VideoNuze Posts

Pretty gushy review today from Walt Mossberg at the WSJ regarding his 10 day experience with AppleTV. I originally offered my opinions on AppleTV's prospects (then called "iTV") back in my December '06 newsletter ("7 Broadband Video Trends for 2007"). I thought AppleTV was likely a winner, but contingent on its content strategy. If it offered buyers access to iTunes content only then its appeal would be much more limited than if it opened up the box to all broadband video sources.

When Steve Jobs offered more details in his Macworld keynote I downgraded my enthusiasm, as they chose the former content strategy, precluding (for now) AppleTV's role as THE bridge between PC/broadband and TV. Walt reiterates this point ("Apple TV's most important limitation is that it can't stream much video or audio directly from the Internet -- yet.") but hints that this capability will be available in gen2 boxes.

I reiterate my opinion - for now AppleTV is ultracool, but will likely find only a limited audience to fork over $299 mainly to watch iTunes content on their TVs, plus manipulate music and photos. When AppleTV allows easy access to the rest of the world of broadband video, then it's going to be a big hit.

I'm heading off to Pebble Beach on Sunday morning, where I'm delivering one of the keynotes at the NAB Futures Summit (a small executive-level annual gathering) there, entitled, "Profiting from Broadband Video's Disruptive Impact".

We released a report in Q4 '06 analyzing the broadcast industry's (both networks and local stations) broadband video initiatives, and one of the report's key conclusions was that local stations' broadband efforts are all over the board. Many have embraced broadband video big time, while others are still at the starting line. I'll be sharing thoughts on how broadband is transforming the video distribution value chain, and where local stations' most attractive opportunities lie.

Unfortunately, my golf shoes are not making the trip with me...hopefully they will next time!

Was of course Viacom's $1 billion suit against Google. I must say, all eyes are riveted on this one. My take is that it's hard to believe there isn't a business deal to be made between these two companies that wouldn't be better for both than having the lawyers slugging it out.

Sure YouTube traffic is up since pulling down many of the Viacom clips, but really what does that prove except that YouTube's rapid growth rate can compensate for these kinds of hiccups? For YouTube to maintain its position as the ultimate video destination, it can't afford to have gaps in its clips springing up here and there. So it should be motivated to make a deal, not just with Viacom, but with all big media companies.

As for Viacom, it's inconceivable to me that they are better off not being a part of YouTube. Exhibit A is the free promotion and exposure The Daily Show has received over the last year from YouTube. Viacom's going to have to lock a muzzle on Jon Stewart to prevent him from lambasting his corporate parent's decision.

None of us knows how courts will interpret the DMCA in this case. The legal scholars' comments I've followed this week certainly don't form a consensus. So I continue to believe, as I wrote about last November ("Big Media's Most Vexing Challenge"), that big media companies' traditional copyright control mentalities are causing them to underoptimize their broadband opportunities. The sooner they loosen their traditional copyright approaches, the sooner they'll be able to fully exploit broadband's potential.

The vast majority of my own broadband video experiences are work-related. So it's always a pleasant reminder of broadband's value when someone close to me uses it for something a little more personal.

Such was the case tonight. Our elementary school age daughter was invited to a birthday party which includes attending a PG-rated movie. Motivated to make sure it would be age-appropriate, my wife jumped online, Googled the movie's title and immediately found the link to the movie's web site. There she was able to watch a series of video clips that provided a good sense of the movie's content, obviating the need to trust an unknown reviewer's written opinion. Satisfied, she closed down her browser. Time elapsed: 5 minutes. Isn't broadband great?

This article in today's Boston Globe points out the looming bandwidth issue that cable ISP customers will be facing as usage of video becomes more widespread. Most people don't realize there are "acceptable use" policies in the user agreements we all sign. That's because today the vast majority of us (99%+) don't come anywhere close to crossing the maximum usage line. However, as this story points out, some people are getting snagged. How many more will cross the line as video usage (particularly from P2P services like Joost and BitTorrent) rises in the coming years?

After our recent report on the broadcast industry's broadband video initiatives, my antennae are up looking for examples of broadcasters' innovation in the broadband video space. So I was pleased to see Today get more immersed in the both broadband and online with its site update announced this week. There's video galore from the program, my only complaint is that it seems like UCG opportunities are limited to uploading photos and also the message boards and blogs. Where are the UGV opportunities??

Lots of scorn flying around the net this week criticizing Oscar's takedown notices to YouTube combined with their miserly video offering at their own site. I'm just going to pile on here. What's happening is totally consistent with the findings of our Q4 '06 report on the broadcast industry and broadband video. A key conclusion of that report was that today networks look at broadband as essentially a new distribution path for existing shows. The 2 options are consumer paid downloads (dominated by iTunes) and free streaming episodes.

What they haven't done yet is create robust clip areas complete with interactivity. This area has been dominated by YouTube and others. As I said in Variety, as a result of networks' inactivity, a vacuum has been created which YouTube is filling. Consumers want clips and they want to interact. The networks should be creating these offerings on their own sites. And they should be working with YouTube. But to do neither is ostrich-like. Their inactions suggest they just wish this whole broadband/community thing would just pass already.