Comments on: ScoopLive Turns Us All into Paparazzi

By: Hits Singapore » Blog Archive » RealScoop Tells You When Politicians And Celebrities Are Lying

Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:15:48 +0000

[...] of the human voice and performs over 1,000 calculations per second to find out if a politician or celebrity is telling the truth. On Tuesday, RealScoop will cover the Vice Presidential debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden, [...]

By: RealScoop Tells You When Politicians And Celebrities Are Lying

RealScoop Tells You When Politicians And Celebrities Are Lying — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 04:57:03 +0000

By: The Scripts Zone » RealScoop Tells You When Politicians And Celebrities Are Lying

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:14:27 +0000

By: RealScoop Tells You When Politicians And Celebrities Are Lying | Web Data Source

Sun, 28 Sep 2008 21:54:34 +0000

[...] Dubbed the Believability Meter, RealScoop’s analysis technology analyzes over 100 vocal elements of the human voice and performs over 1,000 calculations per second to find out if a politician or celebrity is telling the truth. [...]

By: Get the Real Scoop when politicians are lying Vs. Giving you a fib. « My Discoveries on the Road to Prosper and Learn

Sun, 28 Sep 2008 18:27:28 +0000

By: RealScoop Tells You When Politicians And Celebrities Are Lying : VCsAndAngels - Venture Capital / VCs, Angel Investors, Startup News, Etc

Sun, 28 Sep 2008 14:47:13 +0000

By: RealScoop Tells You When Politicians And Celebrities Are Lying

RealScoop Tells You When Politicians And Celebrities Are Lying — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 14:12:27 +0000

By: Wat is het business model voor User Generated Content? (deel 3) by Martijn Staal.nl

Sat, 06 Oct 2007 14:46:49 +0000

[...] Hetzelfde zien we bij Skoeps en Omroep Brabant, die consumenten minstens 20 euro betalen voor de foto’s en video’s die worden doorverkocht aan traditionele media. Scooplive keert incidenteel zelfs vele duizenden dollars uit. [...]

By: Interview with The GoBig Network Founder, Wil Schroter »TechAddress

Interview with The GoBig Network Founder, Wil Schroter »TechAddress — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:39:18 +0000

[...] in Q4 which will push my interests in that segment. A while back I did a story on TechCrunch about ScoopLive that was providing an instant selling marketplace for user-submitted paparazzi photos. I just love [...]

By: Library clips :: Roundup : Voice2Page, Odiogo, wattpad, ScoopLive, UpScoop, Profilactic :: January :: 2007

Sat, 27 Jan 2007 08:50:49 +0000

[...] ScoopLive - make money from your photo’s, sounds like Scoopt, see more. [...]

By: Wil Schroter

Wil Schroter — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 03:04:20 +0000

Patricia- that’s a really good point. Let’s assume that initially the problem hasn’t changed - people can still post a picture of someone on their blog and sell ad space via Adsense without ScoopLive, thereby monetizing the picture in that manner.

But I think as citizen journalism becomes more popular (and mainstream) the notions of getting consent and owning up to the law are going to become far more apparent (which is probably a good thing). I think the Internet gets a whole lot of slack because it’s relatively new still (see what would happen if NBC started showing Family Guy episodes from Fox versus YouTube displaying them.)

I like the idea that companies like this are forcing the issues to the surface and I certainly agree with you that they are very serious.

By: Patricia

Patricia — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 21:50:50 +0000

@ Wil, I know what you’re saying. It still doesn’t mean you can actively photograph and film people who aren’t aware, without any notice, then publish online and monetize, though. We photograph people on the streets and are legally required to have each sign a release form - per our attorney - to ensure we can’t get sued later. When it’s a celebrity, that’s one thing - private citizens, though, I think might get a little sticky.

I would be interested in knowing how a site like this will protect the people feeding its content in the event that somebody files a lawsuit. I think if Girls Gone Wild can get sued by consenting people we can expect there to be a big backlash with non consenting consumers. There was a case not long ago of men using cell phones to take video and snap photos underneath the skirts of unsuspecting girls that I believe sparked a ban of photo and video use in malls, or something.

Just sayin’. Great idea - seems to have some bugs

By: Wil Schroter

Wil Schroter — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 19:58:35 +0000

Patricia - I think 5 - 10 years from now the idea of privacy will have changed significantly (whether we like it or not). It’s Pandora’s Box, so while we will continue to fight the change, the change is comnig and we are certainly going to have to learn how to deal with this environment.

