Forum Replies Created

Page 6 of 17
  • Kerry Brown

    January 14, 2008 at 11:59 pm in reply to: Travel to Asia and Australia

    Also check with US Customs. Have a list of all your equipment with S/Ns for them to stamp.

    KB

  • Kerry Brown

    January 14, 2008 at 11:56 pm in reply to: Travel to Asia and Australia
  • Kerry Brown

    January 12, 2008 at 8:13 pm in reply to: Leather DVD Album

    Try https://www.albumhouse.com/

    by the way I found this wit a web search “leather DVD albums”

    KB

  • Kerry Brown

    December 19, 2007 at 5:13 am in reply to: DVD Sales

    Over a year’s time it could add up. Here is what MPEG LA had to say about some
    questions I had.

    1) “Are duplicators supposed to have this license?”

    Response: Yes, they are.

    2) “Does a cable access facility that makes DVD copies of shows need the
    license?”

    Response: Yes.

    3) “Does any one making duplications and original DVDs need the
    license?”

    Response: Yes, if they create MPEG-2 Packaged Medium (e.g., CD, DVD
    discs containing MPEG-2 video) for anything other than their own home or
    personal use, then they would benefit from the coverage of the MPEG-2
    License in Section 2.4 for MPEG-2 Packaged Medium and would be
    responsible for applicable royalties for the MPEG-2 video on each disc.

    4) “Is the royalty paid thru the purchase of blank DVDs?”

    Response: No, it paid by the party creating the discs with MPEG-2 video
    content on them (see 3 above).

    As a general matter, patent holders have the right to place a royalty at
    any point in the product chain, and in the case of our MPEG-2 License,
    it is our current policy to hold replicators/duplicators responsible for
    taking the License and paying applicable royalties for the MPEG-2
    Packaged Medium they create. But, if a replicator chooses not to
    comply, they thereby thrust the responsibility onto its customers and
    the patent holders will have no choice but to hold the customers
    responsible for payment.

    “Under the MPEG-2 Patent Portfolio License the party that offers MPEG-2
    Royalty Products (Section 1.25) for Sale (Section 1.30) to the end user
    is responsible for royalties on the various categories of end product
    (in hardware or software) sold or placed into the stream of
    distribution.”

    Scenario #1: I create the DVD for client, I send to duplicator, I
    deliver to client (reseller).

    Scenario #2: I create the DVD for client, I deliver to client
    (reseller). Client sends to duplicator. Duplicator delivers copies to
    client.

    Who should be the licensee?

    Also what about schools or government intuitions that offer DVDs of the
    graduation or other events?

    “In the scenarios you describe above, MPEG LA would look to
    the party duplicating the discs to be licensed and pay the applicable
    royalties. But, to the extent that party does not meet its obligations,
    all other parties in the product chain have infringement liability and
    can be held responsible for the applicable royalties.”

    KB

  • Kerry Brown

    December 18, 2007 at 7:43 pm in reply to: DVD Sales

    Not so, there are duplicators that don’t even know about MPEG LA. This falls into the realm of copyright issues. ” If it’s only a few it doesn’t matter?”

    KB

  • Kerry Brown

    December 18, 2007 at 7:57 am in reply to: DVD Sales

    As a sidebar how many of you are aware that a MPEG LA license fee is supposed to be paid for
    each duplicated or replicated DVD?

    KB

  • Kerry Brown

    December 5, 2007 at 5:55 am in reply to: HVX200 Tripod

    Check B&H for a Libec its in your price range.
    Libec LS38 Tripod System- Consists of: H38 Fluid Head, T72 Tripod, PH-3 Pan Handle, SP-1 Spreader, and TC-60 Case- Supports 17.6 lb (8 kg) $649.95

    I have a TH series thats even cheaper I use with a PD150. Does a decent job for the price.

    KB

  • Kerry Brown

    October 26, 2007 at 8:46 pm in reply to: MPEG1 bigger than 320×240 in Compressor

    Because MPEG1 is 320 X 240.

    KB

  • Kerry Brown

    October 20, 2007 at 6:28 pm in reply to: Shooting a stage in dim lighting

    [P. J. in Hollywood] “adjust the back focus using a back focus chart”
    Fixed lens cameras do not have a back focus adj available to the user.

    [P. J. in Hollywood] “Even DVCam is a better format than miniDV”
    DV and DVCam are the same format except that DVCam has a faster tape speed and different track pitch. “MiniDV” is a tape cassette size.
    [P. J. in Hollywood] “Digital Beta Cam or Beta SP”
    Beta SP is analog thus has no data rate. The DV format is very, very close to the resolution
    of Beta SP.

    KB

  • Kerry Brown

    October 1, 2007 at 11:45 pm in reply to: HVX200 versus V1U

    [Shane Ross] “Get a Firestore or Cineporter…hard drives that attach and give you longer record times.

    The Cineporter was dropped from production.

    KB

Page 6 of 17

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy