From: Good Experience - How (not) to prevent people from using bus lanes
This video is hilarious. It should have simply been entitled "DRM", for this is the perfect metaphor for what DRM is. All to often we think technological means can solve sociological issues... when often the technology is completely clumsy, poorly executed, and quite simple obtuse.
The world is not a perfect place, there are exceptions to every rule, life and society will always be messy... there will always be some spam... there will always be some theft. There are no "perfect solutions"... there is only prevention, deterrence and an increased understanding of social engineering.
I find it fascinating that we look endlessly for solutions to sociological issues in technology.
The problems in the IP world are not technological ones, they are due arrogance, greed, complacency and just plain laziness. The culmination of 10+ years of complacency in the music industry. Music executives and media makers at large companies just find it easier to label their customers as criminals and treat them as criminals then to actually trusts them and try to understand them.
As is often said it's easier to hire lawyers then it is to spend money on R&D.
So, with a little innovation and a whole lot of evilness apple now has something like 75% of all online music sales. Why? The music industry created it's own tyrant. They literally handed apple the keys. It's freaking hilarious. Nice job music industry.
And yet... the music industry is no closer to having an open and competitive music market.
The real innovation is happening away from the ball.
The only other music label with any major market share is eMusic with about 10% of digital music sales. How do they do it? While eMusic is not perfect... essentially requiring a stupid monthly service fee instead of allowing people to openly buy music with a simple credit card as they need it... they do do one thing right. They sell unprotected mp3s that will work on the iPod or indeed ANY music player.
I'm torn, because on the one hand I want for these record labels to get a clue, but on the other hand...
Because all these idiotic mainstream labels are standing on the sidelines this has created huge opportunities for independent labels, musicians, and distributors as represented by CD Baby, eMusic, and above all so called "podsafe music", which is music with a simple liberal copyright license, aka. copy-left license such as those from the Creative Commons.
For all these fine institutions have done nothing has done more than the failures of the mainstream media's own endeavors.
Specifically the failure of products like Microsoft's Plays-for-sure DRM, the Zune and the iTunes music store. They have become proofs and vindication for anti-DRM advocates.
1) Plays-for-sure, Microsoft's proposed standard, because of it's complete failure... and the fact that it has become synonymous with 'plays for shit'... not only does it not play on the majority of mp3 players out there, but Microsoft themselves have abandoned it on their latest attempt at competing with the iPod, the Zune.
2) The zune, because of it's notoriety for being completely anti-consumer and obtuse.
and
3) the iPod/iTunes combo because it has created a gigantic monopoly that benefits no-one at all but Apple.
In conclusion...
The solution is sociological not technological.
Tuesday, November 28
Monday, November 27
The inherent flaw in youtube
From: BBC NEWS | Entertainment | The first superstars of web TV
So where's the problem you ask.
1) Money Ian and Anthony have made of youtube: $0
2) Money Ian and Anthony can potentially make of youtube: $0
3) Money youtube has made of just one of Ian and Anthony's videos given 17 million page views and a conservative $5 CPM for all the ads and related traffic. $90k
4) Money google paid for youtube and needs to be made back before youtube can become a profitable enterprise for google: $1.6 billion
So... What does happen when all the stars of youtube wake up and start realizing that youtube is making hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars off of them and not sharing a penny and they have no mechanisms for making a profit or experimentation?
Provided google does start a revenue share, whatkind of percentage do you think these youtube stars are going to get? 5% mayb 50% even?
It all boils down to this.
No matter what google offers them the stars of youtube are going to wake up and realize thay can make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year if they migrate their fan base away from youtube onto an open vlog where they can place advertisements, or do paid subscription... or sell DVD's and merchandise or anything they damn well want, and take home 95% of the profits.
As they say, easy come, easy go.
Dare I say it?
Yes, I day say it.
Youtube is a fad.
One HELL of a fad, yes, but definitely a fad.
That google bought it will give it some staying power and longevity, but the masses are VERY fickle.
I think we're likely to see the migration away from Youtube over the coming years starting with the best and brightest stars that bring them the most traffic unless youtube offers them some serious revenue share AND... youtube must open up to the great world of iPod's, PSP's, and other portable media players and video podcasting which is going to increasingly threaten it's closed business model of web only video.
I speak of no killer app, and I speak of no rapid decline in youtube. All I say is this. Remember mp3.com. Yeah? Well that's youtube five years from now if google isn't very careful about taking the culture of creatures on youtube and turning disenfranchising it by treating it like a culture of consumers whose eyeballs are available to the highest bidder.
Audiences are no longer captive. They owe no loyalty to even the most hard core social networking sites as Orkut, Friendster and many, many others have found out.
This generation is increasingly savy, they get while the getting is good and move along. Youtube is to rigid of a playground, too much of a clay sandbox for the best and brightest of video producers.
Increasingly I'm find more and more of my favorite video makers have started their own domain, their own brand, and their own video blog... and they're using youtube the way traditional media companies are using youtube... purely for product marketing.
Internet video is coming of age, with the best amateur film-makers attracting millions of online viewers.
Two of the web's hottest film-making teams have made videos for the BBC News website, talking about what they do and where they think it will lead.
SMOSH
Ian Hecox and Anthony Padilla are two 19-year-old college students from Carmichael, California.
They are also two of the biggest stars on YouTube, where they go under the name of Smosh.
They started by filming a spoof music video for the Pokemon theme tune, which is now YouTube's second-most watched clip of all time, with 17 million views.
They have since branched out into their own comedy sketches, which have established the pair as firm favourites among the online video audience.
So where's the problem you ask.
1) Money Ian and Anthony have made of youtube: $0
2) Money Ian and Anthony can potentially make of youtube: $0
3) Money youtube has made of just one of Ian and Anthony's videos given 17 million page views and a conservative $5 CPM for all the ads and related traffic. $90k
4) Money google paid for youtube and needs to be made back before youtube can become a profitable enterprise for google: $1.6 billion
So... What does happen when all the stars of youtube wake up and start realizing that youtube is making hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars off of them and not sharing a penny and they have no mechanisms for making a profit or experimentation?
Provided google does start a revenue share, whatkind of percentage do you think these youtube stars are going to get? 5% mayb 50% even?
It all boils down to this.
No matter what google offers them the stars of youtube are going to wake up and realize thay can make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year if they migrate their fan base away from youtube onto an open vlog where they can place advertisements, or do paid subscription... or sell DVD's and merchandise or anything they damn well want, and take home 95% of the profits.
As they say, easy come, easy go.
Dare I say it?
Yes, I day say it.
Youtube is a fad.
One HELL of a fad, yes, but definitely a fad.
That google bought it will give it some staying power and longevity, but the masses are VERY fickle.
I think we're likely to see the migration away from Youtube over the coming years starting with the best and brightest stars that bring them the most traffic unless youtube offers them some serious revenue share AND... youtube must open up to the great world of iPod's, PSP's, and other portable media players and video podcasting which is going to increasingly threaten it's closed business model of web only video.
