Re: [videoblogging] New daily web news/comedy show

[Irina]

hey cute show!
i liked kim's personality very "talk soup" which i guess is now just "the
soup" i think

On 10/17/07, Ricky Marson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   The website I work for, ElasticWaist  ,
> launched a new daily web show this week, called
> the Daily Special. It is funny, smart take on all kinds of stuff
> going on in the world today, particularly affecting women. Check it
> out! Here is the link where you can find today's episode:
>
> http://www.elasticwaist.com/elastic_waist/2007/10/the-daily-spe-1.html
> 
>
> Ricky
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>



-- 
http://geekentertainment.tv


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Irina]

they can try to define it however they want but bloggers report the news and
thats what journalism is money or not see this article in the  post today


*Crackdowns On Bloggers Increasing, Survey Finds*

By Nora Boustany
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, October 17, 2007; A14

Government repression in some countries has shifted from journalists to
bloggers, with the vitality of the Internet triggering a more focused
crackdown as blogs increasingly take the place of mainstream news media,
according to Lucie Morillon, Washington director of the advocacy group
Reporters
Without 
Borders
.

"Countries that were not sentencing journalists to prison terms anymore have
been doing it these last months for bloggers. This is the case in
Egyptand
Jordan," she said yesterday as the group released its sixth annual
Worldwide
Press Freedom Index . Egypt
ranked 146th and Jordan 122nd in press freedom among the 169 countries for
which data were available.

Reporters Without Borders said major industrialized countries, including the
United States, made slight progress, moving up several notches, with the
exception of 
Russia.
Icelandtopped
the list for press freedom in the survey, and
Eritrearanked
last.

While not all press freedom violations were known in the countries ranked
second and third from the bottom -- North
Koreaand
Turkmenistan--
"Eritrea deserves to be at the bottom," the group said. Eritrean
President Isaias Afwerki has banished privately owned press outlets and
jailed the few journalists who have dared criticize the government, it said.
"We know that four of them have died in detention and we have every reason
to fear that others will suffer the same fate," the group added.

Most democracies improved their ranking, with the United States moving up to
48th place from last year's 53rd, Morillon said.

The reason the United States did not make the top 30 is because videographer
and blogger Josh Wolf spent almost eight months in jail for not turning over
video footage of a demonstration in San
Franciscoand
because the confidentiality of sources is under continued attack, she
said. Cameraman Sami al-Hajj, from al-Jazeera satellite television, is still
being held without charges at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba ,
and journalist Chauncey
Baileywas
killed in
Oakland,
Calif.,
after his coverage made him a target, she added.

Outside 
Europe,
no region has been spared censorship or violence toward journalists.

"We are particularly disturbed by the situation in
Burma,"
Reporters Without Borders said. "The military junta's crackdown on
demonstrations bodes ill for the future of basic freedoms. . . . Journalists
continue to work under the yoke of harsh censorship from which nothing
escapes, not even small ads."

Chinawas
at the low end of the index, in 163rd place. "With less than a year to
go to the 2008 Olympics, the reforms and the releases of imprisoned
journalists so often promised by the authorities seem to be a vain hope,"
the group said.

Concerning 
Uzbekistan(160th),
Reporters Without Borders said it feared a wave of repression would
target the handful of independent journalists left in the run-up to the
presidential election in December.

In the Palestinian territories (158th), the threat has changed, according to
Morillon. "Two years ago, it was coming from the Israeli forces shooting at
Palestinian reporters. These days, the main threat comes from internal
conflicts and the rivalry between
Fatahand
Hamas ,"
she added.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] rixer reporter for Marrakech

[Irina]

On 10/15/07, Karine G. Barzegar < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hello,

I'll be in Marrakech from October 22nd till October 27. I don't
know the city and would love to meet up for a mint tea or a couscous
in town... Also if anybody knows a good fixer/reporter, Moroccan and
anglophone, able to do on-camera work, I'm very much interested in
contacting and meeting him/her during this trip... He or she would be
an on-camera guide in a tourism show for an international/anglophone
TV network...

Best,
K

Karine G. Barzegar
8, rue Jean-Baptiste Dumay
75020, Paris
Tel: 06 14 19 83 72

Re: [videoblogging] Let's All Video Rupert

[Irina]

oh i would totally do this if i was in the city!
is anyone going?

On 10/17/07, wabyradio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   Our little web efforts from suburban Melbourne have resulted in Rupert
> Murdoch having to
> be questioned at his annual general meeting about why (after advocating
> bringing
> democracy to Iraq) he won't bring democracy to his own company News Corp
> and insists
> on a jerrymander of votes in his own family's favour.
> Our fearless leader Stephen Mayne is travelling to New York to attend the
> meeting and we
> will try and cover the event courtesy of a blogging resource we made
> contact with through
> this group.
> Traditionally Rupert allows all cameras to cover his entrance to the
> meeting and video him
> at the board table and then kicks everyone out.
> Only those who are shareholders are the ones who can ask questions
> directly to Rupert
> and he has to answer them without hiding behind his PR people.
> It would be great if as many bloggers could show the world's most powerful
> media
> operator the power and independence of the video blog by showing up,
> taping him and
> each expressing their own opinion about anything Murdoch, from Fox News,
> 20th Century
> Fox to the New York Post. Anything!!!
> The meeting is Friday October 19 and is located at the Hudson Theatre 145
> W 44th Street
> New York.
> In the past, reporters from the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal have
> attended as
> members of the press.
> Stephen will be the tall guy with the Australian accent. He can be reached
> beforehand at
> the Pod Hotel 212.355.0300. If you can't come and want him to ask anything
> on your
> behalf you can email him at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> It would be great to see you all.
>
> Paul Bendat
> http://maynereport.blip.tv
>
>  
>



-- 
http://geekentertainment.tv


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Advice on video blog site design

[Irina]

oh what a pretty site
looks like u have plenty of room on the sides as well
i like the idea of having the videos across the top like
http://newteevee.com or down the side in a similar fashion!

On 10/16/07, Nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   Hi all,
>
> I'm after some advice on the design of our videoblog.
> http://www.milkwood.net
>
> We have a variety of content on our site, with about 50% of the blog
> posts having video content. People can subscribe to the full blog
> feeds or just the videos.
>
> Often the videos end up becoming lost in the blog posts. I'm looking
> for suggestions about how I can feature the videos more prominently.
> We host with Blip.tv
>
> I basically am thinking about some kind of episode scroller across the
> top of the front page, that turns into a player when someone clicks an
> episode.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Nick
>
>  
>



-- 
http://geekentertainment.tv


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: YouTube's new content id tool now in beta

[Kenya Allmond]

> Once again, the whole thing's retarded.  None of this would even be
> happening if YouTube hadn't been *BUILT* on blatant piracy from day 1.

I agree.  The exact matching is ridiculous and isn't going to find anything but 
videos that are either directly from the studios or mass downloaded from 
somewhere else.  Only one byte of the file needs to be changed for the hash 
values not to match.

As far as the audio, I'd imagine that it will be similar to Verizon's V Cast 
Song Id where you play a song into the phone and get back the song title, 
artist, etc.  I read that there are a lot of false positives.  Like you said I 
don't think they are going to actually check anything and it's advantageous for 
copyright holders to have false positives because they can control other folks 
stuff.
 

. . .

kenya allmond

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://kenya.allmond.us

vm/f 202.478.0490






__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: Ideal video-ad platform for an online show

[Bill Cammack]

For that, post your videos on http://blip.tv and pay them to serve
post-roll advertisements that YOU choose/create yourself.

--
Bill Cammack
http://reelsolid.tv


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Renat Zarbailov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Thanks Bill for helpful insight into this subject, as well as the 
> link to Jonnygolstein.com interview with Dina Kaplan.
> The thing is that I just brought up Brazil as an example. What I 
> actually meant is demographic-targetted video ads. The show creators 
> buy this backend video-ad serving software and handle the 
> advertising themselves, of course it's harder this way, as opposed 
> to having Blip.tv marketters handle it, but if the show has lots of 
> monthly hits I think it's worth hiring a PR staff that will do all 
> the business part in return for a share in the revenues.
> 
> What do you guys think? 
> 
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > These are all interesting ideas, but I think they're too intricate 
> to
> > be feasible right now.  I don't know that there's such a thing as
> > "Brazilian local video ad providers", for instance.  The way it 
> seems
> > right now is that there are a couple of groups that serve a bunch 
> of
> > different videos and are looking for lots of hits to serve their
> > commercials on.  I don't think there are mom & pop stores that 
> would
> > like to advertise locally on internet shows that seek out
> > opportunities like the ones you're describing.
> > 
> > Also, this is the internet.  People watch stuff from everywhere. 
> > There's no guarantee that someone in Iowa watching something in 
> Brazil
> > will have an "Iowa local video ad provider" that wants to serve 
> videos
> > on Brazilian shows.
> > 
> > Check out Jonny Goldstein's show with Dina Kaplan (blip.tv) for 
> some
> > insight on sponsorship / advertising => 
> > 
> > --
> > Bill Cammack
> > http://billcammack.com
> > 
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Renat Zarbailov" 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I was wondering if anyone knows a solution, aside from 
> Brightcove 
> > > and Blip, that will enable the video content provider to host 
> his 
> > > own videos that can have auto-modular pre-roll, mid-roll, and 
> post-
> > > roll clickable video ads.
> > > 
> > > In other words here is a scenario that would really hit home for 
> a 
> > > show content provider;
> > > 
> > > 1.The end-user visits the site, presses play in the Flash 
> player. 
> > > The system is intelligent enough to figure out where the end-
> user is 
> > > located in the world by his IP address, points all video ads 
> that 
> > > are local to that end-user. If the end-user logs-in in Brazil, 
> all 
> > > the video ads are served from Brazilian local video ad 
> providers. 
> > > Also if the show's original language is English, right away the 
> end-
> > > user is presented with large message that pauses the show asking 
> in 
> > > Portuguese "Watch in Portuguese?" Yes/No. Of course when the 
> content 
> > > provider is publishing the content he will have to provide 
> multiple 
> > > language audio streams, just like DVD movies approach.
> > > 
> > > 2. Somewhere along the show the end-user is presented with a mid-
> > > roll video ad that the creators of the show approve of. So say 
> if 
> > > the creators of the show actually tested a product or service 
> only 
> > > then they allow the video ads to run, in other words complete 
> > > control over ad serving. As well as ad expiration.
> > > 
> > > It's like a flash streaming server software/ad-serving engine 
> that 
> > > works as a package providing the show creators complete control 
> over 
> > > hosting/publishing, plus it install like wordpress on a web host 
> > > server. Allowing to choose the video resolution and bandwith 
> beyond 
> > > 320 X 240, and 500kbps. Therefore all the ad revenues go to the 
> show 
> > > creators.
> > > 
> > > Any comments/suggestions are truly appreacited
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > 
> > > Renat
> > >
> >
>

Re: [videoblogging] YouTube's new content id tool now in beta

[Kenya Allmond]

I posted this as there has been much discussion about YouTube, take down 
notices, and copyright infringement.
 

