Re: [videoblogging] Magma

[andrew michael baron]

Thanks Rupert. This is the best example of a reason why its good to keep
things private while letting people use the site. I didnt even know about
the limit on tags, you should be able to have a one or two character tag, I
just add that to the bug fix list.
Thanks again!


On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Rupert Howe  wrote:

>
>
> Thanks for the invite.
>
> You're right - it's a great idea and does fill an obvious void. Now
> my youtube surfing procrastination will be much more efficient and
> last much longer.
>
> I imagine that people will see its benefits immediately, and it'll
> take off quickly.
>
> I hope the plague of YouTube and Digg hater comments doesn't spread,
> though. If you can find a way to control this, it'll be a much nicer
> way to surf the latest videos.
>
> The Add to Magma bookmarklet works well, too.
>
> Only problem i found was trying to add 'TV' as a tag/category - it
> demands a minimum of 3 characters.
>
> I presume your business plan is advertising-based. Where's the
> advertising going to go?
>
> Good luck with it!
>
> Rupert
> http://twitter.com/ruperthowe
>
>
> On 5-Aug-09, at 9:14 PM, Andrew Baron wrote:
>
> > Hey all, just wanted to drop a line here with a new project Ive been
> > working on called Magma.
> >
> > Unlike Rocketboom, which is essentially a content/production studio,
> > Magma is a video platform and Im very, very excited about it. I think
> > it fills an obvious void in the online video space, on a potentially
> > very large scale.
> >
> > Having essentially pre-launched Rocketboom here on this list, I wanted
> > to for sure return to my roots to get the word out and get your
> > sincere feedback before we go live in the next couple of weeks.
> >
> > We created a private invite code for the list, so if you would like to
> > check it out, just use the code: VIDEOBLOGGING (all upper case) to
> > gain access to the site.
> >
> > http://mag.ma
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


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

Re: [videoblogging] Magma

[andrew michael baron]

You are so right and we have IP detection on our priority list before public
roll out in order to select a nationally specific version that will exclude
any videos that are not available in your country. Thanks for the comment
Frank!
Andrew

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Frank Carver wrote:

>
>
> 2009/8/5 Andrew Baron >:
>
> > I wanted
> > to for sure return to my roots to get the word out and get your
> > sincere feedback before we go live in the next couple of weeks.
>
> Well, one thing struck me immediately. In with all the
> freely-available media there's a bunch of stuff from the restricted
> Hulu, un-watchable outside North America.
>
> While I can see why you have included it, I would *really* appreciate
> some way of telling from a thumbnail whether I might actually be able
> to watch the video, rather than having to play a guessing game and
> click through to the magma page for each video. IMHO an ethical
> aggregator should highlight unrestricted, community-sourced video, and
> at least warn viewers of potentially restricted sources.
>
> Otherwise it certainly looks interesting.
>
> Frank.
>
>  
>


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

Re: [videoblogging] Magma

[andrew michael baron]

Thanks for the comments yall! The "top charts" part of Magma is just the
popular entry point. What Im most excited by is the potential for Magma to
become one of the most effective ways to find those obscure, off the beaten
track videos that no one is watching except you and your friends.
This happens through befriending, collecting and then sharing. Currently for
example, I follow 75 people on the site. When ever they add a new video to
their channel, it winds up in my dashboard. This is where I find the videos
from my friends, so these will tend to be the ones that I like the most.

Also, in time, there will likely be various people who curate a certain kind
of video, say for example, all soccer plays. If you love Soccer, you might
want to follow this person's channel to keep up with all the cool plays as
they happen.

On that note, I'd invite you to check out my personal collection of Japanese
videos:
http://mag.ma/andrew/Japan

...as well as some of my favorite mashup videos:
http://mag.ma/andrew/Mashup

We are also finding videos by website. So if, for instance, you like
Boingboing a lot, we grab every blog post from Boingboing that links to a
video on their blog, on the Magma Boingboing channel:
http://mag.ma/channels/443

So aside form the majority of the people who will probably just hit the home
page, check out some "here-and-now" popular videos, and then bail, anyone
who wants to explore or discover new videos, may like this platform as a way
to find the most relevant ones.

Cheers!


On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Rupert Howe  wrote:

>
>
> Yes. The difference between viral and ephemeral popularity and a
> sustained lower intensity.
> Most of the people in this group have never been into producing the
> kind of videos that will get shown here, because they're about
> something different from the shocking/funny/gossipy X factor that
> makes things virally explode.
> But I think mag.ma is an elegant solution to those times when you want
> to surf some funny popular videos (typically 9.05am and 4.55pm)
>
>
> On 5-Aug-09, at 10:32 PM, Roxanne Darling wrote:
>
> > I signed up as well; thank you for letting us know about it Andrew.
> >
> > My beef, having a well-loved show with longevity but not huge amounts
> > of traditional popularity, is a way to move beyond the algorithms of
> > popularity. Most of the video hosting sites show the most popular -
> > which become more popular because it's so easy to watch what is on the
> > home page. The "discovery" part gets diluted quickly in favor of the
> > mob. Videos that appeal to the 15-25 male demographic continue to rule
> > - they seem to have the most time to watch these and make them popular
> > by default. Looking at the top listings on Magma right now is enough
> > for me to think, "same old same old; no need to return."
> >
> > Thank heaven the TED videos are on the home page however. But then I
> > already subscribe to them. :-)
> >
> > I did try to add 3 BeachWalks,tv videos to the mix and got this error
> > on all three:
> > "This video could not be embedded at this time."
> >
> > I'll be glad to help troubleshoot this with you unless you already
> > know what the problem is.
> >
> > Aloha,
> >
> > Rox
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Frank
> > Carver>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2009/8/5 Andrew Baron 
> >:
> > >
> > >> I wanted
> > >> to for sure return to my roots to get the word out and get your
> > >> sincere feedback before we go live in the next couple of weeks.
> > >
> > > Well, one thing struck me immediately. In with all the
> > > freely-available media there's a bunch of stuff from the restricted
> > > Hulu, un-watchable outside North America.
> > >
> > > While I can see why you have included it, I would *really*
> > appreciate
> > > some way of telling from a thumbnail whether I might actually be
> > able
> > > to watch the video, rather than having to play a guessing game and
> > > click through to the magma page for each video. IMHO an ethical
> > > aggregator should highlight unrestricted, community-sourced video,
> > and
> > > at least warn viewers of potentially restricted sources.
> > >
> > > Otherwise it certainly looks interesting.
> > >
> > > Frank.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Roxanne Darling
> > "o ke kai" means "of the sea" in hawaiian
> > Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more
> > http://reef.beachwalks.tv
> > 808-384-5554
> > Video --> http://www.beachwalks.tv
> > Company -- > http://www.barefeetstudios.com
> > Twitter--> http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: the inevitable conversation about what we're doing

[andrew michael baron]

Well, this list doesn't do it for me much anymore either. I dont
really get that much support from the list. This is not to say that
this is not a supportive community or that its gone bad, its just that
I personally dont get that much from it anymore.

People are not as moved as they seemed to once be and people are not
talking about the next thing. Thats okay, we can keep talking about
the last thing but I liked the next-thing part of the list from
before.

Just the other day I posted what I would consider a pretty relevant
topic about the changing industry, mentioned I had been working on a
hypothesis for quite some time and then asked for thoughts but didn't
get a single response here. It wound up on Techmeme with links from
Mashable, Newteevee, The Hollywood Writers Guild blog and I got
contacted by some striking writers and got offered a panel position,
but not a single comment on this list, even after asking. I guess its
just not interesting or exciting to most people anymore.

I am still grateful for this list, especially for how much support I
have gotten in the past and I think I have given alot as well. Its
kinda of like a family which you love unconditionally even when you
disagree and get upset, so Ill stick around.

Im also not going to just say that this sucks and not throw out a
solution. For some this wont be a solution because there is no
problem, but for those that also feel the lack of any vibrance now,
perhaps people could do more to post about relevant breaking news.
Thats really what was so exciting about the list on top of all of the
other values a couple of years ago. A breaking news story often leads
to a great discussion where people pull their ideas together over new
and fresh ideas. I call it breaking news but it was often filled with
little discoveries from people in the group out there doing. It was
about finding a way to bootstrap two new things together, a way to
take something a step further that had not been articulated before, an
interesting comment on the impact of a message in content - laying out
new methods and talking about them.

This is exactly what keeps me going, personally, an now, when I get
excited and want to engage in a discussion about contemporary or
future issues, I look to other places where people seem much more
impassioned about the space.


On Dec 23, 2007 11:49 PM, Chuck Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> you guys suck
>
>  just kidding!
>
>  there have been a few bad apples in here, and drawn out terrible
>  back-and-forths that made me stop reading this group. that said,
>  the community is still here (or, there, or various places if we look).
>
>  cheryl colan's thread is proof that the videoblogging community
>  exists, and is sensitive and strong and passionate. however i prefer
>  to keep up with that community on Twitter for the most part.
>
>  all my very best of the season to you, each and every one.
>  -chuck
>
>  plug! working on the final ((?)) Vlog Santa going up soon:
>  http://vlogsanta.tv
>
>  

Re: [videoblogging] compressing for iPhone

[andrew michael baron]

Yep, thats one part, and mostly some javascript.

On Jul 16, 2007, at 11:16 AM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:

> Hello Andrew,
>
> On 7/16/07, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > However, a couple of weeks ago, we created special interface just
> > for the iphone:
> > http://www.rocketboom.com/iphone/
>
> Does the magic come from this?...
>
> 
>
> And also designing the page with a smaller screen in mind? (I.e.,
> with a width of 320 pixels?)
>
> See ya
>
> [...]
>
> --  
> Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. <http://ChangeLog.ca/>
>
> All the Vlogging News on One Page
> http://vlograzor.com/
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] compressing for iPhone

[andrew michael baron]

Without needing to use the export to iphone feature, the iphone now  
plays most .mov files, including 3ivx, mpeg4 and h.264 [you can surf  
rocketboom.com on the iphone without any problems].

However, a couple of weeks ago, we created  special interface just  
for the iphone:
http://www.rocketboom.com/iphone/

If anyone would like one for their own videoblog, shoot me an email,  
we are expecting to release a universal app this week that anyone can  
use for their own show.

Drew

On Jul 16, 2007, at 8:42 AM, John Coffey wrote:

> These work on the iPhone and all look great
> hifistl,missbhavins. josh leo, Tiki bar, French Maid,
> Freevlog, m verdi and the last 6 of mine DONT WORK.
> Freevlog, you're getting a beatdown for that "Ryannes
> Faveorite Compression" tutorial.
>
> --- Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > has anyone tried to compress a video specifically
> > for the iPhone?
> > how do videos look on the phone?
> >
> > just fishing for experience.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > --
> > Here I am
> > http://jaydedman.com
> > 917 371 6790
> >
> > Check out the latest project:
> > http://politicalvideo.org
> > 500 hours of George Bush speeches
> > Search, download, use
> >
>
> Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Cocktails  
> and other goodCraichttp://www.jchtv.com/
>
> __
> Bored stiff? Loosen up...
> Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
> http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Wikipedia allow commercial CC media contribution requirement

[andrew michael baron]

Wikipedia is a business. 


Sent via CrackBerry

-Original Message-
From: "Enric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:08:17 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Wikipedia allow commercial CC media contribution 
requirement


I understand the concept of "Free as in Freedom" (I read the book and
 have read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar".) The contradiction I see is
 in disallowing original source contribution to Wikipedia articles
 while allowing commercial usage of original source material in
 Wikipedia without compensation.
 
 -- Enric
 
 --- In videoblogging@  
yahoogroups.com, "Charles Iliya Krempeaux"
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 >
 > Hey Enric,
 > 
 > On 7/14/07, Enric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 > 
 > [...]
 > 
 > > Why does Wikipedia require commercial use of someones contributed
 > > media work?
 > 
 > This reason has to do with some of the philosophy (or whatever you
 > want to call it) behind Wikipedia.
 > 
 > When they talk about Wikipedia being a Free encyclopedia... they are
 > talking about "Freedom". (Not free as in gratis. Or free of charge.)
 > 
 > Basically... long story short... the NC part of a CC license makes it
 > non-Free (as in Freedom). Which is why they don't accept NC stuff.
 > 
 > (I can explain in more detail if you'd like.)
 > 
 > 
 > See ya
 > 
 > -- 
 > Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.  ca/>
 > 
 > 
 > All the Vlogging News on One Page
 > http://vlograzor.  com/
 >
 
  

 
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] YouTube to have H.264 versions

[andrew michael baron]

This news re: youtube certainly helps to change my opinion about H. 
264's adoption potential.

I think my prior comments on 3ivx went up against H.264 but I still  
believe the main benefit of 3ivx is that it is a better alternative  
to mpeg4 compression as an encoder. Its comparison to H.264 is really  
just that, a comparison between two different kinds of things.

Whenever there is a demand, its usually worth providing the extra  
file format to fill it, so we've had both for awhile now.

I always thought we would be really lucky if Apple could spark a home  
ip-TV demand with their AppleTV like they did with the iPod, where  
EVERYONE wants one or has one. Even though there are so many other  
options, maybe Apple could kick it all in gear. Having all of YouTube  
in H264 avail for d/l is a pretty good move if just to expedite  
people hooking up.. ..perhaps.


On Jun 12, 2007, at 5:25 PM, Enric wrote:

> From iLounge, http://tinyurl.com/2fq3t7 :
>
> =
> ...YouTube will soon be encoding videos in the H.264
> streaming-efficient compression format preferred by Apple TV, and that
> all new videos submitted to YouTube as of the mid-June launch of the
> AppleTV update will be playable by the device. From then until fall,
> YouTube will be encoding its entire back-catalog in H.264 format,
> adding videos in chunks until everything is accessible to Apple TV
> users. Direct links and the on-screen keyboard-based search engine
> mentioned in our previous update will bring you to current and old
> videos alike
> =
>
> If available to all, easier to mash-up.
>
> -- Enric
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: 3ivx v5 is out for mac & win & linux

[andrew michael baron]

Thanks for the note, we have a new editor who didn't deinterlace that  
file, a new one is uploading now. A non-issue.

If you have a look at this recent file for example, it looks good for  
a 60meg file:
http://www.rocketboom.net/video/hd/rb_07_may_29_hd.mov

It has a couple of deinterlacing moments in it, again a non-issue,  
but for the most parts looks good.

Yet at 29.9 frames per second and 3Mbits, on my Apple dualG5, it's  
playback is stuttery (what it looks like in mpeg4 when only using 10  
or 12 fps).

The fact of the matter remains: it requires more intensive processing  
to decode H.264 and most people in the world dont have new machines  
that were manufactured in the last 2 years.

Just like film from the 1940's has its own look and feel compared to  
film developed in the 1970's, which has its own flavor/feel, the H. 
264 for me, has a feel of stuttery playback and inconsistent large  
square-like pixels that become more liquidy the more it interpolates.


On Jun 10, 2007, at 9:41 AM, Steve Watkins wrote:

> OK Im just looking at the HD version of Rocktboom's Friday episode.
> Its an interlacing problem, and its bad. Its nothing to do with H264,
> its to do with what resolutuon you've used.
>
> 2 solutions:
>
> Deinterlace within your editing app (if available options exist) or
> using an external app like JES deinterlacer on the Mac.
>
> or
>
> Assuming your source footage is 1080i, try an output res of 960x540
> instead of 1280x720. I beg you to try this with Fridays episode, the
> difference in quality will be huge, all the horrible jaggies will be
> gone, and its much easier than messig around with deinterlace apps at
> this stage.
>
> Also have you ever tried your 320x240 mov mpeg4 version at full  
> framerate?
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve Elbows
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "andrew michael baron"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Also, while H264 looks nice at the highest of settings, I have grown
> weary of the artifacts that appear with intricate motion.
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: 3ivx v5 is out for mac & win & linux

[andrew michael baron]

I would suggest that h264 is not nearly as pervasive of an option to consider 
yet do to the large number of machines out there that can not process the codec 
fast or smooth enough.

Also, while H264 looks nice at the highest of settings, I have grown weary of 
the artifacts that appear with intricate motion. 

If you want to appeal to 9 to 5ers around the US, most don't have fast machines 
at work and in lesser dev parts of the world, its even less likely they will be 
able to view H264. 

So, I conclude from daily experince of rendering both, that 3ivx is better 
looking, smaller in file size, and more compatible, without question. 





Also, I would suggest that 



Sent via CrackBerry

-Original Message-
From: "Steve Watkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:16:37 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: 3ivx v5 is out for mac & win & linux


Yes, these are all mpeg4 encoders, and mpeg4 should generally use less
 cpu & work on a wider range of devices than h264. But this becomes
 much less of an issue as the years go by, and 320x240 h264 should play
 on a wide range of computers. It was mostly at higher resolutions that
 h264 struggled to play smoothly on some machines, eg the apple HD
 samples.
 
 This, coupled with the fact thing like the ipod, apple tv, psp,
 xbox360, can handle h264, along with many people making flash versions
 of their stuff available for widest computer compatibility, means
 there are less reasons to stick with mpeg4 rather than h264, than
 there were when h264 was first added to quicktime a couple of years ago.
 
 But for those that do want to stick with mpeg4 for whatever reason,
 these alternatives are usually better than quicktimes own mpeg4
 encoding. If you pick the right settings when encoding, you can make
 standard mpeg4 files which will playback on a computer without that
 person having to install 3ivx etc. Alternatively you can go for higher
 quality, at the expense of some compatibility (eg some 3ivx settings
 will require the viewer to have 3ivx decoder installed to watch). Its
 all this 'profile' stuff which defines which features a decoder can
 handle, same as there are different h264 profiles, with baseline being
 the simplest, taking less cpu to decode, and working with the ipod
 etc. Most vloggers are interested in compatibility more than pure
 quality, wheras quite a bit of 3ivx, xvid & divx's market is people
 who are ripping DVDs etc to smaller files but that are high quality,
 where they may never be sharing the files, and so compatibility is
 less of an issue, so long as it works for them.
 
 Further complications surrounding these alternative mpeg4 encoders,
 are what file wrapper format is used (eg .mp4 or .avi), and what audio
 format is used. For example DivX uses its own file warpper which is a
 modified avi renamed to divx, and I think they use mp3 audio rather
 than AAC. This is fine for playback on DivX ertified hardware, or
 computers with DivX installed, or in the browser with the DivX browser
 plugin, but makes DivX a less than ideal choice for people looking to
 create ipod compatible files. But as I have mostly been focussing on
 h264 myself, I could be wrong with some of these details.
 
 Cheers
 
 Steve Elbows
 --- In videoblogging@  
yahoogroups.com, "Harold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 >
 > --- In videoblogging@  
 > yahoogroups.com, "Brad Hood"  wrote:
 > >
 > > It's comparable to MP4 flavors Xvid and Dvix, no?
 > 
 > I don't entirely know, Brad. The name certainly makes you think of 
 > DivX and Xvid, but whether there's any similarity in the technology, 
 > I've no idea.
 > 
 > Harold
 >
 
  

 
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: 3ivx v5 is out for mac & win & linux

[andrew michael baron]

We use 3ivx on Rocketboom for our main .mov Quicktime distribution  
file. I've used this for about 2 years and I'm glad to see that the  
update is finally here (when Apple came out with the Intel  
processors, creating 3ivx was not possible (though playing was) and  
so we have remained on an older Apple machine for this reason. Its a  
killer ap for making quicktime videos, I think.

Its simply a generic mpeg4 compression software that makes our QT  
files look REALLY nice for literally about half of the file size.

The nice thing about it is that your audience does not need 3ivx to  
view the videos, they only need mpeg4 which may be one of the most  
common cross-platform codecs besides flash.

Here is the documentation of the settings we use (per v4.5)
http://rocketboom.wikia.com/wiki/Compression

Drew



On Jun 10, 2007, at 2:03 AM, Harold wrote:

> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Brad Hood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
> >
> > It's comparable to MP4 flavors Xvid and Dvix, no?
>
> I don't entirely know, Brad. The name certainly makes you think of
> DivX and Xvid, but whether there's any similarity in the technology,
> I've no idea.
>
> Harold
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Freedom of Speech Watch How you Say it. Call For Help

[andrew michael baron]

Sorry, please disregard, I didn't have the phone on lock and that email was 
sent by my pocket. 



Sent via CrackBerry

-Original Message-
From: "andrew michael baron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 09:45:33 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Freedom of Speech Watch How you Say it.  Call 
For Help


Hu

Sent via CrackBerry

-Original Message-
From: "yeehawsunny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 23:11:11
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Freedom of Speech Watch How you Say it.  Call For 
Help


My good friend runs the American Civil Liberties Union out of Bemidji,
 MN. I'm headed home/MN this Sunday to work on the White Earth
 Reservation at a wild food gathering. I could introduce you to my
 friend next week if you want/have time (email me offline).

