Exclusive Video: Will Degrassi's Carol J. Reach Promenade?

Charlotte now Arnold Degrassi's Carol J. Sinclair(Charlotte now Arnold)has already established a difficult senior year. After being identified with kidney failure and subsequently learning she was utilized, now it appears our prime school senior will need to miss promenade to possess surgery. Fortunately, Holly's closest friend Fiona (Annie Clark) includes a intend to cheer herup. Is Degrassi in your Watchlist? Add it as well as your other faves now and not miss a chapter Within the exclusive clip below from Tuesday's episode,"Have a Bow Part 2,"see what Fiona has cooked up. Degrassi: Now or Never airs Monday through Thursday at 9/8c on TeenNick.

X-Men: First Class Full Movie

Nine Lives

The film happens throughout The Second World War and represents the real story of Jan Baalsruds amazing avoid the German military in the coast of Northern Norwegian and over the border towards the neutral country Sweden. Jan Baalsrud is on the sabotage mission from England to Norwegian as well as 11 other soldiers during the cold months of 1943 inside a fishing-boat when they're assaulted with a German patrolboat. Jan Baalsrud is the only person who handles to flee and sparks towards Sweden with the large numbers of snow and also the steep mountain tops of Norwegian. The neighborhood towns where he passes through help him despite the possibility of being arrested and wiped out. Jan Baalsrud, snowblind and needing to stop his toes due to frost-damage survives alone within the mountain tops for days. The local people are constantly looking to get him to Sweden, but German patrols and also the winter storms delay their departure.

The Hangover 2 Online Free

Google TV Launching In Europe Early 2012: Transcript Of CEO Eric Schmidt UK Lecture