- Original Message 
From: Patrick Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:05:43 PM
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] YouTube's new content id tool now in beta


Hi everyone:
On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/17/07, Kenya Allmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > Google's new content id tool "YouTube Video Identification" is now
 in beta.  It will find and block exact same copies of videos by hash
 value.  I don't see it mentioned but they are developing an audio
 matching tool as well that finds videos containing music based on songs in
 their database.
>  > http://www.youtube.com/t/video_id_about
>
>  I believe Lucas Gonze has talked about this kind of technology
>  before...the ability to match sound wavelengths. supposedly there
 are
>  ways to get around it.
>
>  if commercial companies continue to crack down on fans remixing
 videos
>  and using songs in their personal videos, they'll keep reaping bad
>  publicity.
>
>  they will also be openings for other sites to rise up if Youtube too
>  restrictive.
>  This is also encourage more artists to go independent...and the
>  audience to support them.

Not only that, but unless I'm missing something here, I don't see
anything beneficial for videobloggers or even the average Joe who post
videos there.  When I saw your post in my filter list Kendra, I
thought it was an announcement of YouTube rolling out the downloadable
video service it had promised a few months back (Either that or the
return of director accounts after an overhaul).

All this is is simply good news for people like the RIAA and the MPAA.
 As such, I don't think I'll be participating in this program

Just my honest opinion

Cheers :D

-- 
Pat Cook
Denver, Colorado
PODCASTS -
**NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/


 
Yahoo! Groups Links








__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Ron Watson]

Thank you Josh!

If I could I'd vote for you for Mayor!

Unfortunately, for myself, I've given up fighting.

I don't have the time or the energy, and I have to make a living.

It's a real shame too. I'm pretty good at seeing the big picture...  
finding, seeing, and connecting the dots and drawing the lines.

If I had a pair, I'd put my camera where my mouth is and do some  
media, but I'm afraid that it would destroy our business and our  
livelihood.

I believe I've been at the forefront of understanding the corporate  
monster that's about to gobble America right up, and while many are  
coming around these days, I think it's too little too late.

I'll be happy to support you and anyone who stands up to place people  
before profit, but my days of fighting the establishment are pretty  
much over.

That's really painful to read for me, but I think that's it.

Here's to you kickin' some ass, Josh!

Cheers,

Ron Watson


On the Web:
Pawsitive Vybe
K9Disc.com
Art of K9Disc
Discdog Radio
Discdog TV


On Oct 17, 2007, at 7:38 PM, Josh Wolf wrote:

> Pat,
>
> Would I have been covered under the law? Possibly, due to the fact
> that I sold stringer footage of the protest that night, but even that
> is unclear due to the addition of the word "substantial" to the text
> of the law.
>
> I've discussed this briefly with one of my attorney's and he's a
> little more optimistic than I am, but yeah, we're basically all on
> the same page here. This of course, doesn't mean that you're not
> protected under the free speech provision of the first amendment, but
> it does mean that if the government comes after your unpublished
> materials or wants to know what you discussed with your subject off-
> camera under the promise of confidentiality then you've got almost
> nothing in federal court. If this shield bill goes through and
> becomes law then those who make their living off journalism *will* be
> afforded a slightly greater level of protections but the law is far
> from perfect in terms of how it will protect them too.
>
> Basically watching this law progress has left me feeling even more
> hopeless about our government and politics -- it doesn't help that my
> race for mayor has been a similar voyage. But the important thing is
> that I don't give up, and I'm never going to give up...
>
> Josh
>
> On Oct 17, 2007, at 4:25 PM, Patrick Cook wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone:
> >
> > On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > The US House of Representatives recently passed a Federal Shield
> > law for
> > > journalist.
> > > It's doesnt seem to please anyone fully, but it is a start.
> > >
> > > The interesting part is how they defined Journalist:
> > >
> > > In its current form, the law protects only "a person who, for
> > financial gain
> > > or livelihood, is engaged in journalism," which involves the
> > "gathering,
> > > preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing,
> > > reporting, or publishing of news or information that concerns  
> local,
> > > national, or international events or other matters of public
> > interest for
> > > dissemination to the public.
> > >
> > > So this could include bloggers if what you do is regularly cover
> > topics as
> > > your livelihood.
> >
> > So basically put - Unless I'm missing something here, the Josh  
> Wolf's
> > (Sorry to bring up your name here Josh if you're reading this) of  
> the
> > world *aren't* considered "journalists" as defined under this  
> law. Am
> > I correct?
> >
> > Perhaps someone who's in the legal profession could jump in here?
> >
> > Assuming I am correct, this isn't acceptable. There's a little thing
> > called FREE SPEECH. Congress needs to realize this.
> >
> > Then again, we *are* talking about a Congress who, according to Air
> > America, has a deplorable ELEVEN PERCENT voter approval rate, so
> >
> > Cheers :D
> >
> > --
> > Pat Cook
> > Denver, Colorado
> > PODCASTS -
> > **NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http:// 
> asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
> > THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://
> > thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: What is a journalist--Defined

[wabyradio]

This is exactly the issue I am deliberately to raising by bloggers seeking 
admission to the 
News Corp meeting in whatever capacity they choose.  A For-Profit intention 
should be 
irrelevant and the method of distribution should be too.
Hope you all can join us.

Paul Bendat
http://maynereport.blip.tv/

> On Oct 17, 2007, at 2:57 PM, Jay dedman wrote:
> 
> > > I just don't see how a "free and independent press" doesn't  
> > include people
> > > who get a bug up their rear and publishing something, with no  
> > regard for
> > > their livelihood or personal financial gain. What about journalism
> > > students, who often take chances on writing provocative stuff - 
> > because- they
> > > have no need to earn a paycheck? To me, this was designed to  
> > apply only to
> > > the corporate press who have a vested interest in being the only
> > > organizations allowed to call employees and freelancers  
> > "journalists."
> > > As David points out, it only matters how this applies in the  
> > courts. A law
> > > doesn't mean much without legal precedent to give it nuance.
> >
> > agreed.
> > what issue are they traying to solve?
> > why not just say "anyone can say whatever they want without having  
> > to prove it."
> > To me, it sounds like Congress is trying to make sure the person has a
> > history of telling stories which makes them more trustworthy.
> >
> > Lets talk about some use cases.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > -- 
> > http://jaydedman.com
> > 917 371 6790
> > Video: http://ryanishungry.com
> > Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
> > RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Free compression software

[Patrick Cook]

Hi everyone:

On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I use a program called SUPER (uses ffmpeg,
>  >  Mencoder,MPlayer,x264,ffmpeg2theora, libavcodec)
>  >  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUPER_%28software%29
>
>  cool.
>  I found a cross platform transcoding tool here:
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avidemux
>
>  I made a list here:
>  http://videoblogginggroup.pbwiki.com/Compression-and-Transcoding-sofware

Along these same lines, people might also wanna check out this page on
Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_editing_software

JFYI... :D

Cheers :D

-- 
Pat Cook
Denver, Colorado
PODCASTS -
**NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: In your opinion what is "THE" yearly videoblog/video podcasting event to att

[schlomo rabinowitz]

Instead of turning conference-making into a job/career, we took the year
off.

Believe me when I say this: Labors of Love makes a day job a little harder.
And we do love it madly and deeply.



On 10/17/07, Chumley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   Wasn't that back in 2006? Its almost 2008 and I don't see any coming
> soon stuff on the website or anything.
>
> Rev. Chumley
> Cult of UHF
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com ,
> "schlomo rabinowitz"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > It already happened: Vloggercon:)
> >
> > Relive it through the videos of the event:
> > 
> >
> > And yes, it will happen again. Just like Friday the 13th, right
> when you
> > think its over, it rears its head again.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/17/07, Chumley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > You see so many podcamps and such floating around, there is the
> > > podcasting track at DragonCon, PNME, once upon a time the Vloggies,
> > > and I've only ever been to DragonCon and thats only because I was
> > > going anyway. (and that mostly focuses on audio podcasting).
> > >
> > > I'd love to find out what the big don't miss video event is, so I
> > > could plan to go to it eventually as I'd love to be able to meet some
> > > of my peers as it were.
> > >
> > > Whats the skinny?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Schlomo Rabinowitz
> > http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> > http://hatfactory.net
> > AIM:schlomochat
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>  
>



-- 
Schlomo Rabinowitz
http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
http://hatfactory.net
AIM:schlomochat


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: Ideal video-ad platform for an online show

[Renat Zarbailov]

Thanks Bill for helpful insight into this subject, as well as the 
link to Jonnygolstein.com interview with Dina Kaplan.
The thing is that I just brought up Brazil as an example. What I 
actually meant is demographic-targetted video ads. The show creators 
buy this backend video-ad serving software and handle the 
advertising themselves, of course it's harder this way, as opposed 
to having Blip.tv marketters handle it, but if the show has lots of 
monthly hits I think it's worth hiring a PR staff that will do all 
the business part in return for a share in the revenues.

What do you guys think? 


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> These are all interesting ideas, but I think they're too intricate 
to
> be feasible right now.  I don't know that there's such a thing as
> "Brazilian local video ad providers", for instance.  The way it 
seems
> right now is that there are a couple of groups that serve a bunch 
of
> different videos and are looking for lots of hits to serve their
> commercials on.  I don't think there are mom & pop stores that 
would
> like to advertise locally on internet shows that seek out
> opportunities like the ones you're describing.
> 
> Also, this is the internet.  People watch stuff from everywhere. 
> There's no guarantee that someone in Iowa watching something in 
Brazil
> will have an "Iowa local video ad provider" that wants to serve 
videos
> on Brazilian shows.
> 
> Check out Jonny Goldstein's show with Dina Kaplan (blip.tv) for 
some
> insight on sponsorship / advertising => 
> 
> --
> Bill Cammack
> http://billcammack.com
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Renat Zarbailov" 
> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering if anyone knows a solution, aside from 
Brightcove 
> > and Blip, that will enable the video content provider to host 
his 
> > own videos that can have auto-modular pre-roll, mid-roll, and 
post-
> > roll clickable video ads.
> > 
> > In other words here is a scenario that would really hit home for 
a 
> > show content provider;
> > 
> > 1.The end-user visits the site, presses play in the Flash 
player. 
> > The system is intelligent enough to figure out where the end-
user is 
> > located in the world by his IP address, points all video ads 
that 
> > are local to that end-user. If the end-user logs-in in Brazil, 
all 
> > the video ads are served from Brazilian local video ad 
providers. 
> > Also if the show's original language is English, right away the 
end-
> > user is presented with large message that pauses the show asking 
in 
> > Portuguese "Watch in Portuguese?" Yes/No. Of course when the 
content 
> > provider is publishing the content he will have to provide 
multiple 
> > language audio streams, just like DVD movies approach.
> > 
> > 2. Somewhere along the show the end-user is presented with a mid-
> > roll video ad that the creators of the show approve of. So say 
if 
> > the creators of the show actually tested a product or service 
only 
> > then they allow the video ads to run, in other words complete 
> > control over ad serving. As well as ad expiration.
> > 
> > It's like a flash streaming server software/ad-serving engine 
that 
> > works as a package providing the show creators complete control 
over 
> > hosting/publishing, plus it install like wordpress on a web host 
> > server. Allowing to choose the video resolution and bandwith 
beyond 
> > 320 X 240, and 500kbps. Therefore all the ad revenues go to the 
show 
> > creators.
> > 
> > Any comments/suggestions are truly appreacited
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > Renat
> >
>

Re: [videoblogging] Domain question

[Rupert]

I have a .tv domain (and I'm happier to contribute to the Tuvaluan  
economy than to whomever gets .com fees)

Some bastard or robot stole twittervlog.com. i didn't buy it quick  
enough after launching as twittervlog.blogspot.com

So I got twittervlog.tv instead

and only later realised the unintended way in which the letters TV  
seem also to stand for TwitterVlog. (Um, I had to have that pointed  
out to me at Pixelodeon. Duh.)

