VideoNuze Posts

The ad management company Adap.tv has taken the wraps off its new "Player Partner Program" this morning. Initial partners include Brightcove, thePlatform, Mogulus, VMIX, Twistage and Kaltura. All are now integrated with Adap.tv's "OneSource" ad management system.

Yesterday, Dakota Sullivan, Adap.tv's VP of Marketing told me that though the company has been working with Brightcove and thePlatform informally to date, the new program will provide more structure to partners. Included are a central location on the Adap.tv web site for partners for promotional purposes along with other co-marketing and technology updates. No cash is changing hands with partners though, as Adap.tv tries to maintain neutrality.

These types of partnership programs are springing up all around the broadband video ecosystem, as companies continue to carve out their specific niches, and seek to benefit from partners' marketing efforts in a resource-constrained environment. I expect we'll continue to see them get rolled out.

EveryZing, the search and publishing technology firm, is announcing this morning that it has raised a third round of $8.25M from GE/NBC's Peacock Equity Fund and existing investors, bringing its total funding to date to $22M. In conjunction with the funding NBC Universal will integrate EveryZing's four products into NBC's Media Works platform for deployment across all of NBCU's online properties. Tom Wilde, EveryZing's CEO confirmed it was a flat round and gave me some further details last Friday.

Tom believes that EveryZing is the only 3rd party technology provider that has been integrated across Media Works. This has two key benefits - first, it means EveryZing's products will be readily available to all NBCU properties, thereby minimizing upfront work involved with each successive deployment. And second, the pre-negotiated pricing and standing purchase order means individual properties (and EveryZing) will avoid time-consuming negotiations each time around.

I've been bullish on EveryZing in the past (here and here) as I think their focus on generating metadata for and indexing all content forms (video, audio, text and image) allows content providers to leverage consumers' huge adoption of search. With respect to video specifically, I've long thought that one of the key inhibitors of online viewership has simply been lack of robust discovery in traditional search environments (e.g. Google, Yahoo, etc.). EveryZing addresses this, essentially merging video's surging popularity with search's universal acceptance. One other key benefit this leads to is enhanced targetability of ads.

Tom's been an evangelist on these fronts, recently publishing "Is Your SEM Strategy Ready for Web 3.0," which makes very salient points about how content consumption is shifting from a traditional "container" paradigm to new "objects" paradigm. In the old model, content providers packaged their works into discreet units (e.g. newspapers, albums, etc.). More recently though the content itself has atomized into "objects", which consumers in turn package themselves (e.g. playlists, RSS feeds, etc.). Lacking their historical packaging heft, content providers must find new ways to associate objects, lest many be left undiscovered, and therefore unmonetized.

Tom explained how this notion is at play in the NBC deal. Obviously NBC has a sprawling content empire, which it wants to fully expose across all of its disparate audiences. But until now, even clearly related content hasn't always been shared with users. Worse, this means that interested ad dollars may not be able to find enough inventory to be allocated against, leaving money on the table.

With EveryZing, NBC's goal is to be able to describe and index all of its content, allowing it to drive improved discovery and monetization. In the non-linear video-on-demand world that defines the broadband video experience, my sense is that these capabilities will become more and more valuable.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

Daisy Whitney, my podcast colleague and omnipresent broadband video industry reporter, has recently released an excellent 25-page E-Book on fair use. It is titled "Keeping You and Your Content Out of Court" is a solidly researched piece on an extremely gray subject area that has tripped up even some of the biggest content creators. If you've ever been concerned about how much of someone else's content you can freely use in your work, and what the guidelines for such usage are, this E-Book is a must-read.

The E-Book is available here, with a VideoNuze discount (enter code "VideoNuze" at checkout), for $31.50. Note, there's no commission in this for me.

In this short interview below, Daisy explains what you can expect.

VideoNuze: Tell us more about the E-Book you've written. What are the key benefits to readers?

Daisy Whitney: For the E-Book I interviewed more than a dozen leading copyright attorneys and IP experts, asking for their understanding of fair use and how they advise their clients. I describe the most important fair use court rulings of the last 35 years and what they mean in day-to-day practice. The E-Book gives content creators the tools and "litmus tests" they need to assess whether a video they've created complies with fair use standards. The book is a cost-effective alternative to hiring a lawyer to address these kinds of questions. I hope that creators will learn how to evaluate, edit and distribute their work in a way that avoids any legal troubles.

VN: Why does "fair use" matter to online video creators in the first place?

DW: The fair use doctrine from U.S. Copyright law impacts many decisions video creators make about their videos. For example: What if you wanted to play background music in a video? Can you zoom in on a copyrighted photograph on a web site in your video? And how about incorporating a 5 or 10 second video clip from a TV show? Are you allowed to do any of these things or are you putting yourself at risk of being sued? The answers are not black and white. Just ask the mom of two who shot a video of her toddler dancing to a Prince song and is now being sued by Universal Music Group!

