Published by Robert Scoble
I give you a front-row seat on the future. Focusing most of my efforts now on next-generation augmented reality and artificial intelligence, AKA "mixed reality."
SUBSCRIBE TO MY NEWSLETTER: http://clevermoe.com/scobleizer-news/
BUY OUR NEW BOOK: https://www.amazon.com/Fourth-Transformation-Robert-Scoble/dp/1539894444 "The Fourth Transformation: How augmented reality and artificial intelligence will change everything."
WATCH MY LATEST SPEECHES:
State of VR with Philip Rosedale (done in VR itself, very cool): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zAA1EVGUZU
At GEOINT, June 2017: http://trajectorymagazine.com/glimpse-new-world/
Augmented World Expo, June 2017: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4xHILvLD8E
At Leade.rs, April 2017: https://youtu.be/52_0JshgjXI
+++++++++++
BIO:
Scoble gives you a front-row seat on the future.
Literally. He had the first ride in the first Tesla. Siri was launched in his house. He's been the first to share all sorts of technologies and companies with you, from Flipboard to Pandora to Instagram.
Today he's focusing on mixed reality, AKA "next-generation augmented reality" which will include a new user interface for EVERYTHING in your life (IoT, Smart Cities, driverless cars, robots, drones, etc).
That's based on his view thanks to his past experience as futurist at Rackspace.
Best place to find Scoble? On his Facebook profile at https://www.facebook.com/RobertScoble
He has been a technology blogger since 2000, was one of five people who built Microsoft's Channel 9 video blog/community, worked at Fast Company Magazine running its TV efforts, and has been part of technology media businesses since 1993.
++++++++
SPEAKER PITCH:
Apple and Facebook now have revealed their Augmented Reality strategies, which means your business needs one too. Rely on Robert Scoble, the world's top authority on AR, to bring to your conference what businesses should do next.
SPEECH ABSTRACT #1:
TITLE: The Fourth Transformation: What's next in mixed reality (AR and AI) and the future of technology?
Here's an example of this talk at Leade.rs in Paris in April, 2017: https://youtu.be/52_0JshgjXI
Why "the Fourth Transformation?"
Soon we will have phones and glasses that do full on augmented reality. Everything you look at will potentially be augmented. This world is coming in late 2017 with a new iPhone from Apple, amongst other products. Microsoft is betting everything on its HoloLens glasses that do mixed reality and the industry is spending many billions of dollars in R&D and funding new companies like Magic Leap.
This future will be the user interface for IoT, Smart Cities, autonomous cars, robots, drones, and your TV.
This is a big deal and Robert will take you through what mixed reality is and how it will change every business.
Learn more about Robert's speaking style and contact his agent at http://odemanagement.com/robert-scoble/Robert-Scoble.html
++++++++
SPEECH ABSTRACT #2:
"The Next Two Clicks of Moore's Law."
Over the next four years, or two clicks of Moore's Law, a ton about our technology world will change. Scoble will bring you the best from his travels visiting R&D labs, startups, and innovators around the world.
He views the world through his rose-colored-mixed-reality glasses, which will be the new user interface for self driving cars, Smart Cities, IoT, and many other things in our world.
He'll send you off with some lessons for companies both large and small.
++++++++
SPEECH ABSTRACT #3:
"Personalized Meaning: What is Augmented Reality For?"
As we enter a far more technological world where even cars drive themselves, I predict we'll see a blowback toward the analog, more authentic world.
What role does augmented reality play in both worlds?
Get Scoble's insight into where augmented reality is going, see tons of real-world demos, and understand what he means by 'personalized meaning.'
CONTACT:
If you are looking to contact me, email is best: scobleizer@gmail.com.
++++++++
ENDORSEMENTS:
IZEA Top 25 Tech Influencers: https://izea.com/2017/07/07/25-top-tech-influencers/
Time: One of the top 140 Twitterers!
FT: One of the five most influential Twitterers!
