jasgre2000

Sounds like you have inside information, so I’ll take you word for it that they felt it was their only choice. My point, though, was that, too my knowledge, they were not legally obligated to pay anything. Did a court order them to pay? Was a lawsuit actually filed? (If so, that’s news to me ... but it sounds from your post like there was one). At the end of the day, the payment was voluntary, even if they felt they had no other choice.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Flo (alleged) uses AWS as its backbone. That is the same backbone used by Netflix and a majority of other streaming services. The idea that it is AWS’s fault is laughable.

DCI didn’t have to cut a check. It chose to. No court has ever found that it violated any laws.

Again, you don’t need a license for DVR. Archiving is a different story. Here’s a decent overview of the relevant law: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/08/victory-dvrs-cloud

They don’t need sync rights to implement a DVR service. The Supreme Court has made 100% clear that time shifting constitutes fair use. Flo is just incompetent (or DCI is completely ignorant of copyright law).

Just bought the 3 essentials Blu-ray’s + 2010 Blu-ray.

This is what WILL happen: 1. Cavies 2. SCV 3. Blue Knights 4. Blue Devils 5. Bluecoats 6. BAC 7. Crown 8. Mandarins 9. Blue Stars 10. Crossmen 11. Cadets 12. Pacific Crest I’ll put money on it. 😉

Thanks. Good advice. I’ll start with the essentials and go from there.

No

Since the chance of DCI getting their act together and putting up a streaming video archive are next to nil, I'm planning to start putting together my own Bluray/DVD library. Any suggestions on which years to start with?

Bluecoats were not undefeated before finals week this year.

Of course it happens sometimes. Everyone knew going in that Boston's guard would compete for the top (and everyone knew that Crown would compete for the brass title and that SCV would compete for tops in percussion). But as a general matter, judges have to "leave room" for the corps that perform later, which artificially deflates the scores of the corps that go on earlier. If they waited to score until everyone had performed, it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

Yes, but it seems like that's the exception rather than the rule. The only reason a judge would change their score is if they didn't "leave enough room" to properly slot a corps that went on earlier in the night. I don't think there has ever been a corps that went on earlier than last that's ever got a perfect score, and under the current system there will likely never be one. That will effect every score going all the way down to 12th. If judges feel free to give a 10.0 to the last corps, but not to any earlier corps, that gives the corps going into finals in first place a huge advantage. This does effect every score going down to the bottom. For example, if you are judging the corps that goes 6th to last, you know that the highest score you can give is a 9.7 (since you have to leave 5 half points ahead of them to "leave room" for the remaining corps). This is why slotting happens.

Well ... BD's performance was different than the last time he judged; and BC's performance was different than the last time he judged. Maybe that could be it?

No you don't. It artificially inflates the corps that go on later. If you have to "leave room" for other corps, the only one that can possibly get a perfect score is the corps that goes last. That's not fair. Why not let judges set their scores after everyone performs?