or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information - Page 2669

post #80041 of 93716
Obituary
'Green Acres' Actor Frank Cady Dies at 96
By The Hollywood Reporter Staff - Jun. 11, 2012

Frank Cady, a character actor who is best known for playing general-store owner Sam Drucker on the classic sitcom Green Acres, has died. He was 96.

Cady's daughter Catherine Turk told the Los Angeles Times that her father died Friday at his home in Wilsonville, Ore., but gave no specific cause of death.

Cady played Drucker for the entire run of Green Acres, which aired on CBS from 1965-71. The show starred Eva Gabor and Eddie Albert as a Manhattan couple who moved to a farm in Hooterville, which was populated by a slew of loony residents.

Cady went on to portray the same character on other sitcoms including Petticoat Junction and The Beverly Hillbillies and reprised the role for the 1990 TV movie Return to Green Acres.

He also recurred on The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, playing Doc Williams, and appeared in such movies as Alfred Hitchcock's Rear Window.

The actor was born Sept. 8, 1915, in Susanville, Calif., and studied drama at Stanford University, according to the Times. He started his career in entertainment as a radio broadcaster.

Cady moved to Oregon in the 1990s with his wife, Shirley, who died in 2008.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/green-acres-frank-cady-death-335938
post #80042 of 93716
Technology Notes
Apple Veers Away From Google
By Jessica E. Vascellaro and Ian Sherr, Wall Street Journal - Jun. 11, 2012

Apple Inc. unveiled a series of software features for its mobile phones and computers Monday that place erstwhile partner Google Inc. squarely in its path.

Speaking at the company's annual developer conference in San Francisco, Apple chief Tim Cook and other executives revealed no major surprises to its product line as some attendees had hoped. But Apple did show off a number of new software programs that as a whole underscore how the company is distancing itself from Google.

Among the software products are a new mapping and navigation service that will replace Google Maps as the default on iPhones and iPads. Apple executives also bragged about the comprehensiveness of their local search service, which is integrated with its voice activated "virtual assistant" Siri. And the company struck a long-negotiated deal with Google rival Facebook Inc. to integrate various services.

In several places during the nearly two-hour long keynote, Scott Forstall, Apple's senior vice president for iOS software, referred to areas where the mobile software called iOS outperformed Google's Android software, such as user satisfaction.

"More than 75% of our customers checked the top box, very satisfied, compared to less than 50% for the competition," he said, referring to Android. Even Siri, who welcomed the crowd with a light-hearted video intro, took aim. Among her first jokes was a jab at Android's different version names, which are desserts. "Hey, any of you guys been working with Ice Cream Sandwich or Jelly Bean? Who's been making up these code names, Ben and Jerry?" she said.

A Google spokeswoman didn't comment on overall competition with Apple, but the company said in a statement it had been "working on maps for years" and is "looking forward to continuing to build the perfect map for our users in the months and years ahead."

With the iPhone accounting for 58% percent of Apple's revenue in the quarter ending in March, Apple is in a constant race to update its operating system to beat back the growth of phones running Android.

Those devices accounted for 59% of global smartphone shipments in the first quarter, according to IDC, compared with the iPhone's 23%. Both are up from 36.1% and 18.3% the year-ago quarter respectively, as rivals like Nokia Corp. and Research In Motion Ltd. have struggled.

The keynote presentation at times resembled a sporting event. Attendees cheered in response to new technical features, such as higher-resolution displays and more memory on new MacBook Pro laptops, along with little tweaks like a feature for iPhones that lets people use the Facetime video chat service on cellular networks.

But many moves could challenge Google, analysts say, even though Google remains the default search provider on iPads and iPhones. The mapping service and enhancements to Siri "indicate a clear and present danger to Google's search and ad business," says Jefferies & Co. analyst Peter Misek.

Developers, about 5,000 of which paid $1,599 for tickets, said they were excited to try many of the new mobile software features—particularly the new mapping application. The service, which Apple has been developing for years, has a mode for viewing areas in three-dimensions, along with a local search service and turn-by-turn driving directions for in-car use.

Apple also moved to address issues that nag consumers, adding a "Do Not Disturb" feature to avoid unwanted messages at night. A new app called Passbook organizes loyalty cards, tickets and boarding passes to display the right card when needed. Users can also scan their phone to use a coupon, prompting speculation that the service was a placeholder for a future payments product.

Apple said its new version of its "virtual assistant" Siri, which has been criticized as incomplete, contains more local business information, supports more languages and integrates with its new mapping app. The company will also be bringing the Siri feature to the iPad for the first time with iOS 6, which will be released this fall.

Apple also unveiled a partnership with Facebook to better integrate the social network into its mobile and Mac operating systems— a deal that had been hotly negotiated for more than a year, according to people familiar with the matter. Users will be able to sync their Facebook contacts and calendar events across Apple devices and to more easily post to and log into their apps from Facebook.

Facebook said in a statement that it was "great news for Facebook users."

There were few surprises that hadn't been touched upon in press reports and industry speculation. Some Apple watchers were left wanting more, particularly around the company's future plans for software and apps on televisions.

ISI Group analyst Brian Marshall, who attended, said he was "disappointed" there wasn't more news on that front. But "it was positive overall," he said, noting that Apple's innovations for both hardware and software still place it above its competitors.

