The FIFTY

[snapt]

Cody, wanna make me a good deal on your Ranger now that you've succumbed to van life?

[Wes Mantooth]

Cody, wanna make me a good deal on your Ranger now that you've succumbed to van life?

Can I have the GFC?

[powdork]

Looks like there should be some content in the future with Jim Morrison and Hilaree Nelson in the Beartooths


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Alkasquawlik]

Looks like there should be some content in the future with Jim Morrison and Hilaree Nelson in the Beartooths


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Will be announcing this soon, but unfortunately, no new episodes until the fall. Lots of reasons why, but the main ones were we really weren't able to get filming because of snowpack issues and weather until April. With being on the road and in such a rush to get lines done, we couldn't get episodes edited in time to drop when people still watch ski content. Plus, having the summer to edit gives us far more focus on quality, consistency and better episodes than the ones we drop in near real time that I am honestly never happy with. Mags are the first to know this as of now. I will say, this season is going to be our best in terms of entertainment, guests and stories. The quality of story is upped big time for Year 3. Oh and soon off to Alaska to give one of the cruxes, Mt. St. Elias a try.

[stealurface831]

Will be announcing this soon, but unfortunately, no new episodes until the fall. Lots of reasons why, but the main ones were we really weren't able to get filming because of snowpack issues and weather until April. With being on the road and in such a rush to get lines done, we couldn't get episodes edited in time to drop when people still watch ski content. Plus, having the summer to edit gives us far more focus on quality, consistency and better episodes than the ones we drop in near real time that I am honestly never happy with. Mags are the first to know this as of now. I will say, this season is going to be our best in terms of entertainment, guests and stories. The quality of story is upped big time for Year 3. Oh and soon off to Alaska to give one of the cruxes, Mt. St. Elias a try.

hell yeah, cody. glad to wait if it means better content in your opinion, though i've really enjoyed everything thus far. best of luck with st. elias.

how many do you have ticked off as of now?

[John_B]

Right on. I missed the regular episodes but am stoked to hear you are still working on them. Good luck in the northland.

[yeahman]

Fuck yeah Alka, looking forward to the fall episodes. Good luck on St. Elias, stay safe up there!

[gimpy]

Sooooo.......you’re saying there’s a time when people don’t watch ski content?....... news to me. I guess I’m in the minority then cuz summer is when I watch it the most. In the fall and winter I’m out doing it .....not watching it

[yeahman]

Sooooo.......you’re saying there’s a time when people don’t watch ski content?....... news to me. I guess I’m in the minority then cuz summer is when I watch it the most. In the fall and winter I’m out doing it .....not watching it

Sooooo...you're out "doing" it in the fall and winter 24/7...never have even ten minutes in the evening or at work to watch a ski video. Lol got it. You're so hardcore bruh.

All they need to do is look at view stats from existing episodes to know when most people are likely to watch.

[gimpy]

Uhhhhh no.......just saying I crave watching that stuff more when there’s no opportunity to be doing it........ god forbid I express an opinion different then yours...... but thanks for playing judgemental Web cop.....you’re so hardcore at internetting bruh

[tang]

Be safe Cody, and yes I'm sure this group here isn't the most representative demographic on watching ski content... the fall much better for the normal masses!

[powdork]

Be safe Cody, and yes I'm sure this group here isn't the most representative demographic on watching ski content... the fall much better for the normal masses!

also coincides with new product launches and when people are buying for the winter. it's not just who is watching but when. most of us are going to watch it whenever it comes out, but will be more likely to complete their desired action closer to ski season.

[BFD]

good luck on Saint Elias. Who you flying in with?

[skizix]

Uhhhhh no.......just saying I crave watching that stuff more when there’s no opportunity to be doing it........ god forbid I express an opinion different then yours...... but thanks for playing judgemental Web cop.....you’re so hardcore at internetting bruh

Nobody cares that someone went doodie in your sandbox.

But I digress. St. Elias!!! Ho.Lee.Shit!

Vaya con motherfucking Dios Cody! If you bag it...join one of the most exclusive clubs in all of alpinism and/or skiing (and if you bag it...Logan the following weekend,haha, right? )

Good luck and ferfuxsake stay safe out there!

[powdork]

When yer done playing around on St. Elias, get after those National Parks
https://fstoppers.com/commercial/jud...utional-549688

[alpinevibes]

When yer done playing around on St. Elias, get after those National Parks
https://fstoppers.com/commercial/jud...utional-549688

Cody mentioned this on his Blister podcast in a couple months back and said he was "jumping with joy" when he heard the news. Huge breakthrough for the Fifty

Hopefully that means he can release the Fuhrer Finger and others (?) that were held up, this fall!