Google TV CEO Eric Schmidt was the keynote speaker at the Edinburgh International TV Festivalas he substituted forShine Group founder Elisabeth Murdoch. During Friday’s MacTaggart Lecture (transcript below), given for the first time by a television industry outsider, Schmidt said Google TV plans to launch in Europe early next year, with the UK a top priority. Many more partners are expected to join the fledgling TV service soon, Schmidt said, and the company is”absolutely committed” to its fledglingsmall tube business which allows viewers to mix web and television content on TV screens via a browser. He said U.S. networks who balked at Google TV earlier this year still aren’t on board, and he hopes the service won’t face a similar problem in Europe. In his keynote, Schmidt also named three trends to watch: mobile, local, and social — a nod to Google’s recent acquisition of Motorola Mobility as well as a desire to personalize TV content and services. “Soon, your typical Internet users wont be indoors with a PC; theyll be out and about on their cell phone,” Schmidt said. “Reflecting this, new genres of online content and services are emerging. If content is king, context is its crown. … And if you think all this is exciting, or frightening, remember, this is only the beginning. In technological terms, were scarcely at the end of the first act of the Internet age.” Below is the transcript of Schmidt’s speech: I understand this is the first time the MacTaggart has been given by someone not employed in Television broadcasting or production. Im not sure whether that means the bar has been raised or lowered, but Ill do my best! Its a huge honour to be invited to speak on such a prestigious occasion, especially as an industry outsider. When he spoke here two years ago, James Murdoch described himself as the crazy relative everyone is embarrassed by. I wonder what hed call himself now. If James is the family outcast, Im not sure what that makes me. The geek in the corner?… the alien species?… the Android? Dont worry though, I promise Im not a croak-voiced dalek. Charles Allen called the MacTaggart the longest job application in the industry. Its very kind of you to think of me, but Im still fully committed to Google. All thats changed is that Larry now has the keys to the Google Tardis. I promise Ill stop the Dr Who quips soon – although in this case it is pretty apt. We have a private joke at Google that Larry is actually from the future. Im especially indebted to Mark Thompson – who gave last years lecture – for his tips on what makes a classic MacTaggart. The recipe boils down to anger and arch-villains, impossible proposals and insults. Im not sure about anger, but Ill do my best to come up with the rest. Mark even identified candidates for demonising – usually a choice between the BBC and Murdoch. I must say how refreshing it is that Google isnt on that list! But I dont kid myself – I know some of you have suspicions about Google. Some of you blame us for the havoc wreaked on your business by the Internet. Some accuse us of being irresponsible, uncaring, and worse. Today Ill aim to set the record straight on those points, and demonstrate why we can and should be optimistic about Televisions future, if we work together. But first, a little about my industry. Peter Fincham said this lecture is the closest most TV people get to going to church. Well, I am a tech evangelist from way back, so Ill take any excuse to preach about the Internet. Why the Internet matters In less than 30 years, the Internet has grown from almost nothing to more than 2 billion users. Its available on Mount Everest, and on the South Pole. Half of adults in the EU use it every day. It has become such a profound part of life that 4 in 5 adults worldwide now regard Internet access as a fundamental human right. Today its hard to imagine life without it. We take it for granted, but its worth reminding ourselves just what an incredible force for good it has been. Without the Internet, a child growing up in a remote village is unlikely to reach their potential, with little access to books and teaching. Without the Internet, people worldwide couldnt band together so quickly in a crisis, helping raise the alarm and deliver support. Without the Internet, repressive regimes can deny their people a voice, making it far harder to expose corruption and wrongdoing. And without the Internet, Europe would lose one of its biggest drivers of much-needed economic growth. In the UK alone, the Internet accounted for over 7% of GDP in 2010 – 100 billion pounds – and that will grow to 10% by 2015. Companies who use the Internet are growing four times faster than those who arent. In short: the Internet isnt making inevitable change faster; it has become an engine of change. It has recast the way we communicate. It has transformed the way we learn and share knowledge. Its empowering people everywhere, making the world more open, fairer, and more prosperous. Just think how far weve already come. I encountered my first computer back in high school. It was enormous and clunky. Today, my smartphone is a hundred thousand times faster than my high school computer, and it fits in my pocket. To relay information to my first computer you had to punch holes in cards. Today, I can just talk to my phone, or point its camera, or even tilt it, and it understands. When I started working in computer science we had big dreams, but technology couldnt deliver them. I remember being blown away by Douglas Engelbarts famous demo from 1968 where he showed off an experimental prototype – for a mouse! It was utter science fiction to imagine that one day a computer might be able to respond to your facial expression or decipher the nuances of human behaviour. These represent some of the hardest problems in computer science and today theyre being cracked. In the past year alone, weve passed some incredible computer science milestones. In October, Google demoed self driving cars which use huge computing power to see other traffic and navigate the roads safely. In November, Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT) released Kinect for XBox, breaking new ground in gesture and facial recognition. In February, IBMs Watson became the first computer to cope with the complex grammar and trick questions to win the TV quiz show Jeopardy. Of course, while Im optimistic that computer science and the Internet are forces for good, Im not naive. As JFK put it, Im an idealist without illusions. There are many challenges were still grappling to address. For instance: how do we make the world more open while still respecting privacy? How do we empower people without provoking anarchy? How do we ensure technology enriches rather than devalues relationships and culture? These are important questions, but they arent new. When the printing press was developed in the 15th century, some worried about information overload. Critics of the telephone fretted about private conversations being overheard. When radio was introduced, concerns were raised about it distracting children from reading. Such fears seemed perfectly reasonable at the time, but eventually they disappeared as attitudes and technology evolved. I expect the same thing will happen with the Internet. Its benefits are too great and it is too widely embraced to turn away from now. The Internet is fundamental to the future of TV So what has all this got to do with Television? In 2010, UK adults spent as much time watching TV in 4 days as they did using the web in a month. TV is still clearly winning the competition for attention! Yet, you ignore the Internet at your peril. The Internet is fundamental to the future of Television for one simple reason: because its what people want. Technologically, the Internet is a platform for things that traditional TV cannot support. It makes TV more personal, more participative, more pertinent. People are clamouring for it, nowhere more so than the UK. The team behind the BBCs iPlayer has my utmost respect. I believe its now used by more than 10% of the UK population every week. Its a great product with a vast range of content, more advanced than any other market. And theyve just launched a European version – soon to be global – as an iPad subscription app. Im sure itll be a success. I have just one request: please hurry up and make an Android version too! Of course, iPlayer isnt the only show in town. There are numerous catch-up and on-demand TV services out there, including the most global of them all – iTunes. And YouTube now has long-form content thanks to pioneering partners like Channel 4, who in 2009 became the first broadcaster in the world to put up their full catch-up service. Long-form is the fastest growing YouTube category in the UK both in terms of views and revenues, now with more than 80 content partners. But more choice is just the beginning, and can backfire if youre not careful. Just remember how it felt in the old days of renting videos. Face-to-face with thousands of movies, picking just one to take home was always a struggle. Thats why a system for recommending content is so vital. Its what channel schedulers have done since the beginning of TV. But traditional scheduling is one size fits all. Sometimes their recommendations suit me, but just as often not. Online – for those who wish it and grant permission – things could be vastly different. Online, through a combination of algorithms and editorial nudges, suggestions could be individually crafted to suit your interests and needs. The more you watch and share, the more chances the system has to learn, and the better its predictions get. Taken to the ultimate, it would be like the perfect TV channel: always exciting, always relevant – sometimes serendipitous – always worth your time. Weve already had a glimpse of the power of recommendations to sway viewing with Netflix (NSDQ: NFLX). Around 60% of Netflix rentals are a result of algorithmically generated recommendations. Another example is Amazon (NSDQ: AMZN). Their recommendations – like others who bought this also bought – are incredibly compelling, and in recent years have accounted for between 20 and 30% of their sales. But delivering on the promise of personalisation is tricky, both technologically and culturally. Personalisation requires data: the more the better. As Ive learned first-hand, any online service that involves personal data will be a magnet for privacy fears. It will be vital to strike the right balance, so people feel comfortable and in control, not disconcerted by the eerie accuracy of suggestions. This is new territory for your industry, and dont underestimate the challenge. More generally, doubts have been raised over whether personalisation to this extent is even desirable for society. Theres a fear that filters will become so narrow, well wind up living in a bubble of our own prejudice. Of course, that would be a bad outcome, but I dont think itll happen. The best filters – like the best TV channels – will always have an element of serendipity built in by design. Besides – in practical terms – whats the alternative? Without some form of filtering, we would drown in information. So the real question is, if not personalisation, what kind of filtering should we have? The nanny model where someone else has the power to dictate what you should and shouldnt see? Or the lucky dip model where things are plucked out at random? To my mind, both these alternatives to personalisation are far worse. Ive talked about how the Internet is transforming TV choice. Equally important are changes in how we watch. I remember the excitement about interactive TV a few years ago – all that drama over pushing a red button. There were a few neat experiences on offer, like