Well of course he did ... he acts like a jerk every night he's on. (I stopped watching him years ago. Leno's not much better either.) But all the celebrities that come on his show know this. Some cope with it better than others. Letterman is not a good sport about being sent up either. I'm sure he will sue. That's right up his alley, I think.
This post is an interview with Director of Photography Gale Tattersal who shot “Help Me”, the season 6 finale of “House”, was shot with Canon 5D Mk II HDSLRs using off-the-shelf Canon still lenses.
"According to posts on Cinematography Mailing List not subsequently corrected or contradicted, the Canon footage underwent considerable post-processing, presumably to suppress the residual color moiré and aliasing to which the Canons are rather prone yet which were notable by their absence in the finished show."
Following posts show how it was shot and he reveals that it cost about $40K.
However, if you take all the camera/image-capture-equipment costs out of a $200K movie, you'll find it still cost $200K. The camera/film costs are not what drives the final cost. It's really the labor cost plus the above-the-line costs.
A quality high-budget film takes the combined effort of hundreds of people and years of time. Quality never comes cheap.
The managed server provider was BurstNet.com. They don't say much but suggest that you can read-between-the-lines in this statement,
"We notified him when we terminated it, and we refunded him his money to his account, becasue he has other servers with us. If he wants the refund to his card, we can easily do that. However, it should be the least of his concern.
Simply put: We cannot give him his data nor can we provide any other details. By stating this, most would recognize that something serious is afoot.
As far as his request to speak with the law enforcement officials, he sent it last night at 7PM, after Customer service was closed. We are looking into his request with the necessary persons.
This is the last post we will make on this subject."
The thread is closed now.
My guess is that law enforcement seized the server or servers involved which contained all of the hosted blogs because they believed someone was using them for an illegal purpose. I don't think the officers cared or even knew how many blogs were hosted on it/them.
One or more of the blogs may have had kitty-porn or maybe hackers were using the server to infect/control people's computers who came to any/all of the blogs. If you hacked into a server with 73,000 WordPress blogs, a lot of hidden mischief could be conducted. Think how many people visit these blogs every day.
SUBJECT: Regarding Shazam Music Recognition Technology
Dear Darren P. Griggs,
It is my openion that you have sullied the reputation of the USA, Shazam, Landmark Digital Services, LLC and IBM, Inc. through your attempt to intimidate a Dutch national and fellow developer, Mr. van Rijn.
Patents were originally constituted to "promote the useful arts and sciences". Is that what you think your doing here? Does your patent disclose the information about the technology it covers? Even though Mr. van Rijn didn't know this at the time, isn't that exactly what he is doing on his blog and, if he publishes it, isn't source code the best way to discribe these concepts?
So isn't he doing exactly what you did when you applied for and were granted the two patents in question? In fact isn't that exactly what the patent system is intended to do? And aren't you threatening him for doing exactly what the patent system was intended to do? Instead it is clear that patents, as currently practiced, are stifling innovation. This is especially true of software patents.
Or are you saying that he, and everyone in the world, are not allowed to even discuss these ideas? Are you trying to suppress the free exchange of ideas? Isn't that what you're trying to do?
I think that's exactly what you're trying to do.
Have you heard of "the Streisand effect"? (Look it up.) Well, now you've brought world attention to the algorithms used by Shazam exposing how simple they are. Is that what you wanted? How it's virtually child's play to implement them?
My only recourse is to boycot Shazam and any products of Landmark Digital Services, LLC. One guy; not much impact. Perhaps others will join me.
If they have library cards then why not have the library give them a fine? That makes as much sense as having the school discipline them for non-school activities.
"You can recognize pioneers because they're the ones with arrows in their backs." I heard that back in the '70s when I was involved in some small startups.
Being first is much harder and takes more money than coming later. Financing is easer to raise too.
I am deeply proud to have been a part of electing you as our first black president. It is also the first time I've voted to put a Democrat in our highest office. So it is with a heavy heart that I write to you about my disappointment in the performance of your administration so far.
Copyright and patent law, as currently practiced in the USA, is stifling innovation at every turn. These two concepts are government-granted monopolies ostensibly for the purpose of promoting innovation. Now they are having exactly the opposite effect and creating a new growth industry of litigating instead of innovating. Small businesses who are innovating often get threatened with litigation they might well win if they could afford it. Instead they use their scarce capitol to pay off some patent holder who isn’t making anything.
Another concern of mine is the Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) being negotiated in secret. Where’s the transparency that you promised? From what I know of the ACTA it its clearly being created to favor corporate interests and prop up their outdated business models. Again, stifling innovation is at the heart so that entrenched interests can maintain the status quo.
The Internet and digital media are two of the greatest innovations in the last hundred years. It levels the playing field between large and small interests. It serves to democratize communications and the dissemination of news and information of all kinds. But our laws have not kept pace with these changes. The ACTA serves to slow or stop these admittedly disruptive technologies.
The worst of these is the so called “three strikes” laws, already in place in some countries. This law would have an Internet connection disabled on the receipt of three accusations of copyright infringement. Unconfirmed accusations is all that’s required. And what about the other users in a household who are not infringing?
I write this in the hopes that, in some small measure, you will see how important these issues are and influence you to take steps to find a better balance among the competing interests involved.
Can someone explain exactly what the "Hot News" doctrine is?
Before the Internet, if two newspapers published an article on the same breaking news item, is one violating the hot news doctrine? That seems pretty likely to happen on every big story.
In the current Internet era, what's the criteria? If there's an earthquake and I publish a little piece on my blog before anyone else, do I "own" the news for that earthquake?
If that's anywhere close to the truth then I suggest we set up a "Hot News" web site where anyone can become a "reporter". Part of the registration might be a short questionnaire/test to prove you know how to be a "real journalist".
When something happens that you see, publish it on that site. Then, if it's first, you get to share in the revenue from suing the newspapers that violate your "hot news" rights.
Let's turn it around on them. Let's give them a dose of their own medicine. I think thousands of folks would want to participate in that. I know I would. Post right from your smart phone. Even on-the-scene video interviews.
Maybe this is a good idea even without the suing part. Ad revenue could be shared. Somebody must be doing this already. Anyone know of such a site?
I heard years ago somewhere that the FCC and the Telcos struck a bargain where the Telcos got to keep the new fees for phone features such as call waiting, caller ID, etc. In exchange the Telcos were supposed to use that revenue to upgrade Internet infrastructure.
Does anyone here know anything about that? I don't remember any more details than that.
Not all software innovations are visible on the Internet
I'm not in favor of software patents but not all software is visible on the Internet ... or visible anywhere. There are lots of innovations buried in operating systems, drivers, firmware, etc. The test, for me is, can I implement this after reading the patent ... not, can I implement this after glimpsing the software working.
A good example of this is the patents around compression algorithms. After reading a book on text compression, I wrote a test example that worked. The implementation was simple but I never would have guessed that the simple algorithmic would result in such a high compression ratio in typical English text. I don't think I would ever have discovered that algorithm.
In the opening of the Opinion MILAN D. SMITH, JR., Circuit Judge said, "... requires us to overrule our precedents that allow a defendant in a copyright infringement action to claim the “first sale doctrine” of 17 U.S.C. § 109(a) as a defense only where the disputed copies of a copyrighted work were either made or previously sold in the United States with the authority of the copyright owner."
The operant words I think are, "sold in the United States with the authority of the copyright owner."
What the ruling says is that you must have the "authority" of the copyright holder to resell. The fact that the watches were imported seems immaterial. What this ruling says to me is that you can't resell anything with the words "copyright on them without the permission of the copyright owner.
Also, isn't everything automatically copyrighted from the moment it's created, at least "works of art" such as text, photos and paintings? How can a copyright be applied to a "design", as the ruling says? If a copyright applies to designs then everything is copyrighted.
Perhaps free is a myth. Was it free to create? Is it free to put it on the Internet? Is it free for the creator or free for the consumer?
If a band gives its music away for free on the Internet but then does a concert tour, is it okay (moral) to sneak into the concert venue and listen for free? How's that different, in the moral sense, from listening to the music on the Internet? Infinitely copyable goods do have some marginal cost, do they not? So we're just talking about that difference, right?
I still don't think I understand Mike's ideas, but I do think things are pretty screwed up.
You talk about the "model of infinite and scarce goods" as if Mike is recommending that this is how the "world" SHOULD be. I think he's telling us that this is how the "world" IS or is becoming. His recommendations and reporting are more about how to cope with this new reality.
On the post: Would IMDB Really Not List A Film Because It Was Distributed Via BitTorrent?
Purple Violets
On the post: David Letterman And Joaquin Phoenix Discuss Fair Use As Letterman Threatens To Sue
Letterman asked, "Did I come off as a jerk?"
On the post: How The Attempted Censorship Of File Sharing Sites Avoids Due Process
Senator Patrick Leahy, decrying internet censorship in other countries
http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=4437&wit_id=2629
The current link just goes to the same EFF article.
On the post: Court Tells Mall That It Cannot Ban Customers From Talking To Strangers
What if ...