 As someone noted earlier, there's always 2 sides to every storybut
 here here to keeping independent media/voice alive! I would imagine
 that as opinions and information are more easily accessible to the
 general public, these kinds of scenarios might happen with more
 frequency..?. But it also means they'll get exposed more quickly.

 cheers, ~sunny

 --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> 
yahoogroups.com, "Jay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 >
 > Gena I looked at the EFF and believe that will help. If anyone knows
 > any names of Lawyers that are willing to push the system.
 >
 > I am a Vlogger I believe in the ability of the general public needs to
 > have the ablity to express our selfs and keep the powers that be in
 > line and responsible. I started a Non-profit that works with Youth
 > "Superior Educational Television" A link to one of my Vlogs is here
 >
 > www.youthvideoquest.org
 >




Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Freedom of Speech Watch How you Say it. Call For Help

[andrew michael baron]

Hu

Sent via CrackBerry

-Original Message-
From: "yeehawsunny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 23:11:11 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Freedom of Speech Watch How you Say it.  Call For 
Help


My good friend runs the American Civil Liberties Union out of Bemidji,
 MN. I'm headed home/MN this Sunday to work on the White Earth
 Reservation at a wild food gathering. I could introduce you to my
 friend next week if you want/have time (email me offline).
 
 As someone noted earlier, there's always 2 sides to every storybut
 here here to keeping independent media/voice alive! I would imagine
 that as opinions and information are more easily accessible to the
 general public, these kinds of scenarios might happen with more
 frequency..?. But it also means they'll get exposed more quickly.
 
 cheers, ~sunny 
 
 --- In videoblogging@  
yahoogroups.com, "Jay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 >
 > Gena I looked at the EFF and believe that will help. If anyone knows
 > any names of Lawyers that are willing to push the system.
 > 
 > I am a Vlogger I believe in the ability of the general public needs to
 > have the ablity to express our selfs and keep the powers that be in
 > line and responsible. I started a Non-profit that works with Youth
 > "Superior Educational Television" A link to one of my Vlogs is here
 > 
 > www.youthvideoquest.org
 > 
 
   

 
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/
 

[videoblogging] Rocketboom Sponsorship

[andrew michael baron]

Today we launched a new sponsorship model with YouTube as our first day's 
sponsor: 

http://www.rocketboom.com/sponsorship

So far, we have received pretty good feedback, any crits?

Sent via CrackBerry

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Rendering in realtime on the cheap

[andrew michael baron]

Good points. When talking about an order of $ in the hundreds of  
dollars, I guess cheap is relative, especially considering how much  
time you may spend in your life encoding and how expensive it would  
of been a few years ago.

I imagine a line a computers that cost more (but still consumer),  
including options that are built more for editing.

Apple in particular has had an important role in Video over the years  
and it would make sense to me that they would integrate something  
like this as a priority.

If its true as you say that it will make its way into various set- 
top, tv devices, hard disk recorders, etc, then I think it will be  
cheap enough to stick in a home computer too.

Regards,
Drew


On May 21, 2007, at 10:47 PM, Steve Watkins wrote:

> Interesting.
>
> Its not cheap though, seems more like a high-end encoder/decoder to
> me. For example it supports High profile, which is a superior profile
> that quicktime and the apple TV dont support (as opposed to baseline
> profile at the other end of the spectrum, which the ipod can support).
>
> Cost wise, I wonder what Apple computer it would mek it into. Likely
> would cost more than the CPU. Seems to have a nice low energy use
> though which makes me happy, it will make its way into various set-top
> tv devices, had disk recorders, etc, maybe blueray & hddvd players too
> as I think they use high-profile h264.
>
> Looking at history, hardware mpeg2 decoder chips did not get added to
> computers very often, you could get add-in cards with them in, back
> when CPU power wasnt enough to handle DVD mpeg2, but never a mass
> market product. These days in PC land, a lot of the 3d graphics cards
> offer drivers & software that uses the power of the graphics card
> processors to do video decoding. So if you have the right 3d card that
> isnt a cheap basic model, eg you have a nice gaming system, the cpu
> shares the burden of high-def h264 decoding with the cpu. But all the
> time there is the continuous improvements in CPUs, these days usually
> due to extra cores. So wherever possible computer manufacturers avoid
> the extra cost of dedicated decoder/encoder chips, and rely on cpu and
> software to do the job. The opposite is true for devices like ipod,
> where cpu is low powered and decoding is best offloaded to a dedicated
> chip.
>
> I hope Im wrong, decoding works fine on my macbook but Ive always
> wanted some dedicated hardware to assist with encoding, its certainly
> a burden. But that market was always kept small and expensive when I
> looked, addon cards for fast encoding often cost a lot, or cheap ones
> ddnt give quality as good as decent software encoder. The downside of
> realtime encoding is its usually 1-pass, wheras 2 or more pass
> encoding has some distinct advantages.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve Elbows
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Drew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > For a look into the near future:
> >
> > Fujitsu is releasing a chip on July 1st that appears to encode HD in
> real time for only $247.
> >
> > A chip like this could forseeably make it's way into an Apple
> computer this year. Pair that with
> > fiber optics and next January's CES conference could be full of
> people streaming high quality
> > video in realtime over the net. Could be pretty boring to see but
> the implication otherwise are
> > pretty neat.
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/2833lt
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon 2007

[andrew michael baron]

I'd pitch in for D.C. the folowwing year when things are way more manic.

But now or then, D.C. Is a good one I thinlk.  



Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:04:23 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon 2007

> We've gone from discussing a meetup of the community, to currying media
 > attention (I thought we WERE the media?), to now planning a Million
 > Vlogger March on Washington!
 
 even in here...the spin doctors are at work!
 here's my original pitch for DC:
 
 --Its central and easy to fly into.
 --it'd be a surprise because its not a common place to hold a bleeding
 edge, community tech conference
 --DC is getting more and more attention as the 2008 US elections keeps
 heating up. A grassroots media conference is perfect for this mix.
 --we're right in the heart of the FCC where decisions on Net
 Neutrality are being decided
 --I imagine 300 vloggers running around the Capitol steps with
 cameras. especially the new Nokias where you can upload to the web
 immediately.
 
 It's not about being covered by traditional media, but there is no
 denying that it's a central hub of information creators. For me, it's
 more about educating ourselves on how information in the US gets
 passed around and spread. it's empowering for me to see it and say "is
 that all they do"?
 
 jay
 
 -- 
 Here I am
 http://jaydedman.:  com
 
 Check out the latest project:
 http://pixelodeonfe:  st.com/
 Webvideo festival this June
 
   

 
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: Apple TV and iPod clash

[andrew michael baron]

Good points which suggest that there are really 2 kinds of solution sets that 
have variable best case scenarios. 

Also, some users may sync their iphone for high quality files, but others may 
enjoy lower res files that could be d/l over a slow EDGE network. 

We already have 2 phone 3g files for low and high speed networks due to demand. 



Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "Steve Watkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:29:38 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Apple TV and iPod clash

I think people stick to 4:3 most often because they are shooting in
 that aspect ratio. And whilst its true that it seems a shame to waste
 the screen real-estate of th widescreen devices out there, 16:9 stuff
 on a 4:3 display like the built in ipod could also be seen as wastefu
 and selfish because some of that 4:3 screen is now wasted with black
 bars, or cutoff part of the image and wonder if missing anything
 important.
 
 I love 16:9 but I think 4:3 has an important place for a good while
 longer, and theres plenty of footage that doesnt benefit too hugely
 from being widescreen.
 
 Also I guess when it comes to ipod playback, 16:9 is actually going to
 be a smaller res than 4:3, assuming ipod encoding takes 640 as the
 maximum width, regardless of aspect ratio, and then picks the right
 vertical res to match the aspect ratio? ie 16:9 footage will end up at
 640x360 as opposed to 4:3 being at 640x480? 
 
 Cheers
 
 Steve Elbows
 --- In videoblogging@: <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> 
yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 >
 > The only reason NOT to go with separate files, in my opinion, is 
 > based on ranking in the charts. For instance, if you have 2 or three 
 > dif quicktime feeds, it starts to divide your itunes audiences and 
 > then you dont get reported on any charts. There is some discovery 
 > loss for people who browse itunes.
 > 
 > Im new to TVs myself, but aren't most HD TV's optimized for wide- 
 > screen viewing? And isn't the iphone widescreen as well? So why 3:4 
 > letterbox that much of the screen real-estate? It would have to be a 
 > pretty selfish reason, no?
 > 
 > And if someone is going to watch on just an iPod, Id rather spend the 
 > selfishness on saving the bandwidth because the increase in quality 
 > doesn't seem substantial enough for a small ipod screen unless an 
 > audience member is a rare audiophile type or collector.
 > 
 > Everyone is different, though it seems logical and not unfamiliar to 
 > provide multiple feeds and file formats. Format options seem to be 
 > expanding, not narrowing.
 > 
 > Drew
 > 
 > p.s. It would be interesting to ask Scott S. about this: I recall the 
 > publicly distributed info about the possibility of a single cross 
 > platform file format (i.e. a 640x480 file for ipod, tv and "some 
 > other devise") that came out just before the iphone was introduced. 
 > Interestingly enough, I heard from David Pogue - based on his 
 > interview with Jobs - that Apple used tactics to fool, hide and 
 > divert info from their employees and their partners in order to keep 
 > the iPhone secret up until the last minute. Thus, the inference that 
 > there would be no widescreen anything was made. Kinda of a far 
 > fetched casual proposition as to why people are stuck with 3:4 a 
 > consequence but you never know :)
 >
 
 
   

 
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] Apple TV and iPod clash

[andrew michael baron]

The only reason NOT to go with separate files, in my opinion, is  
based on ranking in the charts. For instance, if you have 2 or three  
dif quicktime feeds, it starts to divide your itunes audiences and  
then you dont get reported on any charts. There is some discovery  
loss for people who browse itunes.

Im new to TVs myself, but aren't most HD TV's optimized for wide- 
screen viewing? And isn't the iphone widescreen as well? So why 3:4  
letterbox that much of the screen real-estate? It would have to be a  
pretty selfish reason, no?

And if someone is going to watch on just an iPod, Id rather spend the  
selfishness on saving the bandwidth because the increase in quality  
doesn't seem substantial enough for a small ipod screen unless an  
audience member is a rare audiophile type or collector.

Everyone is different, though it seems logical and not unfamiliar to  
provide multiple feeds and file formats. Format options seem to be  
expanding, not narrowing.

Drew

p.s. It would be interesting to ask Scott S. about this: I recall the  
publicly distributed info about the possibility of a single cross  
platform file format (i.e. a 640x480 file for ipod, tv and "some  
other devise") that came out just before the iphone was introduced.  
Interestingly enough, I heard from David Pogue - based on his  
interview with Jobs - that Apple used tactics to fool, hide and  
divert info from their employees and their partners  in order to keep  
the iPhone secret up until the last minute. Thus, the inference that  
there would be no widescreen anything was made. Kinda of a far  
fetched casual proposition as to why people are stuck with 3:4 a  
consequence but you never know :)

Re: [videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)

[andrew michael baron]

On Apr 19, 2007, at 12:23 PM, Heath wrote:

> I only see and hear people saying how the MSM is
> covering it is wrong. So I ask out to the group, you are the news
> director you have the ablilty to shape how this story is told, how do
> you do that?

If the guy sent the package to Rocketboom, I wouldn't publish it.

I would hand it over to a committee to decide what to do with it  
based on academic reasons as opposed to economics.




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

Re: [videoblogging] will ferrel

[andrew michael baron]

2 years later, does the question still apply? No feed = no videoblog?

:)

On Apr 17, 2007, at 9:39 AM, joshpaul wrote:

> Is there a feed? I couldn't find one.
>
> On 4/17/07, Peter Van Dijck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > is now a videoblogger :) Some of ours are funnier though.
> >
> > http://funnyordie.com
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > --
> > my blog: http://poorbuthappy.com/ease/
> > my job: http://petervandijck.net
> >
> >
>
> --  
> joshpaul
>
> o: 818-237-5200
> c: 818-667-0900
> w: joshpaul.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



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

[videoblogging] What is YOUR fave for the week?

[andrew michael baron]

This Friday on Rocketboom we are going to highlight a video from  
Videoblogging week 2007.

We asked people to find their favorites and then leave the link(s) to  
the video in the comments section today.

And/or you can vote on your favorite one there in the comments.

http://www.rocketboom.com/stories/rb_07_apr_05

It would be great to get your feedback here.

Cheers,
Drew

Re: [videoblogging] Hyperlinks in Video

[andrew michael baron]

Rocketboom news-day videos have embedded links, you can click on the  
QT video and launch a browser window with the reference.

We use Textation:
http://home.netvigator.com/~feelorium/feelorium/Textation/index.html

Its a bit of a clunky editor but work just fine.

On Apr 2, 2007, at 7:26 PM, Adrian Miles wrote:

> around the 2/4/07 Charles Iliya Krempeaux mentioned about Re:
> [videoblogging] Hyperlinks in Video that:
> >Although, with QuickTime you
> >would have to make the whole screen (displaying the video) clickable.
> >(You could NOT make just a a portion of it clickable.)
>
> no, in QT you can make any part of the screen clickable. you can also
> use tweens so your clickable spot moves in time. they can also be
> time based.
> -- 
> cheers
> Adrian Miles
> this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x]
> vogmae.net.au
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: New words for the vlogging world??

[andrew michael baron]

geek > nerd > dork 


Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "Heath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 15 Mar 2007 19:44:18 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: New words for the vlogging world??

In Cincinnati Ohio, you are still just a geek, trust me (talking 
 about myself here)
 
 Heath
 http://batmangeek7.:  blogspot.com
 
 --- In videoblogging@:  
yahoogroups.com, "Robert Scoble" 
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 >
 > Geek is the new rock star.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > In Silicon Valley we celebrate our geekiness.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Robert
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > _ 
 > 
 > From: videoblogging@:  
 > yahoogroups.com 
 [mailto:videoblogging@:  
yahoogroups.com]
 > On Behalf Of humancloner1997
 > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 10:55 AM
 > To: videoblogging@:  yahoogroups.com
 > Subject: [videoblogging] New words for the vlogging world??
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > I know wse've had spirited debates on "vlogging vs videoblogging" 
 on 
 > this list. I prefer the former but sometimes use the latter when I 
 > think the listener/reader might not understand 'vlogging'.
 > 
 > A friend who is somewhat hostile to my focus on Internet video 
 called 
 > me a "vididiot" yesterday. He even suggested I might be a "vidiact" 
 > (meaning a video addict).
 > 
 > I had to admit I lived in a "vidcentric" world and participated 
 from 
 > time to time in what might be called the "vidocracy" of the Yahoo 
 > discussion group.
 > 
 > All languages grow through the creation of new words. Time Magazine 
 > created the term "yuppie" several years ago. "Fanvid" is an 
 accepted 
 > term on the Internet.
 > 
 > My friend worried that I might someday become a "geek". My response 
 > was that I was a slow learner but hoped I might achieve 
 that 'status' 
 > in twenty or more years.
 > 
 > His response was that "geek" was not a label to be embraced, that 
 it 
 > came from an old carnival term which meant "the one who bit off the 
 > head of a live chicken".
 > 
 > anyone have any thoughts and/or suggestions for new terms we might 
 > start using in this new world of videoblogging?
 > 
 > Randolfe (Randy) Wicker
 > Hoboken, NJ 07030
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 >
 
 
   

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/hOt0.A/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM
~-> 

 
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/
 

[videoblogging] Breaking down media control

[andrew michael baron]

Interesting email I got. Attacking the msm for a presidential politician is 
very risky, but you can almost imagine the implications as it reads.

The potential is great which we all know, but it feels like we may soon reach a 
tipping point.  

Email:

You may have heard by now that John Edwards was the first candidate to  
officially say no to the Fox News debate in Nevada –- and because of 
the hard work of so many grassroots and netroots Democrats, news 
is breaking tonight that Fox is out.

Fox has already started striking back at John for saying no. (There's 
a surprise – Fox attacking a Democrat.) Last night, Roger Ailes – the 
life-long Republican operative who is now Chairman of Fox News 
Channel –  said that any candidate "who believes he can blacklist 
any news organization is making a terrible mistake" and "is impeding 
freedom of speech and free press."

And John's not their only target. Tonight Fox News Vice President 
David Rhodes is telling news organizations not to get involved in the 
Nevada Democratic Caucus because of "radical fringe" groups – 
meaning grassroots Democrats (that would be you) – who objected to 
Fox's long history of spreading Republican propaganda at the expense 
of Democratic leaders.

The whole right wing is getting in on the attack; the Drudge Report is 
blaring the headline: "War! Dems Pull Out of Fox News Debate."

Enough is enough. It's time to send a clear message to Fox News and 
their allies that their right-wing talking points and temper tantrums 
won't go unchallenged anymore  –  when it comes to what Democrats 
should do in the Democratic primary, we'll decide – no matter what 
they report:

http://johnedwards.com/r/7146/53693/

Fox News has already proven they have no intention of providing "fair 
and balanced" coverage of any Democrat in this election.

In recent weeks they have run blatant lies about Senator Obama's 
background. And Fox was only too happy to give Ann Coulter a platform 
to spew more hate a few days after her bigoted attack on Senator 
Edwards and the gay community.

Now it's time for Democrats to stand together and send a clear message 
to Roger Ailes, Fox News and all the rest of them: bias isn't balance, 
but turning tables is fair:

http://johnedwards.com/r/7147/53693/

The truth is, Fox News can "report" whatever they want. And when it 
works for us, we'll deal with them on our terms. But this campaign is 
about responsibility and accountability, and we need to send the 
message to Fox that if they want to be the corporate mouthpiece of 
the Republican Party more than they want to be an impartial news 
outlet, they shouldn't expect Democrats to play along.

You can send that message by contributing today, and remind Fox News 
that in this election, Democrats won't take their spin lying down:

http://johnedwards.com/r/7148/53693/

Thank you for standing up for what we believe in.

Jonathan Prince
Deputy Campaign Manager
John Edwards for President

P.S. If the folks at Fox wonder why nobody thinks they play it 
straight, they should take a look at what Roger Ailes said 
about debates in 1988 when he was a top Republican 
spinmaster for then Vice President Bush: He told the Washington 
Post, "I don't know that we need to do more than one [debate]. 
There's no reason to think we'd need more than one." And he 
told the New York Times, "I don't think you learn anything about 
the issues" from debates. So please send Roger Ailes a message: 
Hypocrisy isn't fair and it isn't balanced; it's just hypocrisy - 
and we've had enough of it from you. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
Help support John Edwards for President with a contribution today:
 
  + http://johnedwards.com/r/7149/53693/
 
Spread the word. Tell a friend about John Edwards for President:
 
  + http://johnedwards.com/r/7150/53693/
 
If a friend sent you this message, join the campaign:
 
  + http://johnedwards.com/r/7151/53693/
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Make sure you receive email updates from Senator Edwards.
Add [EMAIL PROTECTED] to your Address Book:
 
  + http://johnedwards.com/r/7152/53693/
 
If you would like to unsubscribe from email communications sent
by John Edwards for President, please paste the following
address into your web browser:
 
 + http://johnedwards.com/optout?p=MjAwLDUzNjkz%0A
 
Paid for by John Edwards for President
410 Market Street, Suite 400, Chapel Hill, NC 27516
(919) 636-3131 / www.johnedwards.com
 
Contributions to John Edwards for President are not deductible 
for federal income tax purposes.


Sent via CrackBerry  

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/4It09A/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM
~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

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

Re: [videoblogging] SXSW Roll Call

[andrew michael baron]

It would be nice if someone would put up a videoblogging sxsw wiki. 


Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 18:02:13 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] SXSW Roll Call

Tim Street
8th-13th

Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld.  

-Original Message-
From: "JV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 06 Mar 2007 10:02:44 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] SXSW Roll Call

Who is there when? I'll start - 
 
 Jim V - 9-13th
 
 
   

 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--> 
See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/0It09A/bOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM
~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)

[andrew michael baron]

I'm happy to lend a hand too, I think NYC would be super. 


Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "Mike Hudack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:47:16 
To:
Subject: RE: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)

NYC! NYC! NYC!
 
 -Original Message-
 From: videoblogging@:  yahoogroups.com
 [mailto:videoblogging@:  
yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Frank Sinton
 Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:16 PM
 To: videoblogging@:  yahoogroups.com
 Subject: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday FlashMeeting)
 
 NYC is fine with me. I know Peter was involved in the last 
 vloggercon, and I will continue this and voluteer my services in any 
 way that is helpful.
 
