How Comcast Controls Sony’s Internet TV Plans

At a recent press breakfast, someone asked top executives of Sony Electronics about their plans to let their televisions show video delivered by the Internet. While the company has an early effort, called the Bravia Internet Link, Stan Glasgow, the president of Sony Electronics in the United States, said the company can now introduce better products because it has reached an agreement with the cable industry.

Sony’s Bravia Internet Video Link module.Sony’s Bravia Internet Video Link module.

My back arched like a cornered cat. Why should cable companies have anything to say about what I watch that is not on their system?

I spoke to Mr. Glasgow afterward. What he said made sense and even showed a small ray of hope for an area of technology that has been far too stagnant.

Right now, he explained, the Sony Bravia Internet Link and all the other set-top boxes that get Internet content connect to televisions separately from cable systems.

“If you have to ask a consumer to switch sources constantly between cable and another source, it is not the normal consumer experience,” he said. “There has to be a more integrated way to have cable and Internet content on the same user interface.”

I know that many Bits readers scoff at the idea that pushing the “input” button on a remote is any problem at all. Many of you describe rather complex rigs for watching television. But deep in your hearts, you know that you are a geeky minority and Mr. Glasgow is right that many people really want a drop-dead simple interface.

What does it take to make that happen? A lot of time and excruciating meetings, it turns out.

“We’ve worked with the cable companies for five years to develop a system that would allow us and the rest of the television manufacturers to have alternative content on the TV,” Mr. Glasgow said.

The main negotiations were between Sony and Comcast, Mr. Glasgow said, but the deal involves more cable systems and electronics makers. A rather cryptic press release was issued about the agreement last may titled “Sony Electronics and Major U.S. Cable Operators Negotiate National ‘Two-Way’ Plug and Play Solution.”

The deal called for Sony to support the latest incarnation of CableCard, the system that in theory will eventually let a television tap into all the features of a cable system, including premium channels and video on demand, without the need for a set-top box.

This technology was mandated by Congress in 1996, but it has been bogged down for years over a variety of technical and economic issues. A crucial fight has been over who gets to control the program guide and interface people use to pick what shows to watch. By forcing customers to use their set-top boxes and program guides, cable companies hoped to preserve their right to promote pay-per-view movies and other potentially lucrative services. And the television makers, of course, didn’t want to be locked out of any possible money to be made.

Under pressure from the Federal Communications Commission, the cable industry and electronics makers reached what I might call the “two-guide compromise.” Each device using the new CableCard standard, called Tru2Way, will offer the cable system guide and also a guide developed by the manufacturer, which can include links to cable programs, Internet video and anything else it can think up.

A related agreement binds the largest cable systems to make sure that they will support Tru2Way by July 1, 2009. Tru2Way enables interactive services like video on demand that the first version of CableCard did not.

This agreement, which was filed with the F.C.C., has the careful wording of a nuclear disarmament treaty. For instance, a TV maker’s program guide “may overlay the manufacturer’s navigation control method over cable screens if the overlay (i) is user initiated for each use, (ii) is solely for navigation (e.g., no ads), (iii) is transitory, and (iv) appears the same regardless of the channel.”

Later, I checked in with Richard Green, the chief executive of CableLabs, which publishes the CableCard standard. He confirmed Mr. Glasgow’s account of the two-guide compromise and said it would help propagate Tru2Way.

“Sony coming aboard was a huge step forward,” he said. “It allows a common platform.”

There is a lot of good that may come from the evolution of this standard. If it works, you may ultimately have fewer remote controls cluttering your coffee table. And you won’t have to choose between a video recorder with lots of features, say from TiVo, and one that works well with your cable system.

Even more interesting, the Tru2Way technology includes a programming environment, based on Java, that allows applications to interact with television signals. You can imagine an application that lets you trash-talk “American Idol” contestants with your MySpace buddies or draw electronic mustaches on the face of political candidates as they debate. There could be the equivalent of the iPhone App Store for your television.

There’s only one problem here: All of these applications have to be tested by CableLabs and approved by your cable operator. That’s the same crowd that took five years to agree to let Sony build its own electronic program guide.

Mr. Green of CableLabs says he hopes that that is going to change.

“The cable industry is not known for its openness,” he said. “One of the real drivers for us, and why we spent so many years and so many meetings to get the interface done, is to open the cable interface to innovation. ”

I’m not holding my breath. When I asked Mr. Glasgow when we will see products from Sony that simply offer that program guide mixing cable and Internet video, he said they may not be available until 2010 or later.

“This takes time,” he said. “I would love it to occur tomorrow. I get very frustrated.”

Comments are no longer being accepted.

They don’t get it.

Walled garden environments are out.