Inc. Top 5 on list of Tech Power Players You Need to Know: http://www.inc.com/john-rampton/30-power-players-in-tech-you-need-to-know.html
Next Reality: #4 on top 50 AR influencer list: https://next.reality.news/news/nr50-next-realitys-50-people-watch-augmented-mixed-reality-0177454/
View all posts by Robert Scoble
Britney Spears had her son’s name trademarked because she wants to make more money from him and start a children’s clothing line. Does that mean her son Sean could lose the rights to hos own name one day?
LikeLike
Britney Spears had her son’s name trademarked because she wants to make more money from him and start a children’s clothing line. Does that mean her son Sean could lose the rights to hos own name one day?
LikeLike
Whoa! That’s a clever thought experiment in the wild!
It makes me wonder how “public” that trademark infringement/misuse has to be before action has to be taken.
For some time, I’ve been thinking about the problem of how the use of trademarks in private communications becomes a little twisty when those private communications are publicly searchable. Is it infringement if a recording of a private use (misuse) of a trademark becomes part of an archive that is then publicly accessible? In the old days no one would have paid attention (somebody feel free to let me know if filmmakers, authors, or historians are ever prosecuted for documenting incorrect trademark usage).
A one-on one interaction in SL, (or email) is clearly private, but how many participants makes it public? This is like the old “How many people in the to: line before it becomes a listserv?*”
Does requiring accounts and logins make something “private” and not “public”? If too many people have accounts, does that make it “public”? (e.g. Yahoo)
Some of the same stuff drifts in with the YouTube videos of young people dancing to copyrighted music. How public does it have to be to be a public performance, and who do you prosecute? The dancers? The guy holding the camera? The distribution site?
*or before you get to the center of a Tootsie Pop(tm)
-r.
Futher thoughts:
Money-for-products is kind of a red herring. Anything that could be considered compensation could be considered “commerce”. Like barter, or favorable download ratios. C.E. Petit mentions this briefly on his blawg, Scrivener’s Error, but I can’t chase down the reference on this.
Anyway, the upshot is that “it’s not for profit” isn’t a defense for trademark or copyright infringment, even though we all really wish it was.
Facinating stuff. Thanks Mr. Scobelizer.
LikeLike
Whoa! That’s a clever thought experiment in the wild!
It makes me wonder how “public” that trademark infringement/misuse has to be before action has to be taken.
For some time, I’ve been thinking about the problem of how the use of trademarks in private communications becomes a little twisty when those private communications are publicly searchable. Is it infringement if a recording of a private use (misuse) of a trademark becomes part of an archive that is then publicly accessible? In the old days no one would have paid attention (somebody feel free to let me know if filmmakers, authors, or historians are ever prosecuted for documenting incorrect trademark usage).
A one-on one interaction in SL, (or email) is clearly private, but how many participants makes it public? This is like the old “How many people in the to: line before it becomes a listserv?*”
Does requiring accounts and logins make something “private” and not “public”? If too many people have accounts, does that make it “public”? (e.g. Yahoo)
Some of the same stuff drifts in with the YouTube videos of young people dancing to copyrighted music. How public does it have to be to be a public performance, and who do you prosecute? The dancers? The guy holding the camera? The distribution site?
*or before you get to the center of a Tootsie Pop(tm)
-r.
Futher thoughts:
Money-for-products is kind of a red herring. Anything that could be considered compensation could be considered “commerce”. Like barter, or favorable download ratios. C.E. Petit mentions this briefly on his blawg, Scrivener’s Error, but I can’t chase down the reference on this.
Anyway, the upshot is that “it’s not for profit” isn’t a defense for trademark or copyright infringment, even though we all really wish it was.
Facinating stuff. Thanks Mr. Scobelizer.
LikeLike
Robert, I know your new company is PodTech, but you’ve blogged a bunch about Second Life, and I think you also mentioned you’d be working with the Second Life guys – can you say anything about those plans? Is there a relationship between Second Life and PodTech? I think a 3D future for the Internet coming fast, and that maybe Second Life is the best example of that yet, so I can also see some possible connection with Web 2.0. You’re going to be working on the committee around Web 2.0 standards? Cool! All fun stuff to think and talk about, eh? Food for a future blog entry?