Apple executives didn't discuss Apple's $99 box for watching Internet content on TVs—a product that Mr. Cook has hinted that the company intends to evolve over time.

Instead, the company devoted much of the keynote to the software that runs inside its computers and mobile phones.

Craig Federighi, vice president for the Mac software business, showed off an array of features of its previously announced new computer operating system, Mountain Lion, and said it would be available next month for $19.99.

A new, higher-end model of the MacBook Pro laptop—which along with the high-resolution display is 25% thinner and uses faster chips that other models—was a highlight of the event. That new model starts at $2,199.

Apple also updated less-expensive laptops, introducing faster versions of the MacBook Air and existing MacBook Pro lines.

David Barnard, founder of App Cubby, which makes an array of iPhone apps, says he was impressed with the computer's speed and memory specifications. He said that the keynote, the fourth he had attended at the annual developer event, was slightly disappointing, since he had been hoping the company would unveil a new way to manage how apps notify customers about various things, such as a new message or a piece of news. "But that is Apple," he said, acknowledging that despite the big build up in rumors, he was walking away as excited as ever.

The event kicks off a four-day show for developers where more than 1,000 Apple engineers hold sessions to drum up enthusiasm for their products.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303768104577460244284627170.html
post #80043 of 93716
TV Notes
Why Broadcast Networks Killed the Miniseries
By Kimberly Potts, TheWrap.com - Jun. 11, 2012

“Roots.” “Shogun.” “Rich Man, Poor Man.” “The Thorn Birds.” “North and South.” “Gulliver’s Travels.” Those classic broadcast network miniseries from the 1970s, '80s and '90s made for marquee television. They were multi-night programming events that drew people to their TVs in numbers unachievable today outside televised sporting events. They won awards for their networks.

And then the networks stopped making them. The last broadcast-network miniseries to receive an Emmy nomination was CBS’ “Elvis” in 2005 -- and in 2011, there were so few miniseries in the running on both broadcast and cable networks that the Television Academy surrendered to the inevitable and folded the Outstanding Miniseries category into a newly combined category, Outstanding Miniseries or Movie.

What happened? Are the networks so focused on promoting their regular lineups that they don’t want to divert promotional efforts and money to miniseries programming? Are our entertainment options so diverse that it’s tough to draw viewers to an event presentation on TV?

With the lure of big-screen movie series like “Harry Potter,” “Lord of the Rings” and “The Twilight Saga,” did it become a harder sell to get viewers excited about them on the small screen?

Try all of the above.

“From a business point of view, [the miniseries] is not a great business,” Warren Littlefield, former NBC Entertainment president, says. “The series business is a great business. That’s a business where you make a sample, a pilot, you announce it at the upfronts in May. Then you get paid over the summer for that sample. You take in a tremendous amount of money prior to having to spend it to make the product. Cash flow‑wise and as a business, it makes a lot of sense.

“In the movie-of-the-week and miniseries business, you develop the script, and then you pay for it. It doesn’t have that cash flow. It doesn’t have that sales opportunity. More and more, what networks realized is it’s really about the repeat visit in the habit of the series [viewing].”

Since the miniseries category was introduced to the Emmy competition in 1973, ABC, CBS and NBC have received 90 nominations and won 16 awards. But they haven’t won since ABC’s “Anne Frank” in 2001 -- and their total share of the nominations, which topped 60 percent between 1973 and 1999, has been less than 20 percent since 2000. NBC, the dominant network in the miniseries category with 10 wins in its 38-year history, hasn’t been nominated since 1999, when it won nods for “The ‘60s” and “The Temptations.”

Littlefield, who was involved with NBC miniseries like “Shogun,” “Marco Polo,” the Michael Mann-produced “Drug Wars,” “Gulliver’s Travels” and “The '60s” during his network tenure, says viewers also look to regular series now for their event-programming moments.

“The miniseries event was very much a sweeps-driven business,” says Littlefield, who just released the book ‘Top of the Rock: Inside the Rise and Fall of Must See TV,’ a wonderfully detailed oral history of his nearly 20-year career at NBC.

“We’re reminded each and every May on the broadcast side that events in regular series are what audiences are really attached to --the events that end the seasons, or the big, big milestones for characters. Those are as successful in many cases as any movie miniseries event that you can come up with, because audiences are invested in those shows, those characters.”

And regular network series aren’t the only entertainment properties vying for audiences’ attentions. Hundreds of channels of cable TV series, movie theaters, movies online, books, magazines, the internet, web series, videogames and the entertainment buffet that is the iPad have all made for a fractured market in which companies compete with each other (and even themselves) for audience attention and dollars.

Meanwhile, as the broadcast networks have all but abandoned miniseries programming -- and with good reason, as the latest, ABC’s two-night “Titanic” miniseries in April, sunk into the ratings bottom -- cable networks are more ready, willing and able to devote their resources to miniseries projects.

HBO, for example, can invest millions of dollars into Emmy-winning miniseries like “Band of Brothers,” “The Pacific” and “Mildred Pierce,” because its money comes from subscribers, not advertisers who have to be wooed with potential ratings numbers.

And basic cable networks, like AMC with its 2007 Emmy-winning miniseries “Broken Trail” and Syfy (then Sci-Fi) with the 2003 Emmy winner “Taken,” see the cost of event programming as an investment, to draw in viewers who will see promos for -- and potentially become regular viewers of -- their regular schedules.