VN: At a high level, what makes compliance with fair use such a gray area?

DW: Fair use - like many areas of law - is ultimately an art, not a science. That's why lawyers have jobs! Fair use isn't a law per se, it's a set of standards, which can be either a sword or a shield. I have distilled what I heard from the lawyers and experts I interviewed into a set of guidelines and precedents which I think will be invaluable for content creators.

VN: Can you give a couple examples of how fair use has been viewed by the courts?

DW: The Harry Potter case - Warner Bros. and J.K. Rowling vs. RDR Books, is a great example because it helps to define the concept of "transformative" work, which is an important fair use standard. In the case, Warner/Rowling argued that a new online encyclopedia being written with the use of Potter materials would have competed with a similar project Potter author Rowling was also working on. The court ruled that the new encyclopedia did not significantly alter or change the original work so as to become a wholly new work, therefore it was not considered fair use. Ultimately the author added his own comments and critiques, "transforming" his encyclopedia into a new work and qualifying for fair use.

VN: What are the main things an online video creator can do to comply with fair use conventions?

DW: For starters, they should educate themselves about fair use. For instance, some people still believe there's a mythical "15 second rule" that freely allows you to use 15 seconds of someone else's work. That's not true! If your use of someone else's work causes marketplace harm and infringes someone else's commercial rights, that's where you'll get into hot water. So again, the goal of "transforming" the original work into something new is paramount.

Below is the 15th edition of the VideoNuze Report podcast, for May 8, 2009.

Daisy Whitney and I are back on track with our weekly VideoNuze Report podcast. This week Daisy adds more detail to a story she wrote for TV Week, "Targeted Ads: The Holy Grail?" which explores some recent ad targeting successes and ongoing challenges.

On the same targeting theme, I discuss a post I wrote earlier this week "Food2: A New Example of How Cable Networks Leverage Broadband." Scripps Networks, owner of Food Network and other lifestyle cable channels recently launched Food2, a destination targeted to the age 21-34 demo. It's a move that I believe will be closely watched by other channels looking to benefit from broadband's rise by "super-serving" specific audiences.

Click here to listen to the podcast (14 minutes, 38 seconds)

Click here for previous podcasts

The VideoNuze Report is available in iTunes...subscribe today!

Three weeks ago, in "HD Cloud Launches Video Encoding Platform, Capitalizing on Cloud Computing," I detailed how the company is offering video content providers a new, "cloud-based" approach to meet their escalating transcoding needs. Today's post is about mPOINT, another new entrant in cloud-based transcoding and syndication, whose TranSend service goes a step further by also offering metadata creation and management. Chiranjeev Bordoloi, mPOINT's co-founder and CEO and Chris Cali, co-founder and CTO, gave me a rundown recently.

There are multiple drivers behind TranSend (and others in this space): an exploding array of video encoding and metadata formats, skyrocketing premium-quality content consumption and syndication, distribution to mobile devices and various business models/rules, to name just a few.

In fact, though I'm often skeptical of vendor-written white papers, mPOINT's recently released free white paper "Content Syndication in the Cloud" provides a pretty unbiased overview of the evolving video market and the resulting operational complexities. Many of its themes resonate with what I've been hearing from content executives for a while, which are genuine inhibitors to the further development of the "Syndicated Video Economy" I've written about so often. Especially for those new to cloud-based computing, the white paper is an excellent resource. There's even a handy "buyer's guide" to assist in evaluating alternatives.

As Chiranjeev and Chris explained, one of the key differentiators for TranSend is its comprehensiveness. It offers transcoding, metadata creation and management, syndication, packaging, delivery and reporting - all performed in the cloud, which generates cost-savings and simpler work flows. Another focus is on mobile video advertising, where TranSend is able to call an ad server like DART and the source file for the requested video and on-the-fly encode both into the phone's optimal file format.

Chiranjeev and Chris said they're repeatedly told by customers that simplicity, without feature sacrifices, is a key goal. And on the cost side, with a model based on GB in and GB out, plus the number of transcodes, the price usually works out to approximately $2/GB, which mPOINT believes is a fraction of non-cloud alternatives.

mPOINT is focusing on mid-tier and larger media companies that emphasize syndication, which increasingly is most everyone. Yesterday the company announced SnagFilms, the independent film aggregator backed by former AOL executives Ted Leonsis and Steve Case as an early customer. Other announcements are in the hopper. mPOINT bootstrapped itself to profitability and took a seed round in December '08 from Greycroft Partners to tap its relationships for growth. The company is also building out a growing ecosystem of partners which currently include Amazon, Aspera and IBM.