But it's a real pain when trying to give my url to non-techie  
civilians.  they're often confused or irritated by having to  
remember .tv instead of .com or .co.uk.

And that's in addition to them having to remember a stupid name like  
Twittervlog.

Most of my RL friends and relatives tell me they just Google Rupert  
Howe instead.

So I wish I could just give them a simple .com domain.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv/




On 18 Oct 2007, at 01:05, Adrian Miles wrote:

around the 17/10/07 John Oeffinger mentioned about [videoblogging]
Domain question that:
 >If you are not migrating to the .tv domains, is it because of the
 >domain name cost? Thanks for your insight...John

no, because it isn't tv :-), (and neither do I live or work in
Tuvalu). Don't get me started on the commercialisation of country
level domains when they're supposed to refer to geographic/state
entitie.
-- 
cheers
Adrian Miles
this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x]
vogmae.net.au
[official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: In your opinion what is "THE" yearly videoblog/video podcasting event to att

[Chumley]

Wasn't that back in 2006? Its almost 2008 and I don't see any coming
soon stuff on the website or anything.

Rev. Chumley
Cult of UHF

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It already happened: Vloggercon:)
> 
> Relive it through the videos of the event:
> 
> 
> And yes, it will happen again.  Just like Friday the 13th, right
when you
> think its over, it rears its head again.
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/17/07, Chumley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   You see so many podcamps and such floating around, there is the
> > podcasting track at DragonCon, PNME, once upon a time the Vloggies,
> > and I've only ever been to DragonCon and thats only because I was
> > going anyway. (and that mostly focuses on audio podcasting).
> >
> > I'd love to find out what the big don't miss video event is, so I
> > could plan to go to it eventually as I'd love to be able to meet some
> > of my peers as it were.
> >
> > Whats the skinny?
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://hatfactory.net
> AIM:schlomochat
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Steve Rhodes]

 Josh is a journalist.

 It even says on the San Francisco ballot

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ari/1606818196/



-- 
Steve Rhodes

http://flickr.com/photos/ari/  photos

http://ari.typepad.com

http://tigerbeat.vox.com blogs

http://del.icio.us/tigerbeat   interesting articles & sites

http://twitter.com/tigerbeat


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] In your opinion what is "THE" yearly videoblog/video podcasting event to attend?

[schlomo rabinowitz]

It already happened: Vloggercon:)

Relive it through the videos of the event:


And yes, it will happen again.  Just like Friday the 13th, right when you
think its over, it rears its head again.



On 10/17/07, Chumley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   You see so many podcamps and such floating around, there is the
> podcasting track at DragonCon, PNME, once upon a time the Vloggies,
> and I've only ever been to DragonCon and thats only because I was
> going anyway. (and that mostly focuses on audio podcasting).
>
> I'd love to find out what the big don't miss video event is, so I
> could plan to go to it eventually as I'd love to be able to meet some
> of my peers as it were.
>
> Whats the skinny?
>
>  
>



-- 
Schlomo Rabinowitz
http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
http://hatfactory.net
AIM:schlomochat


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] In your opinion what is "THE" yearly videoblog/video podcasting event to attend?

[Irina]

i think this is the event of the year
http://youarethewinner.org/

On 10/17/07, Chumley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   You see so many podcamps and such floating around, there is the
> podcasting track at DragonCon, PNME, once upon a time the Vloggies,
> and I've only ever been to DragonCon and thats only because I was
> going anyway. (and that mostly focuses on audio podcasting).
>
> I'd love to find out what the big don't miss video event is, so I
> could plan to go to it eventually as I'd love to be able to meet some
> of my peers as it were.
>
> Whats the skinny?
>
>  
>



-- 
http://geekentertainment.tv


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Domain question

[Adrian Miles]

around the 17/10/07 John Oeffinger mentioned about [videoblogging] 
Domain question that:
>If you are not migrating to the .tv domains, is it because of the
>domain name cost? Thanks for your insight...John

no, because it isn't tv :-), (and neither do I live or work in 
Tuvalu). Don't get me started on the commercialisation of country 
level domains when they're supposed to refer to geographic/state 
entitie.
-- 
cheers
Adrian Miles
this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x]
vogmae.net.au
[official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined [CNET: How politicians weakened a legal shield for bloggers]

[Patrick Cook]

Hi everyone:

On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Here's CNET's take on the issue and how it was watered down. As noted
>  >  earlier, this will go to the courts...
>  
> http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9799178-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5
>
>  Thanks for the link.
>  Much better breakdown of the new Shield law that still needs to be
>  approved by the Senate and then signed by the President.

We might see a version of the bill pass both houses of Congress but I
think it's pretty safe to say that HELL WOULD FREEZE OVER before
President Bush (Or any other President for that matter) puts his/her
signature on it.

Dare I say it but I think this will be something that the Supreme
Court will be stuck making into law IMO.

Just my opinion :D

Cheers :D

-- 
Pat Cook
Denver, Colorado
PODCASTS -
**NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Patrick Cook]

Hi everyone:

On 10/17/07, Josh Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Pat,
>
>  Would I have been covered under the law? Possibly, due to the fact
>  that I sold stringer footage of the protest that night, but even that
>  is unclear due to the addition of the word "substantial" to the text
>  of the law.

Well if you were to go out and cover a similar protest/riot tomorrow,
I'd be willing to bet you'd be covered now that you work at CNET. :D

>  I've discussed this briefly with one of my attorney's and he's a
>  little more optimistic than I am, but yeah, we're basically all on
>  the same page here. This of course, doesn't mean that you're not
>  protected under the free speech provision of the first amendment, but
>  it does mean that if the government comes after your unpublished
>  materials or wants to know what you discussed with your subject off-
>  camera under the promise of confidentiality then you've got almost
>  nothing in federal court. If this shield bill goes through and
>  becomes law then those who make their living off journalism *will* be
>  afforded a slightly greater level of protections but the law is far
>  from perfect in terms of how it will protect them too.
>
>  Basically watching this law progress has left me feeling even more
>  hopeless about our government and politics -- it doesn't help that my
>  race for mayor has been a similar voyage. But the important thing is
>  that I don't give up, and I'm never going to give up...

Good.  Don't give up.  It's quite obvious the right-wing controlled
government has been brainwashed by the very media it manipulates that
UNLESS you are political blogger FOR A LIVING, you're essentially a
nobody. :(

That means people like me would, as you indicated above, likely be
covered only by virtue of the First Ammendment of The Consititution.
This is almost EXACTLY why I said that the law in its current form is
UNACCEPTABLE.

But either way, I wouldn't expect President Bush to sign it into law
(In fact, I'd be FLOORED if he did), so we probably shouldn't fret
about it too much.

Just my $.02 worth & my opinion :D

Cheers :D

-- 
Pat Cook
Denver, Colorado
PODCASTS -
**NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/

[videoblogging] In your opinion what is "THE" yearly videoblog/video podcasting event to attend?

[Chumley]

You see so many podcamps and such floating around, there is the
podcasting track at DragonCon, PNME, once upon a time the Vloggies,
and I've only ever been to DragonCon and thats only because I was
going anyway. (and that mostly focuses on audio podcasting).

I'd love to find out what the big don't miss video event is, so I
could plan to go to it eventually as I'd love to be able to meet some
of my peers as it were.

Whats the skinny?

Re: [videoblogging] Let's All Video Rupert

[Rupert]

oh, that title got me all excited.
great idea.
wish i could make it.

On 17 Oct 2007, at 19:59, Jay dedman wrote:

 > It would be great if as many bloggers could show the world's most  
powerful media
 > operator the power and independence of the video blog by showing  
up, taping him and
 > each expressing their own opinion about anything Murdoch, from Fox  
News, 20th Century
 > Fox to the New York Post. Anything!!!
 > The meeting is Friday October 19 and is located at the Hudson  
Theatre 145 W 44th Street
 > New York.
 > In the past, reporters from the NY Times and the Wall Street  
Journal have attended as
 > members of the press.
 > Stephen will be the tall guy with the Australian accent. He can be  
reached beforehand at
 > the Pod Hotel 212.355.0300. If you can't come and want him to ask  
anything on your
 > behalf you can email him at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > It would be great to see you all.

I would love to see videobloggers cover Rupert Murdoch.
he's hypnotizing.

Jay

-- 
http://jaydedman.com
917 371 6790
Video: http://ryanishungry.com
Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: YouTube's new content id tool now in beta

[Bill Cammack]

Interesting post, Kenya.

Blocking exact same copies of videos is of zero value.

Whether you can find one example of a copyrighted song or eight of
them makes no difference whatsoever.

As far as the audio-matching tool, I haven't researched stuff like
this, but I say it's impossible... at least for videos where there's
dialogue or other sounds over the music.  If you look at audio
waveforms, you'll know you can't exactly match The Beatles' "Penny
Lane" with a video where someone used "Penny Lane" as the background
music while they talk over it or show videos with audio running as
well.  The waveforms don't match, so the best YouTube can do is
*GUESS* that "Penny Lane" MIGHT be used in this video.  They'll have
better success for those videos where people just ripped the song
directly and posted it to YouTube with pictures over it or soundless
video or if they took a video directly from a television channel like MTV.

The only way to implement this properly is to add the human component
of having people responsible for physically checking each video that
comes up 'flagged', and then making decisions based on that.  YouTube
isn't going to do that, because they CURRENTLY don't have the human
component in place to check videos labeled exactly what they are, with
the actual musicians playing the music in the videos and uploaded by
someone with some corny screen name.

If they try to bypass this and put it in the hands of the copyright
holders, there's no incentive for them to actually watch or listen to
the videos in question.  They would be able to block videos if they
wanted to on the strength that YouTube GUESSED that their music was
being used in someone's video.

Once again, the whole thing's retarded.  None of this would even be
happening if YouTube hadn't been *BUILT* on blatant piracy from day 1.

--
Bill Cammack
http://billcammack.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Kenya Allmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Google's new content id tool "YouTube Video Identification" is now
in beta.  It will find and block exact same copies of videos by hash
value.  I don't see it mentioned but they are developing an audio
matching tool as well that finds videos containing music based on
songs in their database.
> http://www.youtube.com/t/video_id_about
> 
> From the Google blog:
> In implementing this technology, we are committed to supporting new
> forms of original creativity, protecting fair use, and providing a
> seamless user experience—all while we help rights owners easily manage
> their content.
>
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/latest-content-id-tool-for-youtube.html
> 
> I also found this quote interesting "We provide content owners with
an electronic notification and takedown
> tool, to help them more easily identify their material and notify us to
> take it down with the click of a mouse."  The "click of a mouse" is
what bothers me.
>  
> 
> . . .
> 
> kenya allmond
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> http://kenya.allmond.us
> 
> vm/f 202.478.0490
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To thine own self be true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Josh Wolf]

Pat,

Would I have been covered under the law? Possibly, due to the fact  
that I sold stringer footage of the protest that night, but even that  
is unclear due to the addition of the word "substantial" to the text  
of the law.