In fact, if there is hope for a resurgence of the miniseries, it lies mostly with the cable networks, who continue to draw big names like Oscar winner Kevin Costner and Oscar nominee Sigourney Weaver for projects like History Channel’s popular “Hatfields & McCoys” and USA’s “Political Animals,” and PBS, which has been nominated for a miniseries Emmy every year since 2004 and was the inaugural winner of the newly-merged miniseries and movie Emmy last year for “Downton Abbey.” (The soapy “Abbey” has switched to the Outstanding Drama Series category for the 2012 Emmy race.)

Upcoming miniseries include ReelzChannel’s adaptation of Ken Follett’s “World Without End;” Lifetime’s “Columbine,” produced by Christine Vachon and Michael De Luca; a miniseries version of “The Exorcist” from “Martha Marcy May Marlene” director Sean Durkin; and History Channel’s “The Bible,” from producer Mark Burnett.

The miniseries might also serve as a sort of deluxe pilot for some networks that want to scope out viewer interest with just a handful of episodes. “Probably more with an international co‑financing structure, you may see more [miniseries],” Littlefield says. “I think you might find more of them as we look to our European counterparts, the way they change it up with, OK, here’s six hours, and it’s an exciting six hours.

Then we’ll see what the audience says, and maybe we’ll bring it back.

“The models are being thrown up in the air. Change, and a different way of doing things, is being embraced more and more. That’s good. That’s exciting.”

http://www.thewrap.com/tv/article/why-broadcast-networks-killed-miniseries-43756
post #80044 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

TV Notes
On The Air Tonight
TUESDAY Network Primetime/Late Night Options
(All shows are in HD unless noted; start times are ET. Network late night shows are preceded by late local news)

FOX:

8PM - Hell's Kitchen
(R - Jun. 12)
9PM - Masterchef

Fox is showing a June 12 repeat of Hell's Kitchen on...June 12 ??
post #80045 of 93716
^^^ Nice catch (I missed it); fixed! biggrin.gif
post #80046 of 93716
Business Notes
Net connections, movies and music are worthy expenditures despite downturn
By Mike Snider, USA Today - Jun. 11, 2012

Even if the economic outlook is dreary, we want to be entertained.

Over the next five years, growth in U.S. consumer spending on Internet access, movies, music, books and video games is expected to outpace that of the gross domestic product. That's the finding of a report out today from consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Digital delivery of movies, music and other media is driving the spending swell, says PwC partner Stefanie Kane. "Entertainment is a little bit like comfort food … it is really attractive even in a down economy," she says, "now that you can get it at the right time, price and place."

Spending on entertainment and media in the U.S. is expected to grow about 5% annually over the next five years, from an estimated $490 billion this year to more than $597 billion in 2016. Meanwhile, the GDP is expected to grow 4.8% over the five-year period. Global spending on entertainment is expected to hit $2.1 trillion.

As consumers glom onto all things digital — spending for Internet access at home and on the go will hit $81.5 billion in 2016 — advertisers are following. Digital spending in the U.S. will account for 30% of all entertainment spending in 2016, Kane says, up from 20% in 2011.

•Music. We spent less on recorded music last year, but we doled out more for concerts. Total music spending will rise to $19.8 billion in 2016, up from $15.2 billion in 2011.

•Movies. Box-office ticket sales and spending on digitally delivered movies will help Hollywood offset declines in sales of DVD and Blu-ray movie discs. Overall spending on movies will rise from $30 billion last year to $30.9 billion in 2016.

•Television. Pay-TV subscriptions will continue to increase about 5.4% annually to $92.9 billion in 2016. TV advertising will also rise 6.7% to $98.5 billion.

•Books. Increased sales of e-books will help consumer and education book sales rise about 1% to $32.5 billion.

•Games. Spending on mobile and online games will help the overall video game market grow 4% to $16.4 billion.

•Magazines and newspapers. Increased digital readership will drive overall magazine ad sales up 3% annually to $13.5 billion in 2016, as magazine sales rise to $21.3 billion. Newspaper ads — print and digital combined — will fall 2% annually to $21.6 billion. Spending on newspapers will hold steady at about $9.7 billion as paid digital circulation slowly rises.


http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2012-06-12/entertainment-spending/55530446/1
post #80047 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

TV Notes
Why Broadcast Networks Killed the Miniseries
By Kimberly Potts, TheWrap.com - Jun. 11, 2012
“Roots.” “Shogun.” “Rich Man, Poor Man.” “The Thorn Birds.” “North and South.” “Gulliver’s Travels.” Those classic broadcast network miniseries from the 1970s, '80s and '90s made for marquee television. They were multi-night programming events that drew people to their TVs in numbers unachievable today outside televised sporting events. They won awards for their networks.

Money is what killed it. It takes a lot of cash to produce a miniseries. Combine that with all these "reality" shows that cost fractions to produce, there's your answer. Conversely, "Hatfields & McCoys" got really good ratings.
post #80048 of 93716
Video killed the radiostar.
post #80049 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcowboy7 View Post

Video killed the radiostar.

Or so we are lead to believe.
post #80050 of 93716
313

‘Game of Thrones’ Most-Pirated TV Show

The HBO series “Game of Thrones” is by far the most pirated TV show this season, with nearly 4 million downloads per episode.

