I have no doubt, experienced professionals will cringe and say, "No, no, no!!!"
Listen carefully what he is saying. The big leg ALWAYS goes under the boom, BUT... He simply offers a 'hack' here, for the rare situations when you need longer reach of the boom, and can't have the long leg underneath it, because it would be in the shot, AND you don't have any other option (menace arm, etc). His suggestion definitely has merit, although I agree, in the rigid world of professional film/photo production, you would get fired by setting up your C-stand this way.
That trailer for the channel ("Paramount Vault Sizzle") looks like it was done in iMovie (the transitions and theme look awfully like the stock "Newscast" theme...)
Did they give this to some intern to do on her MacBook Pro...?
Warner/Chappell is "considering their options". It may be better to just let this die quietly, rather than push it higher. It is extremely likely that they will continue losing (probably even all the way to SCOTUS, if they decide to take up the case), and such public loss might really motivate that class action.
Your math is a bit off; if they are getting $2m per year today, even if we assume the song has been used in film since the emergence of sound on film in 1927, that would mean less than 90 years, and even if the usage was at around the same frequency as it is today, it would mean less than $180 million in today's dollars. Certainly not billions. And this is the worst-case scenario (for Warner-Chappel).
While people are purchasing it (mostly) as an entertainment device, Apple is trying hard to convince everyone that it is a productivity device (hence, the name iPad Pro). For such, documents fit better on the 4:3 display.
I dont' think the internal storage is for any video content. It is just for apps. Video is still streamed; either from other Apple devices (Macs, iPads, iPhones, iPods), or from online content providers.
As it is, the UHD TV market is in the same place HDTV was some 15 years ago. Back then, many people were bamboozled by sales guys into buying the new $10k flat-screen plasma HDTVs, even though almost no HD content was available. As recently as 2006, a survey found that over 80% of HDTV owners had their HDTV connected to an analogue, SD cable signal, with the image stretched to fill the display (!!??). And vast majority of those believed they were watching HD!!
Well, we are in the same place with 4k today; majority of those who buy $1,5k UHD TVs are thrilled by the image quality of their TV, clueless about the fact that all the content they are watching is still in HD (and a lot of it 720p!). The difference between SD and HD was quite easy to notice; the difference between UHD and HD, not so easy, unless you have 70" display.
Apple had a choice: either make a cheaper device with HD output, or make a more expensive one with UHD output, so that 1% of people out there, who have UHD TVs, AND who know how to get content on them, AND who can tell the difference (i.e. whose TV screen is over 70" big) can get the most out of it. Apple chose to make it cheaper, for the other 99%. Can't blame them...