JamieG Analysis

Following is a Email transcript between myself and Philip Hodgetts, a well known pundit in the world of Media.

I feel its an interesting read and Phil has given permission to post.

Philip Hodgetts wrote:

On Sep 24, 2007, at 12:17 AM, James Gardiner wrote:

Thought you might like this one…

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070923-drm-advocates-getting-nervous-about-consumer-backlash.html

Yes interesting. Nice find.

I am surprised that you appear to not understand the need for streaming. I will admit that forward storage with most likely no DRM is most likely the bulk of our digital future.

You’re right, having worked on streaming systems over the last two years, setting them up and designing them for people, I’ve come to two conclusions: RTSP is not necessary and is only possible with a CDN or within a Telco network. It’s impossible to guarantee QOS without the last two options. Heck, even the BuZZ’s limited live listenership has one or two people who experience a drop out every week. That’s with fewer than 10 listeners and we’re on a good server with a high bandwidth connection. What we can’t guaranteee is the status of the Internet between our sever and their computer.

Philip, if Youtube can work just fine doing progressive download, I think using Streaming will work better and most likely also save in some bandwidth. If rtsp was built into a free server like Apache and flashplayer. I expect it would be used. No one said streaming would replace store and forward. There are other markets and possibilities with this technology that would most likely be beneficial to a independent producer. As you know, media in all ways if fragmenting into different delivery methods and business models.

Plus, rtsp unicast puts enormous strains on the server farm - overall it’s probably 20x more complex to scale an rtsp delivery system than an http one.

I don’t see how, at the end of the day, and rtsp server is nothing more then a bandwidth server like Apache with a little bit more complex protocol controlling the data. And as such, would scale just as well as Apache running progressive download would.

However, other business models will exist that may work well under streaming and with some kind of content management.
Imagine if DL.TV or similar could offer a streaming service to any web browser and could pretty much enforce it and therefore garentee the number/stats for the advertiser.

I imagine that would be appealing to people who see the old models carried forward. I do not find it appealing at all.

Just because you don’t find it appealing is not what business decisions are made. Sure some of these are old ideas, but some old ideas may still fly under certain business models/demographics.

Imagine the niche content producer making content he will only release on a secure, inexpensive streaming link. Makes it harder to pirate, and as the infrastructure is inexpensive, can sell it so cheap that its not worth pirating. This would encourage the ods for him to make a return or a better return on his work.

Niche producers are never going to be able to afford even the most “inexpensive” streaming link. Most producers are technically ignorant and have trouble putting up http delivery.

If rtsp was a apache module, and all the cheap ISP,s around the world simply upgraded and turned it on.. This would change very quickly. General web hosting admins would pick it up in a snap. rtsp streaming is not difficult compared to many features of a Apache server. Come on Phil, I expect you have run a few streaming servers like me, and also Apache, you should know this.

And finally, your vision of the future in which people subscribe to RSS feeds of content. This still does not answer the bigger issue of how to cross promote.

It does in fact. The feed includes all the cross-promotional opportunities that are already tailored to their previous downloads and viewing habits. Far, far better than any existing system. It’s not the subscription to the feed that costs in our model, it’s the actual download of the payable program. Subscribing and customizing the feed is free. Previews in the feed are free. You only pay micropayments (on average a penny a minute, but content will go both ways around that guideline)

Sorry Phil, this is where I completely disagree with you. I may be reading you wrong above, but it sounds like your saying, people only really have to subscribe to your feeds and they will get all the promotion they need or would want. Just like a cable TV service. Umm. some one’s sounding like a Gatekeeper here.

This is where I completely disagree with you. And STB of the future will subscribe to RSS feeds for HD hi quality download. However, some kind of middle ground technology. A hybrid of Web and interface design for a remote control.
This Hybrid, in my opinion, requires the addition of streaming technology to be as effective as it needs to be.

The TV set needs to be an independent system that does not rely on a Computer in the corner to administer it. (not like AppleTV, Media Center) It needs to be as simple as going to the shop, buy it, drop it on your table, plug areal (or in this case an Internet connection) into it, turn it on and go. People may need to program channels (Or RSS feeds) in to it as they tune in channels today. However, a freedom to wonder possible channels like web pages needs to be developed.

I feel this is an important key to the TV3.0 future.

How do people surf around and see what other sites are serving up on the Video RSS feeds.

Wrong paradigm, sorry. It’s an open system and all content goes through it, regardless of where it’s hosted or sourced.