“How I Met Your Mother” was the No. 2 most-pirated show with more than 2.8 million downloads per episode, while “The Big Bang Theory” was No. 3 with 2.7 million. “House,” “Mad Men,” “Modern Family,” “Revenge,” “Desperate Housewives,” “Family Guy” and “Supernatural” rounded out the top ten.

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/piracy/report-game-thrones-most-pirated-tv-show-27498
post #80051 of 93716
Wait if they could somehow measure how many "pirated" downloads there are, why can't they track the pirates themselves and "punish" them? LOL
post #80052 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrLar View Post

Wait if they could somehow measure how many "pirated" downloads there are, why can't they track the pirates themselves and "punish" them? LOL
They do.
post #80053 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingpcgeek View Post

They do.
Not anymore really. Judges have, correctly, ruled recently that you can't identify a person by an IP address, which makes it much more difficult to pursue legal action by copyright holders. Several lawsuits were dismissed because of this ruling. In fact, they have said that IP addresses sometimes can't even pinpoint a state (also correct). 15 mass-BT lawsuits were recently dismissed for that very reason.

I have no doubt that the copyright holders are going to find another way to sue (it's what they do), but the courts are finally getting it right as far as identification is concerned. But more than that, I have no sympathy for companies that refuse to adapt to a changing media landscape. More than one article has been posted here about HBO and their aging distribution model. If they choose to live and die by a model that's decades old, that's on them.
post #80054 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by moob View Post

Not anymore really. Judges have, correctly, ruled recently that you can't identify a person by an IP address, which makes it much more difficult to pursue legal action by copyright holders. Several lawsuits were dismissed because of this ruling. In fact, they have said that IP addresses sometimes can't even pinpoint a state (also correct). 15 mass-BT lawsuits were recently dismissed for that very reason.
I have no doubt that the copyright holders are going to find another way to sue (it's what they do), but the courts are finally getting it right as far as identification is concerned. But more than that, I have no sympathy for companies that refuse to adapt to a changing media landscape. More than one article has been posted here about HBO and their aging distribution model. If they choose to live and die by a model that's decades old, that's on them.
I believe you are misrepresenting the rulings a bit. It is my understanding the rulings were based on "John Doe" mass filings. Judges in some districts are ruling that the right holders must separate complaints for each "Doe" and that they have to provide more stringent information to obtain a warrant to elicit the IP to name association from a provider.

In the 2nd part about states, is very specific in that the filings in the mass suits cross multiple state lines which puts them out of the jurisdiction of a particular court. So, again forced separation.

I'm in no way a lawyer. However, I do follow IP/copywrite/patent cases fairly closely. It's also possible that I have my facts messed up as well. Or, we could be referring to completely different cases. Just keep in mind that there is no one size fits all judicial answer to this problem yet.

I would also suggest you use your BS filter when numbers like those download numbers are released. I think you can assume some generalized consensus of which shows are most downloaded. I doubt very seriously that the numbers in question are within +- %100 of the actual number across all download sources.

my 2 cents
post #80055 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMCecil View Post

Judges in some districts are ruling that the right holders must separate complaints for each "Doe" and that they have to provide more stringent information to obtain a warrant to elicit the IP to name association from a provider.
That's one issue. The other issue is that even if you knew that this particular IP address was used by Bill Smith's modem/router, there is no way of knowing if Bill Smith actually downloaded the show. It could have been Bill, it could have been someone in Bill's household or perhaps someone piggybacked onto his WiFi and downloaded the show from next door.
post #80056 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by moob View Post

I have no sympathy for companies that refuse to adapt to a changing media landscape. More than one article has been posted here about HBO and their aging distribution model. If they choose to live and die by a model that's decades old, that's on them.

I get totally peeved by that attitude. What do you expect companies to do? Sure there are technological innovations out there, but every company has every right to protect the property they spend money to create. You would do the exact same thing. If you built a house for a million dollars, you are going to do anything you can from having people break in and steal from it. Well TV networks spend upwards of a million dollars, typically a whole lot more, per episode of their shows, and they have every right to do anything legal to protect their product. You can throw this "new world or model" BS out there all you want, but the fact is, companies spend money to create product, and they have every right to sell it as they see fit whether it be the old fashioned commercial TV model or the newer premium channel model or pay per view, or individual media sales. But you have no right to steal it. Just because others do it, or it is easier now than it was 15 years ago, does not make it right.
post #80057 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by mscottc View Post

I get totally peeved by that attitude. What do you expect companies to do? Sure there are technological innovations out there, but every company has every right to protect the property they spend money to create. You would do the exact same thing. If you built a house for a million dollars, you are going to do anything you can from having people break in and steal from it. Well TV networks spend upwards of a million dollars, typically a whole lot more, per episode of their shows, and they have every right to do anything legal to protect their product. You can throw this "new world or model" BS out there all you want, but the fact is, companies spend money to create product, and they have every right to sell it as they see fit whether it be the old fashioned commercial TV model or the newer premium channel model or pay per view, or individual media sales. But you have no right to steal it. Just because others do it, or it is easier now than it was 15 years ago, does not make it right.
Your analogy with the house is not really applicable here, people build/guy houses to live in, they don't build and/or buy them to have the whole world come and live with them. Video content is created with the sole purpose of having people wanting to watch it in order to sell ads and/or boost subscription revenues. If the content is compelling enough it stands to reason that people will find ways to watch that content by what ever means necessary if they feel that having to pay $50-$60 per month is too high a cost.

