Hi John, I realise this has made you cross, but I've also been responsible for keeping it in the Group here because I think it needs to be aired - for various reasons that I've explained before and won't rehash at length now.
Lan has actually been the model of restraint and has not written much here about it, and has only written in response to questions by other people who also think it's something they want to discuss here. The price of the photograph is actually not really unfair, if you look into it. And it's not just the value of the photograph - there's an accepted premium element paid by someone who's used a photograph without permission, credit, payment. As for 1982 prices, they can't really be compared. Everything has shifted so much in the last 35 years, particularly in the media and in terms of cost of living and value of the dollar and a whole bunch of other things. Back then Heaven's Gate and Inchon were considered extravagantly expensive Hollywood movies, and cost $44 million and $50 million respectively, I think. Heaven's Gate brought down United Artists. Spiderman 3 (this year) cost about $260 million, I think. Plus then about the same again in marketing - making it a half billion dollar movie. Also, in 1982 a 2/3 bedroomed row house in a not-particularly-special street in West London where I live was worth somewhere between £40k and £60k ($80k and $120k). It's now worth between £550k and £650k ($1.1m and $1.3m). So a lot has changed. But anyway, the value of the photograph is not set by these things, it's set by the market - and in a situation like this, $1000 isn't, as you said, more than fair. Hope all this helps to explain :) Also, for context, read (the whole of - and comments on) Casey McKinnon's blog post here: http://www.caseymckinnon.com/blog/2007/07/10/podtech-needs-more-podtact/ Cheers, Rupert On 12 Jul 2007, at 01:53, John Coffey wrote: Back when 3 Mile Island happened I was in a photo class and the word on the street was that Time magazine paid $2000 for their cover shot (in 1982 dollars). Keep your ground Scoble! $1000 more than fair. John --- Robert Scoble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Well it's been another week and a half since we've > heard anything. Is > this thing resolved yet? > > I'll check. Last I heard Furrier was willing to pay > $1,000 and Bui wanted > $3,000. Not sure if either of them have moved from > those positions but it's > very possible that this is headed to some sort of > court unless one of them > bends. For my part in it I'm sorry about the whole > issue, it was caused by > an employee who made a mistake and feels bad about > it and was amplified by > no follow through and making sure there was some > sort of resolution to the > issue. > > By the way, I've seen a few people say that PodTech > is unresponsive on other > issues, like sending out Vloggies. I have no idea > who hasn't gotten Vloggies > yet, but if anyone has any other issues with > PodTech or me or still is owed > a Vloggie my personal phone number is 425-205-1921 > and you can call me > anytime for any reason. > > Robert Scoble > PodTech.net > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Cocktails and other goodCraichttp://www.jchtv.com/ __________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