They can implement any standard they want, but as soon as the television is connected to web based programming, products will come out that circumvent the cable co’s wishes and present content that each used tailors to his needs. And there will be a flood of alternate programming to fill those needs.

If the Cable Industry could make the World do its bidding, there will not be a “drop-dead simple” way for the consumer to choose between Internet Video and conventional CATV video in our lifetime. However, they are likely to be forced to accommodate the consumer sooner than they would like for three reasons.

First, modern TVs have multiple inputs for a variety of different jacks. Typically, most are unused. But, consumers are going to start getting curious to know if the unused jacks will enable them to get Internet Video to the TV. They will discover that a simple modern laptop computer will do the job because it can connect to the TV in a number of ways and can also connect to the Internet via WiFi. Last month Wal-Mart sold such a laptop for $300 in a special offering.

Second, there is a constantly growing library of high-quality video on the Internet that simply is not available via television. One example is older documentaries.

Third, the approaching economic depression will motivate consumers to cut costs. When they discover that a $300 laptop gets them Internet Video to the TV, many will drop CATV service and retain only broadband Internet using the laptop as an alternate set-top-box for Internet Video. Dropping CATV service will likely save them $50 (or more) per month thereby covering the cost of a new laptop in six months.

//www.insidedigitalmedia.com

Of course, the elephant in the room not addressed in the article is MONEY. The cable companies want to be able to charge their customers extra for the privilege of using a set-top box. That the customer is then locked in to whatever over-priced, poor-quality box the company contracts is only an added bonus.

Since the entire telco industry is founded on government-protected monopolies, and runs on naked greed, the cable companies have been allowed to drag their feet on cable-cards for the last twelve years, and they will keep on dragging as long as they can.

The Cable Industry understands perfectly well.

They understand that to protect every source of revenue and control over viewers will take Obfuscation, Delay, Outright breach of agreements, Brinksmanship, and Overly complex standards and systems.

They will do EVERYTHING to hold onto their profits.

Hey, they’ve been successful in this for 13 YEARS (so far), and it looks like they’ll get at least another 3-5 years in addition.

But, under the Cheney-Bush-we-hate-citizens Administration, businesses who donated to the Republican Party got anything they wanted.

(NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN)

Auto makers, Record labels and the cable company all fighting the inevitable progress of digital technology. Comcast is also fighting this with its bandwidth limits that will make iptv impossible to have.

I’m hoping this will allow my PS3 to act as game console, blu-ray player, AND cable box (DVR) some day.

I’ve been working on cablecard systems for 5 years, with very little traction. I think video content will all move onto the internet before cable companies get a clue and make things open for developers and easy for consumers.

Our TV connects to multiple computers, Tivo, cable, DVD, and a PS3. Cable better get its act together soon — we hardly watch anything on the 100 plus channels right now. And are usually watching shows on Tivo if we watch any cable at all.

I just want TV content over IP – let me pay my Internet connection costs and subscribe to whatever content I want. Presently I’m fairly happy with Tivo Series3 HD – forget the smart TV, just give me a great monitor that integrates well with a great media server (like Tivo).

What I don’t understand is why it’s so difficult to view video content from around the word over the internet.

I tried to register to use canalplay.com which offers French video on demand and was denied because it’s only available to French IP addreses. However, I can buy a relatively inexpensive zone free, multi-format dvd player and watch Frech DVDs without too much trouble.

The cost of hardware to decode HD video is plummeting. Probably the next-gen iPhone will have 1080p decode and Displayport output. At that point it’s game over for Comcast. Everyone under 30 will watch Hulu through an iPhone connected to an HDTV. Or a similar setup through a game console.

Hulu only has to add more content, and a pricing tier to remove ads, to become a practical replacement for Comcast for the casual viewer. There’s no need to create a Hulu-only set-top box because the player can be embedded into any other box with sufficient hardware.

The delivery of television programs over the internet will destroy the cable companies who are basically just middlemen between the consumers and the television programmers. It is ridiculous to believe that the cable companies would participate in something that will hasten their (inevitable) demise.

I’m very excited about what Microsoft is doing with xbox live. The netflix deal is genius. I’m hoping to get rid of my cable company all 2gthr. Cable & satellite companies monthly subscriptions are getting more and more expensive everyday and their package offerings i think are unfair. What i like about the new xbox live interface is that it allows you to watch w/e you want when you want. The on demand programming is really shaping up. Over 20,000 on demand programming @ my fingertips and more to come. All @ a waaaaay more affordable price than cable & satellite. $60.00 per YEAR for an xbox live account and $8.00 to $14.00 per MONTH for nexflix. HOoooRay! finally an alternative to cable & satellite tv!

I discovered this blog six months ago just about the time we got fed up with Comcast’s billing system that no one in either the Comcast residential or business side could fix, except if we signed up for triple play.