That said, I agree that HBO has every right to distribute their content how ever they see fit, but when the amount of people downloading a show starts to surpass those actually watching it when it's aired on TV it's time to get your head out of the sand and start dealing with reality - people will pay for the content, but they are not going to pay a poll tax of having to have a cable TV bill as well.
post #80058 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnesia View Post

That's one issue. The other issue is that even if you knew that this particular IP address was used by Bill Smith's modem/router, there is no way of knowing if Bill Smith actually downloaded the show. It could have been Bill, it could have been someone in Bill's household or perhaps someone piggybacked onto his WiFi and downloaded the show from next door.
^^What he said. That's more of what I was referring to but you're right in that there is no one size fits all argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mscottc View Post

I get totally peeved by that attitude. What do you expect companies to do? Sure there are technological innovations out there, but every company has every right to protect the property they spend money to create. You would do the exact same thing. If you built a house for a million dollars, you are going to do anything you can from having people break in and steal from it. Well TV networks spend upwards of a million dollars, typically a whole lot more, per episode of their shows, and they have every right to do anything legal to protect their product. You can throw this "new world or model" BS out there all you want, but the fact is, companies spend money to create product, and they have every right to sell it as they see fit whether it be the old fashioned commercial TV model or the newer premium channel model or pay per view, or individual media sales. But you have no right to steal it. Just because others do it, or it is easier now than it was 15 years ago, does not make it right.
What do I expect companies to do? Live with smaller profit margins. Yeah. I know. That's unthinkable, but it needs to happen. The old model needs to die, and my guess is we're going to see a bit of turmoil in the next decade or so as things begin to shake up. $25 for a Blu-ray movie? No. Drop it to $15. $15-$20 for premium channels? No. Drop it to $5-$10 (or offer your content elsewhere without needing a Cable company). $6 for one HD movie?!?! Drop it to $3. Media companies keep overvaluing their products, and content providers keep overestimating how much consumers are willing to pay. Something is going to give eventually...or I think it will anyway. They need to learn that the way they value their content isn't the same as the way younger demographics do. They also need to learn that punishing paying customers is a great way to turn them off of acquiring content legally (like the new piracy warning on movies), or getting it at all.

As a PC gamer, this is a concept that's all too familiar. I've passed on games simply because of draconian DRM schemes (Spore), or waited until they implemented changes that removed limits before I made a purchase (BioShock). If you're going to punish me for purchasing your product, then I'm not going to purchase your product. It's that simple.

You use that million-dollar house argument. You know what? Before I buy a million-dollar house, I can walk inside, look around and see what it is I'm getting. I can know everything there is to know about that house before I move in. Can I buy a Blu-ray movie, watch it, decide I don't like it, and then return it? Nope. Can I do that with Mass Effect 3? Nope...it's directly linked to your account online (note that didn't stop me from purchasing it, though I bought it for $30, not $60). Can I sign up for HBO via DirecTV, check out Game of Thrones, and then decide it's not for me? Nope...they lock you in for a month.

I have no problem with IP owners protecting their property, but as a consumer, they're becoming increasingly annoying to those of us who like our content without restrictions at a reasonable price, so they're turning us against them.
post #80059 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by moob View Post



I have no problem with IP owners protecting their property, but as a consumer, they're becoming increasingly annoying to those of us who like our content without restrictions at a reasonable price, so they're turning us against them.

If you think the price is to high, don't buy it. There is no other legal option.
post #80060 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnesia View Post

That's one issue. The other issue is that even if you knew that this particular IP address was used by Bill Smith's modem/router, there is no way of knowing if Bill Smith actually downloaded the show. It could have been Bill, it could have been someone in Bill's household or perhaps someone piggybacked onto his WiFi and downloaded the show from next door.
Thanks to both of you for keeping this as a discussion!!! I think you will find that rulings like that are state by state. Some states have prosecuted while others have set the bar higher. Just like patent holders put a fake office in Texas and litigate their patent claims there and corporations that want bankruptcy protection file for bankruptcy in Massachusetts. The "law" in the various district and appellate courts around the US are very weird and even contradictory. There are also many, many kinds of laws ... copyright, patent, civil, criminal etc... each has extremely different rules between those courts as well.

The only reason I responded is that the OP said that the court had ruled "correctly". Well, correctly is a wildly moving target on these subjects. What I think you meant was that "you agreed with the ruling". Rulings of fact vs rulings of law is a very interesting thing. It's mind bending. As a programmer, I was following the Oracle vs Google case very closely. It's amazing how %100 wrong the media was when reporting on the rulings by the court. They missed the point of almost everything, including mixing up the difference between copyrights vs patents and fair use vs infringement. They used them all freely as interchangeable parts, when the case itself was making rulings for each of those individually. The criteria and laws pertaining to each of those 4 things was different for each.

Copyright law is a cesspool.
post #80061 of 93716
Along these same lines, Internet providers are getting increasingly annoyed at being used as content industry policeman. The largest ISP in the nation just said "no more".
Quote:
Comcast Protests “Shake Down” of Alleged Bit-torrent Pirates

Comcast has run out of patience with the avalanche of bit-torrent lawsuits in the United States. The ISP is now refusing to comply with court-ordered subpoenas, arguing that they are intended to “shake down” subscribers by coercing them to pay settlements. Copyright holders have responded furiously to Comcast’s new stance, claiming that the ISP is denying copyright holders the opportunity to protect their works.

http://torrentfreak.com/comcast-protests-shake-down-of-alleged-**********-pirates-120612/ replace the asterisks with "bit-torrent" no dash. We're still in the middle ages here at AVS with regards to the word "bit-torrent", falls under the heading of "head still stuck in sand".

