Archive for category DRM

Comcast Targets Innocent Customer In P2P Dragnet

Jan 29

Posted by Davis in DRM, Media, SA | Comments off

The Barbed Wire Keeps The Bears OutCNET reported this morning that AT&T and Comcast are planning on adopting a three strikes and you’re out policy for P2P users. The move is yet another desperate attempt by the media industry to try and regain control over content distribution. Because most broadband providers have government protected duopolies, they hope to use the MSOs as a chokepoint in their war on privacy piracy.

If you don’t actively engage in P2P sharing, you probably don’t think you need to worry about this, but I think there are already reasons to be alarmed. Even before the program’s launch, we are seeing reports of innocent customers being targeted by Comcast’s DMCA enforcement division.

Recently, John Aprigliano received a letter from Comcast asking him to take down a torrent that he was allegedly seeding. As if hitting him with a bogus DMCA takedown request wasn’t bad enough, Comcast had to insult his taste in movies by accusing him of sharing Cadillac Records, a movie that he had never heard of BTW.

When he called Comcast to figure it out, he got the usual run around. After 4 different telephone calls and an hour of hold time, he was finally able to determine that Comcast sent him the notice because of an old modem that was now being used by someone else.

I find this scary because I tend to move around a lot. Over the course of my life, I’ve easily used ten different modems. Considering how popular Bit Torrent is, there is more than a good chance that one of my former modems is being used pirate media. Why should I now have to worry about getting kicked off the net, just because Comcast can’t tell the difference between an IP and MAC address?

In John’s case, he was fortunate to be tech savvy enough to catch this, but what happens when some little old lady loses her broadband just because of a Comcast screw up? Are most people really going to know that they need to ask Comcast, what they have down for their Mac address? Somehow, I doubt that my Mom would have been able to prove herself innocent in the same situation.

During the RIAA’s lawsuit blitz, there have been plenty of examples where they filed lawsuits against innocent “infringers”. Now the media industry wants to exploit government granted monopolies, in order to take away high speed internet from those same victims. Forgive me, if I’m more then a little pessimistic. Why Comcast or AT&T would even consider such an anti-consumer proposal is beyond me, but the whole scheme is doomed for failure.

The pirates will eventually figure out even better ways to encrypt their traffic and the end result will just be a bunch of ticked off consumers feeling like big brother is breathing down their neck. It’s hard to get excited about having Comcast monitor P2P activity, when they already have a history for screwing these things up.

DivX Looks Outside The Codec For The Future Of Web Video

May 7

Posted by Davis in Disclosure - I own stock in co. mentioned, DivX, DRM, Netflix, SA, Technology, TV, VOD | 2 Comments

DivXDivX reported their 1st quarter earnings on Monday and while I’m still waiting to read the actual 10k before digging too far into the numbers, I did want to comment on what I see as a significant shift in strategy. Over the last 7 years, DivX has done an impressive job of building an eco-system around a single file format. The first time that I came across a DivX file, I actually thought that it was some kind of a virus. It took me two weeks before I worked up the courage to download the DivX media player so that I could play the movie, but once I did, I realized that my fears were unfounded. The file not only offered a superior video experience, but it was a lot smaller than the MPEG files that I was used to downloading. Since I was on a dial-up connection at the time, every little byte made a big difference.

As the P2P networks developed, DivX and it’s open source cousin XviD, became an important resource for file sharers. Initially, my own interest in DivX was driven by it’s technological advantages over other video formats, as well as the wide availability of DivX content on the grey market, but as compression technology has evolved, my reasons for using DivX have changed as well. Since I’m no longer on a dial-up network, compression is less important then what I can actually do with my videos.

As DivX gained in popularity, they were able to forge agreements with consumer electronic manufacturers that allowed you to play DivX files on a wide range of devices. Even though, H.264 is a superior standard for internet video, I still prefer DivX files because I know that I’ll be able to play them on the hardware devices that I own.

By creating an eco-system that supports portability, DivX has been able to lock me into their format in the same way that Apple has been able to use iTunes to keep their customers buying iPods instead of mp3 players.

As H.264, Microsoft, Apple and Adobe all continue to creep into DivX’s territory, there has been a lot of concern over how DivX would respond to these competing threats. Microsoft’s approach has been to batten down the hatches by developing their proprietary Silverlight codec. By retaining full control over the video format, they are able to convince people to buy as many Microsoft supported products as possible. These extra restrictions increase the appeal of Silverlight for DRM hungry Hollywood studios, but it also frustrates their customers in the process. Incompatible file formats are the reason why services like Netflix’s Watch Now doesn’t get along with Apple. Since Microsoft (and Apple) refuse to open up their codecs, it gives them a monopoly on the hardware that is allowed to support their video files.

Apple has at least opened up their system a little bit by adding support for the H.264 format, but they’ve still chosen to wrap their h.264 files inside of the Quicktime container. This prevents other companies from supporting Apple H.264 content, without obtaining a license for Quicktime first. This helps to open up Apple’s eco-system to alternative video formats, but still gives Apple control over the companies that are allowed to play nice with their your media.

Similarly, Adobe has also forged agreements to support H.264 inside of flash, but if you want to take your Flash H.264 files portable, you’ll need a device that can support the Flash format. To their credit, Adobe has done a good job of building momentum for downloadable flash by supporting open source initiatives, a new DRM system, and by removing license fees for mobile providers, but despite their early traction with these efforts, there are still very few hardware devices that are actually capable of playing portable flash content.

With so many companies pursuing proprietary video strategies, one would expect DivX to be focusing on locking consumers into the DivX format, but like most things having to do with DivX, their strategy for dealing with the next generation of codecs is also built on a system of openness.

We got our first real glimpse of this strategy last November when DivX announced that they had acquired Mainconcept for $22 – $28 million. The Mainconcept acquisition gave DivX an immediate footprint in the H.264 space, but it also raised some important questions about how DivX could maintain a monopoly on their community, while supporting a format that is widely available to competitors.

Interestingly enough, while discussing H.264 on their latest conference call, DivX CEO Kevin Hell pointed out that the current state of H.264 really isn’t all that different from the MPEG-4 standard that DivX was built on.