At that point, when we were also told that we would be paying $61.00 per TV set (they are non digital) in our 1400 square foot home, we chopped out six feet of our Comcast Cable and discovered Internet TV on a $19.95 3.0 GB Verizon DSL line.

Up until this article, I had always assumed that the problems with Comcast that we, as many others had reported, were really connected to badly configured computer billing and customer service systems.

I’d even gotten to the point of wanting to thank Comcast, and its president Brian L. Roberts for being such a badly run operation that it pushed us both into the world of computers and video servers and content streaming at an age when most folks retire.

I was completely wrong.

Thanks to this article I have come to understand the truth of Comcast and its view on where it fits into content distribution, in America today.

My now greater understanding is that Brian L. Roberts, the current CEO of Comcast, who inherited his position, because he is the son of one of Comcast’s founders, is the problem.

He is the problem in that he, like Louis XIV, “the Sun King” of France believes that he, and he alone, has the “divine right,” granted to him by god, and not any of us, to rule his empire, and thus act, and to coerce, with brute force, as is necessary, as if Comcast is the only broker for content and delivery between all of us consumers of content and the makers of the content.

Also, because of his divinely granted position, he is allowed to enrich himself, his family and his courtiers, with such a Royal Monopoly that is granted to him because of his divine position, that none of us will ever attain.

I should have realized it earlier.

Think about it………..only a king, operating on the basis of ‘divine right” would remove decent content cable TV channels, and in their place put his “court’s” generated content. This debased content, which probably only appeals to his royal court and assorted sycophants, enriches his treasury just as well as a king debasing his currency, all to finance a king’s royal life style.

The debased content ranges from lower than commercial rate sports shows, to putting on a variety / interview show sponsored by his dowager mother, “the Queen Mother of Comcast” for all of us subjects to pay for and to presumably cheer to.

Only a king operating on the basis of “divine right” would, with a FCC waiver of digital conversion, turn around, observe what satellite providers technically must do, which is provide a converter box for their technologies, and dream about further enriching his treasury.

So he woke from his dreams and then mandated to his subjects an “enhanced digital experience” by taking away channels and in their place forcing the suffering poor and the elderly to take new digital services that cost nearly 50% more than the old non “enhanced digital services” less than 18 months later.

Only a king operating on the basis of “divine right” would tell the provincial governor of the State of Pennsylvania that he was going to move his palace out of Philadelphia and thus 5000 jobs would disappear. The threat worked, after all god is on “Sun King” Robert’s side, as 60 million or so dollars later and roughly 60 stories tall, “sun King” Brian Roberts, operating in a divinely inspired way, moved into his palace.

Of course his palace was paid for by the cash strapped citizens of Pennsylvania, and,in return, he showed some “Noblesse Oblige” and thus only hiked the cable bills that year by 4-5% in the COmmonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Only “Sun King” Brian Roberts, operating under the “divine right of kings,” would tell Sony Corporation, and probably threaten them behind closed doors, that his subjects were incapable of dealing with the complexities, of plugging in a VGA plug, operating a web browser, configuring a wireless, or wired network connection, or even setting up a sub $400 personal computer to get streaming video over the internet.

Funny thing, I was never ever technical.

For decades I laughed at computer geeks, and was totally into pay the “other guy to do it” and meekly and sheepishly paid the ever increasing “taxes” imposed by “Sun King” Brian Roberts for acting as the Royal Monopolist broker for content and delivery to my home.

But when the bill went beyond reason ($61 each) just to connect four analog TV’s, plus $78 for no extra channels + no digital content and a nearly $70 data line, I revolted. Like all revolutionaries I suffered greatly at first.

But eventually, I was forced to work hard, foreced to ask questions on the Internet, tried things out, including some that did not work, innovated, and now, as I write this, I use a media extender from eBay connected to each of my my TV sets (one time cost each as used items of $39.00), a $125 program called SAGE TV on an old PC downstairs, and a wireless access point so I can watch a movie outside on my laptop on the deck

My server gets all manner of live via digital Over the Air TV sastations as the server has a dual digital tuner card (cost $125.00)

Fox and other content is via Mobi TV, Netflix movies, Hulu and even MGM movies, and all are nicely integrated in a Tivo like menu content, along with self loading nighly podcasts.

So why do I even think I need to pay homage to an out of touch king in Philadelphia, in his 60 story palace dictating to me, because he believes he is divinely inspired to do so, that I need to continue to support his royal Comcast monopoly of being a content broker and delivery agency.

Not any more…….if it was legal, I would pull down his 60 story building as surely as American Colonists pulled down the statue of King George III that used to stand in New York City before July 9th, 1776.