playing along with a game show. But on the whole, red button style interaction was pretty limited. Now were riding a second, much bigger, wave of interactivity. Its a convergence of TV and Internet screens. This time the interaction isnt happening via your red button – its on the web through your laptop, tablet or mobile. But most important of all, this time its social. For some shows, the online commentary that swirls around them – be it through Twitter or chat forums or blogs – has become a crucial part of the experience. Just consider how the BBCs Question Time (NYSE: TWX) is using Twitter to engage audiences. Once you could only shout at the politicians on your screen, now you can tweet your rant to the world. Adding a social layer to TV shows will increase. Among Google Pluss coolest features are group video chats called Hangouts. Watching YouTube videos in Hangouts is like being in the same room. While the video plays you can chat over the top, or text notes on the side. Anyone in the hangout can grab the controls to pause, rewind or fast forward, or even skip to a new clip, and it keeps the video playing in sync for everyone. A social layer is something viewers – or at least a substantial number – clearly want. Its also great for broadcasters. Trending hashtags raise awareness of shows, helping boost ratings. It can be metric for viewer engagement, a vehicle for instant feedback, a channel for reaching people outside broadcast times. It can also provide a great incentive for watching live. In fact, I dont expect TV viewing will ever switch to be entirely to on-demand. There will always be a cultural pull, for some shows, on some occasions, to watch in real-time. Linear viewing remains remarkably robust – in 2010, over 90% of broadcast TV viewing remained live. But I sense the default mode of viewing will inexorably shift. Try forcing a 6 year old whos grown up on DVRs to only watch live TV. Once youre used to such things, its hard to give them up – no pause, no rewind, no choice. Already, in homes with Sky Plus, its claimed nearly 20% of viewing is timeshifted. There are hints too of shifts if you look beyond the headline figures, particularly for shows that appeal to a younger demographic. Its said more people watch ITVs hit show The Only Way is Essex online than on TV – although I confess I havent seen it myself. And despite almost every broadcast outlet showing the footage, the Royal Wedding was live-streamed 72 million times on YouTube with viewers in 188 countries. So, what are the trends to watch? I can sum that up in 3 words: mobile, local and social. Already, mobile search traffic on Google surpasses that from desktop in some countries. Globally, 40% of Google Maps usage is via mobile. Two hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute from mobile devices. Soon, your typical Internet user wont be indoors with a PC; theyll be out and about on their cell phone. Reflecting this, new genres of online content and services are emerging. If content is king, context is its crown – and one of the most important contextual signals is location. If you search for coffee from your mobile, odds are youre looking not for a Wikipedia entry, but for directions to a nearby cafe. Social signals are another powerful driver of behaviour. If three of my friends highly rate a TV series, odds are Id check it out even if reviewers say its rubbish. Were just at the earliest stage of learning how best to use social signals and other taste indicators to provide more personalised content and services. And if you think all this is exciting – or frightening – remember, this is only the beginning. In technological terms, were scarcely at the end of the first act of the Internet age. Challenge begets opportunity Now, I get that all this represents a big upheaval for your industry. I know what that feels like. I was there at the birth of microcomputing. I helped Google change direction to develop for mobile first. I didnt get social networking as fast as I should have done. But if any industry is poised to rise to the challenge, it is yours. Your creative talent is unrivalled. Your independent producers are famed for their entrepreneurial zeal. Your managers have fought hard battles for efficiency, and won. Britains TV industry has an unparalleled global reputation, including journalism, comedy and drama. You cant turn the clock back – and even if you could, why would you when you have such strengths. The opportunities are ripe for the taking. Case in point: sales of digital downloads. Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) have over 200 million customers with accounts tied to credit cards, enabling one-click purchase in the iTunes store. Amazon havent released their figures but its got to be a similar ballpark. Thanks to the Internet, its far easier than ever before for content owners to sell to a global market. And of course, dont forget that the UK is per capita the e-commerce capital of the world. More generally, think about what on-demand means for traditional business models. Most TV channels seem to practice a drip-feed approach to releasing content. But in an on-demand world thats outdated. Netflix get this. In March they outbid the networks to win exclusive rights to screen the US version of House of Cards, and plan to make episodes available in clusters rather than one a week. Consider too the way first-run airings attract an ad premium. Thats a less relevant distinction as viewers shift to watch on their own schedule. If its the first time you watch a show, its first run to you, no matter how many times it has been broadcast. As TV becomes more personalised, ad models should adjust accordingly. Of course, doing this also requires new processes – not least changes in the way TV viewing and ad effectiveness is measured. To that end, Google – and others – are investing in research to better understand how viewers are consuming TV and the web across multiple platforms. In the UK we have recently teamed up with Kantar to create a single source research panel to measure web and TV habits. There are big opportunities for creative processes as well. For instance, recognise the new freedoms on-demand allows for storytelling. As David Simon, writer of the Wire, put it, TV is no longer an appointment, its a lending library. You no longer need worry about your audience missing episodes, theyll watch at their own pace. This frees writers to craft more complex stories, with less time wasted on signposted plot reminders for those whove missed an episode. And dont underestimate the Internets potential as a venue for talent spotting. More than 48 hours of content is uploaded to YouTube every minute. To put that in context, it means more video is uploaded in under a month than all 3 major US networks broadcast in the last 60 years. Amidst the avalanche, the next generation of creativity can be, and is being, found. Perhaps most exciting of all, at least for a technologist like me, are the opportunities to integrate content across multiple screens and devices. Google is exploring this with some of our experimental apps for mobile. For instance, you can use your phone to control YouTube videos watched on a bigger screen, and receive background information on each video while it plays. There are clever mobile apps, like IntoNow, that identify a TV show youre watching from its audio fingerprint and make it easy to share with your friends. And Im fascinated by the BBCs notion of orchestrated media – where the show youre watching triggers extra material on your tablet or mobile, synchronised with the programme. Lessons from history Of course, no matter what I say there will always be some who fear the Internet is set to destroy everything. Thats nothing new. Almost every invention that has reinvigorated and helped the media industry thrive was at first forecast to destroy it. In the 1920s and 30s, US newspapers fought a fierce campaign to prevent radio from news gathering, terrified it would drive them out of business. They eventually lost – and it didnt matter, as newspapers retained their influence and continued to rake in profits. Years later they had a new target. Newspaper editors said, and I quote, I look upon them as parasites and they should handle their own news instead of cashing in on our brains and experience. Sound familiar? In fact, these quotes werent aimed at Google. Theyre from 1957, as newspapers complained about TV muscling in on their news turf. Again their fears proved unfounded. Or how about Hollywood? In 1982, Jack Valenti compared the VCR to the Boston Strangler. The calamity he predicted never happened: by 2005, DVD sales alone accounted for more than half of studio revenues. As Sumner Redstone later put it, home video was the bonanza that saved Hollywood from bankruptcy. A decade ago Jamie Kelner lambasted TiVo (NSDQ: TIVO) for letting viewers steal TV by skipping ads. Its now looking like DVRs could be a saviour, providing second-by-second ratings and helping broadcast TV compete in an on-demand world. Take heart from these parallels. History shows that in the face of new technology, those who adapt their business models dont just survive, they prosper. Technology advances, and no laws can preserve markets that have been passed by. Listen to the entrepreneurs, not the lawyers, if you want to revitalise your business. The onus is thus on you as producers and managers to develop business models that work in the digital age. It wont be easy – but Im convinced it is possible. In fact, like Sumner and VCRs, I wouldnt be surprised if you look back in 20 years time and say the Internet is the best thing that ever happened to your industry. If you dont believe me, just consider how attitudes have shifted towards Netflix. Last year, the US TV establishment was skeptical, and in some cases hostile towards them. Chase Carey, COO of News Corp. (NSDQ: NWS) questioned whether Netflix was giving them fair value. Jeff Bewkes, the CEO of Time Warner compared them to the Albanian army hopelessly trying to take over the world – while Les Moonves, CEO of CBS (NYSE: CBS), was on the fence. A year later and there has been a complete about face. Chase says Netflix provides truly incremental value. Jeff admits hes now fond of them and calls them a welcome addition to the video market. Les praises them as a terrific business partner. The golden age is coming In his 2007 MacTaggart, Jeremy Paxman dismissed the notion there was ever a golden age for TV. As a TV watcher, I respectfully disagree. As Jeff Bewkes and others pointed out in Cannes this year, I think were on the cusp of a golden age now. A vast choice, made manageable by a magical guide, ensuring theres always something wonderful to watch. The option to sit back or lean forward, to watch alone or chat with a community of viewers. Even more importantly for you, the UK is well-primed to lead the way. The UKs production talent is unsurpassed. Its pioneering formats have sold worldwide and become global smashes. The UK is home to one of the worlds most competitive commercial broadcasters, Sky, with the courage, ambition and deep pockets to innovate. In 2010 Sky invested almost as much on original content as Channels 4 and 5 combined. Perhaps heeding Marks call in last years lecture – or perhaps not – Sky is upping its content investment by more than 50% to 600m by 2014. Theres no doubt that theyll be a formidable player in the online TV revolution. ITV (LSE: ITV) too appear in strong shape as they restructure for the digital age, with profits up 45% in the first half of this year – a tremendous feat amidst economic downturn. And of course, you have the BBC. Not just the worlds best public service broadcaster, but arguably the most