[NBABUCKS1]

his insta story about that lawyer was great the other day

[TahoeJ]

Can I have the GFC?

Those GFC's are awesome. I have one on order for my F-150 but it won't be finished for several months.

his insta story about that lawyer was great the other day

That guy is a complete douchebag. Funny that mr. tough guy turned out to be so sensitive.

[Alkasquawlik]

Cody mentioned this on his Blister podcast in a couple months back and said he was "jumping with joy" when he heard the news. Huge breakthrough for the Fifty

Hopefully that means he can release the Fuhrer Finger and others (?) that were held up, this fall!

Although I've been jumping for joy, it hasn't gotten any easier. The guberment decided to preserve their old commercial filming policies (I'm in a very grey area for "commercial filming" btw and have been labeled "commercial" but certain persons in the NPS and "non-commercial" by others) for Wilderness areas, which is exactly 100% of the zones I go into. I've still been required to get permits for the lines I've been going for, though with Price vs Barr, I've noticed the NPS personnel being far more hesitant to deny my permits unlike some knee-jerk No's in the past. I've talked multiple times with the lawyer that argued Price vs. Barr, retained counsel myself, and am of the belief if challenged, the Price vs Barr ruling would set precedent for the NPS's continued policies in Wilderness areas where the NPS is allowed to deny permits based on character of content. That being said, again, I've at least now been able to get permits whereas in the past, parks like Glacier National Park where out right saying no from the moment I first called.

Now when it comes to Mount Rainier, I've gone deep down the rabbit hole, all the way to the head offices in DC to see if I could release a video from the Fuhrer Finger. The only answer I got was a subtly threatening letter from DC with no advice on guidance. Personally, I think I could release it and my argument would stand up in court. But at this time, it's not worth it as I still have lines left in NPS territory and want to remain in good standing. That being said, when the project is over and I have time on my hands, I may end up releasing the video just to prove a 1st amendment point.

[alpinevibes]

Although I've been jumping for joy, it hasn't gotten any easier. The guberment decided to preserve their old commercial filming policies (I'm in a very grey area for "commercial filming" btw and have been labeled "commercial" but certain persons in the NPS and "non-commercial" by others) for Wilderness areas, which is exactly 100% of the zones I go into. I've still been required to get permits for the lines I've been going for, though with Price vs Barr, I've noticed the NPS personnel being far more hesitant to deny my permits unlike some knee-jerk No's in the past. I've talked multiple times with the lawyer that argued Price vs. Barr, retained counsel myself, and am of the belief if challenged, the Price vs Barr ruling would set precedent for the NPS's continued policies in Wilderness areas where the NPS is allowed to deny permits based on character of content. That being said, again, I've at least now been able to get permits whereas in the past, parks like Glacier National Park where out right saying no from the moment I first called.

Now when it comes to Mount Rainier, I've gone deep down the rabbit hole, all the way to the head offices in DC to see if I could release a video from the Fuhrer Finger. The only answer I got was a subtly threatening letter from DC with no advice on guidance. Personally, I think I could release it and my argument would stand up in court. But at this time, it's not worth it as I still have lines left in NPS territory and want to remain in good standing. That being said, when the project is over and I have time on my hands, I may end up releasing the video just to prove a 1st amendment point.

Damn, sorry to hear that. I think your strategy is spot on for the scope of the Project. And if shit hits the fan, the Mag/YT collective will get a GoFundMe going to support your fight!

[MakersTeleMark]

After Price, I cannot fathom a takedown request from the AG's office, but I can understand the practicality of not poking a hornet's nest until one has donned a proper suit.

[jackstraw]

Although I've been jumping for joy, it hasn't gotten any easier. The guberment decided to preserve their old commercial filming policies (I'm in a very grey area for "commercial filming" btw and have been labeled "commercial" but certain persons in the NPS and "non-commercial" by others) for Wilderness areas, which is exactly 100% of the zones I go into. I've still been required to get permits for the lines I've been going for, though with Price vs Barr, I've noticed the NPS personnel being far more hesitant to deny my permits unlike some knee-jerk No's in the past. I've talked multiple times with the lawyer that argued Price vs. Barr, retained counsel myself, and am of the belief if challenged, the Price vs Barr ruling would set precedent for the NPS's continued policies in Wilderness areas where the NPS is allowed to deny permits based on character of content. That being said, again, I've at least now been able to get permits whereas in the past, parks like Glacier National Park where out right saying no from the moment I first called.

