or he didn't. You've acknowledged that he did. And happily for you Lan has let you off the hook but PodTech has yet to address THE COMMUNITY as to why it felt it didn't have to pay Lan what he asked even after he negotiated down from his first invoice. - Dave -- http://www.DavidMeade.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
To match your Seinfeld, I wouldn't want to be in a club that would have me as a member Grouch Marx JCH --- Adam Quirk, Wreck Salvage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Awards don't mean a goddamn thing. They're stupid. They're all stupid. It's beyond me that we feel the need to set aside a night to give out these jagoff bowling trophies so all these people can pat each other on the back about how much money they're making boring the piss out of half the world. Jerry Seinfeld http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_OqvUbBNA4 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Hmm. This is interesting... http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=docstate=lgs64d.2.1 PodTech filed for the Trademark on the Vloggies right before they fired Irina. A coincidence I'm sure... -K --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robyn Tippins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So if Irina is gone, will there be no Vloggies this year? -- Robyn Tippins Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: irina gone
well, i don't see why we couldn't come up with a diff name and get sponsors. that is, if there is interest in this. robyn On 7/23/07, Kent Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm. This is interesting... http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=docstate=lgs64d.2.1 PodTech filed for the Trademark on the Vloggies right before they fired Irina. A coincidence I'm sure... -K --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Robyn Tippins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So if Irina is gone, will there be no Vloggies this year? -- Robyn Tippins Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Robyn Tippins Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
Very interesting Kent. But no more information about Vloggies this year is out there... -Lan www.LanBui.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Kent Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm. This is interesting... http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=docstate=lgs64d.2.1 PodTech filed for the Trademark on the Vloggies right before they fired Irina. A coincidence I'm sure... -K --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robyn Tippins robyntippins@ wrote: So if Irina is gone, will there be no Vloggies this year? -- Robyn Tippins Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: irina gone
With enough notice, I might be able to get a deal on a venue in Chicago... with a full bar and a great staff (I'll take that night off). Jarod. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robyn Tippins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: well, i don't see why we couldn't come up with a diff name and get sponsors. that is, if there is interest in this. robyn On 7/23/07, Kent Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm. This is interesting... http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=docstate=lgs64d.2.1 PodTech filed for the Trademark on the Vloggies right before they fired Irina. A coincidence I'm sure... -K --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Robyn Tippins robyntippins@ wrote: So if Irina is gone, will there be no Vloggies this year? -- Robyn Tippins Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Robyn Tippins Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
