Although we have never met, I have followed your career rather closely for the past ten years. Yep, Imageline was directly involved in the original \”.com\” boom of the late 90\’s as well … only from a totally different perspective than most of you guys with more brains (and more money).

My companies (Imageline and its predecessor company, MGI) pioneered the development of vector-based electronic graphic arts content (clip art illustrations, animations, templates) for the PC platform in the early and mid 80\’s. We employeed some of the finest digtial artists and designers in the world. And our quality was recognized by virtually everyone. We signed licensing agreements with all of the major players of that time – Adobe, IBM, Apple/Claris, Wordperfect, Lotus, Borland, Aldus, Xerox/Ventura, Broderbund, Computer Associates, Parsons Technology, Softkey, Microsoft and others.

Our best year was 1997.

Things changed in the second half of 1997 (almost 10 years ago today!). New Internet companies, such as Xoom.com, InfoSpace, Go2Net, ZDNet, AOL, SimpleNet, Jumbo!, Concentric, Zedcor/ArtToday, Prodigy, Lycos, CompuServe and others (and an equal number of start-up companies internationally) began to give away software/content in exchange for \”eyeballs\”. Advertising would pay the freight. The new \”Net visionaries\” (as they liked to call themselves) discovered that \”images\” represented one of the categories of \”electronic content\” that everyone could use. Pictures were the world\’s common denominator (no translation necessary), and they required NO customer support resources.

So what happened? Before you could blink an eye, Xoom.com and others started to proclaim that they owned \”the largest library of priorietary clip art images in the world\”. Trouble is, Mark, almost all of the digital art was pirated (sexy word for \”stolen\”).

We battled NBCi (who acquired Xoom.com in late 1999) and others in court for over five years! The federal judges didn\’t have a clue what had hit them … especially here in Virginia! They made MAJOR mistakes. Many of them couldn\’t even spell DCMA, let alone interpret it. We took the case to the Supreme Court in 2003, but were rejected.

We ran out of money and were forced to settle … what a shame!

Your Google/YouTube buddies weren\’t the first to come up with this novel idea. Steal other people\’s content, make your fortune, and then get out of the way before the antiquated laws, and those who try to enforce them (both civil and criminal), can catch you. I wrote an interesting article (more like a White Paper, actually) while still with the SPA/SIIA back in mid-2000 titled the \”The Pirates Web\”. It forecast what we have today. Total chaos, in my opinion.

So what\’s my point? I have really enjoyed your perspective on the situation with Google, Viacom, YouTube and others. I think you are one of the few who has it nailed. Wait a second, let me take that back. You are one of the few who has it nailed AND also has the guts to express your opinion publicly. I am VERY disappointed with today\’s corps of so-called independent journalists. Same thing happened in the late 90\’s. So many of their parent companies were trying to cash in on the Internet 1.0 gold rush that controversial opinions almost completely disappeared. I know. I was following it very closely at the time. Still am.

Here\’s the danger. The backbone and origin of most of the new original ideas and entrepreneurial spirit (and employment, as well) of this country lies with the innovation of creative people who are willing to stand up for what they believe in, take a chance, work hard, and be fairly compensated if their instincts (or talents) are right.

Digital piracy removes the final part of this delicately balanced equation. And you can\’t get the toothpaste back in the tube.

Imageline is preparing yet another battle in our ten-year crusade to stop piracy of electronic graphic arts content over the Internet. Our industry (illustrators, artists, designers, animators, cartoonists) is poorly organized (unlike the music, photography, and movie industries) so we (Imageline) have had to form our own \”lobby\”.

We need some \”mavericks\” to help. Are you interested? You can reach me at gpaine3@yahoo.com.

Keep up the good work!

George

Why do you have such a problem with enabled users? Is it possible that the real problem is not concern over lost profits from your own property but lost profits resulting in the creation of a model that can survive WITHOUT your property? If I were to post an advertisement on Youtube, Youtube pays for the outgoing bandwidth each time that ad is viewed!! Youtube provides a service, and most certainly one that costs them money. They are not getting a free ride, and that assertion is ludicrous.