 -Frank
 
 Frank Sinton
 CEO, Mefeedia
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:  com
 
 http://www.mefeedia:  .com - Find, Watch, and Share 
great videoblogs 
 and podcasts.
 Our blog: http://mefeedia.:  com/blog
 
 --- In videoblogging@:  
yahoogroups.com, "RANDY MANN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
 wrote:
 >
 > ok i will go along with the nyc thing as long as i can be the 
 sound guy
 > again
 > 
 > On 2/22/07, Charles Hope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 > >
 > > With Schlomo's blessing, it's pretty much a done deal! Blip.tv 
 would
 > > totally help organize it.
 > >
 > > Why Vloggercon 2007? Because the last one was one of the greatest
 > > weekends of my life.
 > >
 > > We have months to work out the actual agenda.
 > >
 > >
 > > > -Original Message-
 > > > From: videoblogging@:  
 > > > yahoogroups.com 
 > > > [mailto:videoblogging@:  
 > > > yahoogroups.com ]
 > > On Behalf Of Michael Verdi
 > > > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 14:45
 > > > To: videoblogging@:  
 > > > yahoogroups.com 
 > > > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday
 > > > FlashMeeting)
 > > >
 > > > What are people thinking they'd like do at another vloggercon
 > > > aside from meet and hang out (which is a given!)? What
 > > > developments in the last 9 months do you want to see
 > > > addressed? What wasn't addressed last time that should have
 > > > been? Basically I'm trying to steer the conversation from
 > > > when and where to why.
 > > >
 > > > - Verdi
 > > >
 > > >
 > > > On 2/22/07, schlomo rabinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
 > > wrote:
 > > > >
 > > > > I can be, yes.
 > > > >
 > > > > And between you and the multitudes of New Yawkers, I think
 > > > something
 > > > > beautiful can happen.
 > > > >
 > > > > Schlomo
 > > > > http://schlomolog.:  blogspot.com
 > > > > http://webshots.:  com/is/spotlight
 > > > > http://hatfactory.:  net
 > > > > http://evilvlog.:  com
 > > > >
 > > > >
 > > > > On 2/22/07, Robyn Tippins
 > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 > > >
 > > > > wrote:
 > > > > >
 > > > > >
 > > > > >
 > > > > >
 > > > > >
 > > > > >
 > > > > > Schlomo, will you be a planner this year again? I'll be
 > > > glad to lend
 > > > > > a
 > > > > hand
 > > > > > to whoever is organizing it. I'm on the east coast.
 > > > > >
 > > > > > Robyn Tippins
 > > > > >
 > > > > > 
 > > > > >
 > > > > > Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com | Intel.com/software
 > > > > >
 > > > > > _
 > > > > >
 > > > > > From: videoblogging@:  
 > > > > > yahoogroups.com
 > > > [mailto:
 > > > > videoblogging@:  
 > > > > yahoogroups.com ]
 > > > > > On Behalf Of schlomo rabinowitz
 > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:11 PM
 > > > > > To: videoblogging@:  
 > > > > > yahoogroups.com 
 > > > 
 > > > > > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercon? (was Re: Tuesday
 > > > > > FlashMeeting)
 > > > > >
 > > > > > I'm into having it in NYC.
 > > > > >
 > > > > > I've been offered a couple spaces for the event as well.
 > > > > >
 > > > > > Schlomo
 > > > > > http://schlomolog.:    > > > >  blogspot.com> 
 blogspot.com
 > > > > > http://webshots.:    > > > >  com/is/spotlight>
 > > > com/is/spotlight
 > > > > > http://hatfactory.:    > > > >  net> net 
 http://evilvlog.:  
 > > > > >  com> com
 > > > > >
 > > > > > On 2/22/07, Enric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]  > > > > 40cirne.com>
 > > > > com> wrote:
 > > > > > >
 > > > > > >
 > > > > > >
 > > > > > >
 > > > > > >
 > > > > > >
 > > 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: demographics

[andrew michael baron]

Thanks Jan.

Bill, this point below about the gender difference is what I consider  
to be the biggest disappointment from all of the findings.

On Feb 16, 2007, at 8:28 PM, Bill Cammack wrote:

> Interesting. 85 females out of 1063 responses. I suppose that's a
> decent percentage. :)
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > We just completed a demographics study of the Rocketboom audience.
> >
> > We were motivated to do it because advertisers have been egging  
> us on.
> >
> > I decided to take the opportunity to find out for myself anyway.
> >
> > A few interesting inferences to be made.
> >
> > Here is a link to the post which show a fews of the measurements:
> > http://podcast411.com/blog/?p=24
> >
> > And here is the full study report:
> > http://media.libsyn.com/media/podcast411/RB_Demographics.pdf
> >
> >
> > Also, I asked people to list some of their favorite sites and  
> here is
> > the top list:
> >
> >
> > Google  198
> > Digg140
> > Wikipedia   99
> > YouTube 91
> > BBC 91
> > Mac Related 75
> > Slashdot72
> > Apple   67
> > Yahoo   63
> > Zefrank 61
> > Engadget57
> > Boingboing  54
> > NY Times52
> > Myspace 48
> > Flickr  48
> > Ebay48
> > CNN 46
> > Lifehacker  41
> > IMDB37
> > Facebook37
> > NPR 35
> > Amazon  35
> > Ehrensef.de 32
> > Popurls.com 23
> > Gmail   21
> > Gizmodo 20
> > Drudge Report   20
> > The Register UK 19
> > Fark19
> > Cnet19
> > Slate   18
> > Reddit.com  18
> > Twit.tv 17
> > Huffington  17
> > Techcrunch  16
> > Pandora 16
> > Homestarrunner  14
> > PBS 13
> > Mobuzztv.com13
> > Craigslist  13
> > The Onion   12
> > Peekvid 12
> > Jetset  6
> > Linerider   5
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> 



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

[videoblogging] demographics

[andrew michael baron]

We just completed a demographics study of the Rocketboom audience.

We were motivated to do it because advertisers have been egging us on.

I decided to take the opportunity to find out for myself anyway.

A few interesting inferences to be made.

Here is a link to the post which show a fews of the measurements:
http://podcast411.com/blog/?p=24

And here is the full study report:
http://media.libsyn.com/media/podcast411/RB_Demographics.pdf


Also, I asked people to list some of their favorite sites and here is  
the top list:


Google  198
Digg140
Wikipedia   99
YouTube 91
BBC 91
Mac Related 75
Slashdot72
Apple   67
Yahoo   63
Zefrank 61
Engadget57
Boingboing  54
NY Times52
Myspace 48
Flickr  48
Ebay48
CNN 46
Lifehacker  41
IMDB37
Facebook37
NPR 35
Amazon  35
Ehrensef.de 32
Popurls.com 23
Gmail   21
Gizmodo 20
Drudge Report   20
The Register UK 19
Fark19
Cnet19
Slate   18
Reddit.com  18
Twit.tv 17
Huffington  17
Techcrunch  16
Pandora 16
Homestarrunner  14
PBS 13
Mobuzztv.com13
Craigslist  13
The Onion   12
Peekvid 12
Jetset  6
Linerider   5



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: SXSW

[andrew michael baron]

This may be a repeat email from last year and the year before that,  
but I encourage everyone to consider SXSW.

I have been on quite the conference circuit and hands-down, SXSW is  
the most fun. Its very social, very informative, its a great town and  
a great season to be there.

Check out the list of speakers here, you will see its quite a to-do:
http://2007.sxsw.com/interactive/programming/speakers/

If anyone is discouraged by the cost here are a few tips:

1. You wont need a conference pass if you cant afford it. There is  
plenty going on and plenty of people to hang out with.

2. There are a lot of parties, free sessions, etc.

3. There is also an Austin barcamp that is going on at the same time  
and anyone can attend and speak there for free.

4. On Craigs List Austin, type in SXSW and you will see you can  
sublet an apartment or crash a room for next to nothing in price  
(compared to hotels).

5. Its cheap to fly to Austin from many major cities.

Rocketboom has never hosted a party before but this year we are  
teaming up with 30boxes and Satisfaction to host an official SXSW  
party on Sat night.
http://www.dembot.com/012769.html


On Feb 14, 2007, at 11:23 PM, bestdamntechshow wrote:

> i'll be there!
>
> _drew olanoff
> www.pluggd.com
> www.scriggity.com
> www.bestdamntech.com
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "JD Lasica" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
> >
> > Michael created a SXSW page for videobloggers on node101:
> >
> > > http://node101.org/community/index.php/SXSW06
> > > You get an error when you save the page but it will work.
> >
> > Who else in the vlogosphere is coming?
> >
> > Who knows Austin? Where are the hot dining/drinking spots?
> >
> > jd lasica
> >
> >
> > On 3/6/06, Michael Verdi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I set this up:
> > > http://node101.org/community/index.php/SXSW06
> > > You get an error when you save the page but it will work.
> > > -Michael
> > >
> > >
> > > On 3/6/06, Irina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > btw, http://upcoming.org/event/61589/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 3/5/06, JD Lasica <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > Before we get to Austin, wouldn't it be a good idea if we  
> create a
> > > > > page where we can put our contact info, availability and an  
> easily
> > > > > accessible page to see where we're going to get together?  
> I'd sure
> > > > > rather do that than scrolling thru hundreds of emails I get
> each day
> > > > > to identify an email from a fellow SXSWer.
> > > > >
> > > > > So: Can we create a page, on node101 or a wiki or Ourmedia  
> or on
> > > > > someone's personal site, where we can post:
> > > > >
> > > > > Name
> > > > > Dates in Austin
> > > > > Contact info
> > > > > Availability
> > > > > Venue ideas
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll start:
> > > > > JD Lasica
> > > > > Sun March 13 to Thursday March 17
> > > > > Cell: 858-353-1865; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Available: Mon, Tue, Wed dinner/ cocktails
> > > > > Venue: I'll defer to Michael and others.
> > > > >
> > > > > jd
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/5/06, Irina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > hey, i think we should get together in austin, that sounds
> like a good
> > > idea.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/3/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hey all
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > sorry I've been quiet but I'm in Vegas right now finishing
> up a
> > > shoot and
> > > > > > > heading back home this evening.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm catching up on these emails, but I'm in agreement with
> all in
> > > this
> > > > > > > thread. Thanks for keeping it moving!!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Maybe we should get together in sxsw for a little
> face-to-face?
> > > I'll be
> > > > > > > there for the whole time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > schlomo
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I can do a PDF this weekend. I was planning on doing two
> versions,
> > > one
> > > > > > > > for the $2,500-$5,000 levels and one for $500-$1,000. I
> don't
> > > really
> > > > > > > > want the Intels and Proctor & Gambles to worry about the
> lower end
> > > of
> > > > > > > > the tier. Those teetering between $1,000 and $2,500
> could get both
> > > > > > > > flyers (one page each).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > jd
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 3/1/06, Ted Tagami <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> I'I'll review the list again for components. We will
> need a PDF
> > > version
> > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > >> this too perhaps?
> > > > > > > >> Got word back from Creative today. Looks like we will
> be talking
> > > in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> next week or so. They are interested in pushing the zen
> players
> > > and
> > > > > > > >> video
> > > > > > > >> cams..
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On 3/1/06, JD Lasica < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> > Hi all. Does the lack of silence on the sponsorship
> page on the
> > > wiki
> > > > > > > >> > mean that everyon

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Jeff Pulver

[andrew michael baron]

I figured out how to email through, perhaps.

If your reply-to-email to the videoblogging group has all the html  
stuff on the side bar that Yahoo sticks on the email, such at the  
"recent activiy" side bar, colorful "sponsored links" etc, then I  
guess the email will get clogged up while Yahoo checks and delivers  
this back to the group.

If you just create a regular email or copy and past the text, it  
should work faster it seems.

. . .or perhaps only take text emails.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Jeff Pulver

[andrew michael baron]

Great! Notes from Steve, the self-proclaimed authority on  
videoblogging (who has been talking about starting his own for over 2  
years now). Lets strip out all the nonsense and get right to the  
points Steve was trying to make with Jeff Pulver's offer to give away  
$40 thousand dollars to a videoblogger:

"I suspect partially because Mr Pulver is used to moving in circles that
are in awe of his name and his past reputation"

"I laugh at this in disbelief because it misses a fundamental point  
of the new age of video on the internet "

"Anyway its pretty clear they need all the publicity they can get"

"It is my conviction, based on his own words, that Jeff Pulver believes
the next media mogul will be the walled garden gatekeeper who puts
together the best range of shows to suit his audience. "

"And all this from people who use words like 'agitate' and 'disruptive'
when referring to themselves. . .I intend to do a bit of what those  
words actually mean"

"But that would actually involve understandinf web 2.0 and the
long-tail, so dont hold your breath."

"Sometimes I feel guilty about singling them out for my moaning"

"I will read their terms and conditions later "


On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:54 AM, Steve Watkins wrote:

> But that would actually involve understandinf web 2.0 and the
> long-tail, so dont hold your breath.
>
> Sometimes I feel guilty about singling them out for my moaning, but
> then they say something like 'anybody into video needs to be at our
> conference' and all the guilt disappears.
>
> According to words spoken at the NYC 2.0 meet, you can get into the
> conference for free if you can prove you are a startup company  
> though!!!
>
> And all this from people who use words like 'agitate' and 'disruptive'
> when referring to themselves and how they will shakeup the traditional
> media industry. I intend to do a bit of what those words actually
> mean, in order to agitate and disrupt up[starts who wish to copy the
> old way of doing things using new technology, instead of embracing the
> real potential of the internet.
>
> Tune in next week when I empty my bowels on those who think SEO is the
> spirit of the internet.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve Elbows
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jan McLaughlin"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Have had some bank-and-forth with Jeff and Chris Brogan.
> >
> > Invitations and offers of assistance from Pulver. I told him I'd
> come to his
> > VON conferences if they paid my expenses.
> >
> > Told them The Faux Press would cover 'em for $5k / week.
> >
> > No go.
> >
> > I've decided what my time and energy are worth.
> >
> > Long-tail that $40K and ship a bunch of vloggers to vlog the  
> conference
> > rather than sponsor a hierarchical contest, hmmm?
> >
> > He'd get a shitload more Google Juice and advertising from that
> approach.
> >
> > Just sayin'.
> >
> > Jeff? You listening?
> >
> > Jan
> >
> > On 1/30/07, Dean Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I woke up this morning to find this in my inbox;
> > >
> > > Jeff Pulver is normally a very clever guy who started VON among  
> other
> > > things so this is obvioulsy legitimate just sounds/reads a bit  
> weird.
> > >
> > > just passing it on.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Dean
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Tomorrow morning I will be announcing an internet video contest  
> where
> > > the grand prize is US$ 25,000. Submit an episode of your  
> Internet TV
> > > show or a videoblog entry dealing with "How to Watch Internet TV,"
> > > mention Network2 in it as well, and submit a link to where we can
> > > find it.
> > >
> > > Your show doesn't have to be on Network2 to enter (though if  
> you come
> > > to  , you can submit your show for
> > > inclusion). Simply show us how to see your submission,  
> published on a
> > > site (YouTube, Blip, Revver, or anywhere we can easily find  
> it), and
> > > it counts.
> > >
> > > Have fun with this. If you have an ongoing show, see if you can  
> work
> > > the theme into your show. If you're a videoblogger, show us your
> > > style. Humor helps, but follow your own path on this. We want your
> > > take on the topic: How to Watch Internet TV, mentioning  
> Network2 at
> > > some point. Oh, and if you'd give us a link on your website, that
> > > would be nice, too. :)
> > >
> > > We'll review the submissions (due by March 9th), and announce the
> > > finalists around March 16th. We'll announce the winner at  
> Spring 2007
> > > Video on the Net , in San Jose
> > > California, on March 20th. Grand prize gets $25,000. Second prize
> > > wins $10,000, and Third Prize takes $5,000 home.
> > >
> > > For more information, please visit:  contest>. Some
> > > restrictions apply, and there's plenty of rules to read over at:
> > > .
> > >
> > > Earlier today I created a video announcing this contest and just
> > > poste

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Jeff Pulver

[andrew michael baron]

This may be a repeat email. If this email comes first however, I may  
have figured out how to streamline the yahoo group system. If not,  
back to the drawing board.

I sent the below to take you up on the bitching Steve because I just  
cant let you get away with it all alone ;) Im serious however, I  
think your arguments have become dilapidated recently.

Notes from Steve, the self-proclaimed authority on videoblogging (who  
has been talking about starting his own for over 2 years now). Lets  
strip out all the nonsense and get right to the points Steve was  
trying to make with Jeff Pulver's offer to give away $40 thousand  
dollars to a videoblogger:

"I suspect partially because Mr Pulver is used to moving in circles that
are in awe of his name and his past reputation"

"I laugh at this in disbelief because it misses a fundamental point  
of the new age of video on the internet "

"Anyway its pretty clear they need all the publicity they can get"

"It is my conviction, based on his own words, that Jeff Pulver believes
the next media mogul will be the walled garden gatekeeper who puts
together the best range of shows to suit his audience. "

"And all this from people who use words like 'agitate' and 'disruptive'
when referring to themselves. . .I intend to do a bit of what those  
words actually mean"

"But that would actually involve understandinf web 2.0 and the
long-tail, so dont hold your breath."

"Sometimes I feel guilty about singling them out for my moaning"

"I will read their terms and conditions later "

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

Re: [videoblogging] Veoh Playing Nice?

[andrew michael baron]

I know a lot of people here use blip and I love you guys for that but still, 
its only a tiny fraction of this list. 

It would be great to see all of the everyday technical problems with service 
discussed on your website instead of this one. 

Thanks for the consideration,
Drew

Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "Mike Hudack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 07:36:33 
To:
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Veoh Playing Nice?

And you work for or worked for them and are good friends with their CEO. 
 
 
 - Original Message - 
 From: videoblogging@:  yahoogroups.com 
mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com> 
 To: videoblogging@:  yahoogroups.com 
mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com> 
 Sent: Tue Jan 23 00:46:03 2007 
 Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Veoh Playing Nice? 
 
 I continue to have good experiences and get quick response whenever I make 
 suggestions/have concerns. 
 
 2 cents 
 -Halcyon 
 pinkbroadcasting.com 
 
 On 1/22/07, johnleeke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 
 omeworks.com> wrote: 
 > 
 > I've recently been contacted by a person from Veoh, saying they'd like 
 > to feature my videos at their site. 
 > 
 > Considering the Veoh brouhaha a while back it seems nice that an 
 > actual person is actually asking. 
 > 
 > Has anyone had some recent Veoh experiences they would like to relate? 
 > 
 > Is Veoh playing nice these days? Or, should I stay in my own 
 > neighborhood and play with my old regulars? 
 > 
 > John Leeke 
 > by hammer and hand great works do stand 
 > by cam and light he shoots it right 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 
 
 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 
 
 
 
 
 Yahoo! Groups Links 
 
 
 
 
 [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: Widescreen video iphone - question

[andrew michael baron]

The internet will use will happen over wi-fi and then when wi-fi is unavail it 
will switch to EDGE and then GSM if no EDGE. 

So yes, just like this piece of crap blackberry (yesterdays gem) which I have 
set up on cingular edge and gsm, the iphone will have interent whereever 
cingular has coverage in us and maybe canada (there is EDGE in canada now with 
cingular partner Rodgers). 



Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: WWWhatsup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:27:46 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Widescreen video iphone - question

Yep. 8GB doesn't leave a lot of room for downloaded video either,
 I think we may find ourselves adding streaming h.264 at lower speeds.
 
 What wasn't clear to me was if the internet bit only works given
 a wifi connect, or over the phone also. 
 
 And if so one wonders.how much is Cingular going
 to charge for that and at what speed? 
 
 joly
 
 Andrew wrote:
 >c) The extra space required to add video would likely be one of the 
 >first corners to cut.
 
 --
 WWWhatsup NYC
 http://pinstand.:  com - http://punkcast.: 
 com
 -- 
 
 
   

 
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: Widescreen video iphone - question

[andrew michael baron]

They didn't mention anything about a fold out mirror (the camera is on the back 
of the phone). 

;)

Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: Tim Street <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:10:10 
To:
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Widescreen video iphone - question

And can you Video Chat with iChat AV?
 
 on 1/10/07 12:01 AM, andrew michael baron at [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 
<mailto:andrew%40rocketboom.com> com wrote:
 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 >> > One question I have, and it is hinted at, but not
 >> > clear, so I would prefer a yes no type answer is.
 >> >
 >> > Does the phone allow for cell phone video recording?
 >> > how minutes in recording capacity?
 > 
 > Im going to infer that the answer is no video recording.
 > 
 > a) Video recording was not mentioned.
 > 
 > b) The camera has a spec of only 2 megapixels.
 > 
 > c) The extra space required to add video would likely be one of the
 > first corners to cut.
 > 
 > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 > 
 > 
 > 
 
 Tim
 
 Tim Street
 Creator/Executive Producer
 French Maid TV
 The Viral Video of ³How To¹s² by French Maids
 http://frenchmaidtv: <http://frenchmaidtv.com> .com
 818-288-2724 c
 Subscribe for FREE on
 http://www.frenchma: <http://www.frenchmaidtv.com/itunes> 
idtv.com/itunes" target="_blank">iTunes
 
 [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: Widescreen video iphone - question

[andrew michael baron]

> One question I have, and it is hinted at, but not
> clear, so I would prefer a yes no type answer is.
>
> Does the phone allow for cell phone video recording?
> how minutes in recording capacity?

Im going to infer that the answer is no video recording.

a) Video recording was not mentioned.

b) The camera has a spec of only 2 megapixels.

c) The extra space required to add video would likely be one of the  
first corners to cut.



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: [video_vertigo] iPhone

[andrew michael baron]

And java. 

Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: Nathan Freitas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:42:15 
To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:[EMAIL PROTECTED], videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: [video_vertigo] iPhone

sull wrote:
 >
 > do you think osx is open to users or confined to approved applications?
 >
 I feel like they will push widgets as the primary application model for 
developers. Just my guy instinct based on issues around deployment, updating, 
and a networked application model.
 
 +n
 
 
   

 
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: Widescreen video iphone

[andrew michael baron]

How many kids have a phone and an ipod? Now you only need one.

Add the camera, video player and there ya go, a much better deal.

Plus, there is the high-design which is worth it, having seen how the  
interface works.

Also, the computer supports memory cards.

On Jan 9, 2007, at 3:19 PM, Heath wrote:
> and how many "kids"
> will touch it at that price point as well? Not a lot if you ask
> meI guess we will see..



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

Re: [videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone

[andrew michael baron]

Bark.

On Jan 9, 2007, at 2:14 PM, Paul Knight wrote:

> woof woof, go andrew
>
> I still want one.
>
> Paul Knight
>
> On 9 Jan 2007, at 19:08, CarLBanks wrote:
>
> > I think one of the coolest things from reading the liveblogs is
> > that IT RUNS
> > OS X!
> >
> > On 1/9/07, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > 5 hours of full video/phone use, 16hrs of audio.
> > >
> > > Due out in June. :(
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent via CrackBerry
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:43:22
> > > To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone
> > >
> > > Hey Andrew,
> > >
> > > What's the battery consumption like?
> > >
> > > --- andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]:  > > andrew%40rocketboom.com> com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The interface is the most impressive.
> > > >
> > > > You can pintch and expand your fingers to zoom, and
> > > > you can scroll by moving your finger across screen.
> > > >
> > > > Runs full safari browser with excellent interface.
> > > >
> > > > Has sensors and changes to landscape when you turn
> > > > it sideways.
> > > >
> > > > Widgets.
> > > >
> > > > If a hotspot is avil, it will switch from phone
> > > > service GSM and Edge to wifi automatically.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent via CrackBerry
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: "Digital Buddha"  > > digitalbuddha%40gmail.com> gmail.com>
> > > > Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 10:09:23
> > > > To:videoblogging@: <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone
> > > >
> > > > wow !
> > > >
> > > > On 1/9/07, andrew michael baron
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> > > > <mailto:andrew%40rocketboom.com> com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm in steve jobs keynote right now.
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh boy. This phone is a widscreen. No buttons.
> > > > >
> > > > > 160pixels per inch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thinner than Q and black jack.
> > > > >
> > > > > Runs osx!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > 2 mega pixel camera.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is a major revolution.
> > > > >
> > > > > I tried to upload a video pic on flickr.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also itv now called apple tv is out in feb for
> > > > wisescreen too.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent via CrackBerry
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Ted Tagami
> > > > Business Development
> > > >
> > > > Millions of Us
> > > > 80 Liberty Ship Way, Suite #5
> > > > Sausalito, CA 94965
> > > > www.millionsofus.com
> > > >
> > > > mobile: 510-684-9773
> > > > fax: 415-324-5902
> > > > skype: ted_tagami
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > > > removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > mailto:videoblogging-:  > > videoblogging-fullfeatured%40yahoogroups.com>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Send instant messages to your online friends http:// 
> uk.messenger: <
> > > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com> .yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > http://thenameiwantedwastaken.com
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Widescreen video iphone

[andrew michael baron]

3g is planned for version 2.

On Jan 9, 2007, at 2:39 PM, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen wrote:

> No 3G UMTS. :o(
>
> - Andreas
>
> Den 09.01.2007 kl. 20:32 skrev Enric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > The iPhone specs:
> >
> > http://www.apple.com/iphone/technology/specs.html
> >
> > Technical Specifications
> > Screen size 3.5 inches
> > Screen resolution 320 by 480 at 160 ppi
> > Input method Multi-touch
> > Operating system OS X
> > Storage 4GB or 8GB
> > GSM Quad-band (MHz: 850, 900, 1800, 1900)
> > Wireless data Wi-Fi (802.11b/g) + EDGE + Bluetooth 2.0
> > Camera 2.0 megapixels
> > Battery
> >
> > * Up to 5 hours Talk / Video / Browsing
> > * Up to 16 hours Audio playback
> >
> > Dimensions 4.5 x 2.4 x 0.46 inches / 115 x 61 x 11.6mm
> > Weight 4.8 ounces / 135 grams
> >
> > -- Enric
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Although he didnt make it clear whether its a subset of OSX,  
> what the
> >> compatibility is like, whether users will have the ability to load
> >> what they want on it. Skype for example.
> >>
> >> It must be a cut-down version in some way or it would take an  
> annoying
> >> amount of time to startup & drain the battery too quickly?  
> Dunno, just
> >> speculating.
> >>
> >> Looks like a nice device, shame have to wait so long for it,
> >> especially as it wont be out in Europe till the 4th quarter.
> >>
> >> Was there any mention of the built-in camera recording video?
> >>
> >> Any mention of what video formats/resolutions it will support?
> >>
> >> Do we know what the actual screen resolution is?
> >>
> >> Lacking 3G seems like a slightly strange omission although  
> personally
> >> I'll use it mostly with wifi.
> >>
> >> Im glad to see Apple shake this stuff up because my experinces with
> >> smartphones and pocketpc phones havent been overly enjoyable. Am
> >> looking forward to see what the multi-touch is like, and how apples
> >> implementation of touchscreen compares to microsofts dismal tablet
> >> efforts. There was a bit of Apples usually over-egging of the
> >> uniqueness, I can use a finger with my pocketpc quite nicely,  
> but the
> >> full-browser and multitouch should make an interesting  
> difference to
> >> the experience.
> >>
> >> The Apple TV currently has me interested too, any idea of  
> release date
> >> for that? It would probably be more of a killer device if it  
> supported
> >> a widder range of video formats but its too early to tell.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Steve Elbows
> >>
> >> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, CarLBanks  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I think one of the coolest things from reading the liveblogs  
> is that
> >> IT RUNS
> >> > OS X!
> >> >
> >> > On 1/9/07, andrew michael baron  wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > 5 hours of full video/phone use, 16hrs of audio.
> >> > >
> >> > > Due out in June. :(
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Sent via CrackBerry
> >> > >
> >> > > -Original Message-
> >> > > From: Rich 
> >> > > Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:43:22
> >> > > To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> >> > > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone
> >> > >
> >> > > Hey Andrew,
> >> > >
> >> > > What's the battery consumption like?
> >> > >
> >> > > --- andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]:  >> > > andrew%40rocketboom.com> com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > The interface is the most impressive.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > You can pintch and expand your fingers to zoom, and
> >> > > > you can scroll by moving your finger across screen.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Runs full safari browser with excellent interface.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Has sensors and changes to landscape when you turn
> >> > > > it sideways.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Wid

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Widescreen video iphone

[andrew michael baron]

Jobs made it clear that in order to provide the best service they  
needed to upgrade the carries hardware too. So while its a shame its  
not open, the partnership will enable a better, more suited network  
to handle all of the features.

On Jan 9, 2007, at 2:43 PM, Obreahny O'Brien wrote:

> Keep up to date on the latest MacWorld developments here:
> http://www.macrumorslive.com/
>
> Also, Dennis Crowley made a good observation on flickr about the  
> iphone when he wrote:
>
> "I'm really disappointed Apple went w/ Cingular (or any carrier for  
> that matter).I was really hoping Apple was going to say "Fuck the  
> carriers. We'll sell you the phone. You find a SIM card".This would  
> have a been a great opportunity to get the US away from the Carrier  
> Stranglehold model and moving towards the "Phone manufactures sell  
> phones. Carriers sell service" model that exists in Europe"
> It's an interesting thought; maybe the next generations of phones  
> to top the iphone will be the one that is independent of a carrier.
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tue, 9  
> Jan 2007 19:32:40 +Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Widescreen  
> video iphone
>
> The iPhone specs:http://www.apple.com/iphone/technology/ 
> specs.htmlTechnicalSpecificationsScreen size 3.5 inchesScreen  
> resolution 320 by 480 at 160 ppiInput method Multi-touchOperating  
> system OS XStorage 4GB or 8GBGSM Quad-band (MHz: 850, 900, 1800,  
> 1900)Wireless data Wi-Fi (802.11b/g) + EDGE + Bluetooth 2.0Camera  
> 2.0 megapixelsBattery * Up to 5 hours Talk / Video / Browsing* Up  
> to 16 hours Audio playbackDimensions 4.5 x 2.4 x 0.46 inches / 115  
> x 61 x 11.6mmWeight 4.8 ounces / 135 grams-- Enric--- In  
> videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>>  
> Although he didnt make it clear whether its a subset of OSX, what  
> the> compatibility is like, whether users will have the ability to  
> load> what they want on it. Skype for example. > > It must be a cut- 
> down version in some way or it would take an annoying> amount of  
> time to startup & drain the battery too quickly? Dunno, just>  
> speculating.> > Looks like a nice device, shame have to wait so  
> long for it,> especially as it wont be out in Europe till the 4th  
> quarter.> > Was there any mention of the built-in camera recording  
> video?> > Any mention of what video formats/resolutions it will  
> support?> > Do we know what the actual screen resolution is?> >  
> Lacking 3G seems like a slightly strange omission although  
> personally> I'll use it mostly with wifi.> > Im glad to see Apple  
> shake this stuff up because my experinces with> smartphones and  
> pocketpc phones havent been overly enjoyable. Am> looking forward  
> to see what the multi-touch is like, and how apples> implementation  
> of touchscreen compares to microsofts dismal tablet> efforts. There  
> was a bit of Apples usually over-egging of the> uniqueness, I can  
> use a finger with my po cketpc quite nicely, but the> full-browser  
> and multitouch should make an interesting difference to> the  
> experience.> > The Apple TV currently has me interested too, any  
> idea of release date> for that? It would probably be more of a  
> killer device if it supported> a widder range of video formats but  
> its too early to tell.> > Cheers> > Steve Elbows> > --- In  
> videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, CarLBanks  wrote:> >> >  
> I think one of the coolest things from reading the liveblogs is  
> that> IT RUNS> > OS X!> > > > On 1/9/07, andrew michael baron  
>  wrote:> > >> > > 5 hours of full video/phone use, 16hrs  
> of audio.> > >> > > Due out in June. :(> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >  
> > Sent via CrackBerry> > >> > > -Original Messag e-> > >  
> From: Rich > > > Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:43:22> > >  
> To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com> > > Subject: Re: [videoblogging]  
> Widescreen video iphone> > >> > > Hey Andrew,> > >> > > What's the  
> battery consumption like?> > >> > > --- andrew michael baron  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]:  > > andrew%40rocketboom.com> com>> >  
> > wrote:> > >> > > > The interface is the most impressive.> > > >>  
> > > > You can pintch and expand your fingers to zoom, and> > > >  
> you can scroll by moving your finger

Re: [videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone

[andrew michael baron]

5 hours of full video/phone use, 16hrs of audio. 

Due out in June. :(





Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:43:22 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone

Hey Andrew,
 
 What's the battery consumption like?
 
 --- andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]: <mailto:andrew%40rocketboom.com> 
com>
 wrote:
 
 > The interface is the most impressive. 
 > 
 > You can pintch and expand your fingers to zoom, and
 > you can scroll by moving your finger across screen. 
 > 
 > Runs full safari browser with excellent interface. 
 > 
 > Has sensors and changes to landscape when you turn
 > it sideways. 
 > 
 > Widgets. 
 > 
 > If a hotspot is avil, it will switch from phone
 > service GSM and Edge to wifi automatically. 
 > 
 > 
 > Sent via CrackBerry 
 > 
 > -Original Message-
 > From: "Digital Buddha" mailto:digitalbuddha%40gmail.com> 
 > gmail.com>
 > Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 10:09:23 
 > To:videoblogging@: <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com
 > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone
 > 
 > wow !
 > 
 > On 1/9/07, andrew michael baron
 > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 > <mailto:andrew%40rocketboom.com> com> wrote:
 > >
 > > I'm in steve jobs keynote right now.
 > >
 > > Oh boy. This phone is a widscreen. No buttons.
 > >
 > > 160pixels per inch.
 > >
 > > Thinner than Q and black jack.
 > >
 > > Runs osx!!!
 > >
 > > 2 mega pixel camera.
 > >
 > > This is a major revolution.
 > >
 > > I tried to upload a video pic on flickr.
 > >
 > > Also itv now called apple tv is out in feb for
 > wisescreen too.
 > >
 > > Sent via CrackBerry
 > > 
 > >
 > 
 > -- 
 > Ted Tagami
 > Business Development
 > 
 > Millions of Us
 > 80 Liberty Ship Way, Suite #5
 > Sausalito, CA 94965
 > www.millionsofus.com
 > 
 > mobile: 510-684-9773
 > fax: 415-324-5902
 > skype: ted_tagami
 > 
 > [Non-text portions of this message have been
 > removed]
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Yahoo! Groups Links
 > 
 > 
 > mailto:videoblogging-: <mailto:videoblogging-fullfeatured%40yahoogroups.com> 
 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > 
 > 
 > 
 
 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger: 
<http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com> .yahoo.com 
 
   

 
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] Widescreen video iphone

[andrew michael baron]

The interface is the most impressive. 

You can pintch and expand your fingers to zoom, and you can scroll by moving 
your finger across screen. 

Runs full safari browser with excellent interface. 

Has sensors and changes to landscape when you turn it sideways. 

Widgets. 

If a hotspot is avil, it will switch from phone service GSM and Edge to wifi 
automatically. 


Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "Digital Buddha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 10:09:23 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone

wow !
 
 On 1/9/07, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 
<mailto:andrew%40rocketboom.com> com> wrote:
 >
 > I'm in steve jobs keynote right now.
 >
 > Oh boy. This phone is a widscreen. No buttons.
 >
 > 160pixels per inch.
 >
 > Thinner than Q and black jack.
 >
 > Runs osx!!!
 >
 > 2 mega pixel camera.
 >
 > This is a major revolution.
 >
 > I tried to upload a video pic on flickr.
 >
 > Also itv now called apple tv is out in feb for wisescreen too.
 >
 > Sent via CrackBerry
 > 
 >
 
 -- 
 Ted Tagami
 Business Development
 
 Millions of Us
 80 Liberty Ship Way, Suite #5
 Sausalito, CA 94965
 www.millionsofus.com
 
 mobile: 510-684-9773
 fax: 415-324-5902
 skype: ted_tagami
 
 [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/
 

[videoblogging] Widescreen video iphone

[andrew michael baron]

I'm in steve jobs keynote right now. 

Oh boy. This phone is a widscreen. No buttons. 

160pixels per inch. 

Thinner than Q and black jack. 

Runs osx!!! 

2 mega pixel camera. 

This is a major revolution. 

I tried to upload a video pic on flickr. 

Also itv now called apple tv is out in feb for wisescreen too. 



Sent via CrackBerry  

[videoblogging] Second Life Capitol Hill

[andrew michael baron]

If anyone is interested in helping out with a second life event  
(first Congressional presence in a virtual world), we are interested  
in a couple of extra cinematographers to help document this event:
http://tinyurl.com/y646zh

If you are savvy with screen capturing in Second Life and interested,  
please email me off-list.

Thanks,

Drew
http://www.rocketboom.com
http://www.dembot.com




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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: John Edwards to Run for President (announcement on YouTube)

[andrew michael baron]

A very interesting observation of the MSM ignoring videoblogging's  
role in the anouncemenet:
http://newteevee.com/2006/12/28/msm-ignores-edwards-youtube-debut/

"...Some of the MSM accounts do reference the fact that Edwards’  
official campaign Web site went live briefly Wednesday by mistake3, a  
story reported by the Associated Press. But a quick scan of reports  
from the Wall Street Journal4 (via the AP), the New York Times5,  
Reuters6 and the Washington Post7 make no mention of the YouTube clip."

[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] Your Big Project for 2007

[andrew michael baron]

Woops, for 2007 I hope to keep my phone on lock when its in my pocket. 



Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "andrew michael baron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:55:43 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Your Big Project for 2007

Sent via CrackBerry 
 
 -Original Message- 
 From: "Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 
<mailto:solitude%40solitude.dk> dk> 
 Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 23:09:25 
 To:videoblogging@: <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com 
 Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Your Big Project for 2007 
 
 I'd like to film more cats.
 
 - Andreas
 
 Den 28.12.2006 kl. 22:43 skrev [chrisbrogan.com] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 
<mailto:group%40chrisbrogan.com> com>:
 
 > I thought I'd start a thread to ask the question: what's your big
 > videoblogging project for 2007?
 >
 > Some of you have mentioned this in one form or another, but as part of
 > other posts.
 >
 > What are your big plans for 2007?
 >
 > Seems like some folks will be following politicians around. Others are
 > gathering the creative masses. What's YOUR move?
 >
 > --Chris...
 >
 
 -- 
 Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
 http://www.solitude: <http://www.solitude:> : <http://www.solitude: 
<http://www.solitude.dk/> .dk/> .dk/ >
 
 
   

Re: [videoblogging] Your Big Project for 2007

[andrew michael baron]

Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 23:09:25 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Your Big Project for 2007

I'd like to film more cats.
 
 - Andreas
 
 Den 28.12.2006 kl. 22:43 skrev [chrisbrogan.com] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 
 com>:
 
 > I thought I'd start a thread to ask the question: what's your big
 > videoblogging project for 2007?
 >
 > Some of you have mentioned this in one form or another, but as part of
 > other posts.
 >
 > What are your big plans for 2007?
 >
 > Seems like some folks will be following politicians around. Others are
 > gathering the creative masses. What's YOUR move?
 >
 > --Chris...
 >
 
 -- 
 Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
 http://www.solitude:  .dk/ >
 
   

Re: [videoblogging] Re: John Edwards to Run for President (announcement on YouTube)

[andrew michael baron]

Hi Sean,thanks for the feedback.

Here are some thoughts:

Im not a journalist, Im a human being and I pick and choose to focus  
on what I want.

And even though I will probably vote for him, I would be glad to help  
other candidates too; I'm in to offering what I know to help level  
the playing field in politics as the first objective.

Video and Web 2.0 politics gives people the chance to lift or drop  
politicians based on what they see instead of what we hear via  
interpretation.

The more video we get, the more we can decipher the facts and form an  
opinion.

I hope to help establish the back-end systems to allow people to see  
as much as they can so they can make their own decisions.

I also like the idea of enabling the politicians to take the media  
into their own hands.

Even in my own field, if one of my "competitors" in videoblogging  
reaches out with questions, I'll speak up and give my best answers  
and offer sincere help.

I think Ive demonstrated that here even by offering up what others  
would my industry secrets.

Thats just me, I dont see it as competition and believe a rising tide  
lifts all boats.

Here are some specific thoughts on where I stand with the 2008  
Elections.
http://www.dembot.com/010661.html

Drew



On Dec 28, 2006, at 1:27 PM, sean_m_garrett wrote:
>
>
> Therefore, is Rocketboom going to be working with the Edwards campaign
> for the long-haul? (Which would make it very easy for their viewers
> to filter the opinions on the show. It would also help prevent snarky
> comments from bloggers like me who intuitively assume that
> journalistic interactions with a presidential candidate are striving
> for objectivity).
>
> Or is Rocketboom going to provide equal access and their production
> support to any presidential candidate who asks?
>
> Knowing the above answers would provide substantial context to any
> viewer who may happen upon the Rocketboom interview with Edwards  
> today.
>
> With Great Respect,
> Sean Garrett
>
> The 463: Inside Tech Policy
> http://463.blogs.com
>
> P.S.: I joined this list not to talk about politics (or religion),
> but to 1) learn from all of you as I create my own vlog and 2) to
> discuss the implications of public policy that might impact the
> fortunes of online video. I look forward to it.
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Today Joanne, Chuck and I are out in New Orleans.
> >
> > We just filmed John Edwards' first announcement that he is running
> > for president.
> >
> > I just uploaded the video to John Edwards' YouTube account.
> >
> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=1etlZaf6zUw";>http://youtube.com/
> > watch?v=1etlZaf6zUw
> >
> > (BTW, it may look like a photo op, but Edwards has been working out
> > here all day and has been providing major support since last year
> > when Katrina hit).
> >
>
>
> 



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

[videoblogging] John Edwards to Run for President (announcement on YouTube)

[andrew michael baron]

Today Joanne, Chuck and I are out in New Orleans.

We just filmed John Edwards' first announcement that he is running  
for president.

I just uploaded the video to John Edwards' YouTube account.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1etlZaf6zUw";>http://youtube.com/ 
watch?v=1etlZaf6zUw

(BTW, it may look like a photo op, but Edwards has been working out  
here all day and has been providing major support since last year  
when Katrina hit).

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Are You Recommending HD Cameras Yet?

[andrew michael baron]

On iHD and high bit rate files:

One of the things that helped popularize Rocketboom initially was  
that I was one of the first to regularly distribute video content  
with enclosures.

At the time, the audience (audio podcasters) was growing a great  
rate, but there was almost no video content to d/l.

This was a first to market advantage for those of us that implemented  
the specs.

I see the same thing occurring now for iHD. Maybe it wont take off in  
the same way, maybe it will do nothing for those that adopt such a  
file for distribution, though I believe there is a great chance that  
it will, if people also respond to the content.

Have you met anyone with an HD TV? They often become obsessed and  
fanatical about the quality. Its as if they put on glasses for the  
first time in their lives and then become disappointed at anything less.

Our daily Rocketboom files are under 100mb and most people can play  
them right from the browser.

Also, while 640x480 is also a good way to up the ante on your files  
for the upcoming iTV onslaught, iHD files can be in .mov format too,  
and thus look great on bigger screens of any kind, HD or not.