creative and technologically innovative of all. After the necessary pruning, the long-term settlement means the BBC can count on what to anyone would be a mouth watering income stream. It has a recognised and admired brand globally – just imagine live-streaming the Proms to 2 billion people! The world is the BBCs oyster. So what could go wrong? Well, everything. If I may be so impolite (and heres the insult Mark advised I throw in) your track record isnt great! The UK is the home of so many media-related inventions. You invented photography. You invented TV. You invented computers in both concept and practice. (Its not widely known, but the worlds first office computer was built in 1951 by Lyons chain of tea shops!) Yet today, none of the worlds leading exponents in these fields are from the UK. So how can you avoid the same fate for your TV innovations? Of course there is no simple fix, but I have a few suggestions. First: you need to bring art and science back together. Think back to the glory days of the Victorian era. It was a time when the same people wrote poetry and built bridges. Lewis Carroll didnt just write one of the classic fairytales of all time, he was also a mathematics tutor at Oxford. James Clerk Maxwell was described by Einstein as among the best physicists since Newton – but was also a published poet. Over the past century the UK has stopped nurturing its polymaths. Theres been a drift to the humanities – engineering and science arent championed. Even worse, both sides seem to denigrate the other – to use what Im told is the local vernacular, youre either a luvvy or a boffin. To change that you need to start at the beginning with education. We need to reignite childrens passion for science, engineering and maths. In the 1980s the BBC not only broadcast programming for kids about coding, but (in partnership with Acorn) shipped over a million BBC Micro computers into schools and homes. That was a fabulous initiative, but its long gone. I was flabbergasted to learn that today computer science isnt even taught as standard in UK schools. Your IT curriculum focuses on teaching how to use software, but gives no insight into how its made. That is just throwing away your great computing heritage. At college-level too, the UK needs to provide more encouragement and opportunity for people to study science and engineering. In June, President Obama announced a programme to train 10,000 more engineers a year. I hope others will follow suit – the world needs more engineers. I saw the other day that on The Apprentice Alan Sugar said engineers are no good at business. Really? I dont think weve done too badly! If the UKs creative businesses want to thrive in the digital future, you need people who understand all facets of it integrated from the very beginning. Take a lead from the Victorians and ignore Lord Sugar: bring engineers into your company at all levels, including the top. Second: you need to get better at growing big companies. The UK does a great job at backing small firms and cottage industries. But theres little point getting a thousand seeds to sprout if theyre then left to wither or get transplanted overseas. UK businesses need championing to help them grow into global powerhouses, without having to sell out to foreign-owned companies. If you dont address this, then the UK will continue to be where inventions are born – but not bred for long-term success. You also need to get smarter about how to bridge the divide between public and commercial sectors, to get the most from your public sector innovations. The iPlayer is a case in point. Its a great product. It would be even better if it extended to more channels, as was attempted with Kangaroo. But despite several valiant attempts, clever lobbying resulted in regulators blocking it – seemingly on the basis that it would be too successful! I know hope lives on in the guise of YouView. But even if YouView meets its revised timetable of launching in 2012, youll still have thrown away several years when the UK could have been in the lead – a lifetime technologically. Friend not foe While Im being critical, this is as good a moment as any to address the criticisms levelled at Google I referred to earlier. One I face a lot is that were big, scary and trying to take over the world. It takes many forms. In January, Luke Johnson claimed just as Rockefellers Standard Oil was an oppressive enterprise that became so powerful it had to be broken up for the public good – so I believe Google must be seriously tackled in the national interest. Earlier, Professor Willem Buiter said that we should be regulated rigorously, defanged and if necessary, broken up or put out of business. And of course, were currently the subject of antitrust investigations in both the US and Europe. Obviously, I dont share these views, although I respect those who feel a debate is necessary. Its only natural that with success comes scrutiny. That said, its hard not to perceive an undercurrent of protectionism in some of the attacks. As John Fingleton of the Office of Fair Trading put it: while lots of people have talked to us about harm to competitors, nobody has articulated to us harm to consumers. That is the key. Consumers are the ones in the driving seat – all were doing is hitching a ride; and the door is open to anyone. Online, competition is only ever a click away, and there is more of it than ever. As history has shown, its common for once-leading online services to become out-innovated and overtaken. Our rivals are formidable innovators and who knows what new start-up stars will join the fray. As Tolstoy put it, youve just had time to think I have conquered when you are ready to fall in the ditch. In light of this, Googles survival strategy is to place big bets on technology trends. Placing big bets might sound risky but given the pace of change, we think its the only logical approach. Not every bet will succeed, but its safer to aim too high than too low; to strive for game changing progress than to fiddle at the margins. Its better to launch and iterate; to fail fast and learn from your mistakes, than to spend years in planning and end up miles off the pace. Unfortunately, one of the downsides of this approach is it can be disruptive. At times weve inadvertently made things worse, by sharing our delight in innovations without appreciating others discomfort. For that I apologise. I dont think well ever stop ruffling feathers – thats an occupational hazard of innovation. But I do hope were now sufficiently engaged in industry conversations to be sensitive and responsive to concerns. Google TV is a case in point. When it launched, some in the US feared we aimed to compete with broadcasters or content creators. Actually our intent is the opposite. We seek to support the content industry by providing an open platform for the next generation of TV to evolve, the same way Android is an open platform for the next generation of mobile. Just as smartphones sparked a whole new era of innovation for the Internet, we hope Google TV can help do the same for Television, creating more value for all. We expect Google TV to launch in Europe early next year, and of course the UK will be among the top priorities. Which leads me to the second barb thrown at us. Weve sometimes been accused of living off the back of others content and not paying our way, by everyone from Michael Grade to Rupert Murdoch. Perhaps the most colourful phrasing came from the Murdoch camp who called us parasites or tech tapeworms in the intestines of the Internet. But Andy Duncan summed it up most succinctly, saying: Google takes more ad revenue out of the UK than ITV makes It isnt fair that its not reinvesting that back into content and independent film production companies in the UK. Some have suggested Google should invest directly in TV content. To argue that misunderstands a key point: Google is a technology company. We provide platforms for people to engage with content and, through automated software, we show ads next to content that owners have chosen to put up. But we have neither the ambition nor the know-how to actually produce content on a large scale. Trust me, if you gave people at Google free rein to produce TV youd end up with a lot of bad sci-fi! But of course we are helping to fund content. Last year we shared more than $6 billion with our publishing partners worldwide, including newspapers and broadcasters. In the UK, we have invested in deep relationships with Channels 4 and 5 and many other partners to provide catch-up services on YouTube. The result is growing audiences and online revenues, which enhance rather than cannibalise existing viewers. And we also invest in a variety of other ways that greatly benefit the Television industry. Over the years Google has invested billions of dollars in capital expenditure on IT infrastructure, with direct benefit to telcos and content owners. For instance, when a UK user clicks to access a Google website, we dont force their ISP to go across the Atlantic to get it. We build data centres and work with ISPs to help them cache content locally – helping cut transmission costs and allowing content to load faster. This is better for users, and by extension for content owners too. And dont underestimate the money and brainpower that goes into creating and maintaining our software platforms. We employ thousands of the worlds best engineers. What they do looks simple on the surface – believe me, its not. Take Search – one of the great intellectual challenges of our time. Last year we tested over twenty thousand improvements to search and launched roughly 500. We handle an endless variety of queries: 15% of the queries we get each day weve never seen before. We face an army of spammers trying to game our results. In search, it takes constant vigilance, innovation and investment just to stand still. In 2010, Googles R&D spend grew faster than that of any other company worldwide and most of it goes on our core search business. Lets not forget who benefits the most from this – users who get a better search tool; and content owners whose websites are better able to be found. Of course, like every good rule, there are exceptions. We do on occasion invest to fund content thats groundbreaking in the way it uses our platforms. Just like any technology, its hard to convince someone to embrace it until theyve seen a prototype. One example of this is Life In A Day, a unique experiment in social film-making, carried out in partnership with Ridley Scott and Kevin Macdonald. The goal was to show the potential of YouTube as a commissioning platform, by creating a feature film entirely from user submissions. We ended up with over 80,000 contributors sharing over 4,500 hours of footage. The film premiered at Sundance in January to rave reviews and even got picked for theatrical release. But its one thing to experiment on the sidelines with new content technologies; its entirely different to do it professionally at scale. Well never be in your league when it comes to commissioning and creating content – its not our skill set and its not our business. That doesnt mean we dont care about great content – we do. Googles strength is in developing platforms, and were under no illusions that great content is what makes them useful. So we aim to support the content industries as they embrace the online medium. Directly funding prototypes is one way we help. More broadly, were investing in initiatives to equip the next generation of creative talent to push digital boundaries. For instance, the NextUp contest helps promising YouTube talent take their ideas to the next level by offering training and seed funding. In a similar vein, Im delighted to announce we are partnering