As you all heard that Zynga and Facebook's growth in Q2 are poor because nobody cares including me (some have migrated to Google Plus) and I hope they both go down because everyone needs to get out and find some real friends and not some imaginary virtual friends you meet on social media. Divorce rates have skyrocketed because of Facebook. If FB goes down, the divorce rate will go down as well. Men needs to support and think about their wives. For more info on How social media ruins marriages and cause the divorce rate to increase.
Zynga's stock has now fallen below $3.00 and will continue until it goes into bankruptcy by the end of this week. Facebook will follow and will become bankrupt by this autumn.
Monday, July 30, 2012
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
DirecTV/Viacom Dispute negotiations ended: No Deal (UPDATE)
The DirecTV/Viacom Negotiations have ended, but the result for the dispute is: No Deal.
Here's what happened:
On July 10, Viacom demanded DirecTV to remove their channels off the lineup, while negotiations continue.
July 17: DirecTV offers its' customers to watch Viacom's shows online for free, including Hulu. But Viacom took them down, affecting not only DirecTV subscribers, but online viewers as well.
July 18 (today): Viacom offered EPiX as an addition to the negotiations, but DirecTV refused saying it would add additional fees, making its' subscribers pay more. Viacom turned away, thus ending the negotiations quoting in their blog that there's "no intention of (for DirecTV) working with us to expedite a resolution." They also used cable providers (including Comcast) on a radio ad to tell DirecTV subscribers to switch services. DirecTV said they are willing and welcome Viacom to come back to the negotiating table and settle this dispute, but not this time.
If you are DirecTV subscriber, do not switch providers, because Viacom wants you to pay more if you do. There's a lot of things you can do, you still have Disney and Cartoon Network. You should be glad DirecTV brought Disney Junior for your youngsters. In fact, there's a big world out there that needs to be explored, go out and do something, read a book. If you have Netflix, go watch it.
DirecTV tried their best to keep the channels, but we can't afford to pay more for Viacom's content, and they are protecting the consumer.
BOYCOTT VIACOM.
UPDATE: Agteement Reached. Apparently EPiX was not included as we can't afford to pay.
Thank you DirecTV subscribers for battling this fight.
Here's what happened:
On July 10, Viacom demanded DirecTV to remove their channels off the lineup, while negotiations continue.
July 17: DirecTV offers its' customers to watch Viacom's shows online for free, including Hulu. But Viacom took them down, affecting not only DirecTV subscribers, but online viewers as well.
July 18 (today): Viacom offered EPiX as an addition to the negotiations, but DirecTV refused saying it would add additional fees, making its' subscribers pay more. Viacom turned away, thus ending the negotiations quoting in their blog that there's "no intention of (for DirecTV) working with us to expedite a resolution." They also used cable providers (including Comcast) on a radio ad to tell DirecTV subscribers to switch services. DirecTV said they are willing and welcome Viacom to come back to the negotiating table and settle this dispute, but not this time.
If you are DirecTV subscriber, do not switch providers, because Viacom wants you to pay more if you do. There's a lot of things you can do, you still have Disney and Cartoon Network. You should be glad DirecTV brought Disney Junior for your youngsters. In fact, there's a big world out there that needs to be explored, go out and do something, read a book. If you have Netflix, go watch it.
DirecTV tried their best to keep the channels, but we can't afford to pay more for Viacom's content, and they are protecting the consumer.
BOYCOTT VIACOM.
UPDATE: Agteement Reached. Apparently EPiX was not included as we can't afford to pay.
Thank you DirecTV subscribers for battling this fight.
Thursday, July 12, 2012
FBI expands "Anti-Piracy" seal to art, literature, etc.
The FBI has released a new rule to expand the use of the "Anti-piracy" seal, that is used in movies, music labels and software, to art, literature, online publishing content creators, and more. It will make it easier for content owners of art, novels, news, etc. to warn users that they might be felons and the FBI will bust in your house, arrest and throw you in prison for 5 years and fine you $250,000.That means you can use this seal for your blog or webcam video and you can catch people for trying to reproduce and redistribute even if you gave them permission.
This rule goes into effect 30 days after it's published.
For example, I created my own trademark and I don't need to get a trademark license, all I need to do is go to FBI website and get an authorization to use the seal for protection of my trademark and I'm good to go. Don't need to do anything. Just relax and watch the APW seal do the work, someone steals my trademark, that person is busted and he/she gets 5 years in prison and I get paid in loyalty, that includes monetary damages of $250,000.
You would not steal my work would you. So don't think about it. Ever since these jokers try to steal my webcam videos and alter them by putting color effects on it and replacing my voice with a copyrighted audio of Brian Griffin in a banana suit rapping "Peanut Butter Jelly". I am not going to tolerate this, I will catch you for stealing my webcam videos. And I'm going to do it by slapping the Anti-Piracy seal on my webcam videos. Stealing someone's work and plagiarizing them is a felonious crime. It hurts the creator's innovation and it cost everyone and every businesses money.
Five comments in the text concerning that the usage of the "Anti-Piracy" seal would have a chilling effect with "fair use". The FBI fully recognize the doctrine under 17 USC 107s. The FBI will address the issue on its' website. But however, this will make it easier for content owners who not are members of the MPAA, RIAA, ESA, etc. such as Viz, The Pokemon Company, and Funimation can go after those who illegally upload their titles to YouTube. In fact, fanart and fanfiction that are uploaded, DeviantArt will have to take them down and remove the fan art and fan fiction category off their site. FanFiction (dot) Net will be shut down by the FBI just as they shut down.
Other words, it will be fine unless you trace a trademarked character, then it's off to prison with you. If it's for your own private use, it's fine.In fact, the warning message doesn't criminalize "private use".
Now I know if you are a fan of Mickey Mouse, but Disney will not let you fandomize their works, since the comic artist in 1976 who distributed a parody of Mickey Mouse. And now Viacom can not only go after people who redistribute and reproduce their TV shows, but they can now go after those who distribute fan works. If your child draws SpongeBob, you and your entire family will go to prison. As a matter of fact, Viz can go after people who draw Inuyasha. Pokemon Company can also go after those after their fans who fandomize or parodying their product.
The other issues is that the expansion of the Anti-Piracy seal affects the first sale doctrine as the Anti-Piracy seal prohibits distribution of copyrighted content and it also has the chilling effect of educational use.
This rule goes into effect 30 days after it's published.
For example, I created my own trademark and I don't need to get a trademark license, all I need to do is go to FBI website and get an authorization to use the seal for protection of my trademark and I'm good to go. Don't need to do anything. Just relax and watch the APW seal do the work, someone steals my trademark, that person is busted and he/she gets 5 years in prison and I get paid in loyalty, that includes monetary damages of $250,000.
You would not steal my work would you. So don't think about it. Ever since these jokers try to steal my webcam videos and alter them by putting color effects on it and replacing my voice with a copyrighted audio of Brian Griffin in a banana suit rapping "Peanut Butter Jelly". I am not going to tolerate this, I will catch you for stealing my webcam videos. And I'm going to do it by slapping the Anti-Piracy seal on my webcam videos. Stealing someone's work and plagiarizing them is a felonious crime. It hurts the creator's innovation and it cost everyone and every businesses money.
Five comments in the text concerning that the usage of the "Anti-Piracy" seal would have a chilling effect with "fair use". The FBI fully recognize the doctrine under 17 USC 107s. The FBI will address the issue on its' website. But however, this will make it easier for content owners who not are members of the MPAA, RIAA, ESA, etc. such as Viz, The Pokemon Company, and Funimation can go after those who illegally upload their titles to YouTube. In fact, fanart and fanfiction that are uploaded, DeviantArt will have to take them down and remove the fan art and fan fiction category off their site. FanFiction (dot) Net will be shut down by the FBI just as they shut down.
Other words, it will be fine unless you trace a trademarked character, then it's off to prison with you. If it's for your own private use, it's fine.In fact, the warning message doesn't criminalize "private use".
Now I know if you are a fan of Mickey Mouse, but Disney will not let you fandomize their works, since the comic artist in 1976 who distributed a parody of Mickey Mouse. And now Viacom can not only go after people who redistribute and reproduce their TV shows, but they can now go after those who distribute fan works. If your child draws SpongeBob, you and your entire family will go to prison. As a matter of fact, Viz can go after people who draw Inuyasha. Pokemon Company can also go after those after their fans who fandomize or parodying their product.
The other issues is that the expansion of the Anti-Piracy seal affects the first sale doctrine as the Anti-Piracy seal prohibits distribution of copyrighted content and it also has the chilling effect of educational use.
Monday, July 9, 2012
US Trade Representative adds 3-Step test copyright limitations to water down copyright maximum chapter
On July 3, The US Trade Representative announced that they will negotiate to add a "3-step" test in TPP that will allow copyright limitations and exceptions including fair use and first sale.
While these limitation can be a bad thing according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the 3-step test could be a good thing. Countries under a proposed 3-step test can adopt US style copyright limitations and exceptions like I mentioned fair use and first sale. This will protect businesses, such as cafes and karaoke bars, flea markets, yard, and garage sales from being sued and banned. Japan (Should the country join TPP) can also adopt these limitations and apply it on Fan art, Fan Fiction, and Cosplay.
Simply implementing a copyright maximum has been watered down. All at least we can do is try to water down the Arbital Tribunal, such as allowing the defendant (countries) to appeal the lawsuit that threatens to undermine consumer freedom, safety, health, and environmental protection. A corporation sues you for complaining about a defective product, you like in a US court can appeal it with evidence and the corporate cannot appeal it therefore they must pay the damages. Such thing like that can cost a company millions of dollars.
While these limitation can be a bad thing according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the 3-step test could be a good thing. Countries under a proposed 3-step test can adopt US style copyright limitations and exceptions like I mentioned fair use and first sale. This will protect businesses, such as cafes and karaoke bars, flea markets, yard, and garage sales from being sued and banned. Japan (Should the country join TPP) can also adopt these limitations and apply it on Fan art, Fan Fiction, and Cosplay.
Simply implementing a copyright maximum has been watered down. All at least we can do is try to water down the Arbital Tribunal, such as allowing the defendant (countries) to appeal the lawsuit that threatens to undermine consumer freedom, safety, health, and environmental protection. A corporation sues you for complaining about a defective product, you like in a US court can appeal it with evidence and the corporate cannot appeal it therefore they must pay the damages. Such thing like that can cost a company millions of dollars.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)