I speak of no killer app, and I speak of no rapid decline in youtube. All I say is this. Remember mp3.com. Yeah? Well that's youtube five years from now if google isn't very careful about taking the culture of creatures on youtube and turning disenfranchising it by treating it like a culture of consumers whose eyeballs are available to the highest bidder.
Audiences are no longer captive. They owe no loyalty to even the most hard core social networking sites as Orkut, Friendster and many, many others have found out.
This generation is increasingly savy, they get while the getting is good and move along. Youtube is to rigid of a playground, too much of a clay sandbox for the best and brightest of video producers.
Increasingly I'm find more and more of my favorite video makers have started their own domain, their own brand, and their own video blog... and they're using youtube the way traditional media companies are using youtube... purely for product marketing.
Tuesday, November 14
MobuzzTV got Hacked
Not many details, but a reminder that all is not always a hug fest in vloglandia. Mobuzztv.com got on the 9th. They were back up the next day to leave this brief video message, but have not posted a new video as of this posting. :(
In Anil's own words in the comments.
"They wiped the server, destroying everything. No message left.."
I just want to give them a shout out and say, I miss you guys. Get well soon.
(big group hug)
:)
Re: MobuzzTV Vlog: We got Hacked?
Hopefully they'll get some PR out of this and rebound quickly do to RSS subscriptions keeping them connected.
I'll try to follow up when they post their next video.
In Anil's own words in the comments.
"They wiped the server, destroying everything. No message left.."
I just want to give them a shout out and say, I miss you guys. Get well soon.
(big group hug)
:)
Re: MobuzzTV Vlog: We got Hacked?
Hopefully they'll get some PR out of this and rebound quickly do to RSS subscriptions keeping them connected.
I'll try to follow up when they post their next video.
Monday, November 13
Rocketboom's Congdon Headed for HBO Comedy
Big news. Congratulations Amanda!
I hope Amanda won't forget about vlogging... and that HBO will find some great ways to bring Amanda back to the videoblogging world.
From: Rocketboom's Congdon Headed for HBO Comedy
I hope Amanda won't forget about vlogging... and that HBO will find some great ways to bring Amanda back to the videoblogging world.
From: Rocketboom's Congdon Headed for HBO Comedy
Amanda Congdon, co-founder and former host of the comedy video blog Rocketboom.com, is developing a comedy program for HBO.
Details of the project are still being hammered out, but Congdon said she's aiming for a multiplatform property that will be integrated with original video content online. She intends to write and star in the series.
'HBO is exactly the place where I want to be,' Congdon said. 'I'm most interested in playing in that new dimension with two parallel levels of programming, online and on TV.'
Congdon has worked as an actor onstage and in commercials. She remains an owner of Rocketboom but is now concentrating on the HBO project and her www.amandaacrossamerica.com video blog. That project, chronicling her cross-country trek, revolves around environmental issues and is sponsored by the National Resources Defense Council, Environmental Countdown and Ford Motor Co. She recently signed with Endeavor for representation.
Wednesday, November 8
The opensource wikitchen (wiki kitchen)
I've seen the future and it is web3.0. Open source, wikis and social media are starting to have revolutionary implications in the real world.
Zkmiec-TheWikiTchen842.mp4
From: mmmff: WikiTchen
Zkmiec-TheWikiTchen842.mp4
From: mmmff: WikiTchen
Sunday, November 5
Crowdfunding / people-powered film / community driven financing
Regarding His Fans Greenlight the Project, Robert Greenwald Tapped a New Funding Source: The Audience
by William Booth, Washington Post, Sunday, August 20, 2006
From: NETRIBUTION - People-powered film financing raises $267,000 from 4 emails in 9 days
Tell me if this isn't what videoblogging is all about.
From Michael Sullivan Crowdfunding.com | People-powered film funding
Call it community driven financing, crowdfunding, people-powered film or whatever you like but we're starting to see a repetive theme where a whole industry of middle men are being bypassed... where the audience and the artists are connecting directly to fund projects in art, music, film and media.
Read more about Crowdfunding on Wikipedia.
by William Booth, Washington Post, Sunday, August 20, 2006
From: NETRIBUTION - People-powered film financing raises $267,000 from 4 emails in 9 days
Adam P Davies and I have recently begun work on a new film funding book - an update to the One With The Pig on the Front. One of the things I'm most interested in this time round, following on from the Cluetrain stuff, is community-driven financing, and in particular how filmmakers who communicate directly with their audience online can bypass conventional sales and financing methods to some extent.
Tell me if this isn't what videoblogging is all about.
Well Robert Greenwald, who Stephen Applebaum interviewed for his Wal Mart documentary earlier this year, recently completed Iraq for Sale which gets a showing at the Leeds Film Festival next week. Struggling to complete the finance on the film, with producer Jim
Gillam, Greenwald emailed everyone who had previously bought copies of the film. Four emails and nine days
later, just over 3000 people had raised more than $267,000, which in
turn released another conditional $100,000 from a philanthropist. Film financed, industry reinvented, job done. I hope to case study this in full in the book, but meantime, here's a Wall Street Journal article telling more.
From Michael Sullivan Crowdfunding.com | People-powered film funding
This article was brought to my attention tonight and it's a GREAT example of Crowdfunding.
Smart use of the Internet to raise money!
Four emails and nine days later, just over 3000 people had raised more than $267,000
Call it community driven financing, crowdfunding, people-powered film or whatever you like but we're starting to see a repetive theme where a whole industry of middle men are being bypassed... where the audience and the artists are connecting directly to fund projects in art, music, film and media.
Read more about Crowdfunding on Wikipedia.
Monday, October 30
St. Louis & Detroit take #1 & #2, America's most-dangerous cities
From: Annual study of crime lists St. Louis as America's most-dangerous; Detroit 2nd | Chicago Tribune:
Is there some correlation between the baseball & violent crime?
Obviously not, but I remember the riots in 1984 after the Tigers won it.
Tried hitting Morgan Quitno Press's website, just appears to be down.
Days after the St. Louis Cardinals won the World Series, their hometown jumped to first place on a list no one wants to lead: the most dangerous cities in the United States.
The ranking was being released Monday by Morgan Quitno Press, a private research and publishing company specializing in state and city reference books. Violent crime surged nearly 20 percent there from 2004 to last year, according to FBI figures released in June.
Is there some correlation between the baseball & violent crime?
Obviously not, but I remember the riots in 1984 after the Tigers won it.
Tried hitting Morgan Quitno Press's website, just appears to be down.
Sunday, October 29
'Web 2.0', a 'viral video'
I'm so sick of the terms and even the very idea of 'web 2.0' and 'viral media' of course I had to post this viral video about web 2.0. :)
Original post on October 23, 2006 from No fat clips!!!: (RSS feed)
A little something you have probably seen before, as it won at The First Post Viral Competition. But if didn't, this is the right time!It shows a very interactive computer system, a kind of interactivity that goes beyond virtuality.The short has been directed by Leo Bridle and Leo Powell. The music was composed by Tom Rubira.Neither of the directors has had any formal training to date although both did Art foundation courses at Winchester School of Art in 2005. This autumn, Leo Bridle goes to Bournemouth Arts Institute to study animation while Leo Powell will study Fine Art at the University of East London. (Source: The First Post)P.S. Ok, there were a money prize but also, the winners "will be shown on a number of online entertainment websites including YouTube.com".