“Looking forward, a real opportunity exists for DivX to emerge as the consumer face of H.264, serving as a trusted brand for users who don’t want to concern themselves with underlying formats or technologies. In fact, the current H.264 market resembles in many ways the early stages of MPEG-4 market.

When DivX first emerged seven years ago there were number of different and incompatible MPEG-4 implementations available. Through our strong consumer adoption and the creation of the DivX certification program, we were able to simplify the experience for consumers and provide a solution that just works across any device. We plan to repeat that strategy by incorporating broad H.264 support into both our software and consumer electronics offerings under the DivX brand. We are on track to release a new version of our software in 2008 that supports H.264 and then extend that support to consumer electronic devices that are likely to hit the market in 2009. We believe that this development will help move the DivX brand beyond one single format and toward promise of support for any video content, on any device.”

DivX’s evolution towards H.264 won’t be a clean and easy transition, but it is the right direction for the company. If they can successfully integrate H.264 into their certification program, it will reduce the threat of their codec becoming obsolete and will highlight their certification process as being the real value added for consumer device manufacturers.

Instead of trying to educate consumers on the differences between MPEG-4 Part 2 vs. MPEG-4 AVC (H.264), CE manufacturers can slap the DivX label onto their devices and consumers will know that it will support their digital video libraries without complications. In fact, during the Q&A section of their conference call, DivX discussed the possibility of pushing this envelope even further by adding Flash support to their certification program.

“In terms of how we think about Flash more broadly, the vast majority of content that is downloaded today is in DivX format or variations of the DivX format, so we don’t see that as being a threat in terms of the use case that we’re really providing, which is high quality content delivered through the internet and then played back on a variety of devices. To the extent that Flash starts to get traction in terms of files that are downloaded at high quality and based on the terms, it would be something that we could actually extend into and offer into our certification program as well and that’s what we’d be looking to do.”

Part of what makes DivX such a difficult company to pin down, is their ability to take competitors and turn them into partners. On one hand, Microsoft is one of the biggest threats to DivX, but if they can get them to extend DivX support to the Xbox, they could become an important customer.

Adobe is currently using Mainconcept to power their H.264 support, but they are also trying to establish their own format as the new standard for internet delivered video. These complex relationships are enough to make anyone’s head spin, but DivX has a way of getting their partners to look at the glass half full side of the equation.

On one hand, It’s hard for me to believe that Adobe would be all that enthusiastic about giving up control over their flash content, but on the other hand, a DivX partnership would create a powerful competitor to Apple and Microsoft’s closed systems.

Adobe would gain access to an established community of video fans and would have one more platform that could drive demand for Flash content. Instead of having to worry about the lack of downloadable flash content, they could leverage DivX’s popularity, while slowly introducing their own standard for web video. While I doubt that older DivX devices would be able to support Flash with a firmware update, any new DivX devices would be able to support their content.

For DivX, they would be able to increase the appeal of their brand by offering support for the next generation of internet video. They could also use Adobe DRM as a way of bypassing studio approval for DivX content. While DivX did mention plans to update their DRM later this year, getting in through Adobe’s backdoor could be a lot easier than buying off the studios. According to DivX’s 4th quarter 10k filing, they paid Sony $1.5 million and gave them 100,000 warrants at a strike price of $16.14, in order to get the studio to bless the DivX format. While it’s possible that DivX plans on buying off all of the studios, this could get expensive really quick, if DivX is serious about going legit.

For consumers, it would be the biggest win of all. Instead of being locked into a single file format, they would have the flexiblity to adopt alternative standards without having to abandon their current media libraries. This would pressure Microsoft and Apple to open up their hardware, instead of maintaining data silos.

It’s hard to judge how serious DivX is about adopting flash support from just a few comments, but even beyond flash, having support for multi-formats adds real value to their brand. As new forms of digital transmission unfold, DivX is in a position to attach their brand to a much larger category of web video.

Some of the niche video formats don’t have the ability to negotiate partnerships with the device manufacturers directly, but through DivX could gain access to a much larger audience. If DivX certification suddenly meant that Matroska containers could play on DivX devices, it would open up another community that DivX could tap into and it would change how Matroska fans think about the DivX brand.

Bringing other formats into the DivX program, would add to DivX’s cost of revenue, but it would make DivX certification more valuable to their CE partners. I may enjoy dissecting the nuances between the various competing video formats, but most consumers don’t want to think about it. They want to be able to play whatever file they have without converting it into a single format. By focusing on supporting as many formats as possible, DivX may end up competing with their own eco-system, but they’ll also expand their reach in the process. By taking DivX beyond the codec, it allows their community to move forward with the future, while hanging onto the treasures from the past.

Disclosure – I own shares of Netflix

The Pros and Cons Of Media Center Vista

Jan 31

Posted by Davis in Disclosure - I own stock in co. mentioned, DivX, DRM, Media, Microsoft, Slingbox, TiVo, TV | 7 Comments

Caution Objects In Vista Are Less Entertaining Than They Appear

Over the past few months, I’ve finally started to get a feel for Media Center Vista and while I haven’t tried out every feature in the program, I have played around with it long enough to have some initial thoughts. Before I tried the software, I had low expectations, but after actually using the program, I’ve been really impressed with what the Media Center team has put together.

Media Center Vista allows you to perform some pretty advanced tasks without having to be a computer geek in order to figure out how to use it. I initially had some reservations about the user interface, but it only took about a week, before I found it growing on me. There are still improvements that Microsoft needs to make, but they’ve made a giant leap forward, compared to the original XP version.

Pros

-Media Center Vista is wicked fast at finding new programs. In the XP version, the software was painfully slow at trying to search for shows. As soon as I would start typing in the name of a show, XP would freak out from trying to sort through so much information. In Vista, the program still starts searching immediately, but the indexing has been turbocharged. Instead of having to wait for the menu, the results will appear as fast as you can type. This faster indexing shows up in a number of areas. When you are browsing, you can hit page down and scroll through programs as fast as you can read them. If you want to rearrange the priority of your recordings, you can make changes and move onto other areas of the program without having to wait forever while the system checks for conflicts.