I've discussed this briefly with one of my attorney's and he's a  
little more optimistic than I am, but yeah, we're basically all on  
the same page here. This of course, doesn't mean that you're not  
protected under the free speech provision of the first amendment, but  
it does mean that if the government comes after your unpublished  
materials or wants to know what you discussed with your subject off- 
camera under the promise of confidentiality then you've got almost  
nothing in federal court. If this shield bill goes through and  
becomes law then those who make their living off journalism *will* be  
afforded a slightly greater level of protections but the law is far  
from perfect in terms of how it will protect them too.

Basically watching this law progress has left me feeling even more  
hopeless about our government and politics -- it doesn't help that my  
race for mayor has been a similar voyage. But the important thing is  
that I don't give up, and I'm never going to give up...

Josh


On Oct 17, 2007, at 4:25 PM, Patrick Cook wrote:

> Hi everyone:
>
> On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The US House of Representatives recently passed a Federal Shield  
> law for
> > journalist.
> > It's doesnt seem to please anyone fully, but it is a start.
> >
> > The interesting part is how they defined Journalist:
> >
> > In its current form, the law protects only "a person who, for  
> financial gain
> > or livelihood, is engaged in journalism," which involves the  
> "gathering,
> > preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing,
> > reporting, or publishing of news or information that concerns local,
> > national, or international events or other matters of public  
> interest for
> > dissemination to the public.
> >
> > So this could include bloggers if what you do is regularly cover  
> topics as
> > your livelihood.
>
> So basically put - Unless I'm missing something here, the Josh Wolf's
> (Sorry to bring up your name here Josh if you're reading this) of the
> world *aren't* considered "journalists" as defined under this law. Am
> I correct?
>
> Perhaps someone who's in the legal profession could jump in here?
>
> Assuming I am correct, this isn't acceptable. There's a little thing
> called FREE SPEECH. Congress needs to realize this.
>
> Then again, we *are* talking about a Congress who, according to Air
> America, has a deplorable ELEVEN PERCENT voter approval rate, so
>
> Cheers :D
>
> -- 
> Pat Cook
> Denver, Colorado
> PODCASTS -
> **NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
> THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http:// 
> thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Patrick Cook]

Hi everyone:

On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The US House of Representatives recently passed a Federal Shield law for
>  journalist.
>  It's doesnt seem to please anyone fully, but it is a start.
>
>  The interesting part is how they defined Journalist:
>
>  In its current form, the law protects only "a person who, for financial gain
>  or livelihood, is engaged in journalism," which involves the "gathering,
>  preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing,
>  reporting, or publishing of news or information that concerns local,
>  national, or international events or other matters of public interest for
>  dissemination to the public.
>
>  So this could include bloggers if what you do is regularly cover topics as
>  your livelihood.

So basically put - Unless I'm missing something here, the Josh Wolf's
(Sorry to bring up your name here Josh if you're reading this) of the
world *aren't* considered "journalists" as defined under this law.  Am
I correct?

Perhaps someone who's in the legal profession could jump in here?

Assuming I am correct, this isn't acceptable.  There's a little thing
called FREE SPEECH.  Congress needs to realize this.

Then again, we *are* talking about a Congress who, according to Air
America, has a deplorable ELEVEN PERCENT voter approval rate, so

Cheers :D

-- 
Pat Cook
Denver, Colorado
PODCASTS -
**NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/

[videoblogging] Re: Domain question

[Bill Cammack]

+1 to what Rox said.

It depends on what you're branding.

If you're branding your videos, go with .TV.

If you're branding a wide selection of items or ideas that *happen* to
include video, go with .COM.

--
Bill Cammack
http://reelsolid.tv
http://billcammack.com


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Oeffinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Good point Rox, these will primarily be short 5 minute weekly clips  
> on 3 different sites. One weekly clip is based on historical stuff.  
> The other two are weekly summaries of industry stuff (2 different  
> industries - connecting the dots kinda things.)
> On Oct 17, 2007, at 1:02 PM, Roxanne Darling wrote:
> 
> > If you are producing an internet video series or show aka Internet TV,
> > I think.tv helps communicate that message much more effectively than a
> > dot com address.
> >
> > If you have a blog that sometimes includes video, dot com is more  
> > suitable IMO.
> >
> > Aloha,
> >
> > Rox
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: New daily web news/comedy show

[Bill Cammack]

Hey Ricky.

I like the overall format of the show.  When I saw the still, it
looked like the generic "host on the edge, graphic over the shoulder"
situation, but you guys went for some interesting stuff.  I'll stay
tuned. :)

Make sure you tell whomever shoots the show to compensate for that
gigantic, non-transparent, turquouise bug in the lower-left corner. 
Today's show featured a plate of food that was completely obscured by
that bug.  I had no idea what the hostess was trying to eat. 
Worst-case scenario, attach something to the camera where you can
physically block out that area with tape so that the cameraperson
knows that whatever's behind the tape won't show up in the video anyway.

I really like the "live hostess" aspect of the show, not trying to use
cuts to create sentences.  I also like the "live studio audience"
aspect to a large degree.  They may have too much to say,
consistently, for being a group never seen.  Then again, I've only
watched one show, so maybe they were seen on Monday or Tuesday.

Taking it to the street for interviews was a fun idea also.

Good Luck with the show! :D

--
Bill Cammack
http://billcammack.com


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Ricky Marson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The website I work for, ElasticWaist  ,
> launched a new daily web show this week, called
> the Daily Special.  It is  funny, smart take on all kinds of stuff
> going on in the world today, particularly affecting women.  Check it
> out!  Here is the link where you can find today's episode:
> 
> http://www.elasticwaist.com/elastic_waist/2007/10/the-daily-spe-1.html
> 
> 
> Ricky
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Adrian Miles]

around the 17/10/07 Jay dedman mentioned about [videoblogging] What 
is a journalist--Defined that:
>So this could include bloggers if what you do is regularly cover topics as
>your livelihood.

well, as long as you do news and information which in journalism 
speak is not opinion and commentary :-)
-- 
cheers
Adrian Miles
this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x]
vogmae.net.au
[official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Adrian Miles]

around the 17/10/07 Jackson West mentioned about Re: [videoblogging] 
What is a journalist--Defined that:
>So legally, you aren't a journalist unless you're a commercial journalist,
>huh? Funny, other 'professions' like medicine and the law aren't tied to
>such mercenary considerations.

no, but unlike journalism medicine and law are professions which 
means there is a professioanl standards body, registration 
requirements (appropriate qualifications etc). Journalism in this 
sense is not a profession (a profession is  a body that you need to 
be qualified to join) as if the local news outlet hires me to report, 
I'm a journalist.
-- 
cheers
Adrian Miles
this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x]
vogmae.net.au
[official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A

Re: [videoblogging] YouTube's new content id tool now in beta

[Patrick Cook]

Hi everyone:
On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/17/07, Kenya Allmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > Google's new content id tool "YouTube Video Identification" is now in 
> beta.  It will find and block exact same copies of videos by hash value.  I 
> don't see it mentioned but they are developing an audio matching tool as well 
> that finds videos containing music based on songs in their database.
>  > http://www.youtube.com/t/video_id_about
>
>  I believe Lucas Gonze has talked about this kind of technology
>  before...the ability to match sound wavelengths. supposedly there are
>  ways to get around it.
>
>  if commercial companies continue to crack down on fans remixing videos
>  and using songs in their personal videos, they'll keep reaping bad
>  publicity.
>
>  they will also be openings for other sites to rise up if Youtube too
>  restrictive.
>  This is also encourage more artists to go independent...and the
>  audience to support them.

Not only that, but unless I'm missing something here, I don't see
anything beneficial for videobloggers or even the average Joe who post
videos there.  When I saw your post in my filter list Kendra, I
thought it was an announcement of YouTube rolling out the downloadable
video service it had promised a few months back (Either that or the
return of director accounts after an overhaul).

All this is is simply good news for people like the RIAA and the MPAA.
 As such, I don't think I'll be participating in this program

Just my honest opinion

Cheers :D

-- 
Pat Cook
Denver, Colorado
PODCASTS -
**NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: What is a journalist--Defined

[Josh Wolf]

Actually, the original language of the bill, the very same language  
that defines a journalist under the Senate version of the bill is  
quite well articulated in that it defines a covered person under the  
act of journalism as opposed to tying it to the profession and the  
economics entailed within.

Josh


On Oct 17, 2007, at 3:31 PM, Jay dedman wrote:

> > The emphasis on financial gain is extremely weird and pretty much  
> unjustifiable. I can see
> > lots of reasons why you need to discriminate between someone who  
> works (for love,
> > money, or bee in bonnet) as a journalist and someone who doess  
> not. Not all bloggers
> > qualify as journalists (citizen or otherwise) and not all need or  
> deserve to be protected by
> > a journalist's shield. But many do and they are being very  
> deliberately excluded here.
> > Are there any other fields where if you don't earn your living  
> from something you have
> > fewer rights?
>
> I wonder what a better way to word it would be.
>
> Lets take Josh Wolf as an example.
> how should it be worded to have included him?
>
> Jay
>
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> Video: http://ryanishungry.com
> Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
> RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] YouTube's new content id tool now in beta

[Jay dedman]

On 10/17/07, Kenya Allmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Google's new content id tool "YouTube Video Identification" is now in beta.  
> It will find and block exact same copies of videos by hash value.  I don't 
> see it mentioned but they are developing an audio matching tool as well that 
> finds videos containing music based on songs in their database.
> http://www.youtube.com/t/video_id_about

I believe Lucas Gonze has talked about this kind of technology
before...the ability to match sound wavelengths. supposedly there are
ways to get around it.

if commercial companies continue to crack down on fans remixing videos
and using songs in their personal videos, they'll keep reaping bad
publicity.

they will also be openings for other sites to rise up if Youtube too
restrictive.
This is also encourage more artists to go independent...and the
audience to support them.

Jay

-- 
http://jaydedman.com
917 371 6790
Video: http://ryanishungry.com
Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9

Re: [videoblogging] Re: What is a journalist--Defined

[Jay dedman]

>  The emphasis on financial gain is extremely weird and pretty much 
> unjustifiable. I can see
>  lots of reasons why you need to discriminate between someone who works (for 
> love,
>  money, or bee in bonnet) as a journalist and someone who doess not. Not all 
> bloggers
>  qualify as journalists (citizen or otherwise) and not all need or deserve to 
> be protected by
>  a journalist's shield. But many do and they are being very deliberately 
> excluded here.
>  Are there any other fields where if you don't earn your living from 
> something you have
>  fewer rights?

I wonder what a better way to word it would be.

Lets take Josh Wolf as an example.
how should it be worded to have included him?

