Tech Company That Junked Unopened Rebate Claims Pays $10k In Fines

It's no secret that most people hate rebate programs. They're a pain to deal with, so many people don't even send in the rebate forms -- and then, the various companies that receive them often go out of their way to find reasons to reject them. However, a tech company in San Jose named Vastech went a bit further than that. Rather than coming up with ways to void the rebates, it was caught having thrown over a thousand unopened rebate claims into the garbage. The company has now paid up on all the rebates that it had junked and has agreed to pay a $10,000 fine on top of that. To be honest, that seems rather low for deceiving the public.

Let's Sue YouTube

While we all wait for the outcome of Viacom's billion dollar lawsuit against YouTube, it appears that some other media companies aren't waiting around. Italian media firm MediaSet, which just so happens to be owned by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, has sued YouTube and Google for $779 million (almost as much as Viacom is suing for!). MediaSet claims that the 4,643 videos on YouTube that infringe on its copyrights have cost it 315,700 viewer days. Apparently, MediaSet prefers not to take into consideration (a) that most videos on YouTube are limited to under 10 minutes, meaning that it's a poor replacement for watching on TV and (b) that people who watch on YouTube aren't necessarily people who would have watched it on TV and (c) that folks who watch something on YouTube may, in turn, be convinced to watch a show on TV that they wouldn't have watched otherwise. Why bother with little pesky details like that when you can just sue a huge company that has a lot of cash. Given that the Italian government is already trying to put Google execs in jail over some YouTube videos, this looks like a larger Italian campaign against YouTube in general.

Feldman Bares All In Lost Boys 2

Corey Feldman, who appears in the upcoming DVD sequel Lost Boys: The Tribe, told SCI FI Wire that he reveals "a little more of the emotional backdrop of what goes on inside Edgar Frog's mind" as he revisits his famous role from 1987's original The Lost Boys.
"You've got a guy that's been over the trenches, that's been in the battles, and now this is his way of life," Feldman said in an interview at Comic-Con International in San Diego over the weekend.
Part of that new adult way of life includes a sex scene between Feldman as Frog and a male vampire during the course of the film. Originally reluctant to tackle the scene, Feldman credits director P.J. Pesce for "being adventurous in the idea." He added: "I think we pull it off. It just gives a little more inside of what he's thinking, what makes him tick."
Lost Boys: The Tribe is the sequel to the hit '80s teen vampire movie. Tribe focuses primarily on a new set of characters, with Tad Hilgenbrink and Autumn Reeser starring as newcomers to the vampire-infested town of Luna Bay. Angus Sutherland--brother of original Lost Boys star Kiefer Sutherland--takes on the role of the new head vampire, who has a love affair with Reeser's character.
Pesce's goal was to recapture the essence of what made the original film so popular, while providing viewers with a fresh story. "The thing that was so special about the first movie was the tone ... an open-eyed look at what if a family member was actually a vampire," Pesce said in a separate interview. "Well, it's such an absurd idea that it has to be approached with humor. Our number-one mandate that I gave to myself and to them was, 'What would you really do?' ... This has got to be truthful. Humor grows out of that, and that sense of absurdist ... realization that [one of] your family is a member of the undead."
Feldman added: "It's really its own movie. ... It stands alone. But it also certainly pays homage to the other movie."
Fans looking for familiar faces from the original film won't be disappointed. "There's lots of ... character tie-ins that we did," Feldman said. "Obviously, having Angus Sutherland playing the bad vampire is a nice nod to his brother doing the original. We have Corey [Haim] and Jamison [Newlander] there as cameos."

A ‘Monsters, Inc.’ Sequel

They did it with “Toy Story” twice. They’re doing it with “Cars” next. They’ve been rumored to want to do it with “The Incredibles” for years. Pixar is officially in the sequel business these days, with further installments of some of their most popular franchises in the works. So how come we never hear about “Monsters, Inc. 2”? “We’ve thought about it,” “Monsters, Inc.” director Pete Doctor told MTV News about the possibility for a sequel. “We’ve got a couple ideas.” In the moment, those ideas are being filtered into a “Monsters, Inc” roller-coaster at the Walt Disney Resorts, which should open in a couple of years. But a movie? Doctor’s revelation, of course, is a far cry from an actual announcement. Or is it? When I followed up with Doctor about the nature of the ideas all he would say is “I can neither confirm nor deny.” (And he did it in a nervous voice). Is it a denial? A non-denial denial? An admission we’re on to something?

