Video killed the radio star, however Comcast is trying to prevent online video from doing the same to the overpriced and unnecessary cable industry. Comcast announced that on Oct. 1 it will begin capping broadband connections at 250 GB a month. Currently this is a huge amount of data with a limit that the average internet user (2 GB) would never even begin to approach. So why would Comcast make such a cap? It is all about the impending online video future.
The cap Comcast has put in place will directly impact online digital media growth and innovation seen through services such as Hulu, Netflix, On Networks and Move Networks. Their motivation is to protect its video on demand services and prevent ISPs from becoming commodities as 250 GB does not go very far if you are watching HD programming online like movies and live sports.
Our one hope lies in the hands of Congress providing the FCC the power to prevent metered access to the internet. The FCC just recently slapped Comcast on the wrist for degrading P2P traffic on its network which has brought about the consequence of the net neutrality double edged sword. Metered internet access could irrevocably change the development of digital media and the online user experience.
The HD video format war was thought to be over. Back in February Toshiba accepted HD DVDs demise and announced it would step aside, allowing Sony’s Blue-ray to be the industry standard. This was thought a momentous victory for Sony, who’s Betamax had been defeated by JVCs VHS in the videotape format war in the 1970s.
The industry predicted that once a format was settled on, sales of HD video players would explode. Unfortunately this did not happen because the increase in price did not match the overall picture enhancement. To the average consumer, the increase in picture quality between a HDMI DVD player and Blue-ray is marginal, but the Blue-ray machines are still double the cost.
Then the roof caved in this week as Toshiba shot back with its new XD-E500 that utilizes its new eXtended Detail Enhancement (XDE) technology, which upconverts standard DVD to 1080p. Many would suggest this will have no impact on the market because Blue-ray players do the exact same thing as well as allow customers to view true HD videos. I disagree. Instead I think this is the final nail in the coffin for Blue-ray for three reasons:
Price.The Toshiba machine is half the price of a Blue-ray player, making it the lowest cost option for maximizing standard DVD quality.
Confusion. Did you know Blue-ray players also upconvert standard DVDs? It is likely the masses will not and try to extend the life of their DVD libraries until forced to abandon them. The longer the standard DVD player is in a majority of households, the greater the certainty that Blue-ray will be skipped over for reason number three.
Online movie distribution. Netflix, Blockbuster and Amazon all offer movie download and streaming options today. Then of course there is the iTunes behemoth. There is no need for a DVD player when you can obtain movies online and sync them to your TV. The need and desire to own movies in a physical form has past.
As stated by Molly Wood on Buzz Out Loud, Blue-ray is evolutionary, not revolutionary. It is not the next groundbreaking technology, but merely an expensive upgrade. Whether it is video, articles or radio, all media is headed online. Digital distribution is the revolutionary technology and it is right around the corner.
Great news came out his week regarding internet video. Google has been ordered to provide Viacom the log files of YouTube users. This data will be used to prove that copyright infringing videos are the significant majority of content actually watched, demonstrating that YouTube’s traffic and success is built on piracy instead of user generated content. Viacom has stated that this data will not be used to target and bring charges against individuals, and in fact the company will be held in contempt of court if it uses the data for anything beyond determining the popularity of pirated content.
Unsurprisingly, much of the media is up in arms on privacy concerns and the influential nonprofit advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) released strong criticism. The top issue is the belief that the collected user name and IP address could be used to identify individuals, however the court used Google’s own data retention policies to justify its order. I did find this civil disobedience suggestion on TechCrunch amusing though.
Personally, I think our country must come to terms with the fact that anything you do online can be seen by others. Privacy on the Internet is a joke and goes against the open, unwalled garden theme in which the internet was designed. I do not know how to hack, but I have the ability and tools at my disposal to locate a wealth of information about anyone I want. Businesses for a few years now have used the internet as a type of background check for potential hires. The information is there, the true issue is perhaps what people do with their time when they think no one is watching. Well, people are watching. What videos you watch really is not infringing on your privacy. If there is a battle to fight, it is figuring ways to securely transfer financial data digitally. To my earlier premise though, this may be a pipe dream.