-The interface looks fantastic. Microsoft has done a good job of creating a clean and intuitive DVR experience. The program is easy to navigate and has lots of extra features. On the surface the design appears relatively simple, but you can tell that Microsoft has paid a lot of attention to the little details. Whether it’s being able to double click on the picture in picture window, in order to bring up the full screen or being able to see the DVD art for upcoming movies, there are a lot of subtle features that make for a more enjoyable media experience.

-Vista comes with 30 second skip enabled. TiVo fans know that you can hack your remote to add this feature, but the big studios were able to scare TiVo into disabling it for the masses. In the past, I’ve never really used the 30 second skip feature because it meant giving up the skip to the end button on my remote. After spending some time with it on Media Center, I’ve been really surprised at how much I’m enjoying it. Hitting a button six times is a lot easier than trying to guess when the program is about to start again.

-There is minimal interference between you and your recordings. One of my biggest frustrations with the generic DVR was that it required too many unnecessary steps, before I could interact with my content. It felt like I had to hit ten buttons before I could schedule a movie, delete a recording or even watch a show. With Vista Media Center, it’s an entirely different story. The entire experience is built around the content that you are interacting with. You can’t do everything from all levels of the software, but each step is intuitively linked to the task that you are focused on. If you are watching a TV show, then by right clicking you can delete the program or burn it to DVD. If you are playing music it’s one click to pause, skip, repeat, shuffle . . . .

-You can watch TV while surfing the web. Media Center is really designed for the living room, but I’m primarily using it in a desktop setting. I didn’t think that I’d watch a lot of TV at my desk, but I’ve found it to be the perfect compliment to streaming Netflix and YouTube. This isn’t ideal for shows with intense action and complex story lines, but its perfect for tuning into the news when you see a story break online or for listening to late night talk shows, while you’re multitasking on the web. This feature won’t benefit you, if you plan on using Media Center on your TV, but it’s a good reason to add on a TV tuner, the next time you upgrade your PC.

-You can use the XBox360 as an extender. I’ve read a lot about the Xbox extenders, but I had never actually seen one in action. Connecting my Xbox to Media Center took an extra registration step, but it was well worth the time to get it set up. When I first heard about Microsoft’s extender strategy, I was skeptical that it would stream videos without problems or program lock ups. While I didn’t test the connection using WiFi, my experience using the Xbox was almost identical to having the PC directly connected to the TV. No lag, no stuttering, just instant access to my content on my big screen tv.

-You can watch TV while using the menus. TiVo uses picture in picture technology on their Comcast download, but you won’t find it on their stand alone DVRs. I had forgotten how much I enjoyed this until I started using Vista as a DVR. Whether it’s a live show or a recording, Vista will minimize whatever program that’s on, when you want to dig deeper into the menu settings. This isn’t good if you’ve accidentally stumbled onto a football game and are desperately trying to avoid the score, but it is nice for when you’re not exactly sure what you want to watch.

-It will help you find programs that are on right now. Vista Media Center allows you to search for programs in a number of ways, but its their support for upcoming television, that impressed me the most. When it comes to searching for things like TV series, kid shows, etc., it allows you to browse alphabetically or by date. They’ve also built a separate section for movies and for sports where they’ve packed in some extra bonus content. In the TV and movies section, they offer plugins for various movie download services and in the sports section Vista will let you check the box scores or add fantasy players to track.

-You can skip automatically skip commercials. DVRs make it easy to skip commercials, but Vista Media Center takes things one step further by supporting plugins, that can edit out those pesky little ads entirely. It’s not easy to set up and it’s not something that is enabled by default, but it’s still a pretty sweet feature to add.

-You can placeshift your TV. The Slingbox is great if you have a cable DVR or a TiVo, but with Media Center you can download a free plugin that will let you watch your content wherever you can connect to the net. I haven’t actually used the program yet, but it’s still a great feature to have access to.

-You can burn DVDs. Normally, I’m pretty good about watching all of the shows that I record, but when it comes to boxing, I just don’t have time to see every fighter. It’s my favorite sport, but since I record every fight (even the ones on the Spanish channels), there isn’t enough time/hard drive space, to get caught up. Since I’ll never really know which fighters will end up making it big, I’ve decided to use my Media Center to archive all of the fights. By saving them to DVD, I should be able to go back and watch the fights that mattered.

-It supports external storage. Media Center gives you a lot of control over how you want to set up your storage. Since I’m using it as a secondary DVR, I’ve set it up to record a maximum of 100GB on my internal drive. If I need more, I can add an external drive or increase my internal hard drive allocation.

Cons

-You shouldn’t have to reboot your TV. One of the things that I love about my TiVo is that it just works. You don’t have to be a tech geek to figure it out, you plug it into your TV and it records everything. In the entire time that I’ve been a TiVo customer, I can think of very few occasions where TiVo failed to record my programing. When it comes to Media Center, it’s important to remember that it’s a PC first and a DVR second. Over the last few months, I’ve found the program to be mostly reliable, but it hasn’t been smooth sailing either. Whether it’s been dealing with poor DRM design, troubleshooting a bug that refused to let me download the guide data or having my computer crash while recording television, there have been several times where I’ve missed recordings, because of PC related problems. While I can’t blame Microsoft for all of my problems, it’s still frustrating to miss a show because of technical difficulties.

-Internet video support is weak. Media Center includes support for services like Vongo and Showtime on Demand, but it involves registering and downloading a separate program before you can get it working. As a Netflix subscriber, I was looking forward to being able to use Watch Now inside of Media Center, but Microsoft has left it up to the fans to build support for this. Microsoft includes some MSN internet video content, but they make you watch pre-roll ads before knowing whether or not it’s something that you are interested in. The Xbox may unofficially support DivX, but you can’t access it inside of media center. If you prefer to use a media extender instead, it will support your XviD files, but it’s set up to block your DivX content.

-It won’t record radio. XM may have just settled a lawsuit over their radio DVR, but recording radio shouldn’t be any different than television content. Media Center will let you listen to OTA radio, but it doesn’t let you record any of the programs.

-Fast forward is a little too powerful. It may be, that I’m just used to TiVo, but Vista’s fast forward speeds are hard to adjust to. They’ve got slow, almost fast and then it jumps to hyper speed. I can’t tell whether or not they are using a five second skip back, but when I hit play, I’m usually way past the start of the program. If you stick to the 30 second skip it’s not a problem, but it’d be nice if there was some kind of a way to adjust the timing on this.

