Google Monday released its own video playback feature, "Google Video Player," an open-source-based application for use with their video search. The player allows users to stream video clips uploaded to the search giant's video search application by their creators. The move is "probably the most significant play in the online-on-demand video market," said Jupiter Research analyst Gary Stein. "It cuts the distance between producer and consumer," he said, adding "that whole content distribution has been disintermediated." In April, Google began soliciting uploads of video clips, which allows content producers--including consumers--to have their videos hosted on the Web. Google asked uploaders to tag video files with search terms and set a per-view price on their clips. Google takes a share of the revenue, and in some cases, charges a small hosting fee for particularly large or popular videos. Uploaders also were given the option to allow free downloads of their video content. With the release of the Google Video Player, the video clips marked by their uploaders as free now can be streamed from the video search results. The player is based on the open-source videoLAN client media player. At this point, no ads--neither video ads or Google's standard search ads--can be served through the video search service. Gary Stein added that Google's decision to create its own player from open source code allows the search engine behemoth to avoid supporting a video player by a potential rival, while also preserving the flexibility to upgrade or extend the software. Google's move might reflect "a decision to opt for neutrality," he said. "It just gives the greatest degree of flexibility, and it doesn't involve them in any potential political relationships." Stein also speculated that the recently announced Google Wallet, a planned online payment service, could be used to make payments on video content, which Google can then take a cut of to monetize the video search.
In a closely watched case that pitted Hollywood against online file-sharing companies, the U.S. Supreme Court Monday unanimously ruled that peer-to-peer networks can be held liable for intentionally luring users to pirate copyrighted movies and videos. "One who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright ... is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties," wrote Justice David Souter in an opinion for the court. The Supreme Court also ruled 6-3 that Metro Goldwyn Mayer Studios and the entertainment industry companies that sided with it in the lawsuit had presented sufficient proof that peer-to-peer companies Grokster and StreamCast encouraged copyright infringement that the case shouldn't have been dismissed before trial. Earlier, the trial court had dismissed the studios' lawsuit, and the 9th Circuit upheld the dismissal. "The record is replete with evidence that when they [Grokster and StreamCast] began to distribute their free software, each of them clearly voiced the objective that recipients use the software to download copyrighted works and took active steps to encourage infringement," wrote Souter. The court sent the case back to the trial judge, with instructions to reconsider MGM's motion for summary judgment--that is, a verdict in its favor without going through a trial--against Grokster and StreamCast. Stephen Breyer, in an opinion joined by two other judges, disagreed with the portion of the decision that returned the lawsuit to the district court. In a concurrence, he wrote that the district court properly dismissed the case against the file-sharing networks, because peer-to-peer technology can be used for noninfringing purposes. Industry observers say that a secondary effect of the ruling is that it could hurt adware companies that bundle their software with peer-to-peer software, such as Claria and WhenU. Claria is bundled with the free version of Kazaa, while WhenU is bundled with the free version of BearShare's file-sharing software. When Claria filed papers with the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the company listed peer-to-peer network Kazaa as a major distributor. WhenU CEO Bill Day said that BearShare is a sizable distributors, but that WhenU had a number of other equally large distribution partners. Claria did not respond to messages seeking comment by presstime. While neither Kazaa nor BearShare were part of the lawsuit decided Monday, the ruling likely will impact how both companies do business. Alan Morris, executive vice president of Sharman Networks, which owns Kazaa, defended the company in a statement, "Sharman has never encouraged or assisted users of Kazaa software to share copyrighted material in violation of copyright law," he stated. Adware/spyware researcher Eric Howes, an instructor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign who runs the site SpywareWarrior.com, said that the decision isn't as bad for adware companies as it would have been several months ago, because peer-to-peer networks "have been gradually moving away from adware bundles over the past few months." Grokster itself no longer offers a free, adware-supported version. Instead, users can opt to pay the $29.95 download fee or to receive a free five-day trial. Adware researcher and consultant Ben Edelman added that one of the ironies of the case is that major Hollywood studios apparently advertise to Claria subscribers--at least some of whom presumably received the software when they downloaded Kazaa. Edelman said that as recently as this weekend, he was served a Claria pop-ad promoting Universal Studios theme parks, while on the sites BMG.com and Disney.com.