I feel confident in what Viacom will find in this discovery process. People use YouTube to find short clips of pirated content. Want to see a quick clip of the Birthday Cake dunk you heard about or Beckham’s highlight real? Thanks to YouTube this is simple, unfortunately it violates copyrights. As a user, I do not care how I see it as long as I can see it now. Mark Cuban was always right about the demise of YouTube, but in its ashes will grow a legal way for users to locate this content and much like new services coming out that deliver full TV episodes, it will probably have significantly better video quality too. YouTube is the Napster of video. It changed the way we use the internet, but it will not reap the benefits because its base is rooted in piracy. RIP YouTube.
During the past few months it seems that online video has become the most important issue for the internet. Some the myriad of topics include monetization, distribution, infrastructure, network neutrality and piracy. The Viacom vs Google lawsuit directly and indirectly touches on many of these issues and could have a dramatic impact in determining the future of the internet. Viacom wants Google’sYouTube to better police its site and remove copyright violations, where Google contends that the DMCA only requires that it remove copyright material after receiving a request from the content owner.
While Google appears to be technically compliant with the law, clearly this represents a major problem for growth in online video because content owners cannot possibly expend the needed resources to monitor and track all violations across the web. BusinessWeek provides a scalable solution where both content owners and online video sites would share the responsibility. It would provide greater management of copyrighted material as well as allow start up sites to thrive and innovate (which is the true purpose of the DMCA).
Additionally, ArsTechnica digs deeper to uncover how Viacom and other content owners can beat piracy of its content through pure good old capitalistic competition. The article looks at how consumers are drawn to services that provide the best balance of price, convenience and quality. It is fairly hard to beat piracy on price (free), but there is absolutely room to undercut them on convenience and quality. Great examples on the industry moving in this direction can be seen in Hulu and Comedy Central.com
It comes as no surprise that a great deal of innovation is occurring in the arena of online video as its proliferation continues. According to BitTorrent CEO Doug Walker, “Video to the PC and video to the TV is expected to grow by a factor of 10 over the next three to four years.” Google continues to struggle with monetizing YouTube with advertising, but how people interact and control video could rapidly change.
DimP, a direct manipulation video player, was presented by a group from the University of Toronto. The technology allows users to navigate their position by dragging objects within the video along their visual trajectory. The creators estimate that this doubles search speed in video. When I first read this I felt that it was merely a cool feature, but doubted its speed and utility. After viewing the demonstration though, I am convinced that we will see this everywhere in about a year(maybe less). The technology provides pinpoint accuracy that you just cannot replicate with today’s video scroll bars. Take a look…
I came across an interesting article this week looking at the Quiznos vs. Subway TV Ad Challenge back in the fall of 2006. The challenge aske Quiznos fans to submit videos that drew a comparison between Quiznos and Subway with Quiznos being superior. The winner received $10,000, and the video was shown on VH1 and on a giant screen in Times Square on New Year’s Eve in 2006.
Easy enough. Subway has decided to sue Quiznos because it contends that the consumer video contained “literally false statements” and depicted Subway in a “disparaging manner.” The issue though is that Quiznos did not make the videos, but can it be held liable for content its fans made at the company’s request. This is an important case because it will set a precedent that could impact on user generated campaigns moving forward.
I believe this will add yet another layer of consideration when developing online campaigns. This could potentially have impact beyond contests that attack or poke fun of competitors because “false claims” could have a very broad interpretation.
Video killed the radio star, however Comcast is trying to prevent online video from doing the same to the overpriced and unnecessary cable industry. Comcast announced that on Oct. 1 it will begin capping broadband connections at 250 GB a month. Currently this is a huge amount of data with a limit that the average internet user (2 GB) would never even begin to approach. So why would Comcast make such a cap? It is all about the impending online video future.
Unsurprisingly, much of the 
During the past few months it seems that 
I came across an 