LikeLike
Robert, I know your new company is PodTech, but you’ve blogged a bunch about Second Life, and I think you also mentioned you’d be working with the Second Life guys – can you say anything about those plans? Is there a relationship between Second Life and PodTech? I think a 3D future for the Internet coming fast, and that maybe Second Life is the best example of that yet, so I can also see some possible connection with Web 2.0. You’re going to be working on the committee around Web 2.0 standards? Cool! All fun stuff to think and talk about, eh? Food for a future blog entry?
LikeLike
Robert, I am seeing that Virtual Worlds are now being intesected with real world v$$ value. This will certainly have some legal issues on trademarks.
In fact I stumbled across a secondary “Supply Chain” that was ported into WoW , where actually movement of virtual items sold is being modeled into virtual supply chain reality.
LikeLike
Robert, I am seeing that Virtual Worlds are now being intesected with real world v$$ value. This will certainly have some legal issues on trademarks.
In fact I stumbled across a secondary “Supply Chain” that was ported into WoW , where actually movement of virtual items sold is being modeled into virtual supply chain reality.
LikeLike
I don’t see how this is any more a problem in SL than anywhere else. Apple logos appear all over the place in the Internet. For the moment, the only thing unique about the occurrences in SL is that you can’t do a Google search to find them.
I am not a lawyer, but I don’t think the requirement that you defend your trademark means that you must defend each and every violation. These days that would be impossible. What you CAN’T do, as I understand it, is to simply ignore violations for years at a time and then suddenly take an interest again.
SL (Linden Labs) has had a commitment to paying close attention to trademark/copyright issues from the beginning, with details of implementation to follow. Like a lot of things in SL, it is a work in progress. They do a fair amount of planning and make public their “roadmaps” for future work to a greater extent than many companies (Microsoft, Adobe, Apple being examples of companies that value secrecy for their own products while espousing the need for “roadmaps” from everyone else).
A good example of this was that the company promised a Linux version of SL early on. I think many had given up hope that such a thing would ever come to be, especially when an OS X version suddenly appeared. That OS X version in fact was the deciding factor in my switching to an Apple computer for much of my online activities, and formating Windows out of existence on my older Intel PCs. Now that Apple has switched to Intel (how ironic) there is a good chance that my next PC will NOT be an Apple (why bother?) and I’ll just get the best value Intel/AMD box I can find and run Linux on it. There is a good chance that SL will run on such a machine.
Linden labs has been good as their word in honoring their early promises, even in some cases when they didn’t quite know how they were going to do it in advance. I’m sure the trademark/copyright issue will be the same. There is (probably) no way to fully automate detection of violations in SL any more than such detection can be automated on the Internet as a whole. Does Cafe Press inspect every T-shirt they print with a magnifying glass before it is mailed out? I suspect not. It will continue to be the responsibility of copyright/trademark holders to detect violations and use the existing laws to warn/prosecute violators. About all SL can do is to expedite deletion when such violations are found. I think they are already doing this.
LikeLike
I don’t see how this is any more a problem in SL than anywhere else. Apple logos appear all over the place in the Internet. For the moment, the only thing unique about the occurrences in SL is that you can’t do a Google search to find them.
I am not a lawyer, but I don’t think the requirement that you defend your trademark means that you must defend each and every violation. These days that would be impossible. What you CAN’T do, as I understand it, is to simply ignore violations for years at a time and then suddenly take an interest again.
SL (Linden Labs) has had a commitment to paying close attention to trademark/copyright issues from the beginning, with details of implementation to follow. Like a lot of things in SL, it is a work in progress. They do a fair amount of planning and make public their “roadmaps” for future work to a greater extent than many companies (Microsoft, Adobe, Apple being examples of companies that value secrecy for their own products while espousing the need for “roadmaps” from everyone else).
A good example of this was that the company promised a Linux version of SL early on. I think many had given up hope that such a thing would ever come to be, especially when an OS X version suddenly appeared. That OS X version in fact was the deciding factor in my switching to an Apple computer for much of my online activities, and formating Windows out of existence on my older Intel PCs. Now that Apple has switched to Intel (how ironic) there is a good chance that my next PC will NOT be an Apple (why bother?) and I’ll just get the best value Intel/AMD box I can find and run Linux on it. There is a good chance that SL will run on such a machine.
