[opendtv] Re: Commissioner Copps on the Fox vs Cablevision dispute
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 08:03:37 -0400
At 3:55 PM -0500 10/26/10, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
That may be one half of "the reality," as you put it, although IE
and Safari, and others, seem to have no problem.
The real issue seems to be the screen on which the content is viewed.
As pointed out in one of the stories I posted, the congloms appear
willing to put their content on the screens of PCs and Macs, but they
want to block their content if it is using an Internet link/device to
the big screen in the family room. I suppose the reasoning is that
once people get use to accessing content on the big screen via the
Internet they will be more willing to cut the cord with their MVPD.
The other half of "the reality" is that Comcast and Apple, to name
just two, are trying to set up their own barriers to access over the
Internet. For some reason, you are always unwilling to admit or
object to these walled gardens, preferring to vent your ire only at
content owners.
I don't understand what barrier Apple is setting up, other than the
inability of the mobile platforms to use Flash, and the inability of
Apple TV to connect to ANY Internet site. Yes, they have a huge
ecosystem that is optimized to feed their devices. But the barrier is
purchase of an Apple device, not some perceived wall around their
ecosystem.
Imagine a box that only allows access to a handful of Internet
walled gardens. Why should the congloms go for that?
This is EXACTLY what they are doing. They WANT to negotiate terms for
every device rather than creating an "open garden" of their own with
uniform pricing. That being said, they are about to introduce their
own walled garden with Hulu Plus, and seem more than happy to let any
device access this new service...for a price.
The congloms are not going to cut any deals that undercut the
current MVPD model that forces consumers to pay for stuff they
don't consume.
Then how come I can watch Fox for free both over the Internet and
OTA? The plain truth must be, the content owners are unhappy with
certain distribution models, and not with other distribution models.
The distribution models I use DO NOT force me to pay for stuff I
don't consume.
Because, as I described in a previous message, you are watching one
tiny part of the Fox stable of content. And even with Hulu and
Fox.com you cannot access everything they broadcast OTA.
The reality is that when you subscribe to the extended basic tier of
an MVPD, you are paying subscriber fees for more than a dozen Fox
networks.
It would be inconveivable to me that any conglom would force people
to use their prorietary STB to access their content. Because the
congloms are well aware that people won't buy into a scheme that
allows access to just their one network. So instead, what I see, and
you seem unable to see, is that the congloms object to people
creating any sort of exclusive Internet access for the conglom's
stuff over the Internet. The congloms seem happy enough with the
MVPD model, with the FOTA model, and with THEIR OWN web sites, but
not happy with other Internet distribution schemes, including Google.
What they want is to negotiate the rights for every third party
platform and to get paid for those rights.
Apparently Bert may have understood this all along, as he kept
claiming that Google TV would become more than a browser for a TV;
that it would become another "walled garden." The article he posted
yesterday indicates that Google is now negotiating for rights to
allow Google TV to access sites that are freely open to PC based web
browsers.
So the congloms are forcing Google to build a portal for the Google
TV; forcing Google to do what Apple and others have been forced to do
- negotiate for the right to put their content on a big TV screen
while they willingly allow the same content to be displayed on PC
screens without any special deals...
You seem totally stuck on Google, for some reason. Perhaps the
congloms feel that Google would have too much control into how
consumers are directed to certain TV content? Maybe they perceive a
risk that Google will get in bed with certain TV content sources,
making them very easy to find and making others much more difficult?
Wow, that seems sooo far-fetched, right? Like we don't see that all
the time.
I was stuck on Google because it appeared that they were trying to
create a truly open platform. Now it appears that it will be no
different form any of the other walled gardens that you object to.
Apparently our only disagreement is related to who is building the walls...
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