-You can’t skip to the middle of a program. One of the things that I like about downloaded video is being able to immediately jump to the middle or the end of a program. Since this is a key feature in Window’s media player, I was surprised to see this missing from Media Center. There is also no way to jump 15 minutes ahead. If you happen to fall asleep during the middle of a program, you’re stuck with fast forwarding in order to get back to where you were at.

-You can’t rate your television. As television continues to involve, it’s becoming increasingly personal. Media Center does a good job of recording TV, but it doesn’t do a very good job of getting to know you. You can sort movies by the highest rated, but its using someone else’s criteria. Because you can’t tell Media Center what you do and don’t like, there are no suggested recordings or personalization.

-It doesn’t support auto-recording of wishlists. I’m a big basketball fan, but I’m really only interested in seeing the Laker games. Media Center will let me search for the next time that they are playing, but it won’t automatically record the game. It would be nice to be able to use media center to record programs that are customized to my interests.
Al pointed out in the comments that you can actually uses wishlists, you just need to set it up from the add recording field. Thanks for the help Al. This one definitely should go in the pro category.

-Vista’s DRM doesn’t play nice with HD. I’m still fuming over this one. I knew that recording HDTV on Vista would be a hassle, so I stuck with standard tuners when I customized my computer. After upgrading to an HD monitor, Vista disabled my Netflix Watch Now and put Media Center into lock down. If Apple’s DRM wasn’t just as bad, I would be thinking differently after this experience.

-It takes forever to burn a DVD. I was really jazzed up over being able to archive shows onto DVD, but the sluggishness of the DVD burning capabilities has me rethinking this game plan. It took me 2 and a half hours to burn a one hour program to DVD. It’d be one thing if I was using lousy hardware, but it takes less then 4 minutes for me to burn a 2 hour DivX film. It’s nice to be able to save your TV, but it should never take more time to burn the disc, than it does to watch it.

-Good for early adopters, complicated for everyone else. Vista Media Center offers a lot of unique features, but it takes too much tweaking to set these up. Placeshifting and auto commercial skipping are available, but it’s up the consumer to find and install these programs. Even if you know what you are doing, the setup can still be complicated. Instead of making consumers seek out these programs, Microsoft should be including them as part of the package. It wouldn’t be popular with the media companies, but it’d win the company a lot more fans.

-The recording quality is terrible. It’s probably not fair to compare a cablecard connected TiVo with an analog cable media center set up, but the TiVO SD recordings on my 60″ screen, look way better than the Media Center recordings on my 22″ monitor. This probably has less to do with Media Center and more to do with the tuners that I’m using, but it still takes away from the user experience. Unless you want to spend the big bucks on a cablecard media center, you may end up having to deal with poor resolutions.

-There’s no turning back once you delete – As careful as I am, sometimes my DVR instincts go on auto-pilot and I’ll accidentally delete a show before watching it. With TiVo I can recover that program, but in Media Center it is gone forever. The file isn’t even in the Recycle bin. Media Center will always ask you to confirm before deleting, but this also creates one more button to push when you are done with the shows that you have watched.

So there you have it, the good, the bad and Media Center Vista. There are some rough spots around the edges, but it really is a fantastic program. I’m hoping that we’ll see better support for HDTV and for online video as the program continues to evolve.

Bad COPP No Netflix

Jan 3

Posted by Davis in Disclosure - I own stock in co. mentioned, DRM, DVDs, Microchips, Netflix, Technology, VOD | 95 Comments

When In Doubt Blame Microsoft

Even though I’m an HDTV fanatic, it wasn’t until this past weekend, that I finally made the jump to an HD monitor. While I don’t have HDTV tuners on my Media Center, I do have an HD camcorder and it was important for me to be able to edit my high resolution videos.

After doing a little bit of research, I decided to pick up a SyncMasterTM 226BW from Samsung. Between the new monitor and my ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT video card, the resolution looks absolutely stunning. Even my home movies look fantastic in HDTV. I really couldn’t have been happier with the upgrade.

Unfortunately, Hollywood isn’t quite as thrilled about my new HD Media Dream Machine and they’ve decided to punish me by revoking my Watch Now privileges from Netflix.

I first found out about the problem on New Year’s Eve, when I went to log into my account. When I tried to launch a streaming movie, I was greeted with an error message asking me to “reset” my DRM. Luckily, Netflix’s help page on the topic included a link to a DRM reset utility, but when I went to install the program, I stopped dead in my tracks when I saw this warning.

Netflix DRM

The minute I saw“this will potentially remove playback licenses from your computer, including those from companies other than Netflix or Microsoft” I knew better than to hit continue. Before nuking my entire digital library, I decided to call Netflix’s technical support, to see if I could get to the bottom of my C00D11B1 error message.

When I called them they confirmed my worst fears. In order to access the Watch Now service, I had to give Microsoft’s DRM sniffing program access to all of the files on my hard drive. If the software found any non-Netflix video files, it would revoke my rights to the content and invalidate the DRM. This means that I would lose all the movies that I’ve purchased from Amazon’s Unbox, just to troubleshoot the issue.

Technically, there is a way to back up the licenses before doing a DRM reset, but it’s a pretty complex process, even by my standards. When I asked Netflix for more details, they referred me to Amazon for assistance.

Perhaps even worse than having to choose between having access to Netflix or giving up my Unbox movies was the realization that my real problems were actually tied to the shiny new monitor that I’ve already grown fond of.

Netflix’s software allows them to look at the video card, cables and the monitor that you are using and when they checked mine out, it was apparently a little too high def to pass their DRM filters.

Because my computer allows me to send an unrestricted HDTV feed to my monitor, Hollywood has decided to revoke my ability to stream 480 resolution video files from Netflix. In order to fix my problem, Netflix recommended that I downgrade to a lower res VGA setup.

As part of their agreement with Hollywood, Netflix uses a program called COPP (Certified Output Protection Protocal). COPP is made by Microsoft and the protocol restricts how you are able to transfer digital files off of your PC. When I ran COPP to identify the error on my machine, it gave me an ominous warning that “the exclusive semaphere is owned by another process.”