Edited by keenan - 6/12/12 at 6:11pm
post #80062 of 93716
MONDAY's fast affiliate overnight prime-time ratings -and what they mean- have been posted on Analyst Marc Berman's Media Insight's Blog
post #80063 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad1153 View Post

Washington Notes
FCC Chairman Proposes Eliminating Viewability Rule

Update:
Quote:
Cable Companies Led By Comcast Get Relief From Signal-Carry Rule

Regulators will let a rule lapse that allows more than 12 million U.S. cable subscribers with analog television sets to receive signals from broadcast stations without having digital converter boxes.

The Federal Communications Commission in an order distributed by e-mail today said it would let the rule expire at midnight.

The National Cable & Telecommunications Association wanted an end to the rule, which the FCC put in place in 2007 as TV stations replaced wave-like analog signals with digital broadcasts that use less spectrum. The rule requires cable systems to offer analog and digital streams of TV broadcasts.
Since 2007 the share of U.S. households dependent on analog equipment has dropped from 45 percent to just over 20 percent, the Washington-based trade group with members led by largest cable company Comcast Corp. (CMCSA) said in a June 8 filing at the FCC.

Cable operators will provide low-cost converter boxes that let customers view digital broadcast streams on analog sets, according to the filing. Consumers Union had requested in a June 7 filing that the FCC order cable companies to provide the boxes at no cost.

The National Association of Broadcasters in a March 12 FCC filing said the rule should be extended for three years so viewers don’t lose access to programming. Members of the Washington-based trade group include the Walt Disney Co. (DIS)’s ABC, News Corp. (NWSA)’s Fox, Comcast Corp.’s NBC and CBS Corp. (CBS)

To contact the reporter on this story: Todd Shields in Washington at tshields3@bloomberg.net;
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Bernard Kohn at bkohn2@bloomberg.net

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-12/cable-companies-led-by-comcast-get-relief-from-signal-carry-rule.html
post #80064 of 93716
Nielsen Overnights (18-49)
Fox scores best summer Monday in four years
Averages a 2.7 in 18-49s, led by 'Hell's Kitchen'
By Toni Fitzgerald, Media Life Magazine - Jun. 12, 2012

Not facing competition from summer's top show, "America's Got Talent," Fox's Gordon Ramsay cooking shows saw gains last night over last week's premieres.

"Hell's Kitchen" averaged a 2.7 adults 18-49 rating at 8 p.m., according to Nielsen overnights, up 13 percent over last week's premiere.

It was the No. 1 show on the night, and combined with lead-out "MasterChef" to boost Fox to its best summer Monday night in four years, with an average 2.7 rating.

"MasterChef" drew a 2.6 at 9 p.m., also up 13 percent over the previous week.

The shows clearly benefited from the absence of "Talent," which averaged a 3.3 at 8 p.m. last week and boosted lead-out "American Ninja Warrior" to a 2.2.

Instead last night NBC carried the decisive game six of the Stanley Cup finals, which averaged a preliminary rating of 1.6, the lowest rating for an NHL game six in six years.

But among households the game drew a 4.0, up from a 3.9 last year. These ratings are highly unreliable, however, because time zone differences are not accounted for with overnight ratings, and the winning team, the Los Angeles Kings, has a West Coast fanbase.

ABC's "The Bachelorette" apparently benefited from the lighter competition too. It was up 5 percent over last week, to a 2.3, from 8 to 10 p.m.

Fox led the night among 18-49s with the aforementioned 2.7 average overnight rating and an 8 share. ABC was second at 1.9/5, NBC third at 1.6/5, CBS fourth at 1.4/4, Univision fifth at 1.2/3, Telemundo sixth at 0.5/1 and CW seventh at 0.2/1.

As a reminder, all ratings are based on live-plus-same-day DVR playback, which includes shows replayed before 3 a.m. the night before. Seven-day DVR data won't be available for several weeks. Forty-four percent of Nielsen households have DVRs.

Also, ratings for NBC's Stanley Cup coverage are approximate as fast nationals measure timeslot and not actual program data. They also don't account for time zone differences.

At 8 p.m. Fox was first with a 2.7 for "Kitchen," followed by ABC with a 2.1 for "Bachelorette." NBC was third with a 1.6 for hockey, CBS fourth with a 1.4 for repeats of "How I Met Your Mother" and "2 Broke Girls," Univision fifth with a 1.1 for "Un Refugio para el Amor," Telemundo sixth with a 0.5 for "Una Maid en Manhattan" and CW seventh with a 0.3 for a repeat of "Breaking Pointe."

Fox held onto the lead at 9 p.m. with a 2.6 for "MasterChef," with ABC a close second with a 2.5 for more "Bachelorette." NBC was third with a 1.6 for hockey, CBS fourth with a 1.5 for repeats of "Two and a Half Men" and "Mike & Molly," Univision fifth with a 1.2 for "Abismo de Pasion," Telemundo sixth with a 0.5 for "Corazon Valiente" and CW seventh with a 0.2 for a rerun of "The Catalina."