On Dec 18, 2006, at 6:25 PM, Mike Meiser wrote:

> Well said andreas.
>
> I love my $150 a520. It shoots video just fine and is one of the most
> popular camera's on Flickr.
>
> It's cheap, effective, I don't have to worry about destroying it
> because it doesn't cost much, and it's very portable and convienient
> so I can always cary it on me.
>
> Then again, those xacti's are looking pretty cool to... but I'll
> almost certainly stick with something a little more photog focused.
>
> The other thing about shooting on the cheap is it saves in other
> places too. Smaller videos are easier to edit and transcode, and take
> up less hard drive space and are therefore easier to manage. they also
> take less time to upload to your server, and use up less bandwidth. It
> also takes up less space on the Flash card so you can shoot more stuff
> and experiment more freely. The bottom line is cheap and dirty is more
> fun and easy.
>
> I read recently that something like 99% of all digital camera users
> never print their photos larger than 8x10 and most no larger than 5x7.
> Of which 2 megapixels is more than enough resolution. There was also
> an impromptu excersize, I think it was David Pogue where most people
> couldn't even tell the difference between a 3 megapixel image blown up
> poster size and an 11 megapixel.
>
> I'm a fan of the Faux Press way of doing things. When you're just
> communicating quick and dirty is always the best way to go.
>
> HD is vanity.
>
> But that just goes for communics... I think entertainment may require
> a different approach.
>
> On the other hand... some of these vlogs tend to be more like shows or
> minidocumentaries. For example... what I wouldn't give to see all Bill
> Streeter's minidocumentaries on the local St. Louis culture in HD.
> Roller derby girls, regional semi-professional wrestling, minidocs on
> local printmakers, musicans and artists.
>
> I guess my point is... whatever is... most of us are not profeesional
> photographers, most of us are not professional videographers... we're
> not shooting TV shows, or hollywood movies. Or photos won't be
> published as posters.
>
> I don't know what HD video camera's are going for, but you can now get
> an 8 megapixel camera for under $200.
>
> So 99% of us will never use this extra resolution in video or photo,
> but we spend dearly for it and it costs us in all areas from storage,
> to editing, to uploading time, to bandwidth... and for what reason.
>
> Sure there's a few people on this mailing list whom could consider HD,
> but it's a falacy.
>
> My suggestion would be screw that crap, go for the features. Go for a
> better optical zoom. Go for a higher ISO, better shooting at low
> light. Go for the ability to shoot more video and experiment more.
> Megapixels and definition are falacy.
>
> Finally... this is why I love the mobilvlogging and phenom... it is
> the epitome of the quick and dirty approach. It counteracts, is the
> antidote to, the falacy of HD and resolution.
>
> The tazer incident at UCLA (it was UCLA right?) illustrates this.
>
> I always liked that Jan of Faux press, one of the people among us who
> truely knows the value of fidelity and whom works on high budget films
> and documentaries uses as her everday instrament of vlogging a video
> phone. And it's exactly this approach I'd recommend. The old one two
> punch. :)
>
> Sure... for your "studio work" or professional go ahead and use HD
> cam, but just remember to leave that camera at home and carry around a
> cheap phone cam, or cheaper xacti, or some compact camera like any of
> the low end digital camera that shoot video.
>
> It's the content, that rules... the meat of the post, the words coming
> out of your mouth that contain the meaning... not that one can see the
> mole on your ear.
>
> Oh! One final 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Congdon at Apple

[andrew michael baron]

You must be in a different field. 


Sent via CrackBerry  

-Original Message-
From: "Josh Leo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2006 15:33:40 
To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Congdon at Apple

How the heck do I get featured on there?!

On 12/23/06, Casey McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   Television
> –noun
> 1. the broadcasting of a still or moving image via radiowaves to
> receivers that project a view of the image on a picture tube.
> 2. the process involved.
> 3. a set for receiving television broadcasts.
> 4. the field of television broadcasting.
>
> Show
> –noun
> 19. a theatrical production, performance, or company.
> 20. a radio or television program.
> 21. a motion picture.
> 22. an exposition for dealers or the public of products by various
> manufacturers in a particular industry, usually held in an exhibition
> hall, convention facility, or the like: the annual boat show.
> 23. any kind of public exhibition or exposition: a show of Renoirs.
> 24. ostentatious display: nothing but mere show.
> 25. a display, exhibition, or demonstration: a true show of freedom.
> 26. an indication; trace: He frowned on the slightest show of emotion.
> 27. the position of the competitor who comes in third in a horse race,
> harness race, etc. Compare place (def. 27b), win1 (def. 16).
> 28. appearance; impression: to make a sorry show.
> 29. a sight or spectacle.
> 30. an unreal or deceptive appearance: The actress's tears had the
> show of grief.
> 31. an act or instance of showing.
> 32. a motion-picture theater.
>
> If you look at the difference between the two terms you'll notice that
> Television is a method of delivery. Video blogs are an alternative
> method of delivery, therefore although Dictionary.com hasn't altered
> their definitions to include internet-based shows, it's easy to see
> the difference between TV and Video blogs.
>
> Casey
>
> ---
> http://www.galacticast.com/
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com ,
> WWWhatsup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >>>Go behind the scenes of videoblogging's favorite introverted
> extrovert, Amanda Congdon
> >
> > I wonder who came up with that :)
> >
> > The whole blip interface and ad thing all looks great.
> >
> > Doesn't A. kind of blow the 'this is not tv' angle by calling it a show
> > in the next sentence?
> >
> > joly
> >
> >
> > >Hi all,
> > >I just went to upgrade my Quicktime (without iTunes)
> > >and I noticed that Amanda Congdon has a video
> > >on the page for that. You probably already know this.
> > >http://www.apple.com/quicktime/win.html
> > >Zack
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > WWWhatsup NYC
> > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> > --
> >
>
>  
>



-- 
Josh Leo

www.JoshLeo.com
www.WanderingWestMichigan.com


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



 
Yahoo! Groups Links





 
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: RSS as Relationship Tool

[andrew michael baron]

> Obviously you feel something is different here with Network2. Can you
> explain why you see this as different?
>
> -Verdi


Sure, it all comes down to the people.

The aggregator I complained about recently involved a guy who  
threatened to sue Rocketboom.

This aggregator involves a guy who has reached out and offered to  
help Rocketboom, time and time again.

I am certain that the only reason why Blip is doing well right now is  
because of the people. Thats what distinguished them.

As I mentioned earlier, I have spent a lot of time with Chris and  
Jeff this year and after getting to know them and hearing about their  
vision, learning about their resources, and seeing the speed of their  
activity, Id say they have an extremely well funded, very  
experienced, super spirited outlook.

--

I met Chris at Podcamp when he started it in Boston, where he and I  
first met Jeff.

I then went to the on to meet up with Chris and Jeff on many other  
occasions and conferences this year.

We have all been talking recently about sharing a studio space here  
in Manhattan as well.

---

Im personally focused on creating more content right now but with  
regards to all of you this leads me to this thought, again:

I've often said out loud to the various parties involved that it  
would be great to join Vlogmap and Vlogdir (directories), FireAnt  
(software ap) and Mefeedia (database) all together for a killer app,  
esp. because of the talents of the people involved that could be  
shared to develop the uber work.

With Network2 (currently an online aggregator), Blip (hosting) and  
all of the extra stuff that each of these bring to the table, you  
would have a major indi-meregr of support.

I realize its a crazy idea, but if I wasn't busy, I'd do more than  
just suggest it.

On Dec 18, 2006, at 8:50 PM, Michael Verdi wrote:

> Andrew,
> I'm not trying to get in an argument with you but I am interested in a
> clarification of your thoughts here. In the past you've written to  
> this list
> about all the trouble you've had with sites that have sucked in the
> Rocketboom feed allowing people to watch episodes embeded in pages  
> that kind
> of made it look as if Rocketboom had some relationship with the site.
> Obviously you feel something is different here with Network2. Can you
> explain why you see this as different?
>
> -Verdi
>


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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: RSS as Relationship Tool

[andrew michael baron]

On Dec 18, 2006, at 5:23 PM, sull wrote:

> so, let's talke about 'added value'.

No one has put it all together in one easy place to discover. Its an  
obvious missing gap and the value to everyone is immense.

For this reason, I believe (so far) the directory part of the  
conversation should be not be opt-in and perhaps not even give the  
option to opt-out.

A directory is just a collection of links.

The best directory will need to send ace spiders out to collect links.

Remember when Podcasting first came out and there were more  
podcasting directories than there were podcasts?

What happened? Its so decentralized  (this has its many merits too)  
but nothing emerged as the place to go to find it anything.

With videoblogging, no single directory has emerged either.

There is a big value to everyone for a Google-sized Search location  
for online video.

There would be great value in a full on Technorati of videoblogging.

There would be a great value in a digg for video too.




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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: RSS as Relationship Tool

[andrew michael baron]

>
> - I want it to be opt-in
> - I want prominent link to my site
> - I want a link to the post's permalink
> - I want a link to my feed (not the directory's feed of my stuff)
> - I want my work's license displayed


I find this list of points to be spot on as the primary concerns.

I think FireAnt, Network2 and vlogdir/vlogmap serve three different  
types of purposes and each can be treated differently with regards to  
these questions.

I was just emailing with Jeff Pulver and it sounds like he previously  
had the foresight for exactly all of this and may have already  
changed some of it.

As more and more online video content emerges, no one has yet  
surfaced as the entry point for online serial content besides iTunes  
which is not apt for democratic inclusively.

I'm going to give the 'most likely to succeed' award in 2007 to Jeff  
Pulver and Chris Brogan with Network2, Video on the Net and Pod-camp,  
for having emerged basically just this year with these projects,  
shooting up overnight, and having the best of intents and heart (for  
I have gotten to know both this year and this last point is the very  
strongest quality behind everything).

Before I hop off my support-wagon here, most importantly for all of  
us, I expect 2007 is going to require a major battle with Net  
Neutrality.

This battle has already happened before when audio transmission over  
the internet had become democratized.

"On February 12, 2004, Mr. Pulver's petition for clarification  
declaring Free World Dial-up as an unregulated information service  
was granted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). . .   Now  
referred to as "the Pulver Order", the ruling provides important  
clarification that computer-to-computer VoIP service is not a  
telecommunications service. By doing this, the FCC delivered a strong  
signal to consumers and capital markets that the FCC is not  
interested in subjecting end-to-end IP Communications services to  
traditional voice telecommunications regulation under the  
Communications Act.

In otherwords, having co-founded Vonage, Jeff fought to make sure  
stuff like Skype could be free. Even Apple voice chat and podcasting  
would have been at risk.

With regards to tomorrow's internet, Pulver has been hot on the case  
and may be one of the best positioned people to help keep internet  
video transmission free as well.















On Dec 18, 2006, at 12:24 AM, Michael Verdi wrote:

> Here are my thoughts...
>
> The reality is there is money to be made in aggregating and presenting
> content. In other words it's a commercial use of people's content.
> Maybe a site doesn't have ads or even charges money for content but if
> they get lots of viewers because "they have" lots of content then, as
> we've seen with YouTube, they can be valuable. That's value built on
> the backs of others.
>
> Now I think if you opt-in to something that isn't displaying your
> license or linking to your permalink or is putting ads around your
> stuff than you've obviously agreed to that. No problem there.
>
> On the other hand, if like in the case of Network2, you have to
> opt-out then that's not cool at all. Some of my content is up there
> and I've never been asked about it. I have no agreement with them
> though they are, in my opinion, commercially using my content. Even if
> you could somehow argue that it wasn't a commercial use, they still
> aren't displaying the terms of my license.
>
> I also noticed while looking around that Fireant.tv has added ads to
> the page since I last checked. Not cool guys. There weren't any ads
> when I opted in.
>
> So what do I want from a directory?
> - I want it to be opt-in
> - I want prominent link to my site
> - I want a link to the post's permalink
> - I want a link to my feed (not the directory's feed of my stuff)
> - I want my work's license displayed
> I think this is the minimum required.
>
> -Verdi
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

BBC!? You da man!


On Dec 16, 2006, at 5:04 PM, Paul Knight wrote:

> Drew,
>
> You da man, as far as I concerned.
>
> Paul
>
> On 16 Dec 2006, at 21:15, andrew michael baron wrote:
>
> > Ladies and Gentlemen, Im finished.
> >
> > Ive said everything I wanted to say to defend myself from Amanda.
> >
> > EOF
> >
> > I would like to explain my method and thank you for providing a  
> forum
> > in which to help.
> >
> > I did not find this back-n-forth harmful, inappropriate or out of  
> the
> > ordinary.
> >
> > For me this is a result of months and months of pent up emotion,
> > anticipation, and especially legal strategy.
> >
> > This is extremely serious.
> >
> > This is regarding grossly false accusations on my personal character
> > within our own community of friends and colleagues.
> >
> > The feeling is much more intense for me than anyone else because its
> > my integrity at stake and this is directly tied into Rocketboom's
> > well being.
> >
> > I feel as though this forum is important for the support of
> > videobloggers with regards to all aspects of the trials and
> > tribulations of videoblogging. For me, it has always been this way.
> >
> > As you can see from one of 1000's of posts just like this, it also
> > has a real and direct effect on my business:
> > http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/07/05/congdon-fired-from-rocketboom/
> >
> > I appreciate that I could get my side of the story out to a group of
> > people who I find to be the most likely to relate, understand and
> > care.
> >
> > We all have plenty of lessons to learn and hopefully the learning
> > will never stop for any of us.
> >
> > If its not clear or you feel nothing has been settled, that's  
> okay, I
> > feel as though it has and that's why I can now say I am finished  
> with
> > my public statements on this issue.
> >
> > So thanks again.
> >
> > Drew
> >
> > On Dec 16, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Paul Knight wrote:
> >
> > > Dang, so much for my attempt to distract away from the tears and
> > > tantrums episode.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > > On 16 Dec 2006, at 20:07, Zenophon Abraham wrote:
> > >
> > > > Meanwhile, Amanda marches on. She's on CNN's
> > > > program "The Future" right now. And she's doing well.
> > > > Of course, this means I'm blogging rather than
> > > > working out and holiday shopping...
> > > >
> > > > Zennie
> > > >
> > > > --- Deirdre Straughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I guess it has entertainment value for some, but
> > > > > they're hurting themselves
> > > > > more than each other.
> > > > >
> > > > > You know how in movies you see someone doing
> > > > > something really stupid and
> > > > > wrong and you know they're going to get caught, or
> > > > > hurt, or killed? Like
> > > > > when Susan is doing the nth stupid thing in
> > > > > "Desperate Housewives" and you
> > > > > can see the trainwreck coming? I can't take those
> > > > > scenes - they hurt my
> > > > > stomach, I get up and walk out.
> > > > >
> > > > > Which is how this whole thing makes me feel.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12/16/06, Markus Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Dec 16, 2006, at 10:34 AM, Deirdre Straughan
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Moderators, where are you?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > this one is sitting back watching this tread with
> > > > > great amusement.
> > > > > > thanks for the entertainment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > in particular, i really liked the hugs video loiez
> > > > > shared. that was
> > > > > > the highlight.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > i really haven't had time to watch soap operas for
> > > > > a long long time and
> > > > > > this one was actually a real treat.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > for those who wish it would stop: please just
> > > > > ignore it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > btw, a moderator started this thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and another moderator already set it on fire.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > what more do you want?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > play nice kids :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > Markus Sandy
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > best regards,
> > > > > Deirdré Straughan
> > > > >
> > > > > www.beginningwithi.com (personal)
> > > > > www.tvblob.com (work)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > > > > removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > __
> > > > 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]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

Ladies and Gentlemen, Im finished.

Ive said everything I wanted to say to defend myself from Amanda.

EOF

I would like to explain my method and thank you for providing a forum  
in which to help.

I did not find this back-n-forth harmful, inappropriate or out of the  
ordinary.

For me this is a result of months and months of pent up emotion,  
anticipation, and especially legal strategy.

This is extremely serious.

This is regarding grossly false accusations on my personal character  
within our own community of friends and colleagues.

The feeling is much more intense for me than anyone else because its  
my integrity at stake and this is directly tied into Rocketboom's  
well being.

I feel as though this forum is important for the support of  
videobloggers with regards to all aspects of the trials and  
tribulations of videoblogging. For me, it has always been this way.

As you can see from one of 1000's of posts just like this, it also  
has a real and direct effect on my business:
http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/07/05/congdon-fired-from-rocketboom/

I appreciate that I could get my side of the story out to a group of  
people who I find to be the most likely to relate, understand and care.

We all have plenty of lessons to learn and hopefully the learning  
will never stop for any of us.

If its not clear or you feel nothing has been settled, that's okay, I  
feel as though it has and that's why I can now say I am finished with  
my public statements on this issue.

So thanks again.

Drew


On Dec 16, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Paul Knight wrote:

> Dang, so much for my attempt to distract away from the tears and
> tantrums episode.
>
> Paul
> On 16 Dec 2006, at 20:07, Zenophon Abraham wrote:
>
> > Meanwhile, Amanda marches on. She's on CNN's
> > program "The Future" right now. And she's doing well.
> > Of course, this means I'm blogging rather than
> > working out and holiday shopping...
> >
> > Zennie
> >
> > --- Deirdre Straughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I guess it has entertainment value for some, but
> > > they're hurting themselves
> > > more than each other.
> > >
> > > You know how in movies you see someone doing
> > > something really stupid and
> > > wrong and you know they're going to get caught, or
> > > hurt, or killed? Like
> > > when Susan is doing the nth stupid thing in
> > > "Desperate Housewives" and you
> > > can see the trainwreck coming? I can't take those
> > > scenes - they hurt my
> > > stomach, I get up and walk out.
> > >
> > > Which is how this whole thing makes me feel.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/16/06, Markus Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 16, 2006, at 10:34 AM, Deirdre Straughan
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Moderators, where are you?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > this one is sitting back watching this tread with
> > > great amusement.
> > > > thanks for the entertainment.
> > > >
> > > > in particular, i really liked the hugs video loiez
> > > shared. that was
> > > > the highlight.
> > > >
> > > > i really haven't had time to watch soap operas for
> > > a long long time and
> > > > this one was actually a real treat.
> > > >
> > > > for those who wish it would stop: please just
> > > ignore it.
> > > >
> > > > btw, a moderator started this thread.
> > > >
> > > > and another moderator already set it on fire.
> > > >
> > > > what more do you want?
> > > >
> > > > play nice kids :)
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > Markus Sandy
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > best regards,
> > > Deirdré Straughan
> > >
> > > www.beginningwithi.com (personal)
> > > www.tvblob.com (work)
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > > removed]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > __
> > 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]
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

I only ever made one demand in the history of Rocketboom; only once  
did I ever put my foot down.

The last letter to Amanda before she quit:

Begin forwarded message:

Chuck's letter to Amanda:

Hey Amanda,

I just talked to Andrew and he's basically ready to take control of  
Rocketboom.
I think no matter what, he's exercising his 51% and taking control of  
the business.
He wants to know what you want to do.

Everyone wants you to be the face of Rocketboom.
Would you be happy producing shows in the next month while figuring  
out a way to get you to LA and decide what happens next?

Given the state of things, right now Andrew wants you to be talent  
and talk to the press,
and probably produce shows, but no more involvement beyond that.

I told Andrew you guys really need to make a clean break and not have  
some inbetween state.
Nobody knows what that looks like, still, but this buys a month of  
time for everyone to plan for
life beyond that.


Here is Amand'a response:
http://panther.video.blip.tv/uploadedFiles/Unboomed- 
amanda_unboomed_s509.mov

Then, she went on to hang up the dirty laundry on her blog:
http://www.amandaunboomed.blogspot.com/

On Dec 16, 2006, at 1:55 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:

> I agree completely Deirdre. Where are the moderators?
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre Straughan"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Guys, this isn't helping either of you. My strong advice as a
> businesswoman
> > and (I hope) friend is DO NOT discuss this stuff here OR on your
> blogs. If I
> > were a potential sponsor watching all this, I'd be extremely
> uncomfortable
> > about the sensitive details getting batted around.
> >
> > And that is the last I'm going to say on the subject. Moderators,
> where are
> > you?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/16/06, Amanda Congdon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yup. You are right on that one. I wasn't doing it for the money.
> > >
> > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> ,
> > > andrew michael baron
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The deal I was trying to secure was for $250,000
> > > >
> > > > You landed the deal for $0.
> > > >
> > > > Nice one.
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 16, 2006, at 1:03 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > As far as AAA goes, just another example of you failing to  
> secure
> > > > > sponsorship. No contract, no deal. Unless there was a contract
> that
> > > > > you hid from me? You did hide a lot of business stuff.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > best regards,
> > Deirdré Straughan
> >
> > www.beginningwithi.com (personal)
> > www.tvblob.com (work)
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> 



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

[videoblogging] Fwd: Rocketboom Partnership

[andrew michael baron]

I only ever made one demand in the history of Rocketboom; only once  
did I ever put my foot down.

The last letter to Amanda before she quit:


>
> Chuck's letter to Amanda:
>
> Hey Amanda,
>
> I just talked to Andrew and he's basically ready to take control of  
> Rocketboom.
> I think no matter what, he's exercising his 51% and taking control  
> of the business.
> He wants to know what you want to do.
>
> Everyone wants you to be the face of Rocketboom.
> Would you be happy producing shows in the next month while figuring  
> out a way to get you to LA and decide what happens next?
>
> Given the state of things, right now Andrew wants you to be talent  
> and talk to the press,
> and probably produce shows, but no more involvement beyond that.
>
> I told Andrew you guys really need to make a clean break and not  
> have some inbetween state.
> Nobody knows what that looks like, still, but this buys a month of  
> time for everyone to plan for
> life beyond that.
> 
>
> Here is Amand'a response:
> http://panther.video.blip.tv/uploadedFiles/Unboomed- 
> amanda_unboomed_s509.mov
>
> Then, she went on to hang up the dirty laundry on her blog:
> http://www.amandaunboomed.blogspot.com/
>
>



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

The best way to avoid factual statements is to ask questions.