TranSend and others offer the kind of infrastructure advances that are helping lubricate the broadband video business model. I constantly hear from small-to-mid video content providers who are enticed by the surging popularity of online distribution but are often still daunted by its immature business models and operational complexity. mPOINT and others are showing that clever entrepreneurs are steadily addressing these needs.

While executives at other incumbent encoding/transcoding vendors have told me that they have not seen any customer erosion due to cloud-based alternatives, they are watching the developments closely and planning their own initiatives. For now the largest content providers, who have the deepest pockets to staff their own encoding, syndication and metadata operations may be reluctant to be early adopters of cloud-based alternatives. Their concerns span security in the cloud to insufficient proof of cloud success as yet. But with TranSend and others addressing so many critical market drivers, my sense is that this space is going to attract a lot of attention quickly and is poised to become quite hot.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

(note: I've been under the weather this week, which explains yesterday's absence of VideoNuze. I'm getting back on my feet and hope to be resuming regular publication)

Late last week Scripps Networks, parent of cable networks Food Network, HGTV, FLN and others, launched Food2, a web site targeting the 21-34 demo. Scripps has long been a leader among cable networks in capitalizing on online/broadband's potential, and this newest entry is yet another example of how important broadband is to cable networks' future growth. I spoke with Bob Madden, GM of Food's online properties to learn more.

First and foremost, Food2 is distinguished by its focus on the 21-34 demo. One of the interesting things about Food Network on air has been its appeal to younger audiences (this will likely resonate with those of you who have teenagers). But based on research it conducted Food executives realized that - no surprise - younger audiences want to experience food-related content in different ways: with shorter form non-linear content, more emphasis on experimental tastes and increased access to social/content sharing tools.

So Food2 was conceived as an effort to "super-serve" this audience. Scripps defines Food2 as "designed to be a social experience - just like food itself. It's the intersection of food, drink and pop culture." With a heavy emphasis on Facebook/Twitter integration, tons of short videos featuring hip young culinary talent and original webisodes plus challenges, recipes and tips, Food2 seeks to live up to its goal of experiencing food through the eyes of millennials.

To me, Scripps' real insight from a business perspective is recognizing that broadband creates new "shelf space" for them to launch properties that target specific audiences and in turn specific advertisers seeking to reach those audiences. This matters a lot because due to existing contracts with cable/satellite/telco operators, cable networks have been constrained, at least relative to broadcast networks, in their ability to fully distribute online their popular full length programs (for example, there is no Food Network content on Hulu). While these contracts have led cable networks to achieve highly stable financial performance in this rocky economy, it has deprived them of fully serving their audiences.

Food2 demonstrates that there's online value to be built separate and aside from simply distributing full-length programs online. And because Food2 will be promoted on Food Network's air, and will have some of its advertising sold in packages with Food Network and other Scripps properties, it is off to a running start. Lastly, while Scripps doesn't want Food2 to be seen as a "farm team" for Food Network, there's no question that if talent gets traction on Food2, it has the potential to migrate to the 90M homes that Food Network is carried in, offering lots of interesting upside.

Food2 is a tangible example of a traditional media company recognizing that younger audiences want to consume media differently and that broadband is a new kind of medium that can serve them accordingly. With practically all cable networks savoring access to younger audiences, I expect Food2 will be watched by others and eventually spawn similarly targeted sites.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

Looking over last month's posts with an eye for 2-3 themes to extract for my recap post today, I was instead struck by one overarching theme: innovation is alive and well in the broadband video space. Other sectors of the economy may have ground to a halt in the current recession, but whether it's new technologies, new service models or new approaches by traditional media companies, the pace of innovation in all things related to broadband video seems only to be accelerating.

Here are some of the examples from last month's posts:

New technologies

• SundaySky - a new approach to dynamically generate videos out of web site content
• HD Cloud - cloud-based encoding and transcoding plus 3rd party syndication
• Market7 - web-based platform for collaboratively creating and producing video
• FreeWheel - ad management/distribution company raises another $12M

New service models

• Sezmi - next-gen video service provider aiming to replace cable/satellite/telco
• TurnHere - distributed video production services for the corporate market
• Babelgum - premium-quality content destination for independent producers
• YuMe Mindshare iGRP - new measurement unit to compare on-air and online ad performance
• YouTube-Disney - short-form promotional deal

New approaches by traditional media companies

• Disney-Hulu - Exclusive 3rd party online distribution for established broadcast network
• Cable networks launching webisodes - online initiatives to attract and retain new online audiences
• New York magazine video re-launch - emphasis on curating best-of-the web videos with brand
• WWE Smashup - fan-submitted video mashup content driving awareness of on-air special

Now granted I have an eye out for broadband innovations so this list is somewhat self-serving. But remember that for every item above I was probably pitched on 2-3 others that I didn't write about due to time limitations. Some of these other items may have been picked up by other news outlets and captured in the news aggregation side of VideoNuze, while plenty of them likely received little attention.