Jay



-- 
http://jaydedman.com
917 371 6790
Video: http://ryanishungry.com
Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9

[videoblogging] YouTube's new content id tool now in beta

[Kenya Allmond]

Google's new content id tool "YouTube Video Identification" is now in beta.  It 
will find and block exact same copies of videos by hash value.  I don't see it 
mentioned but they are developing an audio matching tool as well that finds 
videos containing music based on songs in their database.
http://www.youtube.com/t/video_id_about

>From the Google blog:
In implementing this technology, we are committed to supporting new
forms of original creativity, protecting fair use, and providing a
seamless user experience—all while we help rights owners easily manage
their content.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/latest-content-id-tool-for-youtube.html

I also found this quote interesting "We provide content owners with an 
electronic notification and takedown
tool, to help them more easily identify their material and notify us to
take it down with the click of a mouse."  The "click of a mouse" is what 
bothers me.
 

. . .

kenya allmond

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://kenya.allmond.us

vm/f 202.478.0490




To thine own self be true.




__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: What is a journalist--Defined

[Josh Wolf]

Hi guys, I'm at work -- just getting a chance to check my e-mail now.  
here's a link to what I wrote on my CNET blog: http://blogs.cnet.com/ 
8301-13508_1-9798084-19.html?tag=head

Basically the latest iteration of this bill only protects those who  
earn a "substantial" amount of money from their work as journalists.  
What legally defines substantial is still unclear. As I see it, this  
law is flawed in that it doesn't so much protect the public's right  
to know as it protects the professional's ability to conduct  
business; that might seem like a subtle distinction but from a  
constitutional perspective it's pretty huge.

Had the House's version of the law been on the books, I may still  
have been protected. I sold the footage from that night for about  
$2,000, and I currently have a blog on the CNET blogging network  
which would also act in my favor, but the Senate version of the bill  
only provides protection when there is a strict promise of  
confidentiality. So in all likelihood when the bills are combined  
into one it would've excluded me.

Anyhow, I've got lots to do here at work so I must get going...

Josh

PS -- anyone want to submit videos for RUNtv the college television  
show I'm producing here in Oakland? It's a strictly non-exclusive  
license and we'll pay you $50 for any videos we use. How about it? E- 
mail me a link to your video and we'll it on the show. Thanks.




On Oct 17, 2007, at 2:14 PM, deirdreharvey2002 wrote:

>
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "David Meade"  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi, long time lurker, rare poster here,
>
> > IANAL ... but I wouldn't count on this wording protecting a blogger
> > from the DOJ if they've got some other "day job" and nobody is  
> paying
> > them to over a given story.
>
> The most recent wording is extremely odd in its specificity. It's  
> like they don't want to
> leave any room for the courts to interpret what a commonly used  
> word like "journalism"
> means. Obviously the changing nature of the concept is not  
> something these legislators
> are keen to embrace.
>
> The emphasis on financial gain is extremely weird and pretty much  
> unjustifiable. I can see
> lots of reasons why you need to discriminate between someone who  
> works (for love,
> money, or bee in bonnet) as a journalist and someone who doess not.  
> Not all bloggers
> qualify as journalists (citizen or otherwise) and not all need or  
> deserve to be protected by
> a journalist's shield. But many do and they are being very  
> deliberately excluded here.
>
> Are there any other fields where if you don't earn your living from  
> something you have
> fewer rights?
>
> > ... but it's a very interesting turn of event in anycase.
>
> absolutely.
>
> >
> > On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > So legally, you aren't a journalist unless you're a  
> commercial journalist,
> > > > huh? Funny, other 'professions' like medicine and the law  
> aren't tied to
> > > > such mercenary considerations.
> > >
> > > im not sure i read it that way.
> > > i think they define it as someone who regularly reports on  
> something,
> > > has a track record of reporting.
> > > This is basically what a blogger can be if they are dedicated  
> to a topic.
> > >
> > > I do agree that it's trubling to read "for financial gain or  
> livelihood".
> > > does this mean you must get paid by a commercial company?
> > > can you just get donations from the community?
> > > can you have a day job and blog at night?
> > >
> > > Jay
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.DavidMeade.com
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] New York Noise launches vidblog

[WWWhatsup]

"New York Noise," NYC TV's hit indie music show, is launching a
weekly video blog, "Weekly Noise," available at
http://www.nyc.gov/weeklynoise. Each episode will feature insights about
the City's indie music scene, information on new bands, upcoming
events, new venues, and more. In the same style of "New York
Noise" the television show, "Weekly Noise" will feature a string
of guest hosts and their playful brand of humor. The video blog
will also be available for syndication across the Web.

"Weekly Noise" is NYC TV's second video blog to launch this year
and is part of the station's larger move into the online video
space. In September 2007, NYC TV introduced its online video
player, NYC TV On-Demand, a cutting-edge web site offering
hundreds of high-quality video clips from NYC TV's Emmy Award-
winning shows.

For more information about NYC TV, please visit http://nyc.gov/tv.


---
 WWWhatsup NYC
http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
--- 

[videoblogging] Re: What is a journalist--Defined

[deirdreharvey2002]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "David Meade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi, long time lurker, rare poster here,

> IANAL ... but I wouldn't count on this wording protecting a blogger
> from the DOJ if they've got some other "day job" and nobody is paying
> them to over a given story.

The most recent wording is extremely odd in its specificity. It's like they 
don't want to 
leave any room for the courts to interpret what a commonly used word like 
"journalism" 
means. Obviously the changing nature of the concept is not something these 
legislators 
are keen to embrace.

The emphasis on financial gain is extremely weird and pretty much 
unjustifiable. I can see 
lots of reasons why you need to discriminate between someone who works (for 
love, 
money, or bee in bonnet) as a journalist and someone who doess not. Not all 
bloggers 
qualify as journalists (citizen or otherwise) and not all need or deserve to be 
protected by 
a journalist's shield. But many do and they are being very deliberately 
excluded here.

Are there any other fields where if you don't earn your living from something 
you have 
fewer rights?

> ... but it's a very interesting turn of event in anycase.


absolutely.

> 
> On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > So legally, you aren't a journalist unless you're a commercial journalist,
> > >  huh?  Funny, other 'professions' like medicine and the law aren't tied to
> > >  such mercenary considerations.
> >
> > im not sure i read it that way.
> > i think they define it as someone who regularly reports on something,
> > has a track record of reporting.
> > This is basically what a blogger can be if they are dedicated to a topic.
> >
> > I do agree that it's trubling to read "for financial gain or livelihood".
> > does this mean you must get paid by a commercial company?
> > can you just get donations from the community?
> > can you have a day job and blog at night?
> >
> > Jay
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.DavidMeade.com
>

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Ron Watson]

I'll tell you what they're trying to accomplish.

They're trying to make sure that nobody reports on anything explosive  
that is not a corporate sponsored journalist.

Media markets have a beautiful mechanism for controlling thought. If  
it costs important artificial people profit, it's not going to be  
said. If it makes lots of money for the right people it's going to  
get wonderful press.

I think the whole idea is to make sure that regular people do not get  
the opportunity to expose things that run counter the corporate  
agenda. You can try, but be prepared to be treated like Josh Wolf if  
things get out of hand. The idea that government should protect a  
citizen's freedom of speech is so pre-20th century. The only right a  
citizen has to media these days is to pay to consume it.

This definition of journalism is to ensure that the rules of the  
market will apply to all news. There will be none of that bullshit  
'public interest' crap to have to deal with.

Personally it makes me sick and more than a little frightened. We're  
all in for a terrible wake up call.

Cheers,

Ron Watson

On the Web:
Pawsitive Vybe
K9Disc.com
Art of K9Disc
Discdog Radio
Discdog TV


On Oct 17, 2007, at 2:57 PM, Jay dedman wrote:

> > I just don't see how a "free and independent press" doesn't  
> include people
> > who get a bug up their rear and publishing something, with no  
> regard for
> > their livelihood or personal financial gain. What about journalism
> > students, who often take chances on writing provocative stuff - 
> because- they
> > have no need to earn a paycheck? To me, this was designed to  
> apply only to
> > the corporate press who have a vested interest in being the only
> > organizations allowed to call employees and freelancers  
> "journalists."
> > As David points out, it only matters how this applies in the  
> courts. A law
> > doesn't mean much without legal precedent to give it nuance.
>
> agreed.
> what issue are they traying to solve?
> why not just say "anyone can say whatever they want without having  
> to prove it."
> To me, it sounds like Congress is trying to make sure the person has a
> history of telling stories which makes them more trustworthy.
>
> Lets talk about some use cases.
>
> Jay
>
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> Video: http://ryanishungry.com
> Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
> RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Free compression software

[Jay dedman]

> I use a program called SUPER (uses ffmpeg,
>  Mencoder,MPlayer,x264,ffmpeg2theora, libavcodec)
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUPER_%28software%29

cool.
I found a cross platform transcoding tool here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avidemux

I made a list here:
http://videoblogginggroup.pbwiki.com/Compression-and-Transcoding-sofware

jay


-- 
http://jaydedman.com
917 371 6790
Video: http://ryanishungry.com
Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9

[videoblogging] New daily web news/comedy show

[Ricky Marson]

The website I work for, ElasticWaist  ,
launched a new daily web show this week, called
the Daily Special.  It is  funny, smart take on all kinds of stuff
going on in the world today, particularly affecting women.  Check it
out!  Here is the link where you can find today's episode:

http://www.elasticwaist.com/elastic_waist/2007/10/the-daily-spe-1.html


Ricky


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined [CNET: How politicians weakened a legal shield for bloggers]

[Jay dedman]

> Here's CNET's take on the issue and how it was watered down. As noted
>  earlier, this will go to the courts...
http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9799178-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5

Thanks for the link.
Much better breakdown of the new Shield law that still needs to be
approved by the Senate and then signed by the President.

Jay



-- 
http://jaydedman.com
917 371 6790
Video: http://ryanishungry.com
Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined [CNET: How politicians weakened a legal shield for bloggers]

[John Oeffinger]

Here's CNET's take on the issue and how it was watered down. As noted  
earlier, this will go to the courts...

http://www.news.com/8301-13578_3-9799178-38.html? 
part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5
How politicians weakened a legal shield for bloggers
Posted by Declan McCullagh
The House of Representatives' vote on Tuesday for a journalist shield  
bill is a timely example of how legislation can be watered down  
surprisingly quickly.

Originally the proposed shield law gave a broad immunization to  
journalists, including bloggers who acted as journalists. But  
eventually it morphed into a far less protective form.

Here's the progression:

#1 Original version:The term "covered person" means a person engaged  
in journalism and includes a supervisor, employer, parent,  
subsidiary, or affiliate of such covered person.

#2 Second version approved by a House committee: The term "covered  
person" means a person who, for financial gain or livelihood, is  
engaged in journalism and includes a supervisor, employer, parent,  
subsidiary, or affiliate of such covered person.

#3 Third version as approved by the full House: The term "covered  
person" means a person who regularly gathers, prepares, collects,  
photographs, records, writes, edits, reports, or publishes news or  
information that concerns local, national, or international events or  
other matters of public interest for dissemination to the public for  
a substantial portion of the person's livelihood or for substantial  
financial gain and includes a supervisor, employer, parent,  
subsidiary, or affiliate of such covered person.

The original version was reasonably protective, and the term "engaged  
in journalism" was reasonably well-defined. But by the time our  
esteemed elected representatives got finished with it, a serious  
blogger who breaks news (but doesn't have Google Ads on his site)  
would not benefit from the shield. It requires "substantial" income,  
even though not all good journalism is done for significant financial  
gain.

By the way, all versions of the shield legislation are pretty  
milquetoast when it comes to actually protecting journalists. They  
say that journalists can be ordered to the witness stand as long as a  
judge thinks their testimony may be "essential to the investigation  
or prosecution or to the defense against the prosecution," which is  
not that significant a hurdle in practice.

I know this firsthand. The U.S. Department of Justice served me with  
a subpoena to testify in a criminal case in Tacoma, Wash., and then  
demanded that the judge declare me a hostile witness when I refused  
to answer certain questions. Even the weakened, final version of the  
House bill is better than nothing, but I fear it'll prove to be a  
very thin and easily circumvented shield in practice.


On Oct 17, 2007, at 1:57 PM, Jay dedman wrote:

> > I just don't see how a "free and independent press" doesn't  
> include people
> > who get a bug up their rear and publishing something, with no  
> regard for
> > their livelihood or personal financial gain. What about journalism
> > students, who often take chances on writing provocative stuff - 
> because- they
> > have no need to earn a paycheck? To me, this was designed to  
> apply only to
> > the corporate press who have a vested interest in being the only
> > organizations allowed to call employees and freelancers  
> "journalists."
> > As David points out, it only matters how this applies in the  
> courts. A law
> > doesn't mean much without legal precedent to give it nuance.
>
> agreed.
> what issue are they traying to solve?
> why not just say "anyone can say whatever they want without having  
> to prove it."
> To me, it sounds like Congress is trying to make sure the person has a
> history of telling stories which makes them more trustworthy.
>
> Lets talk about some use cases.
>
> Jay
>
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> Video: http://ryanishungry.com
> Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
> RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
>
> __
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Let's All Video Rupert

[Jay dedman]

>  It would be great if as many bloggers could show the world's most powerful 
> media
>  operator the power and independence of the video blog by showing up, taping 
> him and
>  each expressing their own opinion about anything Murdoch, from Fox News, 
> 20th Century
>  Fox to the New York Post. Anything!!!
>  The meeting is Friday October 19 and is located at the Hudson Theatre 145 W 
> 44th Street
>  New York.
>  In the past, reporters from the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal have 
> attended as
>  members of the press.
>  Stephen will be the tall guy with the Australian accent. He can be reached 
> beforehand at
>  the Pod Hotel 212.355.0300. If you can't come and want him to ask anything 
> on your
>  behalf you can email him at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  It would be great to see you all.

I would love to see videobloggers cover Rupert Murdoch.
he's hypnotizing.

Jay


-- 
http://jaydedman.com
917 371 6790
Video: http://ryanishungry.com
Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Jay dedman]

>  I just don't see how a "free and independent press" doesn't include people
>  who get a bug up their rear and publishing something, with no regard for
>  their livelihood or personal financial gain.  What about journalism
>  students, who often take chances on writing provocative stuff -because- they
>  have no need to earn a paycheck?  To me, this was designed to apply only to
>  the corporate press who have a vested interest in being the only
>  organizations allowed to call employees and freelancers "journalists."
>  As David points out, it only matters how this applies in the courts.  A law
>  doesn't mean much without legal precedent to give it nuance.

agreed.
what issue are they traying to solve?
why not just say "anyone can say whatever they want without having to prove it."
To me, it sounds like Congress is trying to make sure the person has a
history of telling stories which makes them more trustworthy.

Lets talk about some use cases.

Jay





-- 
http://jaydedman.com
917 371 6790
Video: http://ryanishungry.com
Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Jackson West]

By the way, really looking forward to what Josh has to say in all this.

On 10/17/07, Jackson West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I guess my reaction is born from two things: one, there's no such
> requirement in California's shield law, and two, in the Apple v. Does case,
> the judge opted to protect the bloggers under that shield law (instead of
> trade secrets laws) since they'd committed "an act of journalism,"
> regardless of their background as journalists or reasons for doing so.
>
> I just don't see how a "free and independent press" doesn't include people
> who get a bug up their rear and publishing something, with no regard for
> their livelihood or personal financial gain.  What about journalism
> students, who often take chances on writing provocative stuff -because- they
> have no need to earn a paycheck?  To me, this was designed to apply only to
> the corporate press who have a vested interest in being the only
> organizations allowed to call employees and freelancers "journalists."
>
> As David points out, it only matters how this applies in the courts.  A
> law doesn't mean much without legal precedent to give it nuance.
>
> JW
>
> On 10/17/07, Frank Carver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   Wednesday, October 17, 2007, 7:02:50 PM, Jay dedman wrote:
> > > I do agree that it's trubling to read "for financial gain or
> > livelihood".
> > > does this mean you must get paid by a commercial company?
> > > can you just get donations from the community?
> > > can you have a day job and blog at night?
> >
> > In some ways this is the flip side of all the discussions we have had
> > here about "non commercial" vs "commercial" use of creative commons
> > liceneced resouces.
> >
> > Note that the "finacial gain" clause specifically does not say "as a
> > livelihood" or "for financial gain AND livelihood". The conjunction is
> > "or", which implies that mere financial gain on its own is enough.
> >
> > If showing content on an ad-laden web page counts as commercial use of
> > material for licensing purposes, it's certainly reasonable to think
> > that any site which earns from ads, sponsorship, or whatever would
> > count as "financial gain".
> >
> > Maybe those odd nickels and dimes from Google adsense count for
> > something, after all ...
> >
> > --
> > Frank Carver http://www.makevideo.org.uk
> >
> >  
> >
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Jackson West]

I guess my reaction is born from two things: one, there's no such
requirement in California's shield law, and two, in the Apple v. Does case,
the judge opted to protect the bloggers under that shield law (instead of
trade secrets laws) since they'd committed "an act of journalism,"
regardless of their background as journalists or reasons for doing so.

I just don't see how a "free and independent press" doesn't include people
who get a bug up their rear and publishing something, with no regard for
their livelihood or personal financial gain.  What about journalism
students, who often take chances on writing provocative stuff -because- they
have no need to earn a paycheck?  To me, this was designed to apply only to
the corporate press who have a vested interest in being the only
organizations allowed to call employees and freelancers "journalists."

As David points out, it only matters how this applies in the courts.  A law
doesn't mean much without legal precedent to give it nuance.

JW

On 10/17/07, Frank Carver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   Wednesday, October 17, 2007, 7:02:50 PM, Jay dedman wrote:
> > I do agree that it's trubling to read "for financial gain or
> livelihood".
> > does this mean you must get paid by a commercial company?
> > can you just get donations from the community?
> > can you have a day job and blog at night?
>
> In some ways this is the flip side of all the discussions we have had
> here about "non commercial" vs "commercial" use of creative commons
> liceneced resouces.
>
> Note that the "finacial gain" clause specifically does not say "as a
> livelihood" or "for financial gain AND livelihood". The conjunction is
> "or", which implies that mere financial gain on its own is enough.
>
> If showing content on an ad-laden web page counts as commercial use of
> material for licensing purposes, it's certainly reasonable to think
> that any site which earns from ads, sponsorship, or whatever would
> count as "financial gain".
>
> Maybe those odd nickels and dimes from Google adsense count for
> something, after all ...
>
> --
> Frank Carver http://www.makevideo.org.uk
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[David Meade]

well you left out the last part of the sentence :-P   It says "for
financial gain or livelihood, is engaged in journalism" ... if you're
livelihood is gained from a day job, and you aren't getting paid to
cover a story ...you' aren't engaged in journalism for financial gain
or livelihood and it sounds like this shield wouldn't protect you in
this case.

I mean I can hear it so clearly:  "Your honor, Mr. Fox earns his
livelihood as a dog walker, and receives no financial gain from his
blog ... clearly he is not protected by blah blah"  or "The law
clearly states that protected journalism is that which provides
financial gain and livelihood to the journalist ... Mr Fox get no such
compensation and therefore is not a journalist as far as this law is
concerned blah blah blah"

IANAL ... but I wouldn't count on this wording protecting a blogger
from the DOJ if they've got some other "day job" and nobody is paying
them to over a given story.

... but it's a very interesting turn of event in anycase.

On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So legally, you aren't a journalist unless you're a commercial journalist,
> >  huh?  Funny, other 'professions' like medicine and the law aren't tied to
> >  such mercenary considerations.
>
> im not sure i read it that way.
> i think they define it as someone who regularly reports on something,
> has a track record of reporting.
> This is basically what a blogger can be if they are dedicated to a topic.
>
> I do agree that it's trubling to read "for financial gain or livelihood".
> does this mean you must get paid by a commercial company?
> can you just get donations from the community?
> can you have a day job and blog at night?
>
> Jay
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


-- 
http://www.DavidMeade.com

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Frank Carver]

Wednesday, October 17, 2007, 7:02:50 PM, Jay dedman wrote:
> I do agree that it's trubling to read "for financial gain or livelihood".
> does this mean you must get paid by a commercial company?
> can you just get donations from the community?
> can you have a day job and blog at night?

In some ways this is the flip side of all the discussions we have had
here about "non commercial" vs "commercial" use of creative commons
liceneced resouces.

Note that the "finacial gain" clause specifically does not say "as a
livelihood" or "for financial gain AND livelihood". The conjunction is
"or", which implies that mere financial gain on its own is enough.

If showing content on an ad-laden web page counts as commercial use of
material for licensing purposes, it's certainly reasonable to think
that any site which earns from ads, sponsorship, or whatever would
count as "financial gain".

Maybe those odd nickels and dimes from Google adsense count for
something, after all ...

-- 
Frank Carver   http://www.makevideo.org.uk

Re: [videoblogging] Domain question

[John Oeffinger]

Good point Rox, these will primarily be short 5 minute weekly clips  
on 3 different sites. One weekly clip is based on historical stuff.  
The other two are weekly summaries of industry stuff (2 different  
industries - connecting the dots kinda things.)
On Oct 17, 2007, at 1:02 PM, Roxanne Darling wrote:

> If you are producing an internet video series or show aka Internet TV,
> I think.tv helps communicate that message much more effectively than a
> dot com address.
>
> If you have a blog that sometimes includes video, dot com is more  
> suitable IMO.
>
> Aloha,
>
> Rox


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Domain question

[John Oeffinger]

Thanks Schlomo, Jackson, and David - I appreciate your quick  
responses. I've mainly used .com and snagged a .tv when GoDaddy still  
had it for 9.95...but their .tvs are now $39 so I was wondering if I  
am missing something. I'll stick with the .com but include "tv" in  
the domain name so people see the focus is on video.