My Netflix technician told me that he had never heard of this particular error and thought that it was unique to my setup. When I consulted Microsoft, they suggested that I consult the creator of the program. Since Microsoft wrote the COPP software, I wasn’t sure who to turn to after that.

The irony in all of this, is that the DRM that Hollywood is so much in love with, is really only harming their paying customers. When you do a DRM reset, it’s not your pirated files that get revoked, it’s the ones that you already paid for that are at risk. I’m not allowed to watch low res Netflix files, even though I have the capability to download high def torrents? How does this even make sense? It’s as if the studios want their digital strategies to fail.

While I understand the need for the studios to protect their content, I believe that these measures go too far. It makes little sense to block my ability to copy low res internet movies, when I can always rip the DVD straight from my Netflix discs instead. By blocking access to my Netflix membership, Hollywood is once again punishing their customers by pushing defective DRM.

Forget Radio Shark, The Stream Ripping Piranhas Were What The RIAA Should Have Been Worried About

Dec 18

Posted by Davis in Disclosure - I own stock in co. mentioned, DRM, Media, Music, Technology, TiVo | 5 Comments

PiranhaThe RIAA may have given up on trying to outlaw DVRs, but that hasn’t stopped them from trying to interfere with your legal right to record content and when it comes to recording radio, they’ve drawn a line in the sand. Over the past few years, we’ve seen a number of innovative radio DVR gadgets hit the market, only to be squashed by the goons at the RIAA squad. What’s made the RIAA’s strategy even more boneheaded than usual, has been their insistence on trying to keep this technology out of the hands of their paying customers.

Whether its their ridiculous lawsuit against XM Satellite radio or Creative’s decision to remove FM recording from their MP3 products, there are plenty of examples where the RIAA has used heavy handed tactics to try and stifle innovation.

Yet, no matter how hard they try, they can’t put this genii back into the bottle and by taking such a strong stance against legitimate companies, they’ve driven DVR radio underground, where they’ve now lost all control over it.

The RIAA may have been worried about RadioShark, but it was the radio piranhas that were the real threat and while they were busy suing their partners, the open source movement has been filling the stream ripping wake, that corporations are now too afraid to touch.

Stream ripping software isn’t new, but the functionality has been relatively limited and the interface hasn’t been ready for the average user. Screamer Radio is an excellent open source solution for DVR radio, but it lacks the aesthetic appeal and scheduling features, that make traditional DVRs so easy to use.

Luckily, the open source community has been hard at work and what Screamer Radio leaves out, Raima Radio is now bringing to the table. Raima Radio is a powerful freeware program that fuses features like wishlists, program scheduling, and video support with the traditional features of most stream ripping programs.

This combination turns a tremendous amount of power over to the consumer and will certainly have the RIAA taking extra heartburn medication (when they find out about it ;) ) If they didn’t like XM’s limited subscriber base, having the ability to record satellite radio, then they will hate this program. It gives anyone with a computer and an internet connection, the ability to time shift radio to an mp3 player.

Raima supports a large number of internet radio stations and includes links to web pages, where you can find even more mainstream programs. If you are midway through a program, you can hit record and it caches the data, so that you can get all of the program. For years I’ve wanted to tune into Kevin and Bean’s morning show on KROQ, but since I live in San Francisco, I haven’t had easy access to the program. Now I can use Raima’s program to start recording, before I even wake up. By bridging the gap between the internet and the mp3, Raima allows you to follow radio that would normally be out of geographic reach.

Even more powerful then the scheduling capabilities, is the ability for Raima to monitor and record specific songs or artists that you are interested in. Instead of illegally downloading songs from the P2P networks, Raima allows you to create wishlists and will scan for those songs on any station that you tune into. The number of streams that you can simultaneously record is only limited by your bandwidth. This allows you to set up filters, record 10 different stations overnight and in the morning you’ll have a hefty mp3 collection.

This is the functionality that has the RIAA so terrified. If consumers are able to easily record the songs that they hear off the radio, it reduces their need to buy the hit singles. As someone who prefers albums over singles, I think that this is the wrong way to look at it, but I can still understand why they would see this as a threat to their business model. If you get me hooked on a few of your best songs, I’m going to buy your albums, go to your concerts and tell my friends about you, but if you are a casual music listener, this software will enable you to avoid ever having to purchase music again.

While the radio capabilities are Raima’s strongest suit, they’ve also thrown in support for recording streaming video. There isn’t a large selection of channels and the quality is terrible, but its a nice bonus over some of the other stream ripping programs. I would like to see them add support for recording internet video into XviD, but portability is more important for music, than it is for video.

The biggest drawback to Raima’s software is that the quality of the sound files isn’t always the best. The songs usually start recording ten seconds early and cut off before they finish. Unlike TiVo, there is no way to tell the system to start recording earlier or later to account for the lag. The mp3 streams also tend to include commentary from the DJs and sponsors. This isn’t a big deal if you’re trying to listen to a half an hour of talk radio, but it can be annoying, if you are only focused on the music. The quality of the mp3′s is also dependent on your internet connection. If you are trying to record a stream from Japan, while watching YouTube, running Bit Torrent, and playing online poker, then expect stuttering and interference to show up in your recordings. If you have a dedicated connection to a local radio station, then you should be fine.

While these deficiencies aren’t a major drawback, they still help to differentiate time shifted radio from buying the actual music. As great as Raima Radio is, it still can’t replicate the selection or quality that you can get from visiting Amoeba or buying .mp3′s online.

Another drawback to the software is that you can’t tell if a station is broadcasting until you try to tune into it. Because Raima includes a lot of dead streams, it means that you have to spend a lot of time trying to load dead air.

Overall, Raima Radio is a great freeware program and one that is pushing the envelope for time shifted radio. While there is plenty of room for improvement, its one of the better stream ripping programs out there. Universal may be relishing the royalties that they extracted from XM, but in the end, they paid a fair steeper price by trying to squash innovation.

Twas The Night Before DivX

Dec 10

Posted by Davis in DivX, DRM, Media, TV, VOD | 1 Comment

Hey Santa

‘Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the house
Not a computer was stirring, not even a mouse;

The sockets were open, to the internet with care,
In hopes that St. DivX soon would be there;

The children were nestled all snug in their beds,
While visions of torrents danced in their heads;

Mamma with her ‘dial up, and cable’s internet cap,
Had just settled down for a long winter’s nap,

When out of the innerweb, there arose such a clatter,
I sprang from my ZZZ’s to see what’s the matter.