with the UKs National Film and TV School, to help young filmmakers navigate the world of YouTube. The NFTS is one of the worlds most successful film and TV schools, producing graduates who have gone on to gain credits on some of the UKs and Hollywoods finest productions. Starting in January we will be investing to support an online film-making and distribution module as part of the schools curriculum. Were always on the look-out for opportunities to do more of this kind of thing. Ultimately though, the bulk of our investment should focus not on creating content, but on developing platforms. Platforms which offer distribution to a global audience of 2 billion people, free of charge. Thats where our strengths lie, and thats where we can make the biggest contribution to the Television industrys future. Finally, let me address the issue that has generated some of the most vitriolic debate: copyright. Viacom (NYSE: VIA) alleged that Google made a deliberate, calculated business decision … to profit from copyright infringement. Anne Sweeney at Disney (NYSE: DIS) said serving up pirate sites when you search for our shows is something that we find unacceptable. Let me state very clearly upfront: we respect copyright. Weve taken steps to prevent terms from appearing in search auto-complete which lead to copyright-infringing links. Weve built tools that make it simple for copyright owners to report violations. And were rolling out a system to act on reliable takedown requests to remove sites from our index within 24 hours. Thats faster than any other web service in the UK. In fact, I can reveal our average response time for removal is 4 hours. Lets focus on YouTube. Id hazard a guess that by now most of you have used YouTube for free promotion – sharing trailers and so forth. The power of YouTube as a platform to promote TV content is well proven. Not least by Viacom, who found it so valuable they couldnt resist secretly uploading clips even while they were suing us! Its important to understand, YouTube is a platform. It isnt practically possible for us to exercise editorial control in the way a TV channel can. If YouTube had to pre-vet every new video – 48 hours every minute – it simply couldnt exist. So instead, weve worked hard to find technology solutions to give rights holders control over their content, including ways of making money from it. The centrepiece of this is the Content ID system, which cost 30 million dollars and took more than 50 thousand engineering hours to develop. The way Content ID works is simple. You send us a copy of the video content you own and want to protect. Our system then sifts through the giant pile of videos on YouTube looking for anything that shares the same fingerprint. If a match is found we take whatever action you choose. A few companies want violations taken down immediately, but most prefer to leave it up and sell ads against it. Hundreds of content owners are now making substantial sums from their share of ad revenues on YouTube. Speaking of revenue leads me to another accusation: that Google wants all content to be free. Thats not the case. Were agnostic when it comes to whether free or paid content models are best. Its up to content owners to decide if they want to charge, and its up to users to decide if they want to pay. All we want is for content to be accessible to as many people as possible, but that does not mean it has to be free. This isnt just rhetoric. Weve built a range of tools to help businesses control and earn money from their content online. Earlier this year we launched One Pass, a tool that helps publishers erect a paywall for their content. Were experimenting with pay-per-view and other transactional models on YouTube, such as click to buy links. And of course, Google advertising is the ultimate tool for content owners to monetise their work. Thats enough about Google. I hope Ive made my point clear. Were not your enemy, and we want to help. We dont have all the answers, but we do have insights into where things are headed. We want to work together and support you in the transition. Regulate TV with care By now youre probably wondering who Im going to single out as the bogeyman. For me, no-one has yet filled that role – although I suggest you keep a close eye on your regulators. The UKs creative and broadcasting industries have done remarkably well so far, punching way above their weight. Home audiences seem broadly happy with what theyre getting; innovation in content and delivery is strong. Whether this has happened because – or in spite of – the UKs broadcasting regulation Ill leave for you to judge. But the world is changing. TV is no longer purely a domestic affair. Online, any broadcaster can have global reach. Playing to this wider audience needs a new mindset, particularly when it comes to laws and regulation. Overall, British Television is subject to far more stringent regulation than its counterpart in the US. This means less flexibility and scope for UK companies seeking to compete on the global stage. Even though much of Europe is worse off still, thats irrelevant because your main TV competition – through shared language and similarities in culture – is from across the Atlantic. Im not suggesting the UK should mirror US-style regulation. US TV has problems of its own! And I know it may sound counterintuitive to call for lighter regulation when the UK has just been through the hacking scandal, but hear me out. Its no exaggeration to say decisions made in the next year will determine the long-term health of your broadcasting and content industries for decades to come. If economic growth is the priority of the Government your regulators need to be cautious when making new laws in this space, or risk stifling the growth of your content businesses. If you want my opinion, here are some suggestions. First: the Government should put innovation front and centre of their regulatory strategy. TV is going global and transforming in form. This new era, where innovation and speed are paramount, has parallels to the Internet. To compete on the world stage, your content businesses need the freedom and legal framework to behave more like Internet companies. The starting point for every new piece of legislation should not be how do we regulate this but how do we protect the space needed for innovation. Again, listen to the entrepreneurs, not the lawyers, if you want innovation to thrive. The recent Hargreaves Review of copyright law in the UK is a good example of how you could make some relatively small changes to create the space for new innovation. Putting a little more flexibility into copyright law – without undermining the business of content creators or giving away peoples content – would enable new businesses to spring up, adding an estimated 8 billion pounds to the UK economy. As a direct corollary, Id urge you to cut back on the micro-regulation that broadcasters face. I appreciate that runs counter to the public mood, but there is nothing more stifling to innovation than having to jump through endless hoops. Just imagine if Facebook had to endure regulation like you face in TV. Thered have to be separate Facebooks for each region. Staff would need to be spread out – Salford would be an engineering hub. Thered be rulings to enforce diversity of Wall Posts, with quotas for religion and education. And you could forget about Poking before the watershed. I could go on, but I think you get the point. One of the most egregious areas is the micro-regulation around TV advertising. Your advertising industry is world leading. It is the lifeblood of the broadcasting industry – except the BBC – and yet doesnt get championed by policy makers. In fact, the opposite. Take the investigation into TV ad trading. In todays tough climate, with ever more competition for each marketing dollar, it seems the right time to make things easier for ad-funded broadcasters by, for example, removing market-distorting constraints like the CRR rules that so straitjacket ITV. A similar principle applies when it comes to the use of data, both in advertising and content distribution. Sensible data protection rules are needed that reflect the realities of the digital age. Of course, there are lots of issues around privacy which must be taken into account. User concerns need to be respected and addressed. But its important not to overreact and prevent those who wish to share data and receive a personalised service from doing so. By the way, this applies not just at the UK level. Europe as a whole needs sensible data protection laws to ensure, when people willingly share their data, that it can be shared across national boundaries. Right now, its the Internet sector at the forefront of the data debate, but as TV spreads its wings online, it wont be long before youll join us in the fray. Based on our experience so far, I believe the key to any solution is to be transparent with people about what data is collected and why, and give them the tools to control it. On a broader note, its vital we keep the Internet open. Openness is a prerequisite for innovation – no-one should have to ask permission to launch a new product online. The more attempts to curtail the Internets openness, the harder it is for tomorrows Larry and Sergeys to become a success. To be clear, Im not suggesting a completely laissez faire approach is appropriate. Alongside the Internets benefits, there is content and behaviour none of us want to encourage. From copyright infringement to phishing scams to sexual abuse imagery – none of this is good. But when legislators try to figure out how to minimise the harm of online content, technology solutions rather than laws should be their first thought. Stifling the Internet – whether by filtering or blocking or just plain turning the off switch – appeals to policy makers the world over. I dont blame them for wanting to apply what seems, in theory, the simplest solution. The problem is things are far more complicated in practice. For every ISP filter theres a work-around. For every blacklist theres a proxy server. And for every well-meaning attempt to limit the bad stuff there is good stuff that gets knocked out too. Instead, policy makers should work with the grain of the Internet rather than against it. Harness the huge levels of user engagement we have online to find solutions. Encourage online innovators to find new ways for parents to protect their kids. A good example is YouTubes Community Guidelines, setting rules for YouTube content that go further than the law and enable users themselves to identify content thats inappropriate and have it taken down. Working with the grain of the Internet rather than against it. Allowing the sharing of online data. And ensuring laws allow innovation to flourish. Three big principles that – I think – could help the UKs Television industry to succeed globally. Lets work together To conclude, let me thank you once again for the opportunity to speak today. If youd told me 10 years ago that an engineer like me would one day deliver the UKs highest TV industry lecture, Id have never believed it! Perhaps theres a lesson in that. The computing and creative industries are both on remarkable journeys. Sometimes our paths will intertwine where you least expect. Sometimes therell be potholes and false starts. Sometimes – I hope – therell be stunning shared success. To be clear: in this journey Google seeks to be your partner, not your foe. The opportunities are vast, and British television is uniquely well-placed to take them, if we work together. So think big, think global, and think beyond the TV box. Dont hold back from the journey. Thank you for listening, and I hope we bump into each other more often as we travel ahead.