Robocop To Be Rated R

In welcome news today from MTV.com comes word that the Darren Aronofsky-helmed Robocop reboot will probably be rated R. This is very good news. Some people were concerned that MGM would push for a more teen-friendly PG-13 rating for this “re-imagining instead of an R rating that would be more in line with the original film directed by Paul Vorhoeven from way back in 1987. As a matter of fact the original was so violent that it had to be trimmed down to acheive its R rating because the MPAA gave the first cut of the film an X rating. Producer Mike Medavoy had this to say about the film:

“Well I was involved with the original ‘Robocop,’ and it was an R, and the likelihood is that this will be an R. It’s likely to be an R unless the director cuts back on some of it.”

Based on Aronofsky’s previous work it’s not likely he’ll be going for a PG-13 rating.

The new Robocop film is not a sequel, so I guess we can stop calling it Robocop 4. Instead of “remake” or “reboot” Medavoy prefers the currently chic ”reimagining.” It will not be tied to anything that has come before in the series, so it will be the Batman Begins of the Robocop movie franchise.

Rumors of the film being shot as a 3D feature were also shot down.

Robocop is set to open some time in 2010.

Angelina Jolie as Catwoman?

Even though most of us are still basking in the afterglow (more like after-gloom) of The Dark Knight, it’s never too early to start thinking about the next Batman film. Well, apparently we’re not the only ones looking ahead. According to fanboy site Comic Book Movie, actress/world savior/supermom Angelina Jolie is also hoping to become part of Christopher Nolan’s Bat-universe, by donning the super-tight tights and fierce claws of Catwoman for the third film in the franchise.

(Just picturing Jolie wearing the cat suit begins to erase the horrible memory of that Halle Berry flick.)

Best of all is the source from which this news has stemmed: former Catwoman Julie Newmar is quoted as telling the New York Daily News:

“Angelina would own the part,” said Newmar. “My industry friends tell me [she] has made inquiries about the role,”

Well, it seems as though Newmar is a lot more comfortable passing the torch than Jack Nicholson was. And let’s face it, Angelina playing Catwoman would be as sultry, badass, and downright sweat-inducing as any actress could possibly be in the role. Unfortunately, The Daily News article goes on to remind us that in a recent interview, Dark Knight writers David Goyer and John Nolan stated that, as of now, they are reluctant to include Catwoman in the third film. Maybe Angelina can change all that. The woman has been known to sway men in the past.

I for one think that Catwoman is a logical step for the next film. The Dark Knight left off with Batman being falsely accused of murder, sandwiched between cops and criminals, more alone than ever, with his only love interest having been blown to smithereens. A fella’s got to have some kind of relief, and a woman in a skin-hugging cat suit, who also likes a bit of midnight roof hopping, is never a bad place to start.

Is Google's Proprietary Tech Stack Destroying Its Acquisitions?

While Google has bought plenty of small startups, almost none of those deals have amounted to very much. It almost seems like most of the startups disappear into Google forever. There are a few exceptions such as YouTube and (maybe) Writely. But the list of startups that have simply languished or died is much longer. TechCrunchIT is running an interesting post that suggests one of the key reasons: Google's proprietary tech stack. While Google is a big open source supporter for lower level infrastructure, once you get above that -- it's very much a strong believer in doing everything its own way. I've heard from friends at Google about the difficulty they've had learning to deal with Google's tech stack -- and certainly have heard how it's slowed down the progress of some Google acquisitions while they learn how to "transition."
In fact, some have pointed out that this is one of the side benefits to Google's AppEngine offering. Since it exposes some of Google's tech stack to folks for them to develop and run their applications, it will make it much easier to integrate them into Google at a later date. So, for startups whose strategy is to get acquired by Google (and, I should note, if you start with that strategy, you're probably going to fail), it may make sense to develop on AppEngine just because you're already signaling to Google that the integration costs are significantly lower.
Still, this highlights one of the major downsides to Google's belief that it can do everything much better than everyone else by starting from scratch: in doing so, it actually makes it much harder to capitalize on synergies from many acquisition targets. Yes, there are reasons to go against the "standard" way of doing things, but there are significant costs as well.