(Via Mefeedia)
Friday, October 27
Can Ask A Ninja make $50-100k a month?
From: Ask a Ninja' visits Madison Avenue - MarketWatch
First note Ask A Ninja's business plan
1) advertising
2) paid annual subscriptions
3) merchandising
Second... not merchandising as Ask A Ninja is quoted as doing here has been around on vlogs for years... sell some hats, t-shirts and coffee mugs... if you've got a great brand like Ask A Ninja it's a piece of cake.
What's new here is a) advertisting which I'll get into in a second, and b) paid subscriptions.
Paid subscriptions first. It may not be the best model for them and it's still VERY experimental in the video podcasting space. In short I know NOONE doing it yet... and yet I think Ask A Ninja is right to dive into it and include it in their business plan. It's a good experiment.
Now then!
Let's get down to this crazy specs on advertising
1 - 2 million monthly views X $50 CPM = $50-100k/mo
For those of you who don't know CPM is an online advertising term "Cost Per Thousand Impressions" In this case those impressions are pre-roll ads I assume 15-30 seconds on the front of every Ask A Ninja episodes.
So can Ask A Nija really make $50-100k a month?
First... I don't question that Ask A Ninja is getting 1 to 2 million video views a month. It's a very realistic number given my experience with other vlogs.
The real question therefore is can they effectively transfer that ALL to ad views and is a $50 CPM ($50 per 1000 views) a realistic target.
Well... Ask A Nija actually quoted a $50 CPM... but this is quite high. I'm guessing they're NOT making this kind of money on EVERY ad view. I'm betting to some degree they're bragging about their upper limit... and rightfully so... nothing attracts advertisers and gets them to chuck up the big bucks like showing off your biggest brightest tail feathers.
That said... irregardless of wether Ask A ninja is making $50k or $100k a month or just $20k a month we're talking 2-3 guys working out of their basement! They're succeeding... and this is only the start... in the next couple years this industry is going to explode... and they're going to be more and more advertisers competing for premium video and audio podcasts... whomever can come out on the top of the barrel is going to make tremendous money. Right now I think Ask A Ninja is right where they need to be... as is Rocketboom and Ze Frank.
We're at the start of a new industry. A whole new sector for advertising.
What we need now is a Billboard 100 of sorts for various facets of video podcasting, audio podcasting, podsafe music... some industry rags... some groups competing to be the Nielson's ratings of this space to veryify and standardize how numbers like Ask A Nija's are tabulated... so advertisers don't have to gamble on wether they're closer to 1 million or 2 million.
And let's not forget advertising ISN't the end all be all... protect your intellectual property people.
Build brand and idenity... trademark it... merchandise it... later maybe you can licensce for who knows what.
Right now if you've got the talent the sky is the limit. The playingfield is level. You can do all the same thing as big media players.
licensce it
syndicate it
advertise on it
sell it
And most importantly of all make sure you realize that 95% of vlogs and audio podcasts will never monetize like this because Ask A Ninja is ENTERTAINMENT... and while that's funa and all the other 95% of vlogs and podcasts are merely COMMUNICATIONS.
Just like blogs before them 95% of all video blogs and audio podcasts will be closer to telephones than they are newspapers, TV shows and such... this is to say... they are interpersonal communications... that JUST so happen to be public... just because you're communicating in public... standing on a soap box or not... doesn't mean you're a movie star people... know the difference and by all means REVEL in your new found freedoms and encourage others to participate... but don't mistake these completely new media and your place in them for something they are not. This little evilution isn't about entertainment and news... it's about everday communications.
"The film of tomorrow will resemble the person who made it, and the number of spectators will be proportional to the number of friends the director has."
Truffaut saw almost 50 years ago the future of the moving image would be one day belong to everyday people... and the audience would find these everday moments interesting because they would be the creators friends, family and peers.
This is precisely what we're sing on services like youtube... once you get past the "viral videos" and the spectacle of it... you'll realize it's just people sharing little everday pieces of their life with friends, and peers around the world. Not entertainment... just communications. Youtube is more akin to what people one day envisioned as videoconferencing than it is TV or movies. It's like a big video conference party line... with an open ended timeline.
Most of it has very little to do with where Ask A NIja is going and that's great and fine and dandy.
What you thought everyone was going to be a TV star?
Ha!
The two funny guys behind 'Ask a Ninja' are asking serious money for advertisements placed in their podcast.
Douglas Saline and Kent Nichols are pricing their five-minute episodes at a CPM of $50. They told Advertising Age they get 1 million to 2 million views a month, which could mean a price of $50,000 to $100,000 per show. Saline and Nichols were in New York last week to pitch the show to marketers.
Mark McCrery, CEO of Podtrac, the Ninja ad-rep firm, says the pricing is justified by Ninja's audience: 57% between 19 and 34, and 83% male.
There have been 47 episodes of 'Ask a Ninja' since the series got started about a year ago. The venture began after the Saline and Nichols failed to sell a Ninja movie script and decided to try something on their own. It clicked. (Apology for the pun.)
Fans were not pleased with the Ninja decision to take advertising. 'Presenters' get a graphic at the start of the show and a 10- or 15-second scripted segment at the end, with the Ninja endorsing the product. Advertisers have included Sony Pictures and Warner Brothers.
There are other sources of revenue: 'Premium' members pay $12 to $15 a year and get access to shows a few days before they're posted on the Web. The Ninja show's theme song can be purchased as a ring tone. And the Ninja Mart Store sells $20 caps and $16 T-shirts.
'We're just a couple of funny guys trying to pay our bills,' according to the site. 'Bills that are in the tens of thousands of dollars. We don't want to rip anyone off, and we don't want to go broke doing this either.'
First note Ask A Ninja's business plan
1) advertising
2) paid annual subscriptions
3) merchandising
Second... not merchandising as Ask A Ninja is quoted as doing here has been around on vlogs for years... sell some hats, t-shirts and coffee mugs... if you've got a great brand like Ask A Ninja it's a piece of cake.
What's new here is a) advertisting which I'll get into in a second, and b) paid subscriptions.
Paid subscriptions first. It may not be the best model for them and it's still VERY experimental in the video podcasting space. In short I know NOONE doing it yet... and yet I think Ask A Ninja is right to dive into it and include it in their business plan. It's a good experiment.
Now then!
Let's get down to this crazy specs on advertising
1 - 2 million monthly views X $50 CPM = $50-100k/mo
For those of you who don't know CPM is an online advertising term "Cost Per Thousand Impressions" In this case those impressions are pre-roll ads I assume 15-30 seconds on the front of every Ask A Ninja episodes.
So can Ask A Nija really make $50-100k a month?
First... I don't question that Ask A Ninja is getting 1 to 2 million video views a month. It's a very realistic number given my experience with other vlogs.
The real question therefore is can they effectively transfer that ALL to ad views and is a $50 CPM ($50 per 1000 views) a realistic target.