"Sorry, you'll have to fill out the application for third-party access for noncommercial speech first."
On the post: Rupert Murdoch Suing The Sky Out Of Skype
advertising.com
On the post: Making A High Quality Film On The Cheap With A Digital SLR
House final episode of season 6: The full story.
"According to posts on Cinematography Mailing List not subsequently corrected or contradicted, the Canon footage underwent considerable post-processing, presumably to suppress the residual color moiré and aliasing to which the Canons are rather prone yet which were notable by their absence in the finished show."
http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/tattersal_talks/
On the post: Making A High Quality Film On The Cheap With A Digital SLR
Re: Re: What was the real budget for Uncle Jack?
You are so right ... just released, ARRI Digital AXELA:
On the post: Making A High Quality Film On The Cheap With A Digital SLR
Shane Hurlbut, Cinematographer on "Terminator Salvation"
Here's a link to his blog which shows how beautiful the images can be.
http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2010/04/07/the-last-3-minutes-canon-5d-24p-firmware-shines/? utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+HurlbutVisuals+(Hurlbut+Visuals+Blo g:+Hurlblog)
Following posts show how it was shot and he reveals that it cost about $40K.
However, if you take all the camera/image-capture-equipment costs out of a $200K movie, you'll find it still cost $200K. The camera/film costs are not what drives the final cost. It's really the labor cost plus the above-the-line costs.
A quality high-budget film takes the combined effort of hundreds of people and years of time. Quality never comes cheap.
On the post: Appeal Of Important iiNet vs. AFACT Case Begins
Murder
On the post: Authorities Force 73,000 Blogs Offline?
Some info and some thoughts
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=964013
The managed server provider was BurstNet.com. They don't say much but suggest that you can read-between-the-lines in this statement,
"We notified him when we terminated it, and we refunded him his money to his account, becasue he has other servers with us. If he wants the refund to his card, we can easily do that. However, it should be the least of his concern.
Simply put: We cannot give him his data nor can we provide any other details. By stating this, most would recognize that something serious is afoot.
As far as his request to speak with the law enforcement officials, he sent it last night at 7PM, after Customer service was closed. We are looking into his request with the necessary persons.
This is the last post we will make on this subject."
The thread is closed now.
My guess is that law enforcement seized the server or servers involved which contained all of the hosted blogs because they believed someone was using them for an illegal purpose. I don't think the officers cared or even knew how many blogs were hosted on it/them.
One or more of the blogs may have had kitty-porn or maybe hackers were using the server to infect/control people's computers who came to any/all of the blogs. If you hacked into a server with 73,000 WordPress blogs, a lot of hidden mischief could be conducted. Think how many people visit these blogs every day.
Just a thought.
Peace,
Rob:-]
On the post: Describing How To Create A Software Program Now Puts You At Risk Of Contributory Patent Infringement?
My email to Mr. Griggs
Dear Darren P. Griggs,
It is my openion that you have sullied the reputation of the USA, Shazam, Landmark Digital Services, LLC and IBM, Inc. through your attempt to intimidate a Dutch national and fellow developer, Mr. van Rijn.
Patents were originally constituted to "promote the useful arts and sciences". Is that what you think your doing here? Does your patent disclose the information about the technology it covers? Even though Mr. van Rijn didn't know this at the time, isn't that exactly what he is doing on his blog and, if he publishes it, isn't source code the best way to discribe these concepts?
So isn't he doing exactly what you did when you applied for and were granted the two patents in question? In fact isn't that exactly what the patent system is intended to do? And aren't you threatening him for doing exactly what the patent system was intended to do? Instead it is clear that patents, as currently practiced, are stifling innovation. This is especially true of software patents.
Or are you saying that he, and everyone in the world, are not allowed to even discuss these ideas? Are you trying to suppress the free exchange of ideas? Isn't that what you're trying to do?
I think that's exactly what you're trying to do.
Have you heard of "the Streisand effect"? (Look it up.) Well, now you've brought world attention to the algorithms used by Shazam exposing how simple they are. Is that what you wanted? How it's virtually child's play to implement them?
My only recourse is to boycot Shazam and any products of Landmark Digital Services, LLC. One guy; not much impact. Perhaps others will join me.
Cool regards,
Rob:-]
Shaver Associates
mailto:Rob@ShaverAssociates.net
http://ShaverAssociates.net
On the post: Should Schools Be Involved In Disciplining Students For Off-Campus Bullying?
Do they have library cards?
On the post: Ideas vs. Execution Shows Why Competition Is A Good Thing
You can recognize pioneers ...
Being first is much harder and takes more money than coming later. Financing is easer to raise too.