On Dec 16, 2006, at 1:35 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:

> This proves what? That I (not you) had an HBO meeting and that I fired
> my manager?
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > As you can see, I spent legal fees on the HBO opportunity that was
> > meant for Rocketboom but yea, as I said, you stole it away for  
> yourself.
> >
> > Lie #2. Resolved.
> >
> > Begin forwarded message:
> > > From: "Amanda Congdon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Date: June 2, 2006 2:20:46 PM EDT
> > > To: "Thompson, Bryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Cc: "Johnson, Channing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "andrew michael
> > > baron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jim Congdon"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: Re: Matthew Lesher, semi-urgent
> > >
> > > Bryan and Channing,
> > >
> > > Thank you for getting back to me on this so quickly. As it turns
> > > out, the HBO meeting is now happening on Monday rather than later
> > > today. The introductory meeting between Ari, Andrew and me is  
> still
> > > on as scheduled at 3pm Pacific. How does this change the order of
> > > events, if at all?
> > >
> > > Yes, please prepare Matthew's termination letter.
> > >
> > > Thanks again,
> > >
> > > Amanda
> > >
> > > On 6/2/06, Thompson, Bryan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Amanda:
> > >
> > > I spoke to Channing about this. We think that your analysis of the
> > > situation is spot-on accurate and that it would be appropriate for
> > > you now to terminate your relationship with Matthew.
> > >
> > > Accordingly, we believe that you should inform Matthew, both  
> orally
> > > and in writing, that your relationship with him is now terminated.
> > > You should also inform him that he is not to participate in the  
> HBO
> > > conference call, nor is he to contact or speak with HBO or  
> Endeavor
> > > concerning you, Andrew, or Rocketboom.
> > >
> > > Let me know if you would like us to prepare a letter to Matthew
> > > concerning this.
> > >
> > > In order to assure that Matthew is not on the call, you will need
> > > to contact him orally before the call. Even if we sent a letter
> > > right now, he might not actually read it before the HBO call
> > > begins. When you speak to him you can let him know that a letter
> > > will be coming.
> > >
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > > Behalf Of Amanda Congdon
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 10:19 PM
> > > To: Johnson, Channing; Thompson, Bryan; andrew michael baron
> > > Cc: Jim Congdon
> > > Subject: Matthew Lesher, semi-urgent
> > >
> > > Hello everyone,
> > >
> > > I spoke with Matthew Lesher this evening. I asked him why Ari
> > > Emanuel would be under the impression he was Rocketboom's manger.
> > > He said he didn't know, that maybe Ari just "assumed" as much. He
> > > then said, in fact, that both he and Ari had no interest in the
> > > management of Rocketboom. He also said that because Ari (and thus
> > > Endeavor) were not involved in the book deal, that he felt Ari was
> > > being "aggressive" in wanting 10% equity in Rocketboom. I asked  
> him
> > > why he then jumped on the bandwagon and asked for the same thing
> > > (on Friday Matthew brought up getting 10% too). He started back
> > > peddling and saying that we were just beginning the conversation,
> > > that nothing had been decided. I told him it sounded like he  
> didn't
> > > have my best interests in mind, and he said no, he was just
> > > presenting all the options. If he truly had my best interest in
> > > mind, he would have told me he thought Ari was being aggressive on
> > > Friday, not now after I pressed him about it. Bottom line is  
> that I
> > > don't trust him, so I believe the relationship will have to be
> > > terminated. I would love to hear what everyone else thinks.
> > >
> > > The big issue now is that I have a conference call today (Friday)
> > > scheduled with Caroline Strauss at HBO to workshop show ideas at
> > > 2:30 Pacific, and I don't want Matthew in on that. Ari is the only
> > > one that had anything to do with setting that up. Matthew also has
> > > included himself in an introductory conversation that was supposed
> > > to happen directly before the HBO meeting, with Andrew, Ari and
> > > me. Andrew just sent me an email suggesting perhaps the talk with
> > > Matthew occur very shortly before the HBO meeting is scheduled, so
> > > as not to give Matthew time to backlash before the meeting. Help
> > > please!!
> > >
> > > Thanks so much for all of your guidance,
> > >
> > > Amanda
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

As you can see, I spent legal fees on the HBO opportunity that was  
meant for Rocketboom but yea, as I said, you stole it away for yourself.

Lie #2. Resolved.

Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Amanda Congdon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: June 2, 2006 2:20:46 PM EDT
> To: "Thompson, Bryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Johnson, Channing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "andrew michael  
> baron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jim Congdon"  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Matthew Lesher, semi-urgent
>
> Bryan and Channing,
>
> Thank you for getting back to me on this so quickly. As it turns  
> out, the HBO meeting is now happening on Monday rather than later  
> today. The introductory meeting between Ari, Andrew and me is still  
> on as scheduled at 3pm Pacific. How does this change the order of  
> events, if at all?
>
> Yes, please prepare Matthew's termination letter.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Amanda
>
> On 6/2/06, Thompson, Bryan < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Amanda:
>
> I spoke to Channing about this.  We think that your analysis of the  
> situation is spot-on accurate and that it would be appropriate for  
> you now to terminate your relationship with Matthew.
>
> Accordingly, we believe that you should inform Matthew, both orally  
> and in writing, that your relationship with him is now terminated.   
> You should also inform him that he is not to participate in the HBO  
> conference call, nor is he to contact or speak with HBO or Endeavor  
> concerning you, Andrew, or Rocketboom.
>
> Let me know if you would like us to prepare a letter to Matthew  
> concerning this.
>
> In order to assure that Matthew is not on the call, you will need  
> to contact him orally before the call.  Even if we sent a letter  
> right now, he might not actually read it before the HBO call  
> begins.  When you speak to him you can let him know that a letter  
> will be coming.
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On  
> Behalf Of Amanda Congdon
> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 10:19 PM
> To: Johnson, Channing; Thompson, Bryan; andrew michael baron
> Cc: Jim Congdon
> Subject: Matthew Lesher, semi-urgent
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I spoke with Matthew Lesher this evening. I asked him why Ari  
> Emanuel would be under the impression he was Rocketboom's manger.  
> He said he didn't know, that maybe Ari just "assumed" as much. He  
> then said, in fact, that both he and Ari had no interest in the  
> management of Rocketboom. He also said that because Ari (and thus  
> Endeavor) were not involved in the book deal, that he felt Ari was  
> being "aggressive" in wanting 10% equity in Rocketboom. I asked him  
> why he then jumped on the bandwagon and asked for the same thing  
> (on Friday Matthew brought up getting 10% too). He started back  
> peddling and saying that we were just beginning the conversation,  
> that nothing had been decided. I told him it sounded like he didn't  
> have my best interests in mind, and he said no, he was just  
> presenting all the options. If he truly had my best interest in  
> mind, he would have told me he thought Ari was being aggressive on  
> Friday, not now after I pressed him about it. Bottom line is that I  
> don't trust him, so I believe the relationship will have to be  
> terminated. I would love to hear what everyone else thinks.
>
> The big issue now is that I have a conference call today (Friday)  
> scheduled with Caroline Strauss at HBO to workshop show ideas at  
> 2:30 Pacific, and I don't want Matthew in on that.  Ari is the only  
> one that had anything to do with setting that up. Matthew also has  
> included himself in an introductory conversation that was supposed  
> to happen directly before the HBO meeting, with Andrew, Ari and  
> me.  Andrew just sent me an email suggesting perhaps the talk with  
> Matthew occur very shortly before the HBO meeting is scheduled, so  
> as not to give Matthew time to backlash before the meeting. Help  
> please!!
>
> Thanks so much for all of your guidance,
>
> Amanda





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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

The deal I was trying to secure was for $250,000

You landed the deal for $0.

Nice one.

On Dec 16, 2006, at 1:03 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:

> As far as AAA goes, just another example of you failing to secure
> sponsorship. No contract, no deal. Unless there was a contract that
> you hid from me? You did hide a lot of business stuff.



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

Oh boy, digging a deeper hole for yourself.

ABC News is exactly the people we were in deep talks with. ABC NEws  
and ABC Family. Its all under Dinsey and we were in project talks  
with all. You have just lied again, mark my words here. I will  
release the document to my blog then.

The AAA story? Jeze, you have not told the relevant truth, documents  
are forthcoming. I spent months on this project and it was my sponsor  
relationship you took for Ford. You quit before the deal was done.  
You were only able to complete the deal for no money. My deal was for  
$250,000. No wonder you were able to close it.

HBO contacted Rocketboom and wanted to do a show with Rocketboom. You  
told them I didnt want to. I said I did. I will provide docs,  
forthcoming.

Finally, now we can get somewhere.

Drew
http://www.rocketboom.com
http://www.dembot.com


On Dec 16, 2006, at 12:04 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:

> Sorry, Gary, attacks require rebuttal. I've been minding my own  
> business. Wish Mr. Baron
> could do the same. He's long talked about leaving it up to the  
> lawyers instead of the
> media, but now (since that hasn't worked in his favor), has decided  
> to go the public route.
>
> Hope this ends it.
>
> http://amandacongdon.com/blog/?p=6
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Gary Short <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Amanda Congdon wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Chuck, I am personally offended by that comment. Lady cats  
> everywhere
> > > should be outraged. My cat, Mattie,
> >
> > Yadda, yadda, yadda...
> >
> > Hey, isn't it about time that the Andrew and Amanda camps just  
> declared
> > a score draw and applaud each other as they leave the field?  
> What's done
> > is done, let's move on shall we? Apart from anything else, having  
> two
> > vlogging superstars duking it out like this in public, makes us  
> all look
> > like total amateurs.
> >
> > For example, I've managed to land a paying gig with the  
> Carnoustie Golf
> > Links, vlogging their run up to The Open 2007. This event is the  
> major
> > event in the pro golf calendar. We are talking about a multi-million
> > pound business here; something that puts vlogging up there as  
> something
> > you "just do" when you are hosting an event like this. If I get it
> > right, then every host venue from now on will be doing the same,  
> as they
> > all follow the R&A's advice on what is "best practice", and  
> that's got
> > to be good for everyone.
> >
> > I'm just glad that no-one at the R&A or at Carnoustie Golf Links is
> > following this thread because honestly, I think it could put back  
> what
> > we are trying to achieve by years.
> >
> > Please, will the pair of you just cut it out and move on.
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Gary
> > http://www.garyshort.org/
> > http://www.carnoustiegolflinks.co.uk/vlog/
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

Hi Gary, no need.  I think Sul just meant he didn't want people to be  
antagonistic with each other.

My intent is to provide feedback that will hopefully be useful to  
others.

There is a direction I was going with this and it has to do with  
business practices. Because everyone in the Amanda camp have done  
their best to silence the discussion, I posted it to my blog - you  
and they seem to be overly resistant to considering this worthwhile  
topic.
http://www.dembot.com/011937.html

The other part of the discussion which I have yet to begin is also  
very important and it has to do with the relationships of band members.

Videoblogs are a lot like bands and the collaboration between  
partners leads to a hell of a lot of strife for many people.

Amanda chose to make ours public when she posted her video and began  
attacking me on her blog and to the press.

Thus, it's a perfect opportunity to explore and share the experience  
for the sake of preventing others from having to go through this.

People go though this all the time but its usually behind closed  
doors so no one learns from mistakes and thus progression in the  
favor of independents becomes stifled.

I did not understand the importance of this until it was already  
overwhelming.

There are a lot of people that start working on a project -  
especially duos - and they really need to do some things to  
anticipate the future, good or bad.


On Dec 15, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Gary Short wrote:

> As a mod asked everyone to stop posting on this thread (you must  
> have missed
> that) I'll not respond here, but if you wish to continue this  
> discussion please
> feel free to contact me off list.
>
> Cheers,
> Gary
> http://www.garyshort.org/
>
> http://www.carnoustiegolflinks.co.uk/vlog/
>
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com  
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of andrew michael baron
> Sent: 15 December 2006 14:33
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!
>
> Gary, whats the point of telling me Im getting on your nerves? You
> are doing exactly what Andrew Congdon did and I have no problem
> speaking up about it and defending myself.
>
> I think I provided a well rounded argument for disucssion about the
> cost of doing business when merging established media and new media.
>
> When Andrew Congdon chimed in to "refute" my contribution to this
> group by saying "Sour Grapes", I think this shows dolt behavior.
>
> I think this is now your unfortunate oversight.
>
> Your comments should have been directed at him.
>
> > So what was your idea exactly?
>
> Why dont you go back and read the post instead of participating in
> accusing me of "being such a baby" and shooting me down for the
> contributions I give to this field, big or small.
>
> Andrew, you are really starting to get on my nerves now with this
> carping;
>
> Give me a brea
>
> it is
> so childish, it's like listening to my kids arguing over who has been
> given the
> most veg and how it's s unfair. For goodness sake stop being such
> a baby.
>
> Huh?
>
> The sad fact of business is that people come together, they do great
> work and
> sometimes they disagree and go their own way - that's life Andrew,
> get over it.
> The thing is there is no doubt you have talent, but you are not
> encouraging
> anyone to reach out to you with a new business idea/partnership with
> this
> behavior. People will be reading these outbursts of yours and  
> saying to
> themselves, "is this what it is like if it doesn't work out?" and
> they'll be
> giving you a big body swerve.
>
> While we are on the subject, stop pretending that Rocketboom was some
> huge
> intellectual breakthrough on your part, that it was all your
> wonderful idea.
> What utter nonsense. Entertaining though Rocketboom was (and still
> is) there
> wasn't a single new idea there. I mean, taking a look at the more
> quirky aspects
> of the news? Been done. Fronting the show with a good looking,
> intelligent and
> charismatic woman. Been done. Hosting the show as a video cast for
> download?
> Been done. So what was your idea exactly?
>
> Like I said though, I don't want to pour oil on troubled waters, as I
> think we
> are all tired of hearing about it - just please, get over yourself
> will you?
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

Gary, whats the point of telling me Im getting on your nerves? You  
are doing exactly what Andrew Congdon did and I have no problem  
speaking up about it and defending myself.

I think I provided a well rounded argument for disucssion about the  
cost of doing business when merging established media and new media.

When Andrew Congdon chimed in to "refute" my contribution to this  
group by saying "Sour Grapes", I think this shows dolt behavior.

I think this is now your unfortunate oversight.

Your comments should have been directed at him.

>  So what was your idea exactly?

Why dont you go back and read the post instead of participating in  
accusing me of "being such a baby" and shooting me down for the  
contributions I give to this field, big or small.


Andrew, you are really starting to get on my nerves now with this  
carping;

Give me a brea

  it is
so childish, it's like listening to my kids arguing over who has been  
given the
most veg and how it's s unfair. For goodness sake stop being such  
a baby.

Huh?

The sad fact of business is that people come together, they do great  
work and
sometimes they disagree and go their own way - that's life Andrew,  
get over it.
The thing is there is no doubt you have talent, but you are not  
encouraging
anyone to reach out to you with a new business idea/partnership with  
this
behavior. People will be reading these outbursts of yours and saying to
themselves, "is this what it is like if it doesn't work out?" and  
they'll be
giving you a big body swerve.

While we are on the subject, stop pretending that Rocketboom was some  
huge
intellectual breakthrough on your part, that it was all your  
wonderful idea.
What utter nonsense. Entertaining though Rocketboom was (and still  
is) there
wasn't a single new idea there. I mean, taking a look at the more  
quirky aspects
of the news? Been done. Fronting the show with a good looking,  
intelligent and
charismatic woman. Been done. Hosting the show as a video cast for  
download?
Been done. So what was your idea exactly?

Like I said though, I don't want to pour oil on troubled waters, as I  
think we
are all tired of hearing about it - just please, get over yourself  
will you?

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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

Apparently, not having your own ideas runs in the family. ;)

On Dec 14, 2006, at 4:54 PM, Andrew Congdon wrote:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sour_grapes
>
> On 12/14/06, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On the topic of ABC's videoblog, I'm going to set aside all of the
> > technical problems everyone has already mentioned with the video
> > distribution and the ABC platform - the fact that there are no RSS
> > feeds, the comments are pre-approved and filtered (even when not
> > offensive), the video scrolls have been turned off, one is forced to
> > view long, irrelevant pre-roll ads that outlast many people's
> > curiosity and especially the closed platform with no mobile or local
> > potential.
> >
> > In otherwords, the only difference between this video platform and
> > one from say, 1997, is that for this one, at least the video does
> > come on and plays.
> >
> > Maybe they can hire someone who knows a thing or two about it.
> >
> > I'm going to suggest that the greatest failure of this project
> > however has to do with the severely expensive resources that are
> > being used for a product that can be much more valuable for a mere
> > fraction of the effort and costs.
> >
> > My question is, how much money did it take to produce this?
> >
> > Also, if all of the effort only goes into a once-a-week show, how
> > effective and interested are the people behind the show to take so
> > much time and money to do so little?
> >
> > For instance, we know they are probably paying Amanda a professional
> > salary. They are also paying two senior level producers for this.
> > Then there is at least one editor, a camera person (unless one of  
> the
> > producers is a cameraman), lighting tech, audio guy, all with  
> premium
> > 'ABC' salaries. I am just speculating, perhaps I have missed some.
> >
> > In addition to that, the entity ABC needs to make revenue (beside  
> the
> > people), yet they also have at least one rep that works with Amanda
> > besides the producers and other production staff. Surely they have
> > someone who works on the website if not a section of a team.  
> Amanda's
> > agent needs a professional share. Amanda's manager too. They
> > obviously have a very aggressive PR team too (which they will
> > definitely need to drive people to the show). Lets not forget the
> > advertisers! They are the ones supporting this and because so many
> > people need to get paid such high salaries, the advertisers need to
> > get paid most of the real-estate of the website. In many ways, this
> > scenario is typical of one where the advertisers are way more
> > important than the show itself. The show is just a tool for ad sales
> > in the end, after all.
> >
> > The point I want to make is, there are probably WAY too many people
> > needed to pull off this one 5 minute production exclusively for a
> > small flash file on one website.
> >
> > A company like ABC should perhaps use their expensive resources to
> > produce content that needs expensive resources. Was there special
> > access gained? Was there need for expensive equipment? Travel
> > expenses? 3 producers?
> >
> > No, there was no sign of any need for any of the above that I  
> could see.
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

On the topic of ABC's videoblog, I'm going to set aside all of the  
technical problems everyone has already mentioned with the video  
distribution and the ABC platform - the fact that there are no RSS  
feeds, the comments are pre-approved and filtered (even when not  
offensive), the video scrolls have been turned off, one is forced to  
view long, irrelevant pre-roll ads that outlast many people's  
curiosity and especially the closed platform with no mobile or local  
potential.

In otherwords, the only difference between this video platform and  
one from say, 1997, is that for this one, at least the video does  
come on and plays.

Maybe they can hire someone who knows a thing or two about it.

I'm going to suggest that the greatest failure of this project  
however has to do with the severely expensive resources that are  
being used for a product that can be much more valuable for a mere  
fraction of the effort and costs.

My question is, how much money did it take to produce this?

Also, if all of the effort only goes into a once-a-week show, how  
effective and interested are the people behind the show to take so  
much time and money to do so little?

For instance, we know they are probably paying Amanda a professional  
salary. They are also paying two senior level producers for this.  
Then there is at least one editor, a camera person (unless one of the  
producers is a cameraman), lighting tech, audio guy, all with premium  
'ABC' salaries. I am just speculating, perhaps I have missed some.

In addition to that, the entity ABC needs to make revenue (beside the  
people), yet they also have at least one rep that works with Amanda  
besides the producers and other production staff. Surely they have  
someone who works on the website if not a section of a team. Amanda's  
agent needs a professional share. Amanda's manager too. They  
obviously have a very aggressive PR team too (which they will  
definitely need to drive people to the show). Lets not forget the  
advertisers! They are the ones supporting this and because so many  
people need to get paid such high salaries, the advertisers need to  
get paid most of the real-estate of the website. In many ways, this  
scenario is typical of one where the advertisers are way more  
important than the show itself. The show is just a tool for ad sales  
in the end, after all.

The point I want to make is, there are probably WAY too many people  
needed to pull off this one 5 minute production exclusively for a  
small flash file on one website.

A company like ABC should perhaps use their expensive resources to  
produce content that needs expensive resources. Was there special  
access gained? Was there need for expensive equipment? Travel  
expenses? 3 producers?

No, there was no sign of any need for any of the above that I could see.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

Great, easy.

Chuck, you are the man with the answer. It was the night before  
Amanda posted her video. As our mediator, I told you I was going to  
make a demand.

I said I was no longer negotiating and I demanded that Amanda come  
into work on Monday and film a news day for Rocketboom.

Everything else was negotiable but that one demand I put on Amanda  
was non negotiable.

So what happened? As a matter of fact she did not meet my demand,  
gave up, as we expected she would, and that was it.

This was the third time she had quit and this time she quit for good.

End of story on that one.