Well... Ask A Nija actually quoted a $50 CPM... but this is quite high. I'm guessing they're NOT making this kind of money on EVERY ad view. I'm betting to some degree they're bragging about their upper limit... and rightfully so... nothing attracts advertisers and gets them to chuck up the big bucks like showing off your biggest brightest tail feathers.
That said... irregardless of wether Ask A ninja is making $50k or $100k a month or just $20k a month we're talking 2-3 guys working out of their basement! They're succeeding... and this is only the start... in the next couple years this industry is going to explode... and they're going to be more and more advertisers competing for premium video and audio podcasts... whomever can come out on the top of the barrel is going to make tremendous money. Right now I think Ask A Ninja is right where they need to be... as is Rocketboom and Ze Frank.
We're at the start of a new industry. A whole new sector for advertising.
What we need now is a Billboard 100 of sorts for various facets of video podcasting, audio podcasting, podsafe music... some industry rags... some groups competing to be the Nielson's ratings of this space to veryify and standardize how numbers like Ask A Nija's are tabulated... so advertisers don't have to gamble on wether they're closer to 1 million or 2 million.
And let's not forget advertising ISN't the end all be all... protect your intellectual property people.
Build brand and idenity... trademark it... merchandise it... later maybe you can licensce for who knows what.
Right now if you've got the talent the sky is the limit. The playingfield is level. You can do all the same thing as big media players.
licensce it
syndicate it
advertise on it
sell it
And most importantly of all make sure you realize that 95% of vlogs and audio podcasts will never monetize like this because Ask A Ninja is ENTERTAINMENT... and while that's funa and all the other 95% of vlogs and podcasts are merely COMMUNICATIONS.
Just like blogs before them 95% of all video blogs and audio podcasts will be closer to telephones than they are newspapers, TV shows and such... this is to say... they are interpersonal communications... that JUST so happen to be public... just because you're communicating in public... standing on a soap box or not... doesn't mean you're a movie star people... know the difference and by all means REVEL in your new found freedoms and encourage others to participate... but don't mistake these completely new media and your place in them for something they are not. This little evilution isn't about entertainment and news... it's about everday communications.
"The film of tomorrow will resemble the person who made it, and the number of spectators will be proportional to the number of friends the director has."
Truffaut saw almost 50 years ago the future of the moving image would be one day belong to everyday people... and the audience would find these everday moments interesting because they would be the creators friends, family and peers.
This is precisely what we're sing on services like youtube... once you get past the "viral videos" and the spectacle of it... you'll realize it's just people sharing little everday pieces of their life with friends, and peers around the world. Not entertainment... just communications. Youtube is more akin to what people one day envisioned as videoconferencing than it is TV or movies. It's like a big video conference party line... with an open ended timeline.
Most of it has very little to do with where Ask A NIja is going and that's great and fine and dandy.
What you thought everyone was going to be a TV star?
Ha!
Monday, October 23
YouTube turns over user data to Viacom's Paramount Pictures
From: YouTube turned over user data to media firm lawyers - MarketWatch
The video in question was a student created film with student actors. Based on a segment of script from the movie "twin towers".
Bravo Youtube. Bravo Viacom / Paramount.
Without your bold and heavy handed moves Twin Towers would have had serious box office setbacks as it hits the theatres.
What's more youtubers and bloggers everywhere will cherish and praise your good names.
And meanwhile millions of copies of pirated versions of Twin Towers will flow out of manufacturing facilities and across P2P networks world wide.
But you've shut down one student filmaker, Chris Moukarbel, whom dared to make his own homage to your film.
Way to kick some fan ass.
Money well spent. Bravo.
Again... this was in May. Youtube is just f*cked.
On May 24, lawyers for Viacom Inc.'s Paramount Pictures convinced a federal judge in San Francisco to issue a subpoena requiring YouTube to turn over details about a user who uploaded dialog from the movie studio's 'Twin Towers,' according to a copy of the document.
YouTube promptly handed over the data to Paramount, which on June 16 sued the creator of the 12-minute clip, New York City-based filmmaker Chris Moukarbel, for copyright infringement, in federal court in Washington.
That YouTube chose to turn over the data, rather than simply remove the offending video from its site -- as it did Friday when it agreed to take down 30,000 videos at the request of a group of Japanese media companies -- came as a surprise to copyright experts.
The video in question was a student created film with student actors. Based on a segment of script from the movie "twin towers".
Bravo Youtube. Bravo Viacom / Paramount.
Without your bold and heavy handed moves Twin Towers would have had serious box office setbacks as it hits the theatres.
What's more youtubers and bloggers everywhere will cherish and praise your good names.
And meanwhile millions of copies of pirated versions of Twin Towers will flow out of manufacturing facilities and across P2P networks world wide.
But you've shut down one student filmaker, Chris Moukarbel, whom dared to make his own homage to your film.
Way to kick some fan ass.
Money well spent. Bravo.
Again... this was in May. Youtube is just f*cked.
Sunday, October 8
JPG Magazine, a fine example of participatory media
For some time, particularly since Current TV I've been talking with people (particularly video bloggers) about making high level media that is truly participatory bubble up media.
Flickr has acted as a hot bed of activity within the photographic community allowing all sorts of opportunities to create high level participatory media.
Some have created simple photologs of multiple photographers whose work they love. The economics of these mediums are very simple, they promote the very photographers they love and what could be better than that.
Even more interesting though is some books have been published. (I've been flattered to participate in a couple) Magazines and newspapers have established user groups as marketing tools or to aggregate potentially publishable photos.
JPG Magazine is one such magazine. It is a fine example of what can be done with such participatory media.
Ultimately where Current TV failed to create a truly open and sustainable ecosystem for their users by merely creating a giant ongoing contest... JPG magazine, at least in combination with Flickr and other photo-sharing services and independent photo blogs, is a great example of how participatory culture can be bubbled all the way up into traditional and higher forms of media.
In JPG Magazine's case that "higher form" of media is of course a magazine but why can't other opportunities be created.
Some of my first impressions on JPGmag.com
One of the first things I checked out was JPG magazine's usage restrictions on users submitted photos. I was AMAZED to find out it wasn't draconian, but in fact simple and very user friendly.
That's just freaking beautiful when you consider most websites that take submissions for whatever reason have absolutely draconian terms of service. For example take Youtube, it's terms of service have improved but in essence they claim ownership to anything you submit and can do anything they want with it they like.
JPG Magazine's terms of service alone warrants this blog post of praise. It's an inspiration and it gives me hope that we ARE moving into a much more humane legal age. Needless to say I will be participating in JPG Magazine in the future primarily because of this point, not that it doesn't hurt that JPG magazine pays $100 for each photo it publishes and offers a free subscription if they publish any of your photos.
Side notes:
One of the first things I noticed is that the JPG mag signup had some nice AJAXian automatic verification of data in the signup form. For example when you enter a username the signup form automatically checks that username and verifies visually if it's available. A minor detail, but a very nice detail. ...even though it doesn't tell you if the username is NOT available, which I think might be more important still. :p
Second, after you signup there's a nice introduction to JPG magazine that gives you the lay of the land. Here's the opener to it.