Really, and as it is an “it”, such as Apple, or Foxtel. Who will control that. And what power they will have.
Again, you sound like your making a system that people point at then you take control of the rest. Sure, you may have all the good intentions in the world. But that’s a lot of power, and well, we know where that leads to.

I go back to the idea that the TV user with his remote control needs to be in full control. RSS feeds are a distribution medium controlled by a single entity. This does not fly with me.

Sure, progressive download does a reasonable job. “REASONABLE” being the operative word here. Streaming would do it better and has many other advantages.

I remain unconvinced that, other than the DRM/control issue that streaming has any advantages. Watching the apple streams of their keynotes is usually problematic. Don’t dare pause or you’ll lose the stream completely. And that’s Apple/Akami at their best.

Yes its pretty poor. I have used concurrent a bit. worked great. Also another third party rtsp software that was part of a STB implementation I developed for a public company here in Melbourne. Was very good it. Was lite, fast, ran on very limited hardware. Its all about IO.
Progressive download has its own issues too..

At the end of the day Phil. I fully believe in your vision, I am just at odds on how we are going to get there. I feel that features like streaming are part of this. And a security layer is bound to come with it. And like it or not, will make other niche business models possible.

We’ll have to wait and see,. Since streaming has been tried, and continues to fail, and our approach hasn’t been tried, I’m in favor of going over the new opportunity rather than revisit a continual failure. (Joost are having enormous QOS issues in the US. http://newteevee.com/2007/08/13/the-joost-problem-american-broadband/ )

I have a project in which 150 streams or secure content would be very successful. If it does go well, it will have the money to grow the infrastructure. But this is niche. And niche is going to grow and get bigger in the future, especially if you can ensure some form of low grade protection.
Lets not kaka these business models Philip. Many do work, and many rich Internet business people have used to become rich. They have generally had niche premium content. If it works for them, I can see it working for other models that simply are not viable with current technologies and pricing.

I agree that content owners will think streaming is a good idea. Over the last two years we built out the Mike Reagan radio show’s streaming service and tried to get a suitable package together for the American Cheerleading association, but to meet their modest requirement of two streams to 5,000 people each, was so cost-prohibitive that they gave up on the idea completely.

Sure, if growing that big, you probably in an area where people will pirate your content anyway, so, yes it moves into a different category in which any kind of protection could damage rather then help.

And, fwiw, we can stream through OTN/klickTab but I’d recommend against it because rtsp is not supported on iPods or AppleTV. (Pretty stupid that AppleTV won’t support streaming direct from the Internet, but that’s the current state of the software. YouTube is progressive download on AppleTV just like it is in a browser.)

And a real question, other than specific business applications, where are the rtsp success stories in delivering entertainment?

Philip

Philip, maybe it because I come from a land of convicts, a land where we lead the world in pirating TV shows. A land of quick learning, laid back, she’ll be right mate individualise. Coming it to a world where downloading free content is noted to be easier then using the best store on the web iTunes.
I’m sorry Phil, but I see this becoming a very big problem for the future of the content I see and love. Maybe we need to go though a lot of pain before the mentality of the media consumer of the world wakes up. But really, I would prefer this learning period to be as soft as possible.

Abandoning any form of policing media would be similar to stoping all police car portols in a hi-crime area. We need to step up the prtrols not stop them completely. Not that the Cars actually stop crime, they are just in the minds of the public. Some policy needs to be implemented to archive this in the minds of the public.

If I am to compare it to Film, in which I am taking a big part in killing with my current job. I am sad to see it go, but really prefer it as the replacement is far better. But in the case of TV3.0 and the hurt we will go though. I am not looking forward to that right now. Maybe your RRS/micro transaction ideas will fly, but I still do not see it thriving as much as the past industry has. Well not for a long time in any case.

Finally, I would also like to ask why you seem to be against some of these ideas. Yes forms of DRM are part of it but as usual, business models build with certain restrictions do fly. DRM is like a Gun, I can go around and shoot kinds in a school, or go into the forest and hunt for food for my family. Media seem to prefer to focus on the “School Shootings” I suppose it get more readership.

James

Philip Hodgetts philip@DigitalProductionBuZZ.com
Managing Editor
Creative Planet’s Digital Production BuZZ

Live Thursdays 6-7pm Pacific
Archives and Podcast
http://www.DigitalProductionBuZZ.com
Talk radio for Digital Production,
Post Production and Distribution
Office: 818 206 2415