Will it ever be possible for someone of status in the media machine to give a crap about independent artistry, or is everyone\’s cynicism and attribution of greed correct?

You have obviously hit on the problem, but have not come up with a solution. The problem is that over the long term Youtube doesn\’t have a way to monetize content and stay popular. As soon YouTube makes things to onerous on its viewers, by adding DRM or advertising, they will switch.

But what is the solution? Pay for creation, let consumers distribute for free. http://www.strayform.com lets artists fund the creation of new digital media files by their fans and releases these files under Creative Commons licenses so they can be distributed for free.

Creative Producers want to get noticed and they want their material to get out there. Consumers have shown that they love sharing and spreading these works. \”Piracy\” is a zero-cost distribution and advertising system. It is true that the majority of people would be leechers, but that is true of everything on the internet. But all the true fans would get behind a proposal to create something new if they knew that it was up to them to make it happen.

Don\’t you think that if you said it is going to cost $100,000 to broadcast the next Mavs games that all those who were truly interested would band together and do whatever it took to make it happen?

Now, as far as Donald Trump is concerned, it\’s a familiar component of the elitist milieu: material compensation. In the case of the average middle-aged money bags one could expect that he would compensate for a lack of, ahem, size with a big shiny sports car. In Donald\’s case he must endeavor to compensate for a lack of likability. When all is said and done the real proof is always in the stats. Let me say that again because it bears repeating: the proof(truth) is ALWAYS IN THE STATS.

As a business owner and manager, I can\’t rely on opinion or personal preferences when it comes to making many decisions. I hope my judgment is sound when I DO have to make a judgment call, but if I want to hedge my bets and give myself the best chance of winning: I have to look at the stats. Who do I promote? Look at the stats. Which company do I buy? Look at the stats.

Now notice I said LOOK at the stats. Many people will be willing to tell you what the stats are and what they mean but if the responsibility is on your shoulders then you must LOOK at the stats YOURSELF. Shareholders don\’t want to hear about mistakes made due to following the advice of second-hand hearsay. So let\’s LOOK at the stats…

If the Hair wants to talk sports lets talk about the USFL and the New Jersey Generals. What, you\’ve never heard of the USFL? Well, that\’s not surprising. The upstart league didn\’t last very long and neither did Trump\’s team, the Generals. I think it\’s safe to assume that Mark has enjoyed vastly more success in the sports field than the Hair has.

Point to The Mav.

Second, let\’s consider the Hair\’s record for personal relationships. How many times has the Hair been married? Were these unions successful? Mr. Mav is still married…to his first wife. His ONLY wife. No divorce. No alimony. No child support. Just a happy family.

Point to The Mav.

2-0.

I think you see where this is going.

The hair is a media whore. It appears he has to fill the void of admiration and personal closeness that most other people enjoy with their friends and family with simple hollow media attention. And when that fails to satisfy he can always fall back on controversy. The Hair has enjoyed a major ego stroking by attacking and battling others through the media. Well, this attack may have just backfired. Because the truth is in the stats. Let\’s look at who and WHEN he attacks.

1.Martha Stewart suffered some devastating set backs in recent years and the Hair was there.

2. Rosie O\’Donnell has recently come out of the closet, which for a large majority of this conservative nation was a move that has devastated her popularity – and again the Hair was there.

3. Number one Mavs fan and owner Mark Cuban\’s perennial contender, the Dallas Mavericks suffered a first round exit in the NBA playoffs – and look who\’s there: The Hair.

You know, it\’s interesting how transparent are some people\’s motives. I would not be surprised if The Hair sits up at the local NYC hospice waiting for widowed real estate holders to kick off so he can catch the titles to their properties before they hit the ground. This is the kind of person that no one would want to be around unless you paid them. Which explains why The Hair manages to attract so many to the auditions for his TV show The Disciple, I mean The Apprentice.

I guess a much simpler way of saying all this would be:

Who would YOU rather have a drink and watch the game with?

Regards,
Happy Days DVD