On Oct 17, 2007, at 12:53 PM, David Meade wrote:

> I've not bothered with a .tv domain because I think it's got a
> connotation of "episodic content" or "shows" etc ... and that doesn't
> really describe my stuff.
>
> Also I guess I have always had the "its a website that has video"
> perspective rather than the "I've got videos that need a website"
> perspective  I assume video will be only one of many types of
> media used ... thus I always reach for the .com it seems.
>
> I've got a few vlog-related domains (most of which need some love and
> attention from me) ... and they are all .com or .net
>
> I do like the .tv domain though ... someday perhaps I'll have a
> project for which ".tv" sounds right to me.
>
> - Dave

>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Jay dedman]

> So legally, you aren't a journalist unless you're a commercial journalist,
>  huh?  Funny, other 'professions' like medicine and the law aren't tied to
>  such mercenary considerations.

im not sure i read it that way.
i think they define it as someone who regularly reports on something,
has a track record of reporting.
This is basically what a blogger can be if they are dedicated to a topic.

I do agree that it's trubling to read "for financial gain or livelihood".
does this mean you must get paid by a commercial company?
can you just get donations from the community?
can you have a day job and blog at night?

Jay

Re: [videoblogging] Domain question

[Roxanne Darling]

If you are producing an internet video series or show aka Internet TV,
I think.tv helps communicate that message much more effectively than a
dot com address.

If you have a blog that sometimes includes video, dot com is more suitable IMO.

Aloha,

Rox

On 10/17/07, Jackson West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm in a class on documentary research and writing, and I was trying to
>  whittle down my final choice for a focus from a couple of ideas, and as
>  anyone on the Internet knows, you can't start a project until you've
>  purchased an appropriate domain name. A quick search told me my first
>  choice .com was taken, but .org and .tv weren't. I went with .org because
>  it implies non-profit, while .tv implies ongoing 'channel' or 'collection'
>  of video. Since a feature doc is my goal, .org made more sense even though
>  it sort of forces the profit versus non-profit question. If I was doing a
>  video blog or some such, I would have gone with .tv.
>
>  But yeah, like Schlomo, I seem to collect domains for good ideas that I
>  don't follow through on. But if Carson Daly can squat domains, so can we!
>
>  On 10/17/07, schlomo rabinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  > I own schlomo.tv for only one reason: schlomo.com is taken. Of course, I
>  > don't do anything with schlomo.tv because I'm happy with my blogspot
>  > account, so it just sits around being a waste of money on a yearly basis.
>  >
>  > Since I can't own schlomo.com, godaddy was nice enough to inform me that
> I
>  > can purchase theschlomo.com... which I did after having a couple shots of
>  > whiskey. That one, just like schlomo.tv, languishes on the vine, smelling
>  > worse each day I don't use it.
>  >
>  > So, I guess what I'm trying to say is: if you can't get the .com you
> want,
>  > get the .tv It won't change your life, but it will slightly change your
>  > pocketbook.
>  >
>  > On 10/17/07, John Oeffinger
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  > wrote:
>  > >
>  > > I've mainly lurk on this group but have benefited from your comments
>  > > and suggestions which I appreciate.
>  > >
>  > > Quick question, are most of you still using .com domains or are you
>  > > migrating to .tv domains.
>  > >
>  > > If you are not migrating to the .tv domains, is it because of the
>  > > domain name cost? Thanks for your insight...John
>  > >
>  > >
>  >
>  > --
>  > Schlomo Rabinowitz
>  > http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
>  > http://hatfactory.net
>  > AIM:schlomochat
>  >
>  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
>  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  


-- 
Roxanne Darling
"o ke kai" means "of the sea" in hawaiian
808-384-5554
http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling

http://www.beachwalks.tv
http://www.barefeetshop.com
http://www.barefeetstudios.com

Re: [videoblogging] Domain question

[David Meade]

I've not bothered with a .tv domain because I think it's got a
connotation of "episodic content" or "shows" etc ... and that doesn't
really describe my stuff.

Also I guess I have always had the "its a website that has video"
perspective rather than the "I've got videos that need a website"
perspective  I assume video will be only one of many types of
media used ... thus I always reach for the .com it seems.

I've got a few vlog-related domains (most of which need some love and
attention from me) ... and they are all .com or  .net

I do like the .tv domain though ... someday perhaps I'll have a
project for which ".tv" sounds right to me.

- Dave


On 10/17/07, John Oeffinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've mainly lurk on this group but have benefited from your comments
> and suggestions which I appreciate.
>
> Quick question, are most of you still using .com domains or are you
> migrating to .tv domains.
>
> If you are not migrating to the .tv domains, is it because of the
> domain name cost? Thanks for your insight...John
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


-- 
http://www.DavidMeade.com

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Jackson West]

So legally, you aren't a journalist unless you're a commercial journalist,
huh?  Funny, other 'professions' like medicine and the law aren't tied to
such mercenary considerations.

On 10/17/07, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   Interesting ... reads as though you have to be getting paid to do it
> though.
>
> On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
> wrote:
> > The US House of Representatives recently passed a Federal Shield law for
> > journalist.
> > It's doesnt seem to please anyone fully, but it is a start.
> >
> > The interesting part is how they defined Journalist:
> >
> > In its current form, the law protects only "a person who, for financial
> gain
> > or livelihood, is engaged in journalism," which involves the "gathering,
> > preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing,
> > reporting, or publishing of news or information that concerns local,
> > national, or international events or other matters of public interest
> for
> > dissemination to the public.
> >
> > So this could include bloggers if what you do is regularly cover topics
> as
> > your livelihood.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > --
> > http://jaydedman.com
> > 917 371 6790
> > Video: http://ryanishungry.com
> > Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
> > RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
> >
> >
> > [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]

Re: [videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[David Meade]

Interesting ... reads as though you have to be getting paid to do it though.

On 10/17/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The US House of Representatives recently passed a Federal Shield law for
> journalist.
> It's doesnt seem to please anyone fully, but it is a start.
>
> The interesting part is how they defined Journalist:
>
> In its current form, the law protects only "a person who, for financial gain
> or livelihood, is engaged in journalism," which involves the "gathering,
> preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing,
> reporting, or publishing of news or information that concerns local,
> national, or international events or other matters of public interest for
> dissemination to the public.
>
> So this could include bloggers if what you do is regularly cover topics as
> your livelihood.
>
> Jay
>
> --
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> Video: http://ryanishungry.com
> Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
> RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


-- 
http://www.DavidMeade.com

Re: [videoblogging] Domain question

[Jackson West]

I'm in a class on documentary research and writing, and I was trying to
whittle down my final choice for a focus from a couple of ideas, and as
anyone on the Internet knows, you can't start a project until you've
purchased an appropriate domain name.  A quick search told me my first
choice .com was taken, but .org and .tv weren't.  I went with .org because
it implies non-profit, while .tv implies ongoing 'channel' or 'collection'
of video.  Since a feature doc is my goal, .org made more sense even though
it sort of forces the profit versus non-profit question.  If I was doing a
video blog or some such, I would have gone with .tv.

But yeah, like Schlomo, I seem to collect domains for good ideas that I
don't follow through on.  But if Carson Daly can squat domains, so can we!

On 10/17/07, schlomo rabinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   I own schlomo.tv for only one reason: schlomo.com is taken. Of course, I
> don't do anything with schlomo.tv because I'm happy with my blogspot
> account, so it just sits around being a waste of money on a yearly basis.
>
> Since I can't own schlomo.com, godaddy was nice enough to inform me that I
> can purchase theschlomo.com... which I did after having a couple shots of
> whiskey. That one, just like schlomo.tv, languishes on the vine, smelling
> worse each day I don't use it.
>
> So, I guess what I'm trying to say is: if you can't get the .com you want,
> get the .tv It won't change your life, but it will slightly change your
> pocketbook.
>
> On 10/17/07, John Oeffinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I've mainly lurk on this group but have benefited from your comments
> > and suggestions which I appreciate.
> >
> > Quick question, are most of you still using .com domains or are you
> > migrating to .tv domains.
> >
> > If you are not migrating to the .tv domains, is it because of the
> > domain name cost? Thanks for your insight...John
> >
> >
>
> --
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://hatfactory.net
> AIM:schlomochat
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] What is a journalist--Defined

[Jay dedman]

The US House of Representatives recently passed a Federal Shield law for
journalist.
It's doesnt seem to please anyone fully, but it is a start.

The interesting part is how they defined Journalist:

In its current form, the law protects only "a person who, for financial gain
or livelihood, is engaged in journalism," which involves the "gathering,
preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing,
reporting, or publishing of news or information that concerns local,
national, or international events or other matters of public interest for
dissemination to the public.

So this could include bloggers if what you do is regularly cover topics as
your livelihood.

Jay

-- 
http://jaydedman.com
917 371 6790
Video: http://ryanishungry.com
Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc
RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: New stuff from a Flash showcase

[Enric]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "bordercollieaustralianshepherd"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This was posted to another group. Upcoming stuff in Flash.
>

> 
> The guy (Peter Elst) has a lot to say on his blog, may be worth a
> bookmark to some.
> 
>

Wow, the animation (muscles, bones) and other features of Flash 10 are
something.

  -- Enric

Re: [videoblogging] Domain question

[schlomo rabinowitz]

I own schlomo.tv for only one reason:  schlomo.com is taken.  Of course, I
don't do anything with schlomo.tv because I'm happy with my blogspot
account, so it just sits around being a waste of money on a yearly basis.

Since I can't own schlomo.com, godaddy was nice enough to inform me that I
can purchase theschlomo.com... which I did after having a couple shots of
whiskey.  That one, just like schlomo.tv, languishes on the vine, smelling
worse each day I don't use it.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is:  if you can't get the .com you want,
get the .tv  It won't change your life, but it will slightly change your
pocketbook.



On 10/17/07, John Oeffinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   I've mainly lurk on this group but have benefited from your comments
> and suggestions which I appreciate.
>
> Quick question, are most of you still using .com domains or are you
> migrating to .tv domains.
>
> If you are not migrating to the .tv domains, is it because of the
> domain name cost? Thanks for your insight...John
>  
>



-- 
Schlomo Rabinowitz
http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
http://hatfactory.net
AIM:schlomochat


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Domain question

[John Oeffinger]

I've mainly lurk on this group but have benefited from your comments  
and suggestions which I appreciate.

Quick question, are most of you still using .com domains or are you  
migrating to .tv domains.

If you are not migrating to the .tv domains, is it because of the  
domain name cost? Thanks for your insight...John

Re: [videoblogging] Re: free video converter for PC

[pepa]

for me (avi to mp4) is tooo slow :(. squared5 is great.
thanks!

On 10/17/07, schlomo rabinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   Ah ok, great. I use VisualHub all the time. Glad this is like it so I
> can
> recommend it to my nonMac using friends.
>
> thanks!
>
> On 10/17/07, Stan Hirson, Sarah Jones <[EMAIL 
> PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > -
> > I think it is pretty much the same as VisualHub for the Mac in that it
> > has a great GUI for ffmpeg tools. I use it all the time for doing
> > batch conversions of the digital files from my Xacti E1 to DV for
> > editing on FCP 4.5. It's very handy and easy to use.
> >
> > Stan Hirson
> > http://hestakaup.com
> >
> >
> >
>
> -http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://hatfactory.net
> AIM:schlomochat
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>



-- 
http://pepa.tv


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Inside YouTube with Comedian Mark Day on Jonny's Par-tay

[jonny goldstein]

9PM Eastern tonight. A great opportunity to learn about the weird
wonderful world o' YouTube with tour guide comedian Mark Day.

http://tinyurl.com/ywml8t

Re: [videoblogging] Spamming via Trackback?