There's more, but I'll leave it to you to signup to see it all.
In fact, the only problem I had with JPG view in this otherwise glowing review was their profile page.
After I typed in a nice little bio I was appalled to find that JPG magazine's website just deleted my copy arbitrarily after a certain number of characters and lines... roughly after 500 characters. Quite contrary to the attention to detail on the signup form there was no limit on the form to ensure I didn't type over 500 characters and no alert when I did. Everything over 500 characters was just deleted when I clicked submit. Frustrated I left the following copy as my profile.
To be fair the input form does say "maximum 500 characters" above the form, but this is no excuse.
An arbitrary limit of 500 characters does NOT discourage spam or other negatory activity. It merely tells the user they're unimportant, makes users take less pride, and makes a site like this whose value is in it's sociability a far less powerful and therefore useful too.
The profile page is not just about identity, it's the root building block of user participation... the precursor to the users submitted photos themselves. Case in point I've noticed quite a few grease-monkey scripts floating around on the web that change the user icons all over flickr.com to link directly to the users profile page and NOT the users photo-stream. JPG magazine like Flickr may be about the photos, but the identity is still the most important building block in community interaction.
The objective of JPGmag.com is to aggregate great photos, but without strong identity and identity based mechanisms for identifying great photos JPGmag.com and Flickr would merely be websites with a bunch of meaningless photos. Identity is directly tied to meaning. And MEANING, not beauty or interestingness is the root value of such sites and the root underlying mechanism for discovery and sharing.
To put it simply identity is the root from which all things participatory media grow. The stronger the identity, the stronger the community, the more trust, and participation.
BTW, I also submitted my thoughts to their bug report form which is at the bottom of every page. Yet another VERY nice touch.
All in all I thought I found JPG Magazine to be one of the finest if not the finest example of bubbling up participatory media into higher and more traditional forms of media.
JPG magazine only pay $100 for each photo they use in JPG Magazine, if they do use any. ;) However, while this is pretty low considering how much revenue they take in I suspect or at least hope it will rise in the future as their subscriptions and profits increase to attract an ever greater quality of photographers. This could be both a good and a bad thing. In fact... maybe one day there should be an amateur photographer's JPG magazine and a professional photographers JPG magazine. (competition anyone?) The only difference between such magazines would be the bounty they offer for photographs. This would keep the amateur photography magazine accessible to amateur photographers, while creating the opportunity for all to shoot for a higher level of profit and status. Some like me will revel in amateur photography, others will aim for profits and status... and so be it.
All in all, while I do hope JPG Magazine's bounty for great photos continues to rise. I would probably still submit at least some of my photos to JPG magazine no matter what they paid.
This is not to say money doesn't matter to me it does, but being published in JPG magazine is worth more than simply money. There is a far greater value that's often completely over looked. That core value of participatory media is simply social capital.
Social capital includes things like trust, visibility, recognition, credibility, good will, shared history, education, connectivity and above all the potential for greater upward mobility... aka. opportunity.
Let's not forget simple bragging rights and fun! :)
JPG Magazine is creating a tremendous amount of social capital among photographers and while it just past it's second year birthday I'd still consider my contribution an investment and the greatest ROI not money at all, but simple social capital.
Besides what else am I going to do with all the awesome photos I take with my $150 camera? :)
Flickr has acted as a hot bed of activity within the photographic community allowing all sorts of opportunities to create high level participatory media.
Some have created simple photologs of multiple photographers whose work they love. The economics of these mediums are very simple, they promote the very photographers they love and what could be better than that.
Even more interesting though is some books have been published. (I've been flattered to participate in a couple) Magazines and newspapers have established user groups as marketing tools or to aggregate potentially publishable photos.
JPG Magazine is one such magazine. It is a fine example of what can be done with such participatory media.
Ultimately where Current TV failed to create a truly open and sustainable ecosystem for their users by merely creating a giant ongoing contest... JPG magazine, at least in combination with Flickr and other photo-sharing services and independent photo blogs, is a great example of how participatory culture can be bubbled all the way up into traditional and higher forms of media.
In JPG Magazine's case that "higher form" of media is of course a magazine but why can't other opportunities be created.
- A network of videoblogs could create a cable/sat/TV channel, or a weekly show, or a movie... or a film festival, or a gallery opening, or films screening?
- Why can't a network of bloggers publish a collection of essays, a weekly or monthly newspaper or journal, or even a book, or how about a collaborative work of fiction, a novel?
Some of my first impressions on JPGmag.com
One of the first things I checked out was JPG magazine's usage restrictions on users submitted photos. I was AMAZED to find out it wasn't draconian, but in fact simple and very user friendly.
JPG Magazine is a big fan of copyright. We respect yours and reserve our own.
Contributors to JPG keep all their rights, and do not have to license their work in any particular way. By contributing your photo, you simply give us the right to display the photo online, and print it if chosen.
That's just freaking beautiful when you consider most websites that take submissions for whatever reason have absolutely draconian terms of service. For example take Youtube, it's terms of service have improved but in essence they claim ownership to anything you submit and can do anything they want with it they like.
JPG Magazine's terms of service alone warrants this blog post of praise. It's an inspiration and it gives me hope that we ARE moving into a much more humane legal age. Needless to say I will be participating in JPG Magazine in the future primarily because of this point, not that it doesn't hurt that JPG magazine pays $100 for each photo it publishes and offers a free subscription if they publish any of your photos.
Side notes:
One of the first things I noticed is that the JPG mag signup had some nice AJAXian automatic verification of data in the signup form. For example when you enter a username the signup form automatically checks that username and verifies visually if it's available. A minor detail, but a very nice detail. ...even though it doesn't tell you if the username is NOT available, which I think might be more important still. :p
Second, after you signup there's a nice introduction to JPG magazine that gives you the lay of the land. Here's the opener to it.
Welcome to JPG, Michael!
We're so glad you've joined us.
JPG is not just another photo sharing site - it's a community that's come together to create a photo magazine.
Here at JPG, we like to say we're all about "imagemaking without attitude." That means we want JPG to be a positive experience for everyone. This isn't about photo snobbery or pixel wanking. It's just about the joy of photography.
If you love photography like we do, welcome. But if you're looking to have yet another fight about film vs. digital, or confrontational critique, that's not really what we do here.
We're also about mostly unmodified photos. That means we do not accept photos that have been overly Photoshopped. No fake borders, digitally-added text, or cutouts. Adjustments to color and sharpness is just fine, of course.
Just keep it real, baby. Here's a handy rule: If anything has been digitally added or removed (well, besides dust), it's probably not right for JPG.
There's more, but I'll leave it to you to signup to see it all.
In fact, the only problem I had with JPG view in this otherwise glowing review was their profile page.
After I typed in a nice little bio I was appalled to find that JPG magazine's website just deleted my copy arbitrarily after a certain number of characters and lines... roughly after 500 characters. Quite contrary to the attention to detail on the signup form there was no limit on the form to ensure I didn't type over 500 characters and no alert when I did. Everything over 500 characters was just deleted when I clicked submit. Frustrated I left the following copy as my profile.