By: Patricia

Patricia — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 19:36:29 +0000

Will it compete, then, with TMZ on the paparazzi/celebrity side? I would kind of like to see that.

This stuff creeps me out. At some point, I bet we’ll see a big crack down on people filming you without your consent - from my understanding, in many cities it’s illegal to - and on top of it, posting it to the Web?

It’ll take a while though. That’s for sure.

By: Tim Butterfield

Tim Butterfield — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 18:35:02 +0000

I just tried to registered, but ended up canceling out of the registration. Here are a few issues I saw:

1) The user agreement is French language only. While I speak a very small amount of French, it is nowhere near enough to sign/agree to a ‘legal’ document in that language. I do not yet trust online translation engines to correctly handle nuance. If they are paying attention, this should prevent most non-French reading users from registering.

2) It asks for birth date and location. Even though you can lie and put something else in, this seems problematic as it does not appear to have a valid use, at least for this US resident. After all, payments are via PayPal, which only requires the sender to know an email address. The worrisome part for me is that birth date and location can be used for purposes of identity theft (at least partially). Site security is a bit suspect as this information is not even sent through https. If even that cannot be done, how secure is the back end likely to be?

Count me out for now.

Tim

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:51:04 +0000

DEAR JAMES,

As you can see on the website, birthdate must be written like this : DD/MM/YYYY

There are choices to make when you develop a website and want it to be “International”. This is one of them.

Hundreds of people have registered today and didn’t mention any problem.

We are very sorry if you think we’ve wasted your time, and will try to make this point clear for everybody.

Best.

By: ClintJCL

ClintJCL — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:44:54 +0000

DON’T USE IT.
WASTE OF TIME.

Told me I couldn’t register because I’m under 18.

I’m 33.

I entered my birthday correctly.

Also wouldn’t register w/o a cellphone# — I DON’T HAVE A CELLPHONE, but I have pics I would maybe sell.

But not through these guys.

TechCrunch: If the registration form doesn’t even work yet, DON’T LINK TO IT.

What a waste of time.

By: Wil Schroter

Wil Schroter — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:23:24 +0000

@ Mingus - I inserted Mike into the cover as a joke, but your point is correct - people are going to continue to game the system of “what’s real”. We are to the point now where even video can be successfully manipulated. To suggest that fakes will destroy the service is an oversight, though. If that were the case fake auctions would have destroyed eBay years ago. Fake posts would have destroyed Craigslist. I think if there is more value in the positive than cost in the negative a service can succeed (though execution counts for a LOT!)

@ Andrew - good call on the translation. I hope Madonna and Arrington can sort out their domestic issues!

By: Blake

Blake — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:15:33 +0000

Michael: Ever notice that the common counter is off by one?

By: Mingus

Mingus — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:11:51 +0000

This is an invitation for the semi-skilled and talented digital artists to game this environment for profit. “Photoshop skills” are quite common today, and that extertise in video is getting more commonplace everyday.
The same way that Michael inserted himself into that magazine cover, others will create fakes whose verification will consume significant time and effort for the staff of these sites, damaging any value and credibility of the service.
There’s a reason we have professional celeb journalists - if they try to sell fakes, they get drummed out.

By: Roopan

Roopan — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:58:51 +0000

Personally, I am a big proponent of revenue models structured around user generated video. I think ScoopLive has something special here. It’s a great way to empower the citizen journalist to not only create content, but be on the lookout for and create GOOD content.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:45:46 +0000

It will be interesting to see how well ScoopLive performs versus some of it’s competitors. They’ll have to broker the sale of quite a few photos to really be successful. Even if they manage to sell a photo for $50K, they’ll probably only see about 10% of that (just a guess). That’s not much of a revenue stream and won’t be viable until they’re selling thousands of photos per month at that rate—not likely.

By: smith288

smith288 — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:12:10 +0000

@kula - stay classy

By: Kula bácsi

Kula bácsi — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:06:15 +0000

Retards read this kind of crap with dumbass stars and faggots kissing on the cover.

By: Yohay

Yohay — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 09:37:25 +0000

Citizen journalists have other channels of monetizing scoops when it comes to video. There are various video sharing sites that offer revenue sharing, or pay per view models.

I’m surprised that they weren’t mentioned here…