NBC moved to first at 10 p.m. with a 1.6 for hockey, while Univision took over second place with a 1.4 for "La Que No Podia Amar." CBS was third with a 1.2 for a "Hawaii Five-0" rerun, ABC fourth with a 1.1 for a repeat of "Castle" and Telemundo fifth with a 0.4 for "Relaciones Peligrosas."

ABC was first for the night among households with a 4.8 average overnight rating and an 8 share. CBS was second at 3.8/6, Fox third at 3.4/5, NBC fourth at 2.6/4, Univision fifth at 1.7/3, Telemundo sixth at 0.8/1 and CW seventh at 0.4/1.

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/fox-scores-best-monday-in-four-years/
post #80065 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by spwace View Post

If you think the price is to high, don't buy it. There is no other legal option.
I usually don't. But GoT is a great show, and HBO could probably cut into those numbers if they offered the show elsewhere. The only reason I even subscribed to HBO was for GoT, and luckily I also got a deal on 3 months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMCecil View Post

The only reason I responded is that the OP said that the court had ruled "correctly". Well, correctly is a wildly moving target on these subjects. What I think you meant was that "you agreed with the ruling". Rulings of fact vs rulings of law is a very interesting thing.
You are 100% correct. Well, I agreed with it technically also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keenan View Post

Along these same lines, Internet providers are getting increasingly annoyed at being used as content industry policeman. The largest ISP in the nation just said "no more".
And Verizon did something similar not too long ago as well (and won).

It does beg the question...do these lawsuits even make sense?
post #80066 of 93716
Quote:
Originally Posted by keenan View Post

Along these same lines, Internet providers are getting increasingly annoyed at being used as content industry policeman. The largest ISP in the nation just said "no more".
Sounds like they're aggregating it into their business model like high tech companies do with patent suits. Just another way to screw people so they can "enhance their profit."
post #80067 of 93716
TV/Legal Notes
CBS Derides ABC's Defense of 'Big Brother'-Like 'Glass House'
By Tim Molloy, TheWrap.com - Jun. 12, 2012

Continuing to press for a temporary restraining order to keep ABC's "Glass House" from premiering Monday, CBS said Tuesday that ABC's lawyers had failed to point out any substantive differences between "Glass House" and CBS's long-running "Big Brother."

CBS asked for the order last week, arguing that "Glass House" has not only stolen the concept of "Big Brother" -- 12 to 14 people live in a house where their moves are constantly monitored -- but also poached former staffers from "Big Brother" and stolen production techniques.

ABC offered a series of defenses in a filing late Monday, but in its response Tuesday, CBS said none of them addressed its chief argument: that ABC's show had committed copyright infringement and stolen trade secrets. CBS contends that ABC has defended its show by pointing only to "trivial rule changes" that differentiate it from "Big Brother."

A judge is expected to rule ahead of the planned Monday premiere date for "Glass House."

ABC said Monday in its opposition to the request for a restraining order that CBS's effort to keep its show off the air was "wholly unprecedented," and challenged CBS' suggestion that "Big Brother" was unique.

"To begin, there is no 'secret sauce' in 'Big Brother'"s production process," ABC's lawyers said. They said "Big Brother" uses "commonly known equipment, jobs, and ways of doing things in reality television production."

ABC acknowleged that its show wasn't particularly original, either: "[N]one of the alleged similarities shared by 'Big Brother' and 'The Glass House' involve copyright protectable elements -- they are all generic staples of the reality show genre: people living in a house, competing with each other to avoid elimination, and winning a prize," ABC attorneys wrote.

CBS' filing Tuesday jumped on that contention. Quoting the ABC language in the paragraph above, it said, "That is as useful as saying that Sherlock Holmes lacks copyrightable expression because it is just 'the idea of a detective and a sidekick, who live in London, and use disguises and forensic science to solve crimes.'"

CBS's attorneys said ABC had failed to point out a single show, aside from "Big Brother," that was similar to "Glass House."

Pamela Chelin contributed to this story.

http://www.thewrap.com/tv/article/cbs-derides-abcs-defense-big-brother-glass-house-43891
post #80068 of 93716
TV/Business Notes
Analyst: Nickelodeon Might Be in Danger of Being Dropped by Some TV Distributors
By Eriq Gardner, The Hollywood Reporter - Jun. 12, 2012

Todd Juenger, analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein, on Tuesday raised the specter of the "improbable" -- that cable and satellite services might drop Viacom network Nickelodeon. The analyst mentioned declining ratings, the availability of content online and a thirst by cable and satellite companies to cut costs as linchpins behind a possible action that would no doubt rock the TV industry.

Although still rather unlikely, the prospect of Viacom losing affiliate fees and advertising revenue from one of its flagship stations has been moved by Juenger from being "inconceivable" to being "improbable," which he notes is "a significant difference."

According to ratings reports, Nickelodeon's viewership is down almost 30 percent in the past several months.

Juenger says the overall kids audience universe is down but targets cannibalization from online streaming as a primary factor in a decline in Nick's ratings. He says that ratings are down 10 to 20 percent in Netflix homes, an estimation that comes from research released two months ago that compared 9,500 Netflix streamers and 9,500 nonstreamers from a sample of about 35,000 TiVo set-top users.

Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman has contradicted the notion that the availability of Nickelodeon content on Netflix caused a ratings erosion, saying he didn't think "the limited amount of Nick library content on Netflix … has had a significant impact" and blaming lost ratings on "some ratings systemic issues" at Nielsen.

But Juenger is unconvinced, saying that the problem could extend beyond Nick to Viacom's other networks including MTV. "We fear the long-term value of the flagship networks is in jeopardy," he writes.

Perception of streaming cannibalization could matter as much as the real-or-not truth. One of the comments given by Dish in its announcement that it would soon drop AMC was that customers could still see Mad Men, The Walking Dead, Breaking Bad and other AMC shows through such outlets as Amazon, iTunes and Netflix.

In fact, Juenger offers an imaginary conversation of how a carriage-fee negotiation might proceed between Viacom and multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) such as cable and satellite companies:

• Viacom: "We're here to talk about the next six years of 8 percent price increases, plus 2 percent for TV Everywhere rights."
• MVPD: "Your ratings are down. 26 percent at Nick. And our subs can get your content on Netflix, Amazon and Hulu. We should be talking about how much less we should be paying you, not how much more."
• Viacom: "We're investing heavily to restore our audiences."
• MVPD: "Great, maybe the audience will come back. But we're not paying for it ahead of time."
• Viacom: "We need 8 percent (plus 2 percent). Take it or leave it." ("What are you going to do, drop us?")
• MVPD: At least threatens, with some credibility, to "leave it."


"If such a public flare-up actually materializes, we believe the stock will be penalized swiftly and meaningfully," says Juenger, pointing out that AMC's stock has lagged behind the S&P by 8 percent since Dish's announcement to drop the channel.

The analyst also cites the introduction of the commercial-skipping AutoHop as indication that MVPDs are getting more aggressive. He asks, "If Dish is willing to inject this much disruption and risk into its affiliate relationships in order to reset the balance on retrans, then why would it be hard to believe Dish or somebody else would be willing to take on Viacom in a public pricing war, perhaps even going dark for some period of time?"

Other analysts have offered more sympathetic explanations for Nick's ratings woes.

For example, Michael Nathanson at Nomura Equity Research on Monday gave three reasons for the viewership trends. First, he says that Nielsen's recently revised TV household demographic estimates are impacting viewing data by 1 or 2 percent. Second, improved children-specific programming on Netflix has caused viewing behavior on the margins to change. Finally, he writes, "While it might be hard to believe, significantly warmer weather this winter kept kids outside and away from the TV."

Most of the analysts still have "buy" ratings on Viacom. They argue that the Paramount Pictures division is doing well, the company has been executing an aggressive stock-buyback program, and even though ratings for Viacom networks are said to be down about 10 percent in total, that hasn't yet translated into much of a loss in advertising revenue.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/nickelodeon-viacom-336290
post #80069 of 93716
If CBS wins, Mr. Ed will be suing My Mother The Car and we're off to a new low in creating teachable moments for all the law school kids.
post #80070 of 93716
TV Notes
Robin Roberts reveals she has MDS, a blood and bone marrow disorder; plans to stay on Good Morning America
By Meena Hart Duerson, New York Daily News - Jun. 12, 2012

“Good Morning America” anchor Robin Roberts broke some bad news to viewers on Monday, announcing she has been diagnosed with MDS or myelodsyplastic syndrome, a blood and bone marrow disorder formerly known as preleukemia.

"My doctors tell me I'm going to beat this -- and I know it's true," she wrote in an open letter posted online after she announced her diagnosis on the show.

In 2007, Roberts revealed she had breast cancer and underwent a successful surgery to treat it. Though she has been in remission since then, she revealed her new diagnosis is linked to her earlier health battle.

"Sometimes the treatment for cancer can cause other serious medical problems," she wrote.

Roberts said she was given her diagnosis on the same day she found out “Good Morning America” beat the “Today” show in the ratings for the first time in 16 years, a historic day for the anchor team.

"Talk about your highs and lows!" she wrote.

Last month she found out she would have the chance to interview President Obama about his stance on gay marriage while she was in the hospital having bone marrow extracted.

"The combination of landing the biggest interview of my career and having a drill in my back reminds me that God only gives us what we can handle," she said, "and that it helps to have a good sense of humor when we run smack into the absurdity of life."

Roberts said her "pre-treatment" chemotherapy starts Monday to prepare her for the bone marrow transplant she'll receive later this year from her sister, and used the opportunity to encourage others to register as bone marrow donors.

Her bosses at ABC expressed their support for Roberts.

"We love Robin, the heart and soul of ABC News, and we'll stand arm in arm with her as she fights this new battle," ABC News President Ben Sherwood said in an email circulated to the staff.

Though she'll have to step away from the set for "a chunk of time" when she ultimately has her transplant surgery, Roberts said her plan for the time being is to maintain "business as usual" at “Good Morning America” and stick to her daily schedule as much as possible.

"When I faced breast cancer, your prayers and good wishes sustained me, gave me such hope and played a major role in my recovery," she wrote. "In facing this new challenge, I ask humbly for more of your prayers and love – as I will keep you in my mine and update you regularly on my condition."

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/television/robin-roberts-reveals-mds-a-blood-bone-marrow-disorder-plans-stay-good-morning-america-article-1.1093357
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Hot Off The Press: The Latest TV News and Information