[Patrick Cook]

Hi everyone:

On 10/15/07, J. Rhett Aultman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Since Greentime is supported in (a very, very tiny) part by Google Ads, we
>  did not feel right installing Akismet to handle our spam for us.  I've
>  gotten pretty good at weeding through Greentime's spam, but I came across
>  something I haven't seen before.

It's amazing at the lengths spammers will go to in order to spam
people these days.  :(

Cheers :D

-- 
Pat Cook
Denver, Colorado
PODCASTS -
**NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.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 (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/
THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: free video converter for PC

[schlomo rabinowitz]

Ah ok, great. I use VisualHub all the time.  Glad this is like it so I can
recommend it to my nonMac using friends.

thanks!

On 10/17/07, Stan Hirson, Sarah Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   -
> I think it is pretty much the same as VisualHub for the Mac in that it
> has a great GUI for ffmpeg tools. I use it all the time for doing
> batch conversions of the digital files from my Xacti E1 to DV for
> editing on FCP 4.5. It's very handy and easy to use.
>
> Stan Hirson
> http://hestakaup.com
>
>  
>

-http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
http://hatfactory.net
AIM:schlomochat


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: Ideal video-ad platform for an online show

[bordercollieaustralianshepherd]

I can imagine ... but 

Total speculation follows

Google today more so than with any other product they bought or
created looks to/could be headed in this direction with the recent
purchase of Jaiku  Combining what they already
have in their bag o tricks with Jaiku, Google will not only know a lot
about you, now they will know where you are (in addition to a lot more
from how you use the Social Network).

Goog-411
Google Maps
GPhone
Adsense/Adwords
Jaiku
Google Search
YouTube

All of this looks really promising (at the same time scary). 

"Don't Be Evil" ... Gotta have faith ...




--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Renat Zarbailov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> I was wondering if anyone knows a solution, aside from Brightcove 
> and Blip, that will enable the video content provider to host his 
> own videos that can have auto-modular pre-roll, mid-roll, and post-
> roll clickable video ads.
> 
> In other words here is a scenario that would really hit home for a 
> show content provider;
> 
> 1.The end-user visits the site, presses play in the Flash player. 
> The system is intelligent enough to figure out where the end-user is 
> located in the world by his IP address, points all video ads that 
> are local to that end-user. If the end-user logs-in in Brazil, all 
> the video ads are served from Brazilian local video ad providers. 
> Also if the show's original language is English, right away the end-
> user is presented with large message that pauses the show asking in 
> Portuguese "Watch in Portuguese?" Yes/No. Of course when the content 
> provider is publishing the content he will have to provide multiple 
> language audio streams, just like DVD movies approach.
> 
> 2. Somewhere along the show the end-user is presented with a mid-
> roll video ad that the creators of the show approve of. So say if 
> the creators of the show actually tested a product or service only 
> then they allow the video ads to run, in other words complete 
> control over ad serving. As well as ad expiration.
> 
> It's like a flash streaming server software/ad-serving engine that 
> works as a package providing the show creators complete control over 
> hosting/publishing, plus it install like wordpress on a web host 
> server. Allowing to choose the video resolution and bandwith beyond 
> 320 X 240, and 500kbps. Therefore all the ad revenues go to the show 
> creators.
> 
> Any comments/suggestions are truly appreacited
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Renat
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Ideal video-ad platform for an online show

[Jan McLaughlin]

But what about hyper local markets? I'm thinking North New Jersey for
example.

Skype me. We'll talk. See sig for skype info.

Jan

On 10/17/07, Bill Cammack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> These are all interesting ideas, but I think they're too intricate to
> be feasible right now.  I don't know that there's such a thing as
> "Brazilian local video ad providers", for instance.  The way it seems
> right now is that there are a couple of groups that serve a bunch of
> different videos and are looking for lots of hits to serve their
> commercials on.  I don't think there are mom & pop stores that would
> like to advertise locally on internet shows that seek out
> opportunities like the ones you're describing.
>
> Also, this is the internet.  People watch stuff from everywhere.
> There's no guarantee that someone in Iowa watching something in Brazil
> will have an "Iowa local video ad provider" that wants to serve videos
> on Brazilian shows.
>
> Check out Jonny Goldstein's show with Dina Kaplan (blip.tv) for some
> insight on sponsorship / advertising => 
>
> --
> Bill Cammack
> http://billcammack.com
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Renat Zarbailov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering if anyone knows a solution, aside from Brightcove
> > and Blip, that will enable the video content provider to host his
> > own videos that can have auto-modular pre-roll, mid-roll, and post-
> > roll clickable video ads.
> >
> > In other words here is a scenario that would really hit home for a
> > show content provider;
> >
> > 1.The end-user visits the site, presses play in the Flash player.
> > The system is intelligent enough to figure out where the end-user is
> > located in the world by his IP address, points all video ads that
> > are local to that end-user. If the end-user logs-in in Brazil, all
> > the video ads are served from Brazilian local video ad providers.
> > Also if the show's original language is English, right away the end-
> > user is presented with large message that pauses the show asking in
> > Portuguese "Watch in Portuguese?" Yes/No. Of course when the content
> > provider is publishing the content he will have to provide multiple
> > language audio streams, just like DVD movies approach.
> >
> > 2. Somewhere along the show the end-user is presented with a mid-
> > roll video ad that the creators of the show approve of. So say if
> > the creators of the show actually tested a product or service only
> > then they allow the video ads to run, in other words complete
> > control over ad serving. As well as ad expiration.
> >
> > It's like a flash streaming server software/ad-serving engine that
> > works as a package providing the show creators complete control over
> > hosting/publishing, plus it install like wordpress on a web host
> > server. Allowing to choose the video resolution and bandwith beyond
> > 320 X 240, and 500kbps. Therefore all the ad revenues go to the show
> > creators.
> >
> > Any comments/suggestions are truly appreacited
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Renat
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


-- 
The Faux Press - better than real
http://feeds.feedburner.com/WburgtvFallFilmFest - Fall Film Fest
http://fauxpress.blogspot.com
http://wburg.tv
aim=janofsound
air=862.571.5334
skype=janmclaughlin


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Re: free video converter for PC

[Stan Hirson, Sarah Jones]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey all
> 
> I ran into this and thought some of you PC users may be interested
in it:
> 
> 
> Looks pretty robust and its free!  Basically, it looks like it gives an
> easy-to-use GUI on a bunch of other free/open converters (like those
that
> have problems using the conversion tools on ffmpegX)
> 
> I haven't used it as I'm on a Mac, but I'm interested in what you
think of
> it!
> 
I think it is pretty much the same as VisualHub for the Mac in that it
has a great GUI for ffmpeg tools. I use it all the time for doing
batch conversions of the digital files from my Xacti E1 to DV for
editing on FCP 4.5.  It's very handy and easy to use.

Stan Hirson
http://hestakaup.com

[videoblogging] Re: Ideal video-ad platform for an online show

[Bill Cammack]

These are all interesting ideas, but I think they're too intricate to
be feasible right now.  I don't know that there's such a thing as
"Brazilian local video ad providers", for instance.  The way it seems
right now is that there are a couple of groups that serve a bunch of
different videos and are looking for lots of hits to serve their
commercials on.  I don't think there are mom & pop stores that would
like to advertise locally on internet shows that seek out
opportunities like the ones you're describing.

Also, this is the internet.  People watch stuff from everywhere. 
There's no guarantee that someone in Iowa watching something in Brazil
will have an "Iowa local video ad provider" that wants to serve videos
on Brazilian shows.

Check out Jonny Goldstein's show with Dina Kaplan (blip.tv) for some
insight on sponsorship / advertising => 

--
Bill Cammack
http://billcammack.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Renat Zarbailov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> I was wondering if anyone knows a solution, aside from Brightcove 
> and Blip, that will enable the video content provider to host his 
> own videos that can have auto-modular pre-roll, mid-roll, and post-
> roll clickable video ads.
> 
> In other words here is a scenario that would really hit home for a 
> show content provider;
> 
> 1.The end-user visits the site, presses play in the Flash player. 
> The system is intelligent enough to figure out where the end-user is 
> located in the world by his IP address, points all video ads that 
> are local to that end-user. If the end-user logs-in in Brazil, all 
> the video ads are served from Brazilian local video ad providers. 
> Also if the show's original language is English, right away the end-
> user is presented with large message that pauses the show asking in 
> Portuguese "Watch in Portuguese?" Yes/No. Of course when the content 
> provider is publishing the content he will have to provide multiple 
> language audio streams, just like DVD movies approach.
> 
> 2. Somewhere along the show the end-user is presented with a mid-
> roll video ad that the creators of the show approve of. So say if 
> the creators of the show actually tested a product or service only 
> then they allow the video ads to run, in other words complete 
> control over ad serving. As well as ad expiration.
> 
> It's like a flash streaming server software/ad-serving engine that 
> works as a package providing the show creators complete control over 
> hosting/publishing, plus it install like wordpress on a web host 
> server. Allowing to choose the video resolution and bandwith beyond 
> 320 X 240, and 500kbps. Therefore all the ad revenues go to the show 
> creators.
> 
> Any comments/suggestions are truly appreacited
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Renat
>

[videoblogging] Re: free video converter for PC

[tom_a_sparks]

Super use it all the time for video transcoding

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey all
> 
> I ran into this and thought some of you PC users may be interested
in it:
> 
> 
> Looks pretty robust and its free!  Basically, it looks like it gives an
> easy-to-use GUI on a bunch of other free/open converters (like those
that
> have problems using the conversion tools on ffmpegX)
> 
> I haven't used it as I'm on a Mac, but I'm interested in what you
think of
> it!
> 
> -- 
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://hatfactory.net
> AIM:schlomochat
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Let's All Video Rupert

[wabyradio]

Our little web efforts from suburban Melbourne have resulted in Rupert Murdoch 
having to 
be questioned at his annual general meeting about why (after advocating 
bringing 
democracy to Iraq) he won't bring democracy to his own company News Corp and 
insists 
on a jerrymander of votes in his own family's  favour.
Our fearless leader Stephen Mayne is travelling to New York to attend the 
meeting and we 
will try and cover the event courtesy of a blogging resource we made contact 
with through 
this group.
Traditionally Rupert allows all cameras to cover his entrance to the meeting 
and video him 
at the board table and then kicks everyone out.
Only those who are shareholders are the ones who can ask questions directly to 
Rupert 
and he has to answer them without hiding behind his PR people.
It would be great if as many bloggers could show the world's most powerful 
media 
operator the power and independence of the video blog by showing up, taping him 
and 
each expressing their own opinion about anything Murdoch, from Fox News, 20th 
Century 
Fox to the New York Post. Anything!!!
The meeting is Friday October 19 and is located at the Hudson Theatre 145 W 
44th Street 
New York.
In the past, reporters from the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal have 
attended as 
members of the press.
Stephen will be the tall guy with the Australian accent. He can be reached 
beforehand at 
the Pod Hotel 212.355.0300. If you can't come and want him to ask anything on 
your 
behalf you can email him at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It would be great to see you all.

Paul Bendat
http://maynereport.blip.tv