Linden labs has been good as their word in honoring their early promises, even in some cases when they didn’t quite know how they were going to do it in advance. I’m sure the trademark/copyright issue will be the same. There is (probably) no way to fully automate detection of violations in SL any more than such detection can be automated on the Internet as a whole. Does Cafe Press inspect every T-shirt they print with a magnifying glass before it is mailed out? I suspect not. It will continue to be the responsibility of copyright/trademark holders to detect violations and use the existing laws to warn/prosecute violators. About all SL can do is to expedite deletion when such violations are found. I think they are already doing this.
LikeLike
Like it or not,
Property law will come to the virtual worlds. Trademarks can only be used by their owners. Designed objects sold by their owners or agreed agents, This goes for all representations and derived works as well-plastic/paper/or pixels. SLers can’t legually make and sell virtual “Apple designs and logoed” products.
theymay claim “fair use” for non commercial exhibits of such models, BUT SL as a for profit company, will have to answer to Apple, if they wanted to move to have these objects removed.
While browsing a “SL boutique”, i saw Houses by a “REM KOOLHAUS” – now i gotta think these designs were not from the actual REM studio…and if not, they gottta be pulled- or else all others who create and design original properties for others will be affected.
The bottom line is that professionals who create products need to be paid. And that websites that “profit” via advertising or subscribers shouldnt allow these types of legal violations to occur.
and when they do, thats what the courts are for.
larryr
cube3
LikeLike
Like it or not,
Property law will come to the virtual worlds. Trademarks can only be used by their owners. Designed objects sold by their owners or agreed agents, This goes for all representations and derived works as well-plastic/paper/or pixels. SLers can’t legually make and sell virtual “Apple designs and logoed” products.
theymay claim “fair use” for non commercial exhibits of such models, BUT SL as a for profit company, will have to answer to Apple, if they wanted to move to have these objects removed.
While browsing a “SL boutique”, i saw Houses by a “REM KOOLHAUS” – now i gotta think these designs were not from the actual REM studio…and if not, they gottta be pulled- or else all others who create and design original properties for others will be affected.
The bottom line is that professionals who create products need to be paid. And that websites that “profit” via advertising or subscribers shouldnt allow these types of legal violations to occur.
and when they do, thats what the courts are for.
larryr
cube3
LikeLike
Oh, I definitely think that there will be a couple of trademark infringement suits stemming from things like Second Life at some point in the near future. It might not be from a high-profile corp, but it will happen.
LikeLike
Oh, I definitely think that there will be a couple of trademark infringement suits stemming from things like Second Life at some point in the near future. It might not be from a high-profile corp, but it will happen.
LikeLike
What, no Lawyers in Second Life?
LikeLike
What, no Lawyers in Second Life?
LikeLike
Smart answer to Robert’s question: should the trademarks in an mmporg be treated differently then, say, the trademarks on props in a model railroad set, or toy food in a playset? generally speaking, a die cast car or a toy railroad train or play food, is just one more piece of branded merchandise. If a company sells virtual Apple computers in an mmporg, why would it not be considered branded merchandise?
Please note that I distnguish merchandise for sale in the virtual world, from merchandise that the user creates for his or her own use – such as the avatars in the City of Heroes case.
LikeLike
Smart answer to Robert’s question: should the trademarks in an mmporg be treated differently then, say, the trademarks on props in a model railroad set, or toy food in a playset? generally speaking, a die cast car or a toy railroad train or play food, is just one more piece of branded merchandise. If a company sells virtual Apple computers in an mmporg, why would it not be considered branded merchandise?
Please note that I distnguish merchandise for sale in the virtual world, from merchandise that the user creates for his or her own use – such as the avatars in the City of Heroes case.
LikeLike
Now the big question is then who owns this “virtual mac”, developers of second life, Scobleizer’s son, or Apple?
LikeLike
Now the big question is then who owns this “virtual mac”, developers of second life, Scobleizer’s son, or Apple?
LikeLike