On the post: Make Your Voice Heard On ACTA
Here's what I sent. Best I could do.
I am deeply proud to have been a part of electing you as our first black president. It is also the first time I've voted to put a Democrat in our highest office. So it is with a heavy heart that I write to you about my disappointment in the performance of your administration so far.
Copyright and patent law, as currently practiced in the USA, is stifling innovation at every turn. These two concepts are government-granted monopolies ostensibly for the purpose of promoting innovation. Now they are having exactly the opposite effect and creating a new growth industry of litigating instead of innovating. Small businesses who are innovating often get threatened with litigation they might well win if they could afford it. Instead they use their scarce capitol to pay off some patent holder who isn’t making anything.
Another concern of mine is the Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) being negotiated in secret. Where’s the transparency that you promised? From what I know of the ACTA it its clearly being created to favor corporate interests and prop up their outdated business models. Again, stifling innovation is at the heart so that entrenched interests can maintain the status quo.
The Internet and digital media are two of the greatest innovations in the last hundred years. It levels the playing field between large and small interests. It serves to democratize communications and the dissemination of news and information of all kinds. But our laws have not kept pace with these changes. The ACTA serves to slow or stop these admittedly disruptive technologies.
The worst of these is the so called “three strikes” laws, already in place in some countries. This law would have an Internet connection disabled on the receipt of three accusations of copyright infringement. Unconfirmed accusations is all that’s required. And what about the other users in a household who are not infringing?
I write this in the hopes that, in some small measure, you will see how important these issues are and influence you to take steps to find a better balance among the competing interests involved.
Sincerely,
Robert Shaver
On the post: Newspapers To Court: We Don't Care About TheFlyOnTheWall, But Please Don't Take Away Our Hot News
Can someone explain exactly what the "Hot News" doctrine is?
In the current Internet era, what's the criteria? If there's an earthquake and I publish a little piece on my blog before anyone else, do I "own" the news for that earthquake?
If that's anywhere close to the truth then I suggest we set up a "Hot News" web site where anyone can become a "reporter". Part of the registration might be a short questionnaire/test to prove you know how to be a "real journalist".
When something happens that you see, publish it on that site. Then, if it's first, you get to share in the revenue from suing the newspapers that violate your "hot news" rights.
Let's turn it around on them. Let's give them a dose of their own medicine. I think thousands of folks would want to participate in that. I know I would. Post right from your smart phone. Even on-the-scene video interviews.
Maybe this is a good idea even without the suing part. Ad revenue could be shared. Somebody must be doing this already. Anyone know of such a site?
Peace,
Rob:-]
On the post: Telcos Still Pretending Google Gets "Free Ride"
Didn't we pay for upgrading the Internet already?
Does anyone here know anything about that? I don't remember any more details than that.
On the post: Software Patents Violate The Patent Bargain, Since There Is No Disclosure To Trade-Off
Not all software innovations are visible on the Internet
A good example of this is the patents around compression algorithms. After reading a book on text compression, I wrote a test example that worked. The implementation was simple but I never would have guessed that the simple algorithmic would result in such a high compression ratio in typical English text. I don't think I would ever have discovered that algorithm.
On the post: Solicitor General Tells Supreme Court That First Sale Shouldn't Apply To Foreign-Made Goods
Everything is copyrighted when created, right?
The operant words I think are, "sold in the United States with the authority of the copyright owner."
What the ruling says is that you must have the "authority" of the copyright holder to resell. The fact that the watches were imported seems immaterial. What this ruling says to me is that you can't resell anything with the words "copyright on them without the permission of the copyright owner.
Also, isn't everything automatically copyrighted from the moment it's created, at least "works of art" such as text, photos and paintings? How can a copyright be applied to a "design", as the ruling says? If a copyright applies to designs then everything is copyrighted.
I don't see how this ruling can stand.
On the post: Barry Diller Is A Myth
Free Speech or Free Beer?
If a band gives its music away for free on the Internet but then does a concert tour, is it okay (moral) to sneak into the concert venue and listen for free? How's that different, in the moral sense, from listening to the music on the Internet? Infinitely copyable goods do have some marginal cost, do they not? So we're just talking about that difference, right?
I still don't think I understand Mike's ideas, but I do think things are pretty screwed up.
On the post: Why Does Wal-Mart Need A 3,379-Word Terms Of Use For Its Twitter Account?
model of infinite and scarce goods
You talk about the "model of infinite and scarce goods" as if Mike is recommending that this is how the "world" SHOULD be. I think he's telling us that this is how the "world" IS or is becoming. His recommendations and reporting are more about how to cope with this new reality.
Next >>