Now when it comes to Mount Rainier, I've gone deep down the rabbit hole, all the way to the head offices in DC to see if I could release a video from the Fuhrer Finger. The only answer I got was a subtly threatening letter from DC with no advice on guidance. Personally, I think I could release it and my argument would stand up in court. But at this time, it's not worth it as I still have lines left in NPS territory and want to remain in good standing. That being said, when the project is over and I have time on my hands, I may end up releasing the video just to prove a 1st amendment point.

Aside from your post here...

You're back!? Or is this a van post? Hope all went as planned or is going as planned!

[Benneke10]

My work involves commercial film permits, and while I am a big fan of the Fifty, the nature of the project is without a doubt "commercial" which would make it illegal to post videos taken in Wilderness areas. I think that some land managers are more informed about internet/social media stuff than others which gives mixed messages, but the bottom line is that your videos are funded by corporations in order to sell products. If the videos weren't filled with logos and product placement it would be a different story. Having said this, after Price v. Barr I would be shocked if anyone decided to prosecute if you decided to post. I know that in my agency we have been instructed not to enforce commercial filming laws unless there is an egregiously large operation because they don't want more lawsuits.

[altasnob]

Even if the government refused to prosecute, couldn't an environmental group sue the government to make the government follow the wilderness act?

Getty Images, and other big money corps, are thrilled at the idea of commercial filming in National Parks and wilderness without any fees or permits to deal with. If Alka wants to become the test piece on whether you can commercially film in wilderness without fees and permits, I am sure they would help cover his defense.

[Alkasquawlik]

My work involves commercial film permits, and while I am a big fan of the Fifty, the nature of the project is without a doubt "commercial" which would make it illegal to post videos taken in Wilderness areas. I think that some land managers are more informed about internet/social media stuff than others which gives mixed messages, but the bottom line is that your videos are funded by corporations in order to sell products. If the videos weren't filled with logos and product placement it would be a different story. Having said this, after Price v. Barr I would be shocked if anyone decided to prosecute if you decided to post. I know that in my agency we have been instructed not to enforce commercial filming laws unless there is an egregiously large operation because they don't want more lawsuits.

You see, the nature of that argument comes entirely from one's perceptions. So first off, is a logo at the beginning of a film, placed within the boundaries of the film, an actual "advertisement" with the intent of selling more products? I could point you to a hundred years of marketing studies that show there is no direct correlation between advertisements and selling products. Or are theses logos simply acknowledgment of being producers of the film, i.e. every Hollywood film ever listing the funders of the film as Producers and Executive Producers. The main difference is those Hollywood producers are specifically looking for a return on investment thru film distribution. How exactly are corporations looking for a return on their investment when they are films given away for free online like The Fifty? Well we go back to the advertisements argument. But within my series, are their endorsements of products and / or direct influence of products within them? If you look carefully, I am very very careful to never use language to promote or endorse products within these boundaries. So how exactly is the series 'commercial'? There are no endorsements in Wilderness land, the logos could be argued to be simply 'producer credits' with zero return on investment and these producers are funding this project because they see it as a good for skiers, the sport and the mountains. I know this last argument sounds far fetched, but I've had plenty of companies I work with say they don't use athletes to sell products, but to make sure the sport at the highest level is continuing to evolve and inspire the next generations of skiers. I mean, where would you all be if Scot Schmidt, Glen Plake, and / or McConkey didn't exist? I know I wouldn't be nearly as drawn to the sport if I didn't get to watch movies, read magazines and continually be inspired by the stories, athletes and places of skiing.

I mean, this is how it could be argued, and are along the lines of some of the arguments I've utilized successfully. This gets deep into the woods and I totally see one could easily argue either side in the court of law. One of the most successful of my arguments was telling a NPS employee that wanted to deny me a permit because even if I removed logos, I was still a professional skier, therefore I could benefit from imagery on public land. I said and noted down that what they were telling me is that if I was an independently wealthy rich kid, I could shoot movies on public land, but because of my job, I cannot. It wasn't a legal thing at that point, just a moral thing. Which ultimately is why Price vs Barr won because the NPS was issuing citations and permits based upon character of content, character of individual and what their source of income was, which proved to be a massive violation of the government not infringing individual speech.