My point is that throughout the whole broadband video ecosystem there is a vibrant sense of entrepreneurialism that is slowly but surely remaking the traditional video landscape. To be sure, not all of this stuff is going to work out; either business models will be faulty, technologies won't deliver as promised or consumers will reject what they're being offered. Nonetheless, from my vantage point, the wheels of innovation continue to spin faster. That makes it a very exciting time to be part of the industry.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

OK, Hulu now has ABC in its corner for the next 2 years, along with a re-upped program exclusivity commitment from NBC and Fox. But the nagging question remains: even with all its premium content, fabulous user experience and surging traffic, when will Hulu prove its business model? How that question gets answered will be the real test of Hulu's ultimate success. And with 3 of the 4 broadcast networks now hitching themselves to the Hulu locomotive, the answer is also going to be pivotal to how the industry navigates the broadband video era.

To be clear, VideoNuze readers know that I've been a big fan of Hulu from Day 1. The site has only gotten better over time, not only with more content added, but by continued improvements in the user experience. All of this has no doubt contributed to Hulu's rapid rise up the usage rankings, landing it in the top 3 for the first time in March, with 380M views, according to comScore.

A source familiar with the Disney deal told me the deal was entirely predicated on Disney's desire to tap into Hulu's audience in order to increase ABC's online reach. Among other evidence indicating Hulu's upside potential, comScore data apparently showed that only 8% of the ABC.com audience visits Hulu and only 13% of the Hulu audience visits ABC.com.

To me, three indicators of how much the Hulu deal meant to ABC are the 2 year exclusivity commitment, the redistribution rights for ABC programs to 3rd parties Hulu gained (except for grandfathered ABC partners), and that ABC will allow its programs to be viewed outside of its much-celebrated video player for the first time.

Importantly, the former two terms effectively foreclose any full-length program distribution deal with YouTube and others. For now at least, ABC will limit its relationship with YouTube to clips only. That's a pretty big call; remember YouTube is the category leader that not only has a 40% share of the market, but is also currently over 15 times the size (in streams) of Hulu. There's also YouTube's relationship with Google, which of course has the most formidable online monetization engine (albeit one that hasn't been fully leveraged by YouTube as yet).

The YouTube decision underscores my ambivalence about the broadcast networks' singular embrace of Hulu because there's little evidence that Hulu has yet developed a profitable or sustainable business model. I've written previously about the paucity of ads in Hulu (and broadcasters' own sites for that matter) and how this is creating user expectations that are going to be hard to reset when more ads are inevitably loaded in. One of the reasons users love Hulu is because it is so light on ads. But will Hulu's traffic flatten or decline when the non-skipppable ad load is 2x, 3x or 4x what it is currently?

Further, there was no evidence of customized ad creative or formats meant to incent deeper engagement (unless you count the companion banners prompting users to click to learn more). Deeper engagement and interactivity are supposed to be the calling cards of broadband video advertising. But the ads on Hulu appear to be the same as seen on-air, suggesting Hulu hasn't been able to persuade its brand advertisers to invest in custom creative to leverage the Hulu environment.

Now I know we're in a recession, but still, over a year since Hulu's official launch, and with its tremendous traffic growth, I think all of this is cause for real concern. Hulu is being embraced by the broadcast industry as its main online video vehicle, yet it isn't close to proving it has a model that can actually make money. I don't have insight as to what's going on here, but I hope the networks that are exclusively entrusting their prized programs to Hulu - and consequently incenting huge real-time shifts in viewer behavior - do.

Longer term of course, the networks' bet on Hulu becomes even more profound. That's because as convergence devices of every stripe bring broadband viewing all the way to users' TVs, there's going to be inevitable cannibalization of viewing traditionally done through linear on-air/cable delivery. (Btw, despite much-heralded research to the contrary, anecdotal evidence suggests this is happening already. Just go ask any college student about their viewing behavior.)

Down the road, networks are going to be increasingly reliant on broadband-based ad revenue as their main meal ticket. And if all that's being served up are digital pennies, nickels or dimes - as I believe Hulu is delivering today - then even all the usage in the world will still leave the networks very hungry indeed.

Now that ABC has thrown in with Hulu, you have to believe CBS will as well. With all of the networks on board, they're increasingly betting the industry on the hope that Hulu can figure out its business model. For their sake, let's hope it can.

What do you think? Post a comment now.