Watch Harry Potter 7 Online Free

Streisand Pays Tribute to Songwriting 'Family'

NEW YORK (AP) Oscar-winning songwriting greats Alan and Marilyn Bergman rarely wrote a song with Barbra Streisand in mind.In fact, Streisand was often the one who had to approach them when she found a Bergman song that she wanted to claim as her own."Normally, over the years, we have never played her songs; she just heard them elsewhere," recalls Marilyn Bergman. "Once she saw a song sitting on the piano, and saw the title, (and) she's says, 'What's that?'"Yet Streisand turned out to be one of the greatest interpreters of their iconic songs. Over the decades, she put her stamp on such memorable tunes as "The Way We Were," ''You Don't Bring Me Flowers" and "Papa, Can You Hear Me?" from her musical "Yentl.""I just love their words, I love the sentiment, I love their exploration of love and relationships," Streisand said. "They understand the craft of songwriting, the art of songwriting."On her new CD, "What Matters Most," Streisand pays tribute to the songwriting couple by recording an album full of their material, including some of their best known songs, such as "Nice 'n' Easy," made famous by Frank Sinatra, and "The Windmills of Your Mind," the esoteric theme from "The Thomas Crown Affair.""It's interesting; I never understood the song until I heard Alan sing it," Streisand said of the Oscar-winning song, which Dusty Springfield made a classic. "Then I started relating to it in terms of my own jumbled mind, with so many crazy thoughts going through it."With the release of the album, Streisand has recorded over 60 songs by the Bergmans."We love to hear her sing what we write. How lucky can you get?" Marilyn said.But the relationship between Streisand and the Bergmans runs far deeper than that of songwriter and artist."They're like my parents in a way," explained Streisand, 69, during a phone interview from her home last week."They're certainly my role models as to how relationships ideally should be. They have an amazing marriage and they're so kind to one another, and so respectful. ... They adore each other. They've been so good to me as a friend."Streisand noted one time when she wasn't feeling well. The Bergmans did more than check on her. "They came over in the middle of the night, and Marilyn slept on the couch in my bedroom, and Alan stayed downstairs.""That's the kind of friends they are," she added. "We're family. You can't pick your family, but you can pick the family you'd like to have. Those are very strong relationships."The trio likes to say they were fated to be friends; they are all from Brooklyn, from lower- middle-class families, and were born at the same hospital (though in different years). The Bergmans met Streisand when she was a burgeoning young singer in New York City. Streisand's performance brought Marilyn to tears, and they quickly became close friends."It is a unique relationship," Marilyn explained. "We met when she was very young; there's a kind of sister/daughter relationship. The age difference was probably more parent than now. At a certain point you become contemporaries."Although the Bergmans sent Streisand a list of songs to consider for her new album, it was Streisand who decided what she would sing. She decided to choose material she'd never tackled before instead of reinterpreting old hits. "Why would I do that? ... The past is the past. I'm always looking to do something new, something I haven't done before."The Bergmans were surprised at some of her choices, like "Nice 'n' Easy," which was a Sinatra special. "She approached it in an entirely different way, in a seductive way," Marilyn notes."She's a storyteller, and that comes from not only her inner soul, but her directing," says Alan.Besides the new album, she's also starring in "My Mother's Curse" with Seth Rogen, a film she describes as a comedy with serious undertones; it will be released next year.Streisand hopes to perform those new Bergman songs, as well as her many classics, with a new tour. Her last was in 2006, and that came after a 12-year absence from the road.She also wants to direct a movie; would like to write a sequel to her home decorating book, "My Passion for Design," published last year; still has eyes on a remake of the film "Gypsy" ("I don't think the movie did the play justice. I think it could be done better," she sniffs); and still plans a duets album (names like Beyonce, Seal and Yo-Yo Ma have been thrown into the mix)."It seems like there's not enough time in the day, there's not enough time in the year," she sighs.Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. By Nekesa Mumbi Moody August 25, 2011 Barbra Streisand PHOTO CREDIT AP Photo/Chris Pizzello NEW YORK (AP) Oscar-winning songwriting greats Alan and Marilyn Bergman rarely wrote a song with Barbra Streisand in mind.In fact, Streisand was often the one who had to approach them when she found a Bergman song that she wanted to claim as her own."Normally, over the years, we have never played her songs; she just heard them elsewhere," recalls Marilyn Bergman. "Once she saw a song sitting on the piano, and saw the title, (and) she's says, 'What's that?'"Yet Streisand turned out to be one of the greatest interpreters of their iconic songs. Over the decades, she put her stamp on such memorable tunes as "The Way We Were," ''You Don't Bring Me Flowers" and "Papa, Can You Hear Me?" from her musical "Yentl.""I just love their words, I love the sentiment, I love their exploration of love and relationships," Streisand said. "They understand the craft of songwriting, the art of songwriting."On her new CD, "What Matters Most," Streisand pays tribute to the songwriting couple by recording an album full of their material, including some of their best known songs, such as "Nice 'n' Easy," made famous by Frank Sinatra, and "The Windmills of Your Mind," the esoteric theme from "The Thomas Crown Affair.""It's interesting; I never understood the song until I heard Alan sing it," Streisand said of the Oscar-winning song, which Dusty Springfield made a classic. "Then I started relating to it in terms of my own jumbled mind, with so many crazy thoughts going through it."With the release of the album, Streisand has recorded over 60 songs by the Bergmans."We love to hear her sing what we write. How lucky can you get?" Marilyn said.But the relationship between Streisand and the Bergmans runs far deeper than that of songwriter and artist."They're like my parents in a way," explained Streisand, 69, during a phone interview from her home last week."They're certainly my role models as to how relationships ideally should be. They have an amazing marriage and they're so kind to one another, and so respectful. ... They adore each other. They've been so good to me as a friend."Streisand noted one time when she wasn't feeling well. The Bergmans did more than check on her. "They came over in the middle of the night, and Marilyn slept on the couch in my bedroom, and Alan stayed downstairs.""That's the kind of friends they are," she added. "We're family. You can't pick your family, but you can pick the family you'd like to have. Those are very strong relationships."The trio likes to say they were fated to be friends; they are all from Brooklyn, from lower- middle-class families, and were born at the same hospital (though in different years). The Bergmans met Streisand when she was a burgeoning young singer in New York City. Streisand's performance brought Marilyn to tears, and they quickly became close friends."It is a unique relationship," Marilyn explained. "We met when she was very young; there's a kind of sister/daughter relationship. The age difference was probably more parent than now. At a certain point you become contemporaries."Although the Bergmans sent Streisand a list of songs to consider for her new album, it was Streisand who decided what she would sing. She decided to choose material she'd never tackled before instead of reinterpreting old hits. "Why would I do that? ... The past is the past. I'm always looking to do something new, something I haven't done before."The Bergmans were surprised at some of her choices, like "Nice 'n' Easy," which was a Sinatra special. "She approached it in an entirely different way, in a seductive way," Marilyn notes."She's a storyteller, and that comes from not only her inner soul, but her directing," says Alan.Besides the new album, she's also starring in "My Mother's Curse" with Seth Rogen, a film she describes as a comedy with serious undertones; it will be released next year.Streisand hopes to perform those new Bergman songs, as well as her many classics, with a new tour. Her last was in 2006, and that came after a 12-year absence from the road.She also wants to direct a movie; would like to write a sequel to her home decorating book, "My Passion for Design," published last year; still has eyes on a remake of the film "Gypsy" ("I don't think the movie did the play justice. I think it could be done better," she sniffs); and still plans a duets album (names like Beyonce, Seal and Yo-Yo Ma have been thrown into the mix)."It seems like there's not enough time in the day, there's not enough time in the year," she sighs.Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Dick Ebersol Lists $13 Mil Telluride Home (Exclusive)

THR has found that Dick Ebersol, who resigned from NBC in May, and the wife, Susan St. James, have take their Telluride house available on the market for $13 million.our editor recommendsDick Ebersol Resigns From NBC SportsWhy Dick Ebersol Resigned from NBC Sports (Analysis)Ken Schanzer, No. 2 to Dick Ebersol, to Step Lower From NBC Sports - It's Official Situated the tony enclave of Mountain Village, the 7-bed room, log-and-stone house sits among pines and aspens on 1.7 acres with mountain-peak sights. Based on the listing, doorways, flooring and cabinets are built of rustic reclaimed wood and "chandeliers and fire places hand made by a few of the West's finest artists." Based on San Miguel County assessor records, the Ebersols bought the 12,962-square-feet residence in 2004 for $10.4 million. Built-in 2001, the home includes 7 full baths along with a home entertainment. The purchase comes a lot more than six years once they experienced the dying of the 14-year-old boy, Teddy. The teenager, together with his older brother and father, were one of the people inside a private plane that crashed in the Montrose Regional Airport terminal in southwest Colorado in 2004. In This summer, Jerry and Jessica Seinfeld also listed their Telluride residence, an 11-bed room, multi-building compound on 26-acres for $18.25 million. The home's listing agent, TD Cruz, wouldn't discuss the identity from the proprietors. Related Subjects Dick Ebersol Jerry Seinfeld Jessica Seinfeld Property Sports

New Over Time Posters Hit The Net

Justin Timberlake's time is moneyOne! Mwahahaha.... Two! Mwahahaha.... Three! Mwahahaha.... *lightning bolt*.... Four! Mwahahaha.... Five! Mwahahaha.... *thunder clap*.... Six! Mwahahaha.... Seven! Mwahahaha.... No-the first is more enthusiastic about amounts than Sesame Street's The Count, except possibly Johnny Ball and Jesse Trump's accountant. Men, you have a brand new rival. It's In Time's Will Salas. Performed by Justin Timberlake, he's the guy away from home in Andrew 'Gattaca' Niccol's new sci-fi thriller. Salas must buy themself a while. The issue? It's actual some time and he is doing need to buy it. The movie's stratospheric concept - a society by which time may be the currency and ageing stops at 25 - is definitely an intriguing one. Place it by doing this, JT is not likely to remain as awesome, calm and collected because he looks alongside Amanda Seyfried's moll on these brand new one-sheets. The good thing is that he's experienced a 'Timeonaire' and inherited greater than a hundred year's price of time-cash unhealthy news is the fact that he's now charged with the murder and it has both Alex Pettyfer's crim and Cillian Murphy's 'tec on his situation. . As Niccol told the Comic-Disadvantage throng: The field of the film will appear familiar because.... everybody is designed to possess a body clock, but this invention may be the finish of each and every other invention. Poor people don't have any time for you to create anything new, and also the wealthy don't have any incentive - why invent a brand new vehicle after i could get it done 100 years from now? . Using the type of symmetry so beloved of studio marketeers, Over Time will expensive before our eyes from November one in the United kingdom.