I was surprised at how good the usability was on jpgmag.com until this profile page. It throws all high standards out the window.
The very idea of a "profile" implies and encourages the user to write freely, but jpgmag arbitrarily truncates (deletes) the users first attempt at a well written profile at 500 chars with no alert, and no way to recover a lost attempt.
There's no reason why there should be a 500char limit. It's just asinine. Why have a limit at all?
To be fair the input form does say "maximum 500 characters" above the form, but this is no excuse.
An arbitrary limit of 500 characters does NOT discourage spam or other negatory activity. It merely tells the user they're unimportant, makes users take less pride, and makes a site like this whose value is in it's sociability a far less powerful and therefore useful too.
The profile page is not just about identity, it's the root building block of user participation... the precursor to the users submitted photos themselves. Case in point I've noticed quite a few grease-monkey scripts floating around on the web that change the user icons all over flickr.com to link directly to the users profile page and NOT the users photo-stream. JPG magazine like Flickr may be about the photos, but the identity is still the most important building block in community interaction.
The objective of JPGmag.com is to aggregate great photos, but without strong identity and identity based mechanisms for identifying great photos JPGmag.com and Flickr would merely be websites with a bunch of meaningless photos. Identity is directly tied to meaning. And MEANING, not beauty or interestingness is the root value of such sites and the root underlying mechanism for discovery and sharing.
To put it simply identity is the root from which all things participatory media grow. The stronger the identity, the stronger the community, the more trust, and participation.
BTW, I also submitted my thoughts to their bug report form which is at the bottom of every page. Yet another VERY nice touch.
All in all I thought I found JPG Magazine to be one of the finest if not the finest example of bubbling up participatory media into higher and more traditional forms of media.
JPG magazine only pay $100 for each photo they use in JPG Magazine, if they do use any. ;) However, while this is pretty low considering how much revenue they take in I suspect or at least hope it will rise in the future as their subscriptions and profits increase to attract an ever greater quality of photographers. This could be both a good and a bad thing. In fact... maybe one day there should be an amateur photographer's JPG magazine and a professional photographers JPG magazine. (competition anyone?) The only difference between such magazines would be the bounty they offer for photographs. This would keep the amateur photography magazine accessible to amateur photographers, while creating the opportunity for all to shoot for a higher level of profit and status. Some like me will revel in amateur photography, others will aim for profits and status... and so be it.
All in all, while I do hope JPG Magazine's bounty for great photos continues to rise. I would probably still submit at least some of my photos to JPG magazine no matter what they paid.
This is not to say money doesn't matter to me it does, but being published in JPG magazine is worth more than simply money. There is a far greater value that's often completely over looked. That core value of participatory media is simply social capital.
Social capital includes things like trust, visibility, recognition, credibility, good will, shared history, education, connectivity and above all the potential for greater upward mobility... aka. opportunity.
Let's not forget simple bragging rights and fun! :)
JPG Magazine is creating a tremendous amount of social capital among photographers and while it just past it's second year birthday I'd still consider my contribution an investment and the greatest ROI not money at all, but simple social capital.
Besides what else am I going to do with all the awesome photos I take with my $150 camera? :)
Thursday, September 28
A righteous vlogger gets promoted in iTunes Podcast Directory
Featured Video Podcast in iTunes!!, higres version
Bill Streeter of lofistl.com was featured today in the iTunes podcast directory.
And he got some good PR.
riverfronttimes.com | Best Of
Congrats Bill.
Monday, September 25
Mobile AV podcast agregation support to be unvieled on the Nokia N95 tomorrow!?
As many know I've blogged time and again about the idea of the fabled "networked ipod"... The idea being "hubless media aggreagation" or "direct to portable device media aggregation"... taking podcasting and videoblogging "beyond the desktop"... and I've put it many other ways.
The ultimate vision is that that one day soon we'll be walking down the street and our portable media device will suddenly beep at us and we'll pull it out and see we have a new video or audio podcast from a friend right there and ready to play.
Ideally this device will transparenly jump on and off any open or trusted network checking all our photo, audio podcast, or videoblog subscriptions downloading any media in the background transparently without needing any attention. We'd then be able to pull it out at any point and be assured that the absolute latest videos, photos or audio podcasts would be right there waiting for us.
Such a device will allow podcasting technology to become untethered.. to go with us out into the world, to be experienced not in realtime, but in web time. Such media will then start to become not just more ubiquitous than traditional broadcasting and entertainment... but also a seemless tool of everday inter-personal communications.
The wifi enabled Sony PSP has been the closest to this vision, but it is not a automatic aggregator... it's simply a browser... and it requires way to much attention to discover, download, and prepare content prior to simple playback. You must be on network to browse media and download individual videos and pieces of audio individually for later playback. In order for such a device to be successful content must come to the device without the need for constant attention and require us only to choose which mp3 or video and press play.
Nokia has been making some major in-roads lately with devices like the n770 and more recently the n93, and now it appears that their latest device the n95 will be out as soon as tomorrow and that it might, just might, finally have full on support for audio and video podcast aggregation!
I'll believe it when I see it! :)
I don't have the exact specs but Steve Garfield just posted about the Nokia N95 which will supposedly be out tomorrow. According to him it will have an audio and video podcast aggregator on the phone.
I have lots of questions steve (and nokia)! and I want answers! :)
First, I want specs!
Steve, and Nokia... if you're listening... send me one already for testing!
We over at mefeedia.com have been waiting and prepared to take videoblogging and audio podcasting beyond the desktop computer and "tethered devices" like the ipod... for over a year... just give us basic RSS 2.0 support, some good formats support like mp4 and mp3, a way to get a feed in the device and a simple easy to use aggregator / playback interface we'll do the rest! :)
Steve G's whole post is here: Nokia Test Center Blog: Blogger Preview of the Nokia N95
nokian95, nokianseries, N95
The ultimate vision is that that one day soon we'll be walking down the street and our portable media device will suddenly beep at us and we'll pull it out and see we have a new video or audio podcast from a friend right there and ready to play.
Ideally this device will transparenly jump on and off any open or trusted network checking all our photo, audio podcast, or videoblog subscriptions downloading any media in the background transparently without needing any attention. We'd then be able to pull it out at any point and be assured that the absolute latest videos, photos or audio podcasts would be right there waiting for us.
Such a device will allow podcasting technology to become untethered.. to go with us out into the world, to be experienced not in realtime, but in web time. Such media will then start to become not just more ubiquitous than traditional broadcasting and entertainment... but also a seemless tool of everday inter-personal communications.
The wifi enabled Sony PSP has been the closest to this vision, but it is not a automatic aggregator... it's simply a browser... and it requires way to much attention to discover, download, and prepare content prior to simple playback. You must be on network to browse media and download individual videos and pieces of audio individually for later playback. In order for such a device to be successful content must come to the device without the need for constant attention and require us only to choose which mp3 or video and press play.
Nokia has been making some major in-roads lately with devices like the n770 and more recently the n93, and now it appears that their latest device the n95 will be out as soon as tomorrow and that it might, just might, finally have full on support for audio and video podcast aggregation!