On Dec 13, 2006, at 2:39 PM, mariolibrandi wrote:

> Andrew,
>
> There is nothing to hide. Facts are facts. You made a mistake by
> kicking us out and now you have to live with it. Good luck with the
> lawsuit.
>
> And if you really want to share experiences, I am still waiting for
> that $7,050 check.
>
> I've always said to Amanda that we should just have a public debate to
> end this once and for all, that way we can show everyone the truth.
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Amanda, I have always been outspoken about sharing my experiences
> > with Rocketboom and this is no longer an exception.
> >
> > You can hide talking about it publicly, we see how that has led to
> > your advantage. As long as no one speaks up, you continue to lie and
> > mislead people about what you have done for "yourself". Meanwhile no
> > one can learn from the problems you have created.
> >
> > As you know our lawyers ARE working on it. I hope your lawyer is
> > listening when I say yet again, look here below how you have out
> > right lied in saying I let you go.
> >
> > People should know that in order to do business in this field there
> > is a need to protect oneself from this kind of atrocious behavior.
> >
> > Luckily I have, its just that I have previously been quiet about it
> > for legal reasons myself.
> >
> > So now Im ready to share with everyone how I expect this will turn
> > out and then we can talk about it, take wagers, and see what the
> > judge has to say.
> >
> > In the end, we should all be in a better position to engage in
> > creative partnerships.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 13, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew, get a grip. Please.
> > >
> > > This
> > >
> > > http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?
> > > q=rocketboom.com&url=rocketboom.com
> > >
> > > is not my fault.
> > >
> > > You made the decision to let me go. So I went.
> > >
> > > As for your outlandish claims about HBO and ABC, please contact my
> > > lawyers. Let's do this the right way. And having a desk and a  
> second
> > > camera are not ideas you own. Those are conventions.
> > >
> > > Best to focus on your own show, I think. Or you can continue to
> > > attempt to drag me down and write "emotional" emails to ABC but  
> I'm
> > > done talking about this publicly. Time to move on.
> > >
> > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Jeeze, I have never been so offended.
> > > >
> > > > Its like Alice and Wonderland around here, somebody pinch me:
> > > > http://www.dembot.com/011895.html
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 13, 2006, at 10:47 AM, CarLBanks wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This gives me hope that I could be picked up one day.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

I dont want anything at all right now. I just want to talk about it.  
I  think its lame, that all. I have not filed a suit against Amanda.

If you had a business yourself and one of your partners left and took  
all of your contacts and business relationships, your code, your  
design and your format and the projects that meant the most to you,  
the same projects that you spent a lot of money on, I think you would  
be concerned, especially if they did not have any control over these  
projects.

Its illegal in most cases. This is just what I have learned.


On Dec 13, 2006, at 2:35 PM, jesse.cooper wrote:

> A creative partnership I thought you all had that with
> rocketboom... now it sounds as if you would like to creatively get
> paid by ABC for what Amanda does regardless if you are a part of it or
> not.
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > In the end, we should all be in a better position to engage in
> > creative partnerships.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 13, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew, get a grip. Please.
> > >
> > > This
> > >
> > > http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?
> > > q=rocketboom.com&url=rocketboom.com
> > >
> > > is not my fault.
> > >
> > > You made the decision to let me go. So I went.
> > >
> > > As for your outlandish claims about HBO and ABC, please contact my
> > > lawyers. Let's do this the right way. And having a desk and a  
> second
> > > camera are not ideas you own. Those are conventions.
> > >
> > > Best to focus on your own show, I think. Or you can continue to
> > > attempt to drag me down and write "emotional" emails to ABC but  
> I'm
> > > done talking about this publicly. Time to move on.
> > >
> > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Jeeze, I have never been so offended.
> > > >
> > > > Its like Alice and Wonderland around here, somebody pinch me:
> > > > http://www.dembot.com/011895.html
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 13, 2006, at 10:47 AM, CarLBanks wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This gives me hope that I could be picked up one day.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

Amanda, I have always been outspoken about sharing my experiences  
with Rocketboom and this is no longer an exception.

You can hide talking about it publicly, we see how that has led to  
your advantage. As long as no one speaks up, you continue to lie and  
mislead people about what you have done for "yourself". Meanwhile no  
one can learn from the problems you have created.

As you know our lawyers ARE working on it. I hope your lawyer is  
listening when I say yet again, look here below how you have out  
right lied in saying I let you go.

People should know that in order to do business in this field there  
is a need to protect oneself from this kind of atrocious behavior.

Luckily I have, its just that I have previously been quiet about it  
for legal reasons myself.

So now Im ready to share with everyone how I expect this will turn  
out and then we can talk about it, take wagers, and see what the  
judge has to say.

In the end, we should all be in a better position to engage in  
creative partnerships.




On Dec 13, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:

> Andrew, get a grip. Please.
>
> This
>
> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details? 
> q=rocketboom.com&url=rocketboom.com
>
> is not my fault.
>
> You made the decision to let me go. So I went.
>
> As for your outlandish claims about HBO and ABC, please contact my
> lawyers. Let's do this the right way. And having a desk and a second
> camera are not ideas you own. Those are conventions.
>
> Best to focus on your own show, I think. Or you can continue to
> attempt to drag me down and write "emotional" emails to ABC but I'm
> done talking about this publicly. Time to move on.
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Jeeze, I have never been so offended.
> >
> > Its like Alice and Wonderland around here, somebody pinch me:
> > http://www.dembot.com/011895.html
> >
> > On Dec 13, 2006, at 10:47 AM, CarLBanks wrote:
> >
> > > This gives me hope that I could be picked up one day.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] OOoh, Amanda's Up!

[andrew michael baron]

Jeeze, I have never been so offended.

Its like Alice and Wonderland around here, somebody pinch me:
http://www.dembot.com/011895.html

On Dec 13, 2006, at 10:47 AM, CarLBanks wrote:

> This gives me hope that I could be picked up one day.


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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: vlog

[andrew michael baron]

You are also a human, like it or not. And you can call it what you  
want but its a website you are talking about when you say 'my site'.

You could take your site off the web but right now its there and  
that's what it is.

You vlogger, you.

:P

On Dec 9, 2006, at 3:56 PM, David Howell wrote:

> How is my archive page a video web log? It's a page that links to
> videos I've created and posted on my site.
>
> As I own my site, I am the one to define what it is. I dont see myself
> as a vlogger. If you want to call me one then that's your prerogative
> I guess. Personally, I can't stand the word.
>
> David
> http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Matt Savarino"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Your goal and/or style should not define the generic word "vlog".
> >
> > From a viewer's point of view, this is a video Web log...
> > http://www.davidhowellstudios.com/archive/
> >
> > I'd then call you a vlogger since you are the creator.
> > It that considered a bad thing now?
> >
> > -Matt
> > http://vlogmap.org
> >
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "David Howell" 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree. I dont think of my site as a vlog. It's a website that  
> I post
> > > video on. There is no style to my videos or the manner in which I
> > > shoot them.
> > >
> > > Thus, I am very pleased to not call myself a vlogger.
> > >
> > > David
> > > http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] vlog

[andrew michael baron]

When someone engages in the regular activity of posting online video,  
be it aimless, their own show or their own favorite links, in each  
case, its a an ongoing log of videos.

YouTube (which uses the word 'vlog' in their interface), Blip and  
many other blog software packs are content management systems for  
logging data, be it text, images, video or whatever.

Video specific sites like Youtube and Blip are designed specifically  
for the activity of logging video, or, vlogging.

Drew


On Dec 9, 2006, at 11:44 AM, Loiez D. wrote:

> The vlogger is defined by a style The addition of the styles makes
> the vlogging.
> The others post videos on Internet
> ( omho)
>
> Loiez
>
> Le 9 déc. 06 à 17:27, Mike Hudack a écrit :
>
> > This is exactly why we've started using the word "shows" at blip.
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nox Dineen
> > > Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 9:11 PM
> > > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] vlog
> > >
> > > Given the amazing breadth in the scope of what's produced
> > > under the name of "vlogging" I'd have to agree with you. It
> > > generates an expectation of merely a multimedia blog.
> > >
> > > Plus, as an admitted linguaphile, I just hate the word. I'm
> > > curious, though, how many people pronounce it phoenetically
> > > and how many say it "vee-logging."
> > >
> > > I think we can all agree that a much more hideous word
> > > (although a raging awesome concept) is glogging
> > > <http://wearcam.org/glogs.htm>. (I don't mind telling you
> > > that I almost peed my pants with glee when I found out I may
> > > be able to get my hands on an Eyetap <http://www.eyetap.org/>
> > > and join the "cyborg logging" weirdos.)
> > >
> > > Nox
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/8/06, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Back to the age old question of terminology, I think
> > > "vlogging" and
> > > > "vloggers" stuck.
> > > >
> > > > Surprisingly, even the regular You-Tube people identify
> > > with "vlogging".
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Vox Noxi (blog) -- noxdineen.vox.com
> > > The Blair Bitch Project (vlog) -- www.blairbitchproject.net
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



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

[videoblogging] vlog

[andrew michael baron]

Back to the age old question of terminology, I think "vlogging" and  
"vloggers"  stuck.

Surprisingly, even the regular You-Tube people identify with "vlogging".

[videoblogging] apple script - auto upload

[andrew michael baron]

Just in case anyone is interested, here is the bulk of an apple  
script that we just started using to auto-upload all our files each day.

After the master file is complete, and the rendering is engaged, the  
script waits for the files to complete rendering, and then ftp's all  
the files to the right directories.

This ends up saving us about 2hrs of waiting around for renders to  
complete before uploading and an extra 15min or so of saved time  
manually uploading all the files to the various directories.

Once complete, it sends us an email to let me know.


-- Folder RB_Script exists on Desktop
-- 1) A folder called RB_Script
set baseDirectory to "" -- Directory within "web" where all files  
will be placed
set directoryList to {"images", "video", "video/hd", ""} -- Sub- 
directories within the baseDirectory where files go, referrenced in  
script by number
set secondDirectoryPlace to "" -- Initializes variable
set sizeDelay to 30 -- Time script waits to see if files are finished  
writing. Turn up if partial files get uploaded, down if script takes  
too long to execute.
set exportFolder to "RB_EXPORT" -- Name of folder on desktop where  
files to be uploaded are held
set uploadFolder to "RB_UPLOADED" -- Name of folder on desktop where  
files are moved after being uploaded
set timenow to (current date)
set noteSubject to "Files Uploaded" -- Subject line of notification e- 
mail
set noteRecipient to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -- Who gets  
notification e-mail
set notice to "RocketLauncher Script Was Run at " & timenow & "

" -- First line of text of notification e-mail
set didSomethingFlag to 0 -- Sets a flag to see if the script did  
anything, just to avoid generating empty e-mails.

tell application "Finder"
with timeout of 3600 seconds
repeat while the (count of items in folder exportFolder) is not 0
set bunch to every file of folder exportFolder in 
desktop
repeat with thingus in bunch
set didSomethingFlag to didSomethingFlag + 1
set thingusSize to size of thingus
if thingusSize > 2000 then
delay sizeDelay
set thingusNewSize to size of thingus
if thingusSize = thingusNewSize then
set thingusName to name of 
thingus
if thingusName contains 
"sm.jpg" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 1 of directoryList
else if thingusName contains 
".jpg" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 1 of directoryList
set 
secondDirectoryPlace to baseDirectory & item 3 of  
directoryList
else if thingusName contains 
"hd.mov" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 3 of directoryList
else if thingusName contains 
".mov" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 2 of directoryList
else if thingusName contains 
"full.wmv" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 2 of directoryList
else if thingusName contains 
".wmv" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 2 of directoryList
else if thingusName contains 
".mp4" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 2 of directoryList
else if thingusName contains 
".mpg" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 2 of directoryList
else if thingusName contains 
".3gp" then
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 2 of directoryList
else
set directoryPlace to 
baseDirectory & item 4 of directoryList
end if
do shell script 
"~/Desktop/RB_Script/send.ex " & thingusName &  
" " & directoryPlace
set notice to n

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Nokia N93

[andrew michael baron]

On Nov 28, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Ted Tagami wrote:
> can you skype-out with this?
>
> .


Yep.

BTW, a couple of weeks ago at the Network2 party in NYC, Nokia showed  
up with an N95 which is now out and seems to be a major upgrade and  
also supports calls over i.p :

"The new auto-focus, 5 megapixel camera unit, Nokia's first, makes  
use of Carl Zeiss optics, just like the N93 and N90 do. Images and  
videos can be uploaded to a number of different photo gallery and  
blogging systems. Videos can be recorded at VGA (640x480) resolution  
at 30fps, and can be recorded with digital image stabilization. A TV  
out function on the N95 let users enjoy their works of art on a  
larger screen, too. The N95 also supports MP3, AAC, M4A, and WMA  
music playback through its built-in stereo speakers or headphones  
attached to its 3.5mm headset jack. An FM radio is also included in  
the N95.

http://www.mobileburn.com/review.jsp?Id=2741

Drew
http://www.rocketboom.com
http://www.dembot.com





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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Nokia N93

[andrew michael baron]

Yep, I dont have any card in my phone. No plan. No bill. When you  
want to email, browse, upload to flickr, youtube, etc. the phone will  
search for all avail hotspots.

Thats why the US carries wont sell them. They must be shakin in their  
boots :)



On Nov 28, 2006, at 7:09 PM, Enric wrote:

> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I'm considering getting the Nokia N93 for two purposes:
> > >
> > > - Can only have a basic plan with Sprint or another carrier -- I'm
> > > considering the $29.95, 200 minutes plan -- or is another plan
> > > required to use this mobile device?
> >
> > I use mine without a plan. It has wi-fi so I can piggyback off my
> > home network, starbucks, hotspots, etc.
>
> When using the wifi, is one off the plan? So you can use wifi without
> charging to the plan?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Enric
>
> >
> > Apparently you can skype off it too with wi-fi but I havent tried.
> >
> > I still find the quality not great for planned shoots, but super
> > great for spontaneous ones.
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> 



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

Re: [videoblogging] Nokia N93

[andrew michael baron]

> I'm considering getting the Nokia N93 for two purposes:
>
> - Can only have a basic plan with Sprint or another carrier -- I'm
> considering the $29.95, 200 minutes plan -- or is another plan
> required to use this mobile device?

I use mine without a plan. It has wi-fi so I can piggyback off my  
home network, starbucks, hotspots, etc.

Apparently you can skype off it too with wi-fi but I havent tried.

I still find the quality not great for planned shoots, but super  
great for spontaneous ones.

>
>





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

Re: [videoblogging] feedcycle.com

[andrew michael baron]

Cool, I just made one with a story album I created once before.

A new part of the story will appear each day, no matter when you sign  
up, as you say. Neat-o!

http://feeds.feedcycle.com/10033/10063/68d31be2/1164596201/

Drew
http://www.rocketboom.com
http://www.dembot.com


On Nov 26, 2006, at 8:11 PM, sull wrote:

> spotted on techcrunch.com...
>
> http://www.feedcycle.com/
>
> might be of interest to some of you.
>
> "A serialised RSS web feed enables a subscriber to receive, perhaps  
> on a
> daily basis, sequential episodes from within a series of episodes. The
> subscriber always starts at the beginning regardless when they  
> start their
> subscription. "
>
> -- 
> Sull
> http://vlogdir.com (a project)
> http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog)
> http://interdigitate.com (otherly)


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

[videoblogging] What's Next?

[andrew michael baron]

Re: [videoblogging] The Shallow Nature of Video Blogging

[andrew michael baron]

In The Myth of Sisyphus, Sisyphus, unfortunately, was in the wrong place at the wrong time and overheard secrets of the Gods fighting. So Sisyphus was punished to spend the rest of his life pushing a bolder up a mountain. When the bolder fell, or rolled over the other side of the mountain, Sisyphus must go back and start again, forever.Without a purpose for his life and without meaning for his activity, Sisyphus eventually noticed that there was a time when the bolder was on its own and he was descending the mountain effortlessly, noticing the beautiful flowers (so to speak), the birds' songs and the comfortable cool breeze and that this was his time. The determined duty was aside and the time, however absurd, was all that much worthwhile and especially, free.On Jun 2, 2006, at 2:23 PM, Shannon Noble wrote: You know,sometimes I look at my own expressions and the content of my work, as well as many others here, and think how shallow and meaningless much of what we do is. We put our own meaning on it as it really has none of it's own. It is all enculturated. We make it up for or own selves to get what we want from others. I feel that way when I look at something like this: http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/36871/and ponder.-shannon  SPONSORED LINKS  Fireant  Individual  Typepad  Use  Explains YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 




  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Typepad
  
  


Use
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

[videoblogging] Video Search

[andrew michael baron]

In case anyone is interested we have been working with this really  
cool company called Podzinger.

I have been pretty excited about this feature, probably more so than  
any one feature we have added to our site:

http://www.rocketboom.com/vlog/search.html

Its speech-to-text video search and the search returns are pretty  
great. You can also subscribe to words, etc.

We worked with them to create a custom look-and-feel search return  
but I'm pretty sure anyone can add their feeds and incorporate it  
into their site or at least use their site. 


  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] SFGATE: Video bloggers claim spotlight

[andrew michael baron]

I also thought this was a good one!On May 1, 2006, at 10:26 AM, Ted Tagami wrote: Overall, I'd say a very good article! Congratulations! On 5/1/06, Steve Garfield < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Video bloggers claim spotlight Online diaries looking a lot like television Ellen Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer Monday, May 1, 2006  http://tinyurl.com/fxwqy  or  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/05/01/  BUGK7IHGO81.DTL  This is an excellent article about videoblogging. Ellen Lee, of the San   Francisco Chronicle, presents an accruate view of how some   videobloggers use vlogging to capture fleeting moments of life.  It's unfortunate that the headline writer totally missed the point of   the article by writing, "Online diaries looking a lot like television."  The whole point of the article is that most of the video blogs   highlighted in the story are not like televison at all.   --Steve --  http://SteveGarfield.com - Fighting the good fight http://Rocketboom.com - Correspondent http://hipcast.com (formerly audioblog)  - Community Manager  SPONSORED LINKS   Fireant   Individual   Typepad   Use   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.   -- Ted TagamiFounding Partner Universus Networks, LLCU N I V E R S U S . N E TVideo Bloggers Podcasting Vloggercon.com - San FranciscoJune 10th and 11th, 2006  SPONSORED LINKS  Fireant  Individual  Typepad  Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 




  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Typepad
  
  


Use
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Wired

[andrew michael baron]

Yikes, to clerify, check out the story links on the right, all kinds  
of goodness.

On May 1, 2006, at 10:33 AM, andrew michael baron wrote:

> I predict this article will be more of the talk of today:
> http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.05/guide.html
>
> Not just online, this is a pretty comprehensive overview for a
> magazine.
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Typepad
  
  


Use
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

[videoblogging] Wired

[andrew michael baron]

I predict this article will be more of the talk of today:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.05/guide.html

Not just online, this is a pretty comprehensive overview for a  
magazine. 





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Typepad
  
  


Use
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Bravo Colbert

[andrew michael baron]

Ok, I missed a point. Here is the final case, I think. Not all of the  
work is public domain but some of it is:

"As public domain material, the video coverage of the floor  
proceedings of the U.S. House of Representatives and of the U.S.  
Senate is not subject to this license, and as such, may also be  
similarly used for educational purposes."

http://www.c-spanclassroom.org/copyright.asp


On Apr 30, 2006, at 5:19 PM, andrew michael baron wrote:

> There is an interesting discussion with good outbound source links on
> the wikipedia entry of CSPAN. It appears as though the site claims in
> one place that the material is "public domain" and in another section
> of the website, one could infer that it's not public domain.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSPAN
>
> Statements seem like they would outweigh inferences.
>
>
> On Apr 30, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Andreas Haugstrup wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:42:37 +0200, Jen Simmons
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> And, p.s., for anyone who doesn't realize, since this is a C-SPAN
>>> recording, it is public domain! Everything shot / edited /
>>> produced by
>>> the federal U.S. government is automatically public domain,  
>>> including
>>> everything from C-SPAN -- so we are all free to copy /  
>>> redistribute /
>>> edit / etc this as much as we want without any worries or ethical
>>> considerations of copyright.
>>
>> Errr, C-SPAN is a privat non-profit. It is not run by the federal
>> government. You need to take all the usual ethical and legal
>> considerations before working with the footage.
>>
>> -- 
>> Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
>> http://www.solitude.dk/ >
>> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Typepad
  
  


Use
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Bravo Colbert

[andrew michael baron]

There is an interesting discussion with good outbound source links on  
the wikipedia entry of CSPAN. It appears as though the site claims in  
one place that the material is "public domain" and in another section  
of the website, one could infer that it's not public domain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSPAN

Statements seem like they would outweigh inferences.


On Apr 30, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Andreas Haugstrup wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:42:37 +0200, Jen Simmons  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> And, p.s., for anyone who doesn't realize, since this is a C-SPAN
>> recording, it is public domain! Everything shot / edited /  
>> produced by
>> the federal U.S. government is automatically public domain, including
>> everything from C-SPAN -- so we are all free to copy / redistribute /
>> edit / etc this as much as we want without any worries or ethical
>> considerations of copyright.
>
> Errr, C-SPAN is a privat non-profit. It is not run by the federal
> government. You need to take all the usual ethical and legal
> considerations before working with the footage.
>
> -- 
> Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
> http://www.solitude.dk/ >
> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Typepad
  
  


Use
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] re: gumby IP question

[andrew michael baron]

Thanks JD, great information!!