Friday Evening Lights Alternate Ending Revealed!

Kyle Chandler Fans of Friday Evening Lights can anticipate an unexpected Easter time egg about the final season DVD: another ending towards the series finale. Throughout the epilogue that demonstrated audiences in which the primary figures wound up, a farewell speech by Coach Taylor (Kyle Chandler) was initially likely to play within the images (rather, the Delta Spirit song "Demon Knows You are Dead" was the lilting soundtrack). Friday Evening Lights' Jason Katims on Emmy noms "touchdown," the way the finale joined together Executive producer Jason Katims describes to Entertainment Weekly: "Since the images went such a long time, it had been hard for all of us to find a elegant method to easily fit in it. Also, I simply desired to allow the images are a symbol of themselves ... after searching in internet marketing for both, I recognized the episode was more powerful without them.Inch To be able to watch the erased voice-over, visit the menu screen about the Season 5 DVD, turn the commentary off, after which choose the football that seems. You may also participate in it here.

Gallery: Live From The Big Screen Floor

Photos from the Live QuarterWith Empire Presents.... Big Screen in full swing, The 02 is awash with movie memorabilia and cine-artefacts so precious even Indy himself turned up to inspect them. The Live Quarter is completely free to visit and, as you can see, it's chockers with Bond cars, Back To The Future DeLoreans and precious goodies from The London Film Museum, including props and costumes from Braveheart and Alien eggs. It's completely free to attend and the perfect day out for all the family - especially if those eggs don't hatch. Did we mention that it's completely free? Nilch! Gratis! On the house! What are you waiting for? Head down to that big dome-y thing with the giant spikes coming out it. {Big Screen Floor 1}

Man Charged With Illegally Profiting From Disney's Purchase of Marvel

A man who made a 3,000 percent profit buying Marvel call options just before Disney purchased the company was charged with insider trading, the Securities and Exchange Commission said Thursday. The SEC said Toby Scammell was working at an investment fund in August 2009 when, acting on information he obtained from his girlfriend, a Disney employee, he loaded up on Marvel options that soared in value once Disney said it would acquire the company for $4.2 billion. The SEC also said that Scammell secretly used money from accounts owned by his brother, a U.S military man. Scammell had access because he controlled those accounts while his brother served in Iraq a few years earlier. The SEC did not name the brother or girlfriend and said neither was involved in wrongdoing. "This does not involve Disney and the complaint speaks for itself," a Disney spokeswoman said Thursday. The incident is the second in a year where a man tried to profit from information obtained by a Disney employee he was romantically involved with. In October, Yonni Sebbag tried to sell early access to a Disney quarterly earnings report that his girlfriend, Bonnie Hoxie, an assistant to Disney's head of corporate communications at the time, would supply him. Sebbag was sentenced to 27 months in prison and Hoxie was given four months of home confinement. In the case of Scammell, the SEC said the girlfriend spoke to him about an upcoming transaction but didn't give details due to "confidentiality." The girlfriend was described as "an extern in Disney's corporate strategy department" who "possessed confidential details about the pricing and timing of the deal." According the SEC, Scammell learned that Disney was about to buy Marvel in a variety of ways, including listening in on his live-in girlfriend's conversations. The girlfriend was also considering writing about the Disney-Marvel acquisition as part of her application to business schools, a decision Scammell was aware of and in a position to exploit. The SEC said Scammell's trades stood out because he didn't usually deal with call options, and because he was purchasing Marvel options with unusually high strike prices: $45 and $50, even though the stock never traded above $41.74. The options were also set to expire worthless a month after he purchased them if the stock didn't rise dramatically. Scammell bought $5,400 worth of Marvel call options and cashed them in for a $192,000 profit in less than a month, the SEC said. Related Topics The Walt Disney Company

Henry Cavill talks British actors storming Hollywood

Total Film has spoken exclusively to man of the moment, Henry Cavill about why British actors suddenly seem to be taking over Hollywood.The Man of Steel star says that it's just down to a mix of good timing and the sheer quality of our home-grown talent."I think maybe it's an experience thing", says Cavill."I've done quite a few jobs over an 11-year career and maybe it just so happens that all the Brits are hitting their peak at the same time. No matter what age we are, we just seem to be coming into our stride."Maybe there are lots of people out there who haven't been seen yet. So we'll have to wait and see!"It's great to have as many great actors out there as possible because it doesn't have to limited to just a few good actors. The more good actors the better. We can bloody well work together and make great movies together."When we asked him what's next on the cards after Man Of Steel, Cavill says he's ruling nothing out. "I want to do everything! Maybe a fantasy type thing or some historical fiction. Maybe a sci-fi..."Man Of Steel is set to open in cinemas Summer 2013.

Tyler Posey stars in taco truck comedy

PoseyMaya Entertainment will produce indie comedy "Taco Shop" with Tyler Posey ("Teen Wolf") toplining.Rick Najera will produce along with Robert A. Parada of Streetwise Entertainment and Moctesuma Esparza and Sandra Avila of Maya."Taco Shop" will be directed by Joaquin Perea with production starting this month. Script, written by Najera and Oskar Toruno, centers on a young man who quits his taco shop job to open his own shop -- but finds himself in an all-out war when a gourmet taco truck parks across the street. Pic also stars Carlos Alazraqui, Eric Roberts, Felipe Esparza, Laura Harring, Paula Jai Parker and Parvesh Cheena.Maya has worldwide rights will distribute domestically. Contact Dave McNary at dave.mcnary@variety.com

'Desperate Housewives' Stars React to News of the Show Ending

Mere hours after ABC formally announced it would be bidding farewell to Desperate Housewives, a handful of the series' stars were swarmed by reporters at the Beverly Hilton on Sunday night.our editor recommends'Desperate Housewives' Insider Backs Nicollette Sheridan's Story as ABC Lawsuit Heats Up (Exclusive)'Desperate Housewives' Eva Longoria and George Lopez Host Alma Awards Return on NBC Primetime Stars Felicity Huffman (Lynette), Marcia Cross (Bree) and Brenda Strong (Mary Alice) each made an appearance at the network's Television Critics Association cocktail party, where they shared stories of how they found out the upcoming eighth season would be their last. All three of the actresses heard the news on Friday, with Cross finding out from her manager and then emailing Huffman. PHOTOS: Summer TCA "When anything is good, you don't want it to end. ... We were all hoping there would be a ninth year," said Strong, who acknowledged that her initial reaction when her reps informed her was sadness. "I think we probably could have gone to nine," added Huffman, "but I think it was too much of a risk to take and they really value [creator] Marc [Cherry] and the show." Huffman said executive producers George Perkins and Bob Daily came to the set Friday and made an announcement to everyone. "It was very quiet," she said. "Everyone was that odd combination of really sad and very sorry and, at the same time, very grateful." STORY: ABC Chief Paul Lee: 'We Wanted to Make Sure ['Desperate Housewives'] Had its Victory Lap' From there, Huffman spoke to Cherry, who had been sitting on the news for a couple of weeks. "He can't seem to keep his mouth shut so he had to keep himself away from set," she said, noting how relieved she thought he was to have the cat out of the bag. "I was glad that it was finally out there and decided, because I felt like it was coming and Iwas saying, 'Hey guys, i think this is coming,' and everybody was saying 'no,' ' said Cross, who like her co-stars is happy to be able to finish the long-running series on their terms. STORY: 'Desperate Housewives': Season 8 Will Be Its Last Looking ahead to the final season, Strong's character will be back in the series' fold. According to the actress, Mary Alice will revisit the day that she killed herself duringthe show's first three episodes. "There will be some different emotional layers that you haven't seen before," she teased, "and some interesting things will be revealed about one of the current characters on the Lane." As for the others, Cross would like to see her character's many men return, while Huffman hope her character gets back together with her husband.But after that, it's anybody's guess, noted a particularly candid Huffman. TCA Summer Press Tour: THR's Complete Coverage "You go into acting jail at the end of these things because it's hard for anyone to see you as anything other than Lynette Scavo or whatever it is," she said. "So I think it's unwise to look at the carnage around you of past television actresses and go, 'Well it's not going to happen to me.' " Huffman added, with a slight giggle, "It probably will, which is why I'm planning on opening supermarkets and gas stations." Related Topics ABC Television Critics Association Awards Felicity Huffman Desperate Housewives

