News for
Number 17 (1932) More at IMDbPro »Number Seventeen (original title)

ad feedback

3 items from 2012

22 February 2012 3:00 PM, PST | Speakeasy/Wall Street Journal | See recent Speakeasy/Wall Street Journal news »

Epa Jeremy Lin

Jeremy Lin is knocking down the milestones of contemporary pop-culture like floaters in the lane. Time magazine cover? Check. Twitter troll explosion? Check. Kim Kardashian-is-comin’-to-get-you rumor? Check.

And now, here comes the first Lin-stant book trying to cash in on Number 17′s burgeoning popularity: “Jeremy Lin: The Reason for the Linsanity,” to be penned by Timothy Dalrymple for Hachette Book Group, which expects to get it into stores by May — in time for the NBA playoffs. »

- Jeff Yang

10 February 2012 11:00 AM, PST | Speakeasy/Wall Street Journal | See recent Speakeasy/Wall Street Journal news »

Getty Images Jeremy Lin of the New York Knicks brings the ball up the floor against the Washington Wizards at Verizon Center on February 8, 2012 in Washington, D.C.

At the Ainsworth, a tony sports lounge on Manhattan’s Lower West Side, two thirds of the club’s screens are tuned to the Hoyas-’Cuse game. But to a delirious clutch of fans at one end of the long bar — my fellow members of the Harvard Asian American Alumni Alliance — the »

- Jeff Yang

18 January 2012 1:08 PM, PST | Deadline TV | See recent Deadline TV news »

The 6-2 U.S. Supreme Court decision favors content owners including Hollywood studios over an unusual coalition of public interest and Internet activists including Google. At issue was whether the federal government had the right in 1994 to pass a law that extended copyright protection to works that were already in the public domain. Lawmakers acted to sync U.S. copyright law with other countries’ rules as part of a broad trade agreement known as the Uruguay Round. But the change meant that public groups lost access to works including Alfred Hitchcock’s 1932 film Number Seventeen,  J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit, Prokofiev’s “Peter and the Wolf” — and about 1 million books that Google said it wanted to make available online. Those challenging the change said that the government had trampled on the First Amendment without a compelling reason. But the Supreme Court justices deferred to Congress’ right to decide the national interest. »

- DAVID LIEBERMAN, Executive Editor

3 items from 2012