Ok, I can’t do that, Also, we can’t toss Comcast into any harbor, unlike a once hated tea and its extreme Royal taxes.

So in the meantime, and the best I can offer……….does anybody want to borrow my slightly used bolt cutter and chop out their Comcast Cable.

If they do, I promise you, youu will set yourselves free of “Sun King” Brian Roberts and his Royal Tyranny

Divine RIght of KIngs ended with the French Revolution, that was 200 years ago,it is time that we tell the Comcast Petty Tyrant, that his Royal Monoply is defunct and we believe in content access freedom.

# 14, you went so far beyond the length that anyone will read, that you will not be read. Just digest it next time, jeez…write the book. My only comment is, haven’t had cable since 1994, and have been happy figuring out other ways to get content since then. Drop them now, it’s like they’re still promoting FAX.

Sorry Clear Window

Will learn from your comment, but we are angry at Brian Roberts and his company.

You have to understand that I do live in PA and my taxes just keep going up, and we paid for that Comcast palace out of tax revenue.

Also, there are many elderly individuals I know from my charity work, who had cable service that they were happy with at just around 50 per month, and then Comcast took the opportunity to force digital convertor boxes on them, and all manner of enhanced services that honestly, they did not what or need and bills well beyond $80 for essentially the same content..

Finally, we did try to work with Comcast over a beserk billing sytem that took a regular bill and turned it into a $344 a month monster, and in an effort to try to fix the problem with them we paid the bill twice, and finally could not, after repeated visits to the local office and making the 90 plus mile drive to their palace and found Comcast people who were sympathetic but could not fix it unless we bought “triple play.” and thus ended up turning our orginal $50.00 bill into $110 a month before we added digital converter baxes at $8.00 each times 4 tvs.

Perhaps my ire and thus long submissions is that I do understand tha we once gave them the right to string their cables in our community in return for providing service at a reasonable cost and profit.

Right now I hink they forgot that.

#14
I read every word, and I couldn’t agree with you more.

Cable companies have missed the boat.

Long live the internet.

I simply can’t believe how incredibly ungrateful all of you are!? Not that I’m apologizing for the Cable industries poor customer service track record, by any means, but I’m shocked at how few of you understand the economics of the cable industry and who the real villains are in this equation; the Content Companies, the Telcos and the Consumer Electronics companies.

First of all, Content, the reason your cable bill is so high is that over 50% of your bill goes to the cable networks themselves. Let’s look at Disney as an example, who owns, ESPN. If a Cable distributor like Comcast wants to carry ESPN, they have to pay a few $ per month per subscriber AND Disney forces them to take other emerging networks like Disney Family who no one ever heard of or cares about. Because Comcast passes along the bill to you, you complain to Comcast and not Disney, Viacom, Discovery Networks, Time Warner, etc. Shame on all of you for not understanding that and spreading your ire around.

Second, roughly the other 50% of your bill goes to the build out, operations, maintenance of the network, billing and customer care ops. Yes, the Comcasts and Time Warner’s of the world have neglected their Billing and Customer Care, but for the most part, their networks are pretty robust. Without a cable modem, you’d be left with crappy dial up and inferior DSL. If you know anything about the Telcos, they are far worse at protecting their turf and never woudl have invested in DSL if it weren’t for Cable. You are all so proud of yourselves about being users of the internet and broadband, but without the investment in Cable industry in Cable modems, this would be a very slow “IP” world where all your video would be coming down at 56kbps.

Lastly, the Consumer Electronics companies. Yes, the cable industry fought the CE companies and their retailers (like Circuit City.. remember them?) for years about two way Cable products. But think about this for a second? Where did this legislation come from? Lobbyist.. that’s where. Cable companies historically purchased Set-tops and leased those boxes to subscribers to cover those costs. Anyone here who got a cell phone for NOTHING or $50 or something crazy understands the benefits of underwriting. Secondly, the Sony’s of the world are in a commodity business, right? Somewhere in the world, someone will find a way to manufacture a TV for cheaper. So, Sony gets the idea that if content will eventually be delivered over the Internet, why not get our share of that… remember, Sony owns a studio?

People, people, people….. Cable is not exclusively the enemy of freedom and democracy that you all make them out to be. They just happen to be the suckers who get to deliver you the bill. You should all take one huge step back, get educated and THEN decide to open your mouths.

And while we’re at it.. let’s think about the macro econimic issues here for a second….. If all of you dumped your hated cable subscription today and “self programmed” to your hearts content over the internet to a PC or some TiVo like device…. all your precious content would go away OVERNIGHT! That’s right, your subcription and the advertising you are so quick to fast forward through have given you and your families and incredible arrray of content you never had when ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS were your options.

Long live the Internet, but let’s not kill the Media business in the process!