On Apr 26, 2006, at 9:49 PM, JD Lasica wrote:

> I promised I'd ask an attorney friend about our friend Gumby, and
> Andrew's idea of dusting him off and remixing him for the 21st
> century. Here's what she says:
>
>
> This "Gumby Problem" is a lot like the Peter Pan case I worked on
> (and eventually settled) at Stanford last year. The problem is: what
> happens to trademarked characters once the copyrighted work falls
> into the public domain. (I'm assuming here that Gumby is in fact in
> the PD.)  In the Peter Pan case, it's absolutely clear that the
> original story was in the public domain (published 1911). So our
> client used the characters and made a sequel to Peter Pan that is set
> in this century. Our client had the characters act differently, put
> them in new "modern" situations, and even challenged the idea that
> growing up is necessarily a bad thing. The Peter Pan copyright owner
> claimed both copyright and trademark infringement. There are cases
> that state pretty clearly that the characters also fall into the PD
> when a copyright expires, so the copyright question is, in my
> opinion, fairly clear (though we fought about it in the Peter Pan  
> case).
>
> The TM question is trickier because generally a TM lasts as long as
> it is not abandoned by the owner and is properly used to identify a
> good or service. You can still parody the mark without infringement
> or dilution concerns (thanks to our First Amendment), but you always
> need to keep an eye out for whether you are using the mark in a
> manner that will cause customer confusion (infringement) or whether
> you are possibly diluting the Gumby mark. (Dilution claims stem from
> either "blurring" [e.g., causing a famous mark to lose some of its
> distinctiveness due to use of a similar marks]  or
> "tarnishing" [e.g., associating a famous mark with unpleasant or
> unwholesome products/services] the mark.)
>
> I hope this is helpful!
>
> Best,
> Colette Vogele
> San Francisco
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>



  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Trademark/Copyrights Question

[andrew michael baron]

We are not having a problem at all right now, but I always think  
about this with regards to our theme song that we have adopted, "Zoom  
a Little Zoom".

It came from an album called "Space Songs" with Tom Glazer, a popular  
1940's folk musician:
http://www.acme.com/jef/singing_science/

Unlike the rest of the albums in the six-LP set produced around the  
same time, this album experienced a lapse in copyright and for some  
reason, perhaps accidentally (I think they simply forgot at the  
time), the album entered into the public domain.

Today, as we have adopted the song for Rocketboom, the song seems to  
be "at risk" of becoming more associated with Rocketboom than it's  
original context. We also often use the other songs in the album to  
tie in our own thematic.

Its just something I'm curious about; I wouldn't want to go back and  
take down or edit out all that music in the future.



On Apr 24, 2006, at 3:44 AM, Andreas Haugstrup wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:24:02 +0200, JD Lasica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrew, it's too bad your email query didn't get more thoughtful
>> responses here. I suspect it's because it's largely a legal question,
>> and most of us aren't lawyers. Be that as it may ...
>
> I usually don't mind giving my opinion even though I'm not a  
> lawyer, but
> when I saw Andrew's email last night the issue struck me as  
> particulary
> confusing/complex. I don't know what my opinion is. :o)
>
>> Shall I ask my lawyer friends to weigh in? :~)
>
> I'd love to hear what they have to say.
>
> -- 
> Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
> http://www.solitude.dk/ >
> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Trademark/Copyrights Question

[andrew michael baron]

Shut up? Thanks for the great advise Josh.The point of the matter is that David last said this:Uhhh...Gumby isnt public domain. and he also said this:>>> It looks like Veoh and their promise to rid their site of>>> copyrighted>>> material was rather empty.These statements are false. Let it be known people on the videoblogging list that these statements are not true. If I dont speak up, no one else will.On Apr 24, 2006, at 1:37 AM, Josh Leo wrote: what the heck is going on here... both of you shut up and start talking about the issue at hand here... put your ego's aside and have beneficial discussion,.,On 4/24/06,  andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Way to stay off-topic and avoid your dishonest and false statements.None of it is your fault per say, and I assume you can't help it, butI only addressed you to let you know that you were wrong.On Apr 24, 2006, at 1:19 AM, David Howell wrote: > Oh Andrew...please feel free to get your stubby little fingers typing> away then. Rather than write back to me though, address whatever it is> you have to say to the owners of the Gumby copyright. >> David> http://www.davidhowellstudios.com>> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>>>> David, I could add a pretty long rant about knee jerking responses>> but I'll just suck it up and get right to the point:>>>> Copyrights and trademarks can expire, lapse or be changed for a >> number of reasons. I have found that in fact there are several Gumby>> cartoons that are a part of the public domain. Here are a few:>> http://tinyurl.com/p283s >>>>>> On Apr 23, 2006, at 9:45 PM, David Howell wrote:>>>>> Uhhh...Gumby isnt public domain. The little guy is far from that.>>>>>>  http://www.gumbyworld.com/copy.htm>>>>>> It looks like Veoh and their promise to rid their site of>>> copyrighted>>> material was rather empty.>>>>>> David >>> http://www.davidhowellstudios.com>>>>>> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, WWWhatsup  wrote: >>>>>>>> I don't know if that's true that Gumby is public domain - it's 60's>>> right?>>>>>>>> However if stuff is in the public domain, yes one is free to make >>> any kind>>>> of derivative work, and then even copyright that work.>>>>>>>> Hence the development of such animals as the GPL in order to ensure>>>> that 'free' works can only be spawned into further 'free' works. >>>>>>>> joly>>>>>>>> At 03:24 PM 4/22/2006, you wrote:>>>>> I noticed on Veoh, they have a complete Gumby video on the home>>> page in the 'featured videos' section. >>>>> <http://veoh.com>http://veoh.com/>>>>>>>>>> I assume the particular Gumby video>>> < http://tinyurl.com/jruf7>http://tinyurl.com/jruf7 is public domain>>> because Michael Eisner is featuring it, along with a couple of >>> complete Superman videos that I have seen tagged as public domain on>>> the Archive before.>>>>>>>>>> Since I am then allowed to use the public domain video of Gumby to >>> create or recreate my own work, or version, wouldn't that mean>>> that I>>> may also freely refashion Gumby for a contemporary world? In>>> otherwords, if I am able use the video myself to make my own >>> video, I>>> would make a new Gumby out of the old Gumby. I would use the>>> music in>>> the video, mash the likeness, reshape him a bit physically speaking,>>> but would especially make his psyche much different; he would do and >>> say different kinds of things and have different body behaviors, for>>> instance. I might have some plans to add a couple of permeant>>> deformations to his walk and give his a few classic behavioral >>> problems, for instance. Gumby himself could change and evolve>>> instead>>> of be trapped in time, the way he is now. Perhaps I could give>>> the new>>> Gumby away for free and encourage others to take him and develop >>> him.>>> Gumby could be reborn into a global star!>>>>>>>>>> Would I be allowed to do all of the above with my public domain>>> Gumby without getting into trouble with the Gumby trademark and >>> other>>> later, non-public domain Gumby stuff claimed to be owned entirely>>> by a>>> private entity?>>>>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Trademark/Copyrights Question

[andrew michael baron]

Way to stay off-topic and avoid your dishonest and false statements.  
None of it is your fault per say, and I assume you can't help it, but  
I only addressed you to let you know that you were wrong.

On Apr 24, 2006, at 1:19 AM, David Howell wrote:

> Oh Andrew...please feel free to get your stubby little fingers typing
> away then. Rather than write back to me though, address whatever it is
> you have to say to the owners of the Gumby copyright.
>
> David
> http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> David, I could add a pretty long rant about knee jerking responses
>> but I'll just suck it up and get right to the point:
>>
>> Copyrights and trademarks can expire, lapse or be changed for a
>> number of reasons. I have found that in fact there are several Gumby
>> cartoons that are a part of the public domain. Here are a few:
>> http://tinyurl.com/p283s
>>
>>
>> On Apr 23, 2006, at 9:45 PM, David Howell wrote:
>>
>>> Uhhh...Gumby isnt public domain. The little guy is far from that.
>>>
>>> http://www.gumbyworld.com/copy.htm
>>>
>>> It looks like Veoh and their promise to rid their site of  
>>> copyrighted
>>> material was rather empty.
>>>
>>> David
>>> http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
>>>
>>> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, WWWhatsup  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don't know if that's true that Gumby is public domain - it's 60's
>>> right?
>>>>
>>>> However if stuff is in the public domain, yes one is free to make
>>> any kind
>>>> of derivative work, and then even copyright that work.
>>>>
>>>> Hence the development of such animals as the GPL in order to ensure
>>>> that 'free' works can only be spawned into further 'free' works.
>>>>
>>>> joly
>>>>
>>>> At 03:24 PM 4/22/2006, you wrote:
>>>>> I noticed on Veoh, they have a complete Gumby video on the home
>>> page in the 'featured videos' section.
>>>>> <http://veoh.com>http://veoh.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> I assume the particular Gumby video
>>> <http://tinyurl.com/jruf7>http://tinyurl.com/jruf7 is public domain
>>> because Michael Eisner is featuring it, along with a couple of
>>> complete Superman videos that I have seen tagged as public domain on
>>> the Archive before.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since I am then allowed to use the public domain video of Gumby to
>>> create or recreate my own work, or version, wouldn't that mean  
>>> that I
>>> may also freely refashion Gumby for a contemporary world? In
>>> otherwords, if I am able use the video myself to make my own  
>>> video, I
>>> would make a new Gumby out of the old Gumby. I would use the  
>>> music in
>>> the video, mash the likeness, reshape him a bit physically speaking,
>>> but would especially make his psyche much different; he would do and
>>> say different kinds of things and have different body behaviors, for
>>> instance. I might have some plans to add a couple of permeant
>>> deformations to his walk and give his a few classic behavioral
>>> problems, for instance. Gumby himself could change and evolve  
>>> instead
>>> of be trapped in time, the way he is now. Perhaps I could give  
>>> the new
>>> Gumby away for free and encourage others to take him and develop  
>>> him.
>>> Gumby could be reborn into a global star!
>>>>>
>>>>> Would I be allowed to do all of the above with my public domain
>>> Gumby without getting into trouble with the Gumby trademark and  
>>> other
>>> later, non-public domain Gumby stuff claimed to be owned entirely  
>>> by a
>>> private entity?
>>>>> <http://tinyurl.com/mgu4q>http://tinyurl.com/mgu4q
>>>>>
>>>>> I would assume that somehow, I would not be able to reshape Gumby,
>>> even if I did it all with the materials that I got from the public
>>> domain Gumby video.
>>>>>
>>>>> Surely, there is a conflict here and I would assume there is a
>>> simple answer that has already been worked out legally. Does anyone
>>> know what that would be?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>  WWWhatsup NYC
>>>> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Trademark/Copyrights Question

[andrew michael baron]

David, I could add a pretty long rant about knee jerking responses  
but I'll just suck it up and get right to the point:

Copyrights and trademarks can expire, lapse or be changed for a  
number of reasons. I have found that in fact there are several Gumby  
cartoons that are a part of the public domain. Here are a few:
http://tinyurl.com/p283s


On Apr 23, 2006, at 9:45 PM, David Howell wrote:

> Uhhh...Gumby isnt public domain. The little guy is far from that.
>
> http://www.gumbyworld.com/copy.htm
>
> It looks like Veoh and their promise to rid their site of copyrighted
> material was rather empty.
>
> David
> http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, WWWhatsup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I don't know if that's true that Gumby is public domain - it's 60's
> right?
>>
>> However if stuff is in the public domain, yes one is free to make
> any kind
>> of derivative work, and then even copyright that work.
>>
>> Hence the development of such animals as the GPL in order to ensure
>> that 'free' works can only be spawned into further 'free' works.
>>
>> joly
>>
>> At 03:24 PM 4/22/2006, you wrote:
>>> I noticed on Veoh, they have a complete Gumby video on the home
> page in the 'featured videos' section.
>>> http://veoh.com/
>>>
>>> I assume the particular Gumby video
> http://tinyurl.com/jruf7 is public domain
> because Michael Eisner is featuring it, along with a couple of
> complete Superman videos that I have seen tagged as public domain on
> the Archive before.
>>>
>>> Since I am then allowed to use the public domain video of Gumby to
> create or recreate my own work, or version, wouldn't that mean that I
> may also freely refashion Gumby for a contemporary world? In
> otherwords, if I am able use the video myself to make my own video, I
> would make a new Gumby out of the old Gumby. I would use the music in
> the video, mash the likeness, reshape him a bit physically speaking,
> but would especially make his psyche much different; he would do and
> say different kinds of things and have different body behaviors, for
> instance. I might have some plans to add a couple of permeant
> deformations to his walk and give his a few classic behavioral
> problems, for instance. Gumby himself could change and evolve instead
> of be trapped in time, the way he is now. Perhaps I could give the new
> Gumby away for free and encourage others to take him and develop him.
> Gumby could be reborn into a global star!
>>>
>>> Would I be allowed to do all of the above with my public domain
> Gumby without getting into trouble with the Gumby trademark and other
> later, non-public domain Gumby stuff claimed to be owned entirely by a
> private entity?
>>> http://tinyurl.com/mgu4q
>>>
>>> I would assume that somehow, I would not be able to reshape Gumby,
> even if I did it all with the materials that I got from the public
> domain Gumby video.
>>>
>>> Surely, there is a conflict here and I would assume there is a
> simple answer that has already been worked out legally. Does anyone
> know what that would be?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> ---
>>  WWWhatsup NYC
>> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
>> ---
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

[videoblogging] Trademark/Copyrights Question

[andrew michael baron]

I noticed on Veoh, they have a complete Gumby video on the home page in the 'featured videos' section.http://veoh.com/I assume the particular Gumby video http://tinyurl.com/jruf7 is public domain because Michael Eisner is featuring it, along with a couple of complete Superman videos that I have seen tagged as public domain on the Archive before.Since I am then allowed to use the public domain video of Gumby to create or recreate my own work, or version, wouldn't that mean that I may also freely refashion Gumby for a contemporary world? In otherwords, if I am able use the video myself to make my own video, I would make a new Gumby out of the old Gumby. I would use the music in the video, mash the likeness, reshape him a bit physically speaking, but would especially make his psyche much different; he would do and say different kinds of things and have different body behaviors, for instance. I might have some plans to add a couple of permeant deformations to his walk and give his a few classic behavioral problems, for instance. Gumby himself could change and evolve instead of be trapped in time, the way he is now. Perhaps I could give the new Gumby away for free and encourage others to take him and develop him. Gumby could be reborn into a global star!Would I be allowed to do all of the above with my public domain Gumby without getting into trouble with the Gumby trademark and other later, non-public domain Gumby stuff claimed to be owned entirely by a private entity?http://tinyurl.com/mgu4qI would assume that somehow, I would not be able to reshape Gumby, even if I did it all with the materials that I got from the public domain Gumby video.Surely, there is a conflict here and I would assume there is a simple answer that has already been worked out legally. Does anyone know what that would be?

  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Rolling Stone

[andrew michael baron]

INTERPRETATION: I DONT CARE ABOUT ROLLING STONE!

On Apr 20, 2006, at 3:06 PM, Susan wrote:

> Dude, we're going to have to butter your ears just to push you through
> the doorway!!
>
> ;)
> Susan
> http://vlog.kitykity.com
>
>
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> No, I was trying to say that what used to be God is now just a
>> stepping stone. . .
>>
>> On Apr 20, 2006, at 2:20 PM, Deirdre Straughan wrote:
>>
>>> Did you buy five copies for your mother?
>>>
>>> On 4/20/06, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> There is also an article that came out yesterday in Rolling Stone
>>>> Magazine but I haven't seen it online. Its called: "Vlog Stars,
>>>> Online video bloggers are redefining the worlds of news and
>>>> entertainment". It mentions Rocketboom, Ask a Ninja, Kitkast, Vlog
>>>> Soup, A Good Word With the T-Bird. They used a stock photo of
>>>> Rocketboom so I wound up also pictured in the article. 10 years  
>>>> ago,
>>>> my greatest dreams and aspirations was to be in the Rolling  
>>>> Stone. As
>>>> a musician, that's as far as my dreams could go back then. It would
>>>> include the end-all-dream of being owned by Sony for $2000/month  
>>>> with
>>>> a bonus of a million dollar debt.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> best regards,
>>> Deirdré Straughan
>>>
>>> www.beginningwithi.com (personal)
>>> www.tvblob.com (work)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Rolling Stone

[andrew michael baron]

Hey Casey, its called May 4th, Issue 999. Just came out here in nyc  
yesterday.

On Apr 20, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Casey McKinnon wrote:

> Hey Andrew... Any idea what page I can find the article on?  I just
> picked up a copy and went through it page by page finding nothing...
>
> Are you talking about Issue 998 (April 20, 2006)?
>
> Casey
>
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andrew michael baron
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> There is also an article that came out yesterday in Rolling Stone
>> Magazine but I haven't seen it online. Its called: "Vlog Stars,
>> Online video bloggers are redefining the worlds of news and
>> entertainment". It mentions Rocketboom, Ask a Ninja, Kitkast, Vlog
>> Soup, A Good Word With the T-Bird. They used a stock photo of
>> Rocketboom so I wound up also pictured in the article. 10 years ago,
>> my greatest dreams and aspirations was to be in the Rolling Stone. As
>> a musician, that's as far as my dreams could go back then. It would
>> include the end-all-dream of being owned by Sony for $2000/month with
>> a bonus of a million dollar debt.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>



  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Rolling Stone

[andrew michael baron]

No, I was trying to say that what used to be God is now just a  
stepping stone. . .

On Apr 20, 2006, at 2:20 PM, Deirdre Straughan wrote:

> Did you buy five copies for your mother?
>
> On 4/20/06, andrew michael baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There is also an article that came out yesterday in Rolling Stone
>> Magazine but I haven't seen it online. Its called: "Vlog Stars,
>> Online video bloggers are redefining the worlds of news and
>> entertainment". It mentions Rocketboom, Ask a Ninja, Kitkast, Vlog
>> Soup, A Good Word With the T-Bird. They used a stock photo of
>> Rocketboom so I wound up also pictured in the article. 10 years ago,
>> my greatest dreams and aspirations was to be in the Rolling Stone. As
>> a musician, that's as far as my dreams could go back then. It would
>> include the end-all-dream of being owned by Sony for $2000/month with
>> a bonus of a million dollar debt.
>>
>>
>
> --
> best regards,
> Deirdré Straughan
>
> www.beginningwithi.com (personal)
> www.tvblob.com (work)
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>






  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

[videoblogging] Rolling Stone

[andrew michael baron]

There is also an article that came out yesterday in Rolling Stone  
Magazine but I haven't seen it online. Its called: "Vlog Stars,  
Online video bloggers are redefining the worlds of news and  
entertainment". It mentions Rocketboom, Ask a Ninja, Kitkast, Vlog  
Soup, A Good Word With the T-Bird. They used a stock photo of  
Rocketboom so I wound up also pictured in the article. 10 years ago,  
my greatest dreams and aspirations was to be in the Rolling Stone. As  
a musician, that's as far as my dreams could go back then. It would  
include the end-all-dream of being owned by Sony for $2000/month with  
a bonus of a million dollar debt.





  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Michael Eisner joins Veoh

[andrew michael baron]

On Eisner's new TV show via BoingBoing:


"In spite of his formidable star power, former Disney chairman  
Michael Eisner's new CNBC talk show did not attract the audience  
network execs hoped. Tuesday's debut of 'Conversations with Michael  
Eisner' netted only 95,000 viewers, according to Nielsen Media  
Research. I think he should have started a video blog, instead. I'd  
subscribe to his RSS feed. I think he'd have no trouble attracting  
many times more visitors in that medium." - BoingBoing

http://tinyurl.com/hb2sq


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> 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/
 

[videoblogging] Michael Eisner joins Veoh

[andrew michael baron]

The former Disney CEO, it seems, has joined the board of a San Diego-based company called Veoh, which helps deliver video over the Internet. The NY Times quotes him on why he's so excited about the venture, founded in 2004:"Anybody, now, can have their own network," Mr. Eisner said. "There are no borders. No gatekeepers. No restrictions on creativity of any kind."http://tinyurl.com/zbf3j




  
  
SPONSORED LINKS
  
  
  

Fireant
  
  
Individual
  
  
Use
  
  

   
  







  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



  

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Embed vs. Pop-Up

[andrew michael baron]

Thanks for the clarification, I had falsely assumed that browsers blocked pop-ups even when requested. Gald to know thats not an issue for the most part.On Apr 17, 2006, at 10:44 AM, David Meade wrote:  Generally requested "pop-ups" are allowed with anything not just Firefox.  its only the pop-ups that happen without the user clicking a link that are blocked.  If your browser isn't opening a link you click, you have pretty big issues. It's possible however if the pop-up page is done with JS (as many are) and you've got some application that prevents any page from opening via JS (even if you request it) that it could be an issue.  Typically however, if you click a link, it will open the page it points to (even if someone has called that page 'popup"). Firefox wont give you the alert box, Duncan, only IE.  (and at the moment only a fully patched IE).- Dave-- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed:   http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed   YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 

  




  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



   Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.