Mega Buzz: The Office's New Baby and Romantic Reunions on CSI: Miami and Grey's

Jenna Fischer, Adam Rodriguez, Sara Ramirez Every week, editors Adam Bryant and Natalie Abrams satisfy your need for TV scoop. Please send all questionsto mega_scoop@tvguide.com. How will Jim and Pam handle the new baby on The Office? - Marisa NATALIE: With Pam's hormones in overdrive, she won't know who to trust, causing her to seek out an unlikely ally. "She's clearly in a position where everyone is lying to her to make her feel better, except for Dwight, and she starts to think he's the only person she can trust," executive producer Paul Lieberstein says. After she gives birth, though, it'll be Jim who has problems. "Usually, he wants to get out of work, but it might be a little easier for him at work than at home." Any news on Calleigh and Eric getting back together on CSI: Miami? - Lizzie, via Twitter ADAM: There will be definite movement on that front in the Season 10 premiere. "Right away in the first episode, we open the door a little bit ... and we see them step through," co-executive producer Barry O'Brien hints of the on-again, off-again couple. "They're sort of re-examining where they've been and where they're going together. They've had such a history together, and you see the power and depth of their feelings toward each other." Thanks for all the scoop on Grey's Anatomy, but you didn't mention Callie and Arizona. What's coming up for them this season? - Brandy NATALIE: After the tumultuous year they just endured - they broke up, Callie got knocked up, then nearly died in a car accident before they got married - executive producer Shonda Rhimes says she wants them to be happy in Season 8. "I think they've earned the right for us to enjoy them as a couple and to enjoy them as mothers, and to watch them juggle what motherhood means to their relationship, their sex life and their jobs," she says. I've heard Castle's new season will feature a superhero episode. What can you tell me about it? -Luke ADAM: I can tell you that the case involves a young criminal justice student who spends his nights prowling the streets as a masked, sword-wielding vigilante named the Lone Vengeance. Sadly, I can neither confirm nor deny that Nathan Fillion's titular mystery writer will appear in spandex. Got any scoop on the final season of Chuck? - Matt NATALIE: The Buy More is going through a few more changes this season. Now that Chuck's private spy agency, Carmichael Industries, owns Nerd Herd central, Captain Awesome will become the face of the company, says portrayer Ryan McPartlin. (Can I please have a copy of the first Buy More magazine with his pretty mug on it?) "He's going to be like the Tony Robbins of the Buy More," McPartlin says, adding that Awesome won't be quitting his day job as a doctor. "The fact that Ellie and Awesome know about the spy world, it'll be like the A-Team and we'll help out, but only when we're absolutely needed because of the baby." Will Blue Bloods have another season-long mystery this year? - Janet ADAM: As a matter of fact, it will! And like last season's Blue Templar case, this one also involves Jamie, who will be nosing around a mob family. "Jamie totally by chance befriends a young man, who is the 'Jamie' of an organized crime family," new executive producer Ed Zuckerman tells us. "We're not even sure if he's involved with the family or not, but Jamie has to decide whether or not to pursue this relationship as a friendship or as an informer." What will the study group face in the new season of Community? - Eric NATALIE: As you might expect, the study groups' new biology teacher (The Wire's Michael K. Williams) is a tough customer. "There's a big confrontation that happens the first day of class and it affects the entire episode," Yvette Nicole Brown says. As for Pierce leaving them in the dust in the Season 2 finale, Brown adds, "It will be dealt with in the very first episode, and everybody in our group has guilt in varying degrees." Can you tell me anything about Danny and Lindsay on CSI: NY? - Wendy ADAM: The couple's home life will be rattled a bit by the fact that Danny is now out of the crime lab and working a beat after passing the sergeant's exam. In addition to the added danger of working the streets, Danny will be partnered with a beautiful-but-tough rookie. But we don't think Lindsay should be too threatened: The partners get off to a rocky start when Danny publicly humiliates her for a series of mistakes. Has Tom really left the Parks Department on Parks & Recreation? - Aaron NATALIE: You don't really think a business run by Tom Haverford and Jean-Ralphio will succeed, do you? "When the season comes back, Tom is still at Entertainment 720, so he's a CEO, which is the closest he's gotten to his dream," Aziz Ansari teases. "His swagger goes up 1,000 percent in Season 4. [But] the business is not being run very smartly by those two guys, so I imagine, at some point, he'll have to come back to the Parks Department." I haven't heard a lot about the new season of One Tree Hill. Got anything? - Lily ADAM: I hear that Clay is going spend a significant amount of time with a shrink this season after he suffers some unexplained blackouts. The good news: The therapist is an old friend, having helped Clay through his grief after Sara's death. The bad news: Fixing this current problem might require Clay admitting himself to the loony bin. Do you have more scoop on Amelia's struggle with addiction on Private Practice? - Catherine NATALIE: You'd think that after Amelia's medical privileges were suspended, she might at least attempt to get back on the wagon, but Shonda Rhimes says she'll only fall further down the rabbit hole this season. "We're going to see this as an ongoing struggle that she goes through," she says. "Doctors and addiction is a huge issue that we've never really tackled before in a meaningful way." Got any teases about the new season of Raising Hope? - Katie ADAM: One of this season's flashbacks will recall the time when Garret Dillahunt's Burt was kidnapped, leaving Virginia and a 4-year-old Jimmy at home. Why the need to remember that bad time? It probably has something to do with the fact that the kidnapper shows up on the Chances' doorstep again 20 years later. Adam's Mega Rave: I'm not sure how Maura Tierney found the courage to pull off her angry, no-frills performance as a cancer survivor on Rescue Me months after her own health scare, but I'm sure glad she did. Are you paying attention, Emmy voters? Natalie's Mini Rant: First, Lea Michele, Cory Monteith and Chris Colfer were leaving Glee in Season 4, and now they're not. Can we just focus on Season 3 for now? (Additional reporting by Kate Stanhope) Crave scoop on your favorite TV shows?E-mail Adam and Natalie at mega_scoop@tvguide.comor drop us a line atTwitter.com/TVGuide

Drew Pearce Writing The Mighty

He's on for the DC Comics adaptationEver since creating and writing superhero sitcom No Heroics for ITV, Drew Pearce has seemingly hit a vein of good luck, as big gigs have suddenly landed on his doorstep. Not content with winning the job of penning the next Iron Man outing alongside director Shane Black, Pearce is now signed on to adapt DC Comics tale The Mighty for Paramount. The Mighty, which was crafted as a graphic novel by Peter J Tomasi and Keith Champagne, along with artist Peter Snejberg, follows police officer Gabriel Cole, whose life as a youngster was saved by seemingly heroic super-powered type Alpha One. But there's a twist: Cole discovers that the alleged hero actually has a dark side and has horrible plans for his mortal charges. So Cole decides to thwart Alpha One's plans - no easy feat when your villain has special powers and you're just relying on being a tough cop. While it might seem odd to find a DC Comics character headed to a studio other than Warner Bros. (which, after all, owns the company), it's not without precedent as Warners is not necessarily required to pick up all the DC titles (Red was an example of a book that the studio passed on) and in this case, the novel's team had an option to search elsewhere for film deals. So now Paramount's Disruption Entertainment company is overseeing things. The presence of Pearce will likely help it shuffle further along the development halls, but there's no guarantee that it'll make it to screen...