Away to computer, I flew like a flash,
Tore open my network, before my Window’s PC could crash.

The files that appeared, in the monitor’s glow
Gave the lustre of completion to the videos below,

When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,
But a miniature video file from eight tiny mirrors,

With a little old driver, so lively and quick,
I knew in a moment, it must be St. DivX!

More rapid than the video store, his coursers they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;

“Now, Wedding Crashers! now, Dirty Dancers! now, Tropic of Cancer and Wrestling Vixens!
On, Bill Haley and the Comets! on Two Gun Cupid! on, Donner’s Pass and Mp3 Blitzes!

To the top of the pirate’s bay! to the top of my hall!
Now dash away! dash away! dash away all!”

As subpoenas before the RIAA fly,
When you meet with an obstacle, blame the neighbor’s WiFi,

So up to my desktop the coursers they flew,
With a tray full of videos, and St. DivX too.

And then, in a twinkling, I heard on the roof
The prancing and pawing of the MPAA’s burden of proof.

As I drew in my hand, and was turning around,
Down the chimney St. DivX came with a frown.

He was dressed in encryption, from his head to his foot,
But his clothes weren’t all tarnished with DRM soot;

A bundle of codecs he had flung on his back,
And he looked like a peddler unzipping his pack.

His files — how they twinkled! his Warez how binary!
His gifts were ones and zeroes, that made my eyes teary!

His droll little mouth was drawn up like a bow,
Ready to deliver a holiday message from Sheryl Crow;

The stump of a pipe, he held tight in his teeth,
His smoke encircled the media, just like a sheath;

He had long tail distribution for the little round telly,
That shook, when he laughed like a bowlful of jelly.

He was chubby and plump, a right jolly old elf,
And I laughed when I saw him, in spite of myself;

A wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
Soon gave me to know, I had nothing to dread;

He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,
And filled up my folders; then turned with a jerk,

And laying his finger aside of his nose,
And giving a nod, up the broadband he goes;

He sprang to the web, to his team gave a whistle,
And away they all flew like a judgment dismissal.

But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight,
“Happy pirating to all, and to all a good-night.”

To celebrate the holidays, DivX is currently giving away free copies of their Pro, Converter and Player software. Normally, this bundle would cost $20, but if you act fast enough, you don’t have to pay anything. In order to get the promotional deal on the software, all you’ll need to do is download and activate the program using the following instructions.

Fox Business News Foozles Again: How A New Video Strategy Could Salvage Their Online Reputation

Nov 29

Posted by Davis in DRM, Marketing, Media, Slingbox, Technology, TV, VOD | 3 Comments

Lolz FoxWhen I first heard that Fox was coming out with a new business channel, Rupert Murdoch had me at “more corporate friendly.” Since CNBC seems to only cover the hype and Bloomberg is painfully boring, I was hopeful that Fox could provide a fresh perspective on business events, while still entertaining me with their bombshell anchors and their sensationalism style of reporting.

Unfortunately, Fox Business News has turned out to be a big joke and continues to lose credibility on Wall St. Since launching the channel, I’ve seen three of their stories to go viral, but instead of giving me a reason why for why I should be tuning in, the stories have been about embarrassing gaffes by the channel.

The first story involved an anchor who incorrectly reported that Apple had purchased an 8% stake in AMD. Even after discovering the mistake, Fox compounded this error by misreporting that it was the “Arabs” who had purchased AMD instead.

A few days later, Fox followed up this viral hit with another blunder, after they rushed to report that HP had missed their earnings estimates, when in fact they had easily beaten them.

The latest story to hit the innerweb, involves a man on the street interview with a planted shill from the National Retail Federation :roll:

I don’t know why Fox is having so many problems getting their news right, but these types of stories are having a serious impact on their credibility. “Fair and balanced” may work for their political reporting, but when traders are betting millions of dollars on breaking information, they expect their news to be accurate.

While it’s easy to blame these PR errors on clumsy anchors, I think that Fox’s PR failings have more to do with their web video strategy. These may only be a few isolated events, but without positive buzz, it leaves people with the impression that Fox gets things wrong, more often then right. I don’t think that Fox can prevent future goof ups from going viral, but by making it easier for the web community to share their reporting, they could begin to repair their tattered reputation.

When it comes to premium content, it’s understandable that the studios would be reluctant to move it to the net, but when it comes to business news, it’s an entirely different animal. You don’t need to watch Heroes live, in order to extract value from the content, but breaking financial news isn’t the sort of thing that people time shift.

Because the information is time sensitive, it protects business channels from the DVR effect, but it also limits the monetary value of their archived content. Even though people won’t pay for a Squawk on the Street DVD box set, it doesn’t mean that there isn’t real marketing value locked up in the business news vaults.

The problem with Fox’s web video strategy, is that they are trying to control what goes viral, by only uploading certain highlights to their website. This might help to beef up the content on their site, but it doesn’t make the best use of their archived footage. I believe that the stock market is the ultimate example of the long tail in action. The large cap companies may get all the press, but there are an unbelievable number of companies out there and each one has an eager audience. By making it easier for the long tail community to easily share their reporting, I believe that Fox can strike a body blow against their CNBC rival.

Over the last year, Sling Media has been working on a clip and sling service, that would allow their customers to snip certain sections of a program and send them to people in their social network. Sling hasn’t released very many details on the software, but it’s already stirred up some controversy among some of the media companies.

Instead of fighting this technology, Fox should be using it as a weapon against CNBC. If Fox were to run a 20 minute delayed feed and let viewers clip and share the news within their social circles, they would soon have an army of volunteers creating a massive and valuable advertising platform for them. It may only be a 60 second clip talking about an obscure company, but that clip would get included in email groups, message boards and blogs, that are devoted to these subjects.

By running the news at a 20 minute delay, it would also encourage people to watch the channel live, so that they could then jump online to share the video. It would also help the home viewers have a better understanding of how breaking news impacts the markets. With most online quote services being 20 minutes delayed, sometimes its hard to tell why a stock is jumping or falling without the live data. If home viewers had a way of syncing the business news with their delayed quotes, it could help them to make better sense of the trading activity in the markets. A 20 minute delay would also give Fox enough time to at least spin/correct any mistakes, before the bloggers jumped all over them.