From seed-spitting contests to town hall meetings, CBS's local online content will remain provincial, but its packaging is going pro, according to Viacom, which announced Monday that its Television Stations Digital Media Group is relaunching each of its 40 stations' Web sites. Under the direction of Jonathan Leess, president of the Media Group, each site is getting a surface polish, a souped-up video flash player, and a slew of local features. Leess--who's already devoted a year to the project--has conducted three soft launches since May with station Web sites in Salt Lake City www.kutv.com, Minneapolis www.wcco.com, and Denver www.cbs4denver.com. Web sites for stations in San Francisco, Chicago, Baltimore, and New York are pending--which, said Leess, will lead the way for 14 other CBS stations, 16 UPN stations, and three that are not affiliated with major networks. "The commitment behind this initiative represents the television broadcast paradigm shift we must make in order to adapt to today's on-demand, always-on consumer," said Leess. "The improvements we are making across the board will significantly enhance our station's ability to connect with the millions of broadband Internet and wireless users who are thirsting for more video and for locally relevant content." The focal point of each site is its video streaming product, which allows for free access to the thousands of hours of each local station's archived video libraries, as well as each day's news features. With regard to site layout, Leess said he veered away from the "NASCAR approach," opting for a clean, palatable look. The all about "content, content, content," said Leess, but, regarding advertising, he was selling on national and regional level through third-party ad sales groups. A portion of the ad space would surely be devoted to Viacom Television Stations Group promotions, Leess added. A local search engine, which incorporates ZIP-code driven results enhanced by retrospective and prospective search products, is also included on each site. This will give content providers and advertisers an unprecedented degree of reach, according to Leess. "With regard to advertisers, what differentiates this project is the ability we now have to target the highest CMP levels," Leess. "Advertisers can now target to an extremely specific audience, and we're talking about people at work, which is all the more appealing." The overall initiative will also feature desktop, wireless, and mobile distributed components, including breaking news, traffic, weather, and entertainment alerts in voice and text, and eventually, video. Also featured prominently on the new sites are real-time weather maps and forecasting alerts; live traffic cameras, maps and accident and construction alert systems that support real-time routing directions; local real estate guides, and sports scoreboards and news. There are also localized content sections dedicated to health, lifestyles, food, entertainment, pets, shopping, autos, and careers.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision on Monday that cable companies, unlike telecoms, need not share their lines with rival Internet providers. The case, which pitted Brand X Internet Services against the Federal Communications Commission and the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (whose members include cable giants Comcast and Time Warner), potentially could lead to fewer broadband options for consumers down the road, analysts said. But in the short term, the holding--which preserves the status quo--is seen as unlikely to affect service or availability. "The FCC seems to be acting in line with what federal regulations allow them to do," said Joe Laszlo, research director for Jupiter Research, who authored a report in May indicating that the total number of U.S. households with broadband had increased 35 percent between 2003 and 2004. "It's of a piece with the inconsistent way that cable and phone services are regulated in the U.S., but one could say there is adequate growth in the United States at present--it's hard to look at the numbers and find a lot of fault with them." However, consumer advocates criticized the ruling, saying that the Supreme Court made it easier for a few cable companies to dominate the industry. "This decision allows the cable companies and the owners of cable networks to kept consumers under their thumb and continue their chokehold on the services they offer over those networks," Matt Hartwig, spokesman of the Washington D.C.-based advocacy group Consumers Union, told OnlineMediaDaily. "[The FCC] abandoned a fundamental principle that has applied to all means of communications throughout U.S. history: Communications and transportation networks must be available to all on a nondiscriminatory basis if they are to serve the public interest," said the Consumers Union in a statement. At present, some 32 million households in the United States--a little less than half of all online households and 28 percent of households overall--currently use broadband to access the Internet, said Laszlo. In neighboring Canada, the number is far higher, with 5.5 million households--42 percent of households overall--using broadband. Cable companies currently account for about 63 percent of the broadband market, with Comcast responsible for 22 percent of broadband households and Time Warner accounting for 12 percent, according to Jupiter Research. The case has been closely watched by media observers and advertisers, as broadband is seen as an increasingly lucrative method by which consumers use the Internet. A report this month by the research company eMarketer titled "Broadband Demographics & Usage" estimated that 49.5 million U.S. broadband users ages 14 and older (66 percent broadband users overall) made an online purchase last year, and projected that in 2008, 98.8 million broadband users over age 13 (or 72 percent of broadband users in that year) would do so.