I'll believe it when I see it! :)
I don't have the exact specs but Steve Garfield just posted about the Nokia N95 which will supposedly be out tomorrow. According to him it will have an audio and video podcast aggregator on the phone.
This is Steve Garfield reporting from the Soho Grand Hotel where Nokia has gathered bloggers from around the world to preview the new Nokia N95, prior to it's public unveiling tomorrow in NYC at the 7th Regiment Armory.
[...]
There was an application called podcasting and I asked about it. It's a media aggregator that will be able to subscribe to audio and video podcasts which you'll then be able to watch on the device. It's really a lot more than just a phone. It's a multimedia computer.
I have lots of questions steve (and nokia)! and I want answers! :)
First, I want specs!
- video/audio codecs supported -- 3gp, mp4, mp3 ???
- RSS standards supported -- RSS 2.0, mediaRSS, Atom ??
- memory -- Onboard memory size, explandability, flash card type?
- does it aggregate via any open wifi? what about authenticated wifi?
- does it aggregate over wireless!? i.e 3G
- can it jump on and off trusted and open networks without my attention
- can it aggregate media in the background
- how do i get RSS feeds to the phone? does nokia have an API?
Steve, and Nokia... if you're listening... send me one already for testing!
We over at mefeedia.com have been waiting and prepared to take videoblogging and audio podcasting beyond the desktop computer and "tethered devices" like the ipod... for over a year... just give us basic RSS 2.0 support, some good formats support like mp4 and mp3, a way to get a feed in the device and a simple easy to use aggregator / playback interface we'll do the rest! :)
Steve G's whole post is here: Nokia Test Center Blog: Blogger Preview of the Nokia N95
nokian95, nokianseries, N95
Sunday, September 24
82,978 podcasts and counting
Haven't seen any stats on the number of podcasts recently and was pleasantly suprised to see a podcaster (Victor Cjiao of typicalmacuser.com) went through and totaled up all the numbers in the iTunes podcast directory. 82,978 podcasts and counting
According to Victor that's a ten-fold increase since apple started the directory just over a year ago.
What with all the great podcasting platforms like Odeo, Hipcast, Vimeo, Blip.tv and dozens of directories and platforms like Mefeedia the iTunes directory certainly doesn't contain everything. (In fact i'm sure it has but a small fraction of the total number of video and audio podcast feeds.) However it's a good indicator of how big podcasting has grown and how fast it's growing.
So why is it so important that there are 82,978 podcasters in the iTunes Podcast directory?
Because Apple sent out a cease and decist against Podcast Ready claiming their name infringed on Apple's trademarks. This implies that Apple believes that any name containing "podcast" might infringe on their trademarks and it has got many of those 82,978 podcasters blood boiling.
According to Russell Shaw over at ZDNet this is not simply a case of trademark protectionism gone mad.
According to him it appears Apple is attempting to do a trademark land grab not only around the term "pod", as was previously known, but now also the term "ipodcast".
Now there's virtually no chance Apple will succeed in maintaing total control over the user of "pod" and especially "podcast" in this space but they sure hasn't stopped them from trying and they sure are pissing a lot of people (and businesses) off.
The ZDnet article: » EXCLUSIVE: Apple Trademark Office docs point to REAL reasons for" Podcast" controversy | IP Telephony, VoIP, Broadband | ZDNet.com
Thanks Victor for the info.
Saturday, September 23
Apple threatening Podcast Ready over use of the term Pod
Well... if this isn't just the bees knees... Like I need another reason to hate Apple these days. I'm already pissed the new iTunes 7.0 STILL doesn't have permalinks / linkbacks to podcasters. Now this.
From: Apple Hits Podcast Ready with Nastygram (Wired.com)
It's important to note they're are two different issue here... It's quite likely "myPodder" may be an infringment... However if "Podcast Ready" is an infringement that would make any company who ever used "podcast" in their name an infringing.
I am actually really pissed at Apple... they didn't CREATE or invent podcasting and clearly they're behaving with both iTunes 7.0 and with their trademarks like they own it... it is a "comsumer driven culture" or better explained as "a community created" and "community driven technology" and whatever apple now thinks of the term "podcast" now it's to late for them to try to claim ownership over the term or tech after it was created by the community and Apple has embraced and encouraged the terms general usage for almost two years. The term "podcasting" and the tech for podcasting were around before Apple started using the term and before they added the technology to iTunes... and I'll bet anything if there's a showdown that the technology and term are still around long after Apple and the iPod have gone the way of all other companies and products over the years.
At this point I'm really hostile toward apple on the podcasting front and I wish the blogging community would just get organized and create an uproar and put apple in it's place. We litterally number in the hundreds of thousands whereas apple is just one company.
Apple has with their vertical integration of Podcasting into the iTunes store endoctrinated podcasting, making podcasting rigid, stiffling innovation, and disenfranchising thousands of bloggers, videobloggers and podcasters with their business 1.0 model of vertically integratation and lockin into the itunes store, directory and software.
Apple is creating a golden silo or walled garden to capture and drive traffic and sales in the iTunes Store... greedily grabbing traffic and locking people into the iTunes store with DRM and the iTunes podcasting platform.
With Apple all traffic is inbound, none outbound.
Bloggers and Podcasters everywhere are driving thousands and thousands of users to iTunes via thousands of inbound itunes links... I'm willing to bet we are THE number one driver of traffic to the iTunes store. I challenge you... who else is driving traffic to Apple? Apple is using YOU.
There is not a single permalink or linkback anywhere where our content is being watched and listened. Not one link in the media playback interface back to our own sites! There are plenty of links from the iTunes interface into the iTunes Store.. but no links to OUR websites... where we conduct OUR businss.. sell our content... or just discuss the podcast episode you've just listened to in iTunes.
I'd call it a slick bastardization of podcasters interest... but it's NOT slick. It's sickening... an outrage.
There are no perma-links back from itunes to independant artists... musicians, videographers, or podcast producers whom are strugling to make a dime... to do everything from sell an mp3... to simply get some achnowlegement. Apple has shaped ALL workflow around and within iTunes disconnecting bloggers from their audiences.
As I put it before. All links are inbound to iTunes and NOTHING is outbound.
It's particularly vexing to me because podcasting is based on blogging and RSS.
RSS syndication would not even EXIST without linkbacks and permalinks. If syndication didn't drive traffic back to websites it would not exist at ALL!
Permalinks are FUNDAMENTAL. So fundamental in fact that of the hundreds or even thousands of RSS podcatcher and newsreader applications out there I'm willing to bet 99% of them link back to the original blog post... pretty much every single one but Apple!
Perhaps it's time to create an Creative Commons legally binding RSS license and include that anyone syndicating content MUST link back to the original place where that content was posted. You would think it would be obvious wouldn't you!? But Apple's iTunes has had podcasting support for over a year, it's now in it's second major revision with podcasting support and still no trackbacks!
So!
Anyway..
Backing up... I think we're going to see another Streisand Effect over this Apple vs. Podcast Ready thing. And I welcome it. I think it's time for an uproar.. for some outrage in the blogging community. Enough of Apple bending the will of the podcasting community to suit it's needs. Enough. This is a symbiotic relationship, a partnership or it should be not at all.