Giving up this type of control can be scary for big media companies, but Fox has already lost control of their live video. If they have a major screw up, someone out there will take the time to get that footage onto YouTube because scandal sells and people love to gossip, but if they have an interesting interview with an exec, someone needs to be really motivated before they can share that content with their audience.

Instead of fighting this trend, Fox should accept that they can’t suppress live video and instead make it easier for people to share the good reporting that is also going on. Instead of limiting their videos to mainstream content, Fox should be opening up their programming to the entire web, so that they can leverage the marketing power of the content. When you only hear about the negatives, it’s hard to put a lot of value on Fox’s live coverage, but if people started to see content that was relevant to them, it would make them think about how they would have seen it live, if they were only watching Fox business instead.

IBM Files Patent For Putting Advertisements On DVDs

Nov 19

Posted by Davis in DRM, DVDs, Marketing, Media, Movies, Technology, TV | 3 Comments

Coming Soon To DVDIt’s hard for me to believe that there isn’t prior art for this already, but while I was digging through the US patent website, I noticed that IBM had filed an application for putting non-skipable commercials onto DVDs. According to the application, the commercials could either be updated via the internet or they could be embedded directly on the disc.

“A method wherein contents of DVDs may be restricted based upon purchased certificates is provided. The certificates allow for secured information on playback. Specifically, whenever a DVD is to be played, a certificate is consulted to determine whether the content of the DVD should be played with or without commercial interruptions. If the certificates provide for commercial interruptions, then commercials can be obtained from an online service that renders commercials on demand, or from the DVD itself. In such a case, the content of the DVD may be interspersed with commercials.”

I’m usually a fan of new DVD technology, but I’ve got mixed feelings on this one. Every now and then, I’ll come across a DVD that won’t let me skip past the previews and it drives me absolutely nuts. If I’ve already paid for my content, then should I be forced to watch advertisements? It makes me feel like the studios are double dipping.

On the other hand, I could see plenty of advantages to having ad supported DVDs. There are a lot of people who aren’t willing to pay money, in order to watch a DVD. If they can catch up on a series by dealing with the ads, then this technology could introduce time shifting to an entirely new audience. It could also open up new distribution channels for content providers. For example, if McDonalds included ad supported Disney flicks in their Happy Meals, I’d wager that they would reach more viewers, then Friday nights on ABC.

With advertisers already scared to death of the ad skipping powers of the DVR, I could see studios adopting this as a way of shoring up advertising revenue. I’m certain that the TV producers would prefer live viewers, but if a consumer ends up watching the ads eventually, then why should it matter, when they see the program?

One of the more interesting components to the IBM application, was it’s focus on internet delivered advertising. Whenever I’ve been forced to watch previews on DVDs, it’s typically been for movies that were released a long time ago. While the previews may have been relevant seven years ago, they seem a little outdated today. I don’t think that the free DVD consumer market is going to have the latest internet connected DVD players, but I still found it interesting to learn, that IBM is working on a solution to this problem.

I don’t see this patent making it all the way through the application process, but I do expect that we’ll see more of these types of advertisements in the future. The optimist in me, would love to see this technology used to reach new consumers, but my inner cynic knows that the studios would rather unleash ads on paying viewers, then risk cannibalizing their precious DVD. I don’t fully understand IBM’s motives for filing the patent, but thought that it was an interesting solution for bringing entertainment to the masses.

DivX Thrives As The DVD Continues To Die

Nov 6

Posted by Davis in Disclosure - I own stock in co. mentioned, DivX, DRM, DVDs, Media, Netflix, Technology, TV, VOD | Comments off

DivX VideoThe market for DVD players may be in decline, but you wouldn’t know it by looking at DivX’s latest quarterly results. On a day where the press was reporting a 15% drop in the number of DVD players sold, DivX surprised investors by announcing better then expected revenues, driven largely by gains in the DVD player category.

During the quarter, DivX took in $20.9 million in revenue, of which $17.1 was related to their core licensing business. This jump in revenue represents an increase of 44%, over the same period a year ago.

During a conference call discussing the results, DivX estimated that as of June 30th, they had captured 37% of the global DVD player market. This compares to a 25% penetration rate, from a year ago. During the more recent 3rd quarter, they saw their market share for US based DVD players, climb from 20% to 31%, over the past year.

Kevin Hell, DivX’s newly appointed CEO, attributed the growth to top OEMs, reacting favorably to greater consumer demand for DivX products.

“These penetration gains are a direct result of our growing relationships with the key OEM partners, as they react to increasing consumer demand for DivX devices. In Q3, our top 5 OEM partners, taken as a group, increased unit shipments of DivX Certified products by 55% relative to the same period last year. What’s more, we are especially pleased that we have been able to achieve this growth while maintaining our historically strong average royalty rates.”

What I find so fascinating about this aspect of DivX growth, is that they are seeing it come from their existing partners. If new partners were coming on board, it would be easy to dismiss their gains as being driven by OEM competition, but to see 55% growth from your existing customers, would suggest that DivX’s market share is either being driven by consumers directly choosing DivX devices over non-certified products, or from OEMs recognizing the value that DivX adds in a more competitive environment. Whether it’s the chicken or the egg that has been driving demand, these gains represent a strengthening of DivX’s core business and offers further proof, that DivX certification can drive the adoption of consumer electronic devices.

In addition to seeing progress in their core DVD licensing business, DivX also saw key developments in their emerging products category. During the quarter, they successfully launched their DivX Connected platform, they formed a strategic relationship with Qualcomm to help drive DivX mobile, and they signed an important advertising agreement with Yahoo!

On their conference call, DivX didn’t unveil any new customers for their Connected platform, but they did announce that Connected would begin shipping on November 12th. Initially, it will only be available in the UK, Germany and France, but DivX expressed hope that we could see a North American launch sometime in 2008.

One area where DivX continued to struggle, was in securing the rights to premium content. When asked about their progress, Hell said that DivX remained committed to the idea, but that negotiations with studios tend to take a lot of time.