Adware company 180solutions Monday began a campaign to inform all consumers who receive adware from the company that they have ad-serving software installed on their computers. For the initiative, 180solutions intends to serve all adware recipients pop-ups telling them that they have 180search Assistant or Zango Search Assistant installed on their desktops. The pop-ups--which will inform customers that they receive two to three ads a day in exchange for free content--also will contain uninstall instructions. The company expects to reach all 20 million of its adware recipients by the end of July, said Sean Sundwall, 180solutions' director of public communications. The consumer notification is part of an ongoing initiative by 180solutions to polish its image. In the last several months, the company filed lawsuits against distributors that allegedly were installing the ad-serving programs without first obtaining consumers' consent. Additionally, 180solutions has cut off 422 distributors so far this year, Sundwall said. Later this summer, the company plans to revise its software to make it harder for distributors to install it without recipients' consent. The upgrade, said Sundwall, "is going to make it very difficult for distributors to do drive-by downloads of our software."
With a hardy "as long as we can hit a high standard and have no risk of vandalism, then it is worth having a try at it again;" and a "Hi-Oh-Silver!" Rob Barrett, the Los Angeles Times Interactive general manager, drove a stake through the heart of the paper's ill-conceived two-day experiment having online readers add their two cents to a newspaper editorial. As the world knows by now, the mirthful readers of LATimes.com thought profanity and pornographic pix were appropriate contributions to an editorial about the Iraq war. "Readers took things in an unforeseeable way," Deputy Editorial Page Editor Michael Newman told Editor and Publisher. Acknowledging that hindsight is a good deal more refined than foresight, is there a breathing soul among us who could not have predicted that any position on the Iraq war would have prompted extreme reaction? Hey, why not launch with a position on abortion or gay marriage, or if illegal immigrants in Southern California should get free state-provided medical benefits? While it is a little premature to compare Iraq to Vietnam, the polarizing effect on public opinion is just short of the Tet offensive. I'm confident that the editors who thought up this wikitorial experiment wanted to start with something that would provoke reaction. Well, they got it, and from 1,000 registered contributors--some of whose lexicon was apparently at odds with the prevailing community LA standard of decency. Which, given what passes for PG-13 in that town, is something of a surprise. The Internet is still a largely untamed environment where nearly anything (well, where almost everything) goes. It is seen by hackers as a public playground where they can run around with abandon, regardless of the toddlers in the sandbox and old people on the benches. The anonymity empowers otherwise ordinary citizenry to collect porn, entrap unsuspecting teens, pose as gender opposites in chat rooms, and deface earnest attempts at public discourse. One wonders if the LAT problem was the result of the subject matter or the fact that it was hosted by the Great Corporate Establishment Press? I suspect, a little of both. There is also the demented satisfaction some people get out of seeing their graffiti in a highly visible public place. And frankly, I am surprised it doesn't happen online more often. Other than have someone real-time monitor what is being posted, I foresee no end to this problem. Other than perhaps requiring full (verified by the host) disclosure of name, address, and phone number. This will surely cut down on the participation and take away that "anything goes, because I am anonymous" thrill--but in the end, might right the ship enough to set a new, more successful course.