Fortunately this is great timing and great PR for Podcast Ready, just as they've come out with a new version of their software... I'm sure they'll benifit tremendously from the publicity.
Remember kids... Conflict is good for business... especially if you're the underdog like Podcast Ready and not some big gorilla with plans to embrace, extend and vertically integrate an entire creator's culture into your little schema to take over the media world.
Apple's got to give here... they're doing a crap ass job of courting hollywood and podcasters. Not only is hollywood not buying it but independant musicians and media makers are being squashed on the other end of the spectrum. The entire spectrum of the media free market cannot be represented in a closed market owned by one company. The center of the market mist remain open. Something has got to give... and i'm guessing it's already starting with Apple's reputation as a platform for independant media makers.
As for me... I'm switching to podcast ready today... I'm so damn sick of iTunes bloatware. The latest edition of myPodder couldn't have come out sooner. Nor Apple have spurred publicity around it at a better time. I emplore everyone to take the jump with me... and switch those iTunes subscription links on your site that point to iTunes to people like PodcastReady.com, FireAnt.com, Mefeedia.com, Odeo.com and others whom are actually providing services for the community.
Peace.
Tip via Yahoo Podcasters group
From: Apple Hits Podcast Ready with Nastygram (Wired.com)
Apple Computer has slappedPodcast Ready with a "cease and desist" letter, claiming that the terms "Podcast Ready" and "myPodder" infringe Apple's trademarks, and that they cause confusion among consumers. The company has been cracking down on use of the word "pod" by all sorts of parties, even though its trademark is for the word "iPod."
Podcast Ready CEO Russel Holliman said he'd consider dropping the name myPodder if he had to, but "Podcast Ready"? If that's infringement, Apple is claiming that it owns the word "podcast." Sure, the word originated with the word iPod, but most people now see it as a general term for downloadable audio shows that isn't affiliated with one brand more than another.
Coincidentally, Apple's letter arrived the day before Podcast Ready unveiled a new version of its software -- one that works with the iPod.
Podcast Ready works by sucking down subscribed podcasts directly to a portable device whenever that device is connected to a computer. This allows you to update your player's podcasts on any computer, instead of just the one running, say, your iTunes software. The latest version of the program works better with iTunes because it adds freshly-downloaded podcasts to your iPod's navigation database without you having to import the podcasts into iTunes first.
It's important to note they're are two different issue here... It's quite likely "myPodder" may be an infringment... However if "Podcast Ready" is an infringement that would make any company who ever used "podcast" in their name an infringing.
I am actually really pissed at Apple... they didn't CREATE or invent podcasting and clearly they're behaving with both iTunes 7.0 and with their trademarks like they own it... it is a "comsumer driven culture" or better explained as "a community created" and "community driven technology" and whatever apple now thinks of the term "podcast" now it's to late for them to try to claim ownership over the term or tech after it was created by the community and Apple has embraced and encouraged the terms general usage for almost two years. The term "podcasting" and the tech for podcasting were around before Apple started using the term and before they added the technology to iTunes... and I'll bet anything if there's a showdown that the technology and term are still around long after Apple and the iPod have gone the way of all other companies and products over the years.
At this point I'm really hostile toward apple on the podcasting front and I wish the blogging community would just get organized and create an uproar and put apple in it's place. We litterally number in the hundreds of thousands whereas apple is just one company.
Apple has with their vertical integration of Podcasting into the iTunes store endoctrinated podcasting, making podcasting rigid, stiffling innovation, and disenfranchising thousands of bloggers, videobloggers and podcasters with their business 1.0 model of vertically integratation and lockin into the itunes store, directory and software.
Apple is creating a golden silo or walled garden to capture and drive traffic and sales in the iTunes Store... greedily grabbing traffic and locking people into the iTunes store with DRM and the iTunes podcasting platform.
With Apple all traffic is inbound, none outbound.
Bloggers and Podcasters everywhere are driving thousands and thousands of users to iTunes via thousands of inbound itunes links... I'm willing to bet we are THE number one driver of traffic to the iTunes store. I challenge you... who else is driving traffic to Apple? Apple is using YOU.
There is not a single permalink or linkback anywhere where our content is being watched and listened. Not one link in the media playback interface back to our own sites! There are plenty of links from the iTunes interface into the iTunes Store.. but no links to OUR websites... where we conduct OUR businss.. sell our content... or just discuss the podcast episode you've just listened to in iTunes.
I'd call it a slick bastardization of podcasters interest... but it's NOT slick. It's sickening... an outrage.
There are no perma-links back from itunes to independant artists... musicians, videographers, or podcast producers whom are strugling to make a dime... to do everything from sell an mp3... to simply get some achnowlegement. Apple has shaped ALL workflow around and within iTunes disconnecting bloggers from their audiences.
As I put it before. All links are inbound to iTunes and NOTHING is outbound.
It's particularly vexing to me because podcasting is based on blogging and RSS.
RSS syndication would not even EXIST without linkbacks and permalinks. If syndication didn't drive traffic back to websites it would not exist at ALL!
Permalinks are FUNDAMENTAL. So fundamental in fact that of the hundreds or even thousands of RSS podcatcher and newsreader applications out there I'm willing to bet 99% of them link back to the original blog post... pretty much every single one but Apple!
Perhaps it's time to create an Creative Commons legally binding RSS license and include that anyone syndicating content MUST link back to the original place where that content was posted. You would think it would be obvious wouldn't you!? But Apple's iTunes has had podcasting support for over a year, it's now in it's second major revision with podcasting support and still no trackbacks!
So!
Anyway..
Backing up... I think we're going to see another Streisand Effect over this Apple vs. Podcast Ready thing. And I welcome it. I think it's time for an uproar.. for some outrage in the blogging community. Enough of Apple bending the will of the podcasting community to suit it's needs. Enough. This is a symbiotic relationship, a partnership or it should be not at all.
Fortunately this is great timing and great PR for Podcast Ready, just as they've come out with a new version of their software... I'm sure they'll benifit tremendously from the publicity.
Remember kids... Conflict is good for business... especially if you're the underdog like Podcast Ready and not some big gorilla with plans to embrace, extend and vertically integrate an entire creator's culture into your little schema to take over the media world.
Apple's got to give here... they're doing a crap ass job of courting hollywood and podcasters. Not only is hollywood not buying it but independant musicians and media makers are being squashed on the other end of the spectrum. The entire spectrum of the media free market cannot be represented in a closed market owned by one company. The center of the market mist remain open. Something has got to give... and i'm guessing it's already starting with Apple's reputation as a platform for independant media makers.
As for me... I'm switching to podcast ready today... I'm so damn sick of iTunes bloatware. The latest edition of myPodder couldn't have come out sooner. Nor Apple have spurred publicity around it at a better time. I emplore everyone to take the jump with me... and switch those iTunes subscription links on your site that point to iTunes to people like PodcastReady.com, FireAnt.com, Mefeedia.com, Odeo.com and others whom are actually providing services for the community.
Peace.
Tip via Yahoo Podcasters group
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)