“we continue to aggressively pursue Hollywood content and believe that there is a strong rationale for a deal. Of course, these sort of deals take time, particularly with our open approach, where we’re working across a number of different device types and a number of different brands, but we think that the rationale for the studios and other premium content owners is compelling. We have over 100 million devices out there that are certified. All of those devices have our DRM inside and so ultimately we believe, it’s just a matter of time. Once we do get these folks on board, the studios and other premium content owners, we’ll then be working with other folks like Amazon or Netflix to enable services for distribution in the powered by DivX model.”

There may be strong rationale for a deal, but it appears that DivX is finding out the hard way, that studios don’t always behave rationally. DivX may still be committed to trying to secure the digital rights to content, but you wouldn’t know it by looking at their their legal department. During the quarter, DivX sued Universal music group, in order to help establish the legality of their Stage6 video sharing site. On October 22nd, UMG fired back by filing a copyright complaint against DivX, as well as ten John Does who are accused of uploading infringing content to the Stage6 website.

When asked about whether or not the lack of premium content would impact the popularity of DivX Connected, Hell didn’t seem to feel that it would be an issue.

“I think Connected in its current form and the sense that it has access to all of your music, your photos and, of course, your video, as well as access to Stage6 and other services is a compelling offering and I believe that its something that solves the problem out there, unlike any other platform that’s out there today. That said, of course, I do see Hollywood content as being an accelerator to Connected.”

For most digital media companies, being denied access to premium content would make or break your business, but because DivX’s core customers already have access to premium content, this really isn’t all that significant of an issue. Customers may have to steal their movies off the P2P networks, but DivX consumers have already demonstrated a willingness to take content, especially when legal downloading isn’t an option. Premium content will be an important part of Connected, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be legal content, in order for the platform to succeed.

During the quarter, DivX saw three major developments for their mobile strategy. As part of a new multi-year agreement with LG Electronics, they introduced another DivX certified cell phone, they expanded the global availability of the Samsung F500, and they formed a strategic partnership with Qualcomm.

Of these events, the Qualcomm deal was the most important, because it lays the infrastructure for mass deployment further down the road. Qualcomm is a major player in the cell phone chip market and if DivX can achieve interoperability with their technology, it will accelerate the mass adoption of DivX mobile, once the phone companies finally warm to the technology.

Of all the questions that the analysts raised, I was most surprised by the confusion surrounding their Yahoo! agreement. Over the quarter, DivX reported that they had replaced Google with Yahoo!, as their advertising partner on DivX software downloads. While I can understand why people might be concerned by the end of the Google agreement, I also believe that the move makes perfect sense for Yahoo! and DivX.

Over the last several years, DivX has bundled the Google toolbar as an option, when you download or update their software. Even before, DivX went public, there were concerns that Google’s toolbar would be less effective, as market saturation set in. As more and more people download the Google toolbar, it becomes increasingly harder to find new customers to cross sell to.

From DivX’s perspective, I have to believe that they’ve been experiencing diminishing returns on this revenue stream. By partnering with Yahoo!, they are not only able to cross sell a less saturated product, but Yahoo! will also get a chance to directly steal current Google toolbar customers, every time, someone updates their DivX software. By swapping out advertisers, DivX is able to help keep this revenue stream fresh and relevant, despite their success with the Google software.

When it comes to Stage6, DivX was understandably tight lipped about their progress towards spinning off the asset. For negotiation reasons, they didn’t want to discuss the valuation or the format of the spinoff, but did give some background metrics on the development of the video sharing service.

During the quarter, DivX spent $4.0 million on Stage6. Of this amount, $2.6 million was directly related to bandwidth costs. While this expense was considerably higher then a year ago, it was still less then the $4.5 million that DivX had previously predicted it would spend. DivX CFO Dan Halvorson pointed to infrastructure constraints as a reason for the reduction in spending.

“As we mentioned in the past, the site experienced huge trajectory in 2007, moving from 4 million “uniques” in April to 10 million by July. At the end of October, Stage6 reached 11.7 million unique visitors. Our view is the number of uniques could have been higher, but were limited by infrastructure capacity. To accommodate the increased traffic we have continued to enhance the Stage6 infrastructure.”

Halvorson didn’t elaborate on how they were enhancing the infrastructure, but during the 3rd quarter, DivX did take a $2.2 million charge on their Veatros acquisition from the prior quarter.

While it’s understandable that DivX investors would be worried about the death of the DVD player, DivX’s current results suggest that they will handle this transformation just fine. Unlike the movie studios or print newspapers, DivX should see greater growth from the transition to a digital environment and can still take DVD player market share, even with the industry in decline. As the DVD format begins to disappear, DivX will eventually lose this business, but if they can transfer this licensing revenue into new product categories, they should see a dramatic increase in the demand for DivX devices.

When he was asked to rank the importance of these emerging technologies, Halvorson pointed out that the potential market for DivX devices is 10 times larger then the current DVD opportunity.

“In terms of the ranking of those opportunities, I would say, mobile, given its size obviously, is probably the largest. We are also thus seeing DTVs, HDTVs, set top boxes and gaming consoles all being interested to us over time as well. Cameras, of course, are important not just because it’s a large market, but because it is also a generic content in the DivX format, and as I mentioned, I think the addition of H.264 to our overall media language will allow us to penetrate that more quickly as well.”

The death of the DVD business will happen eventually, but whether it takes five years or twenty, DivX is in a good position to take advantage of this shift. In the near term, OEMs are recognizing the value that DivX brings to a more competitive environment and over the long run, DivX will only need to capture 10% of their market opportunity, in order to replicate their current level of success. As consumers turn away from the DVD, they will need to embrace a digital format and DivX has positioned themselves to directly benefit from this evolution in the digital market.

Disclosure – I am a shareholder of Netflix

Circus Circus Clowns Around With Their Hotel TV

Oct 22

Posted by Davis in Disclosure - I own stock in co. mentioned, DRM, Slingbox, Technology, TiVo, TV, VOD | Comments off

Circus Circus Clowns Around With Their TVI don’t take a lot of vacations, but every now and then I like to get out town, in order to do a little bit of gambling :) Every time I go to Vegas, Reno or Tahoe, I try to stay at a different casino, so I never really know what to expect. Some of the hotels that I’ve stayed at have been great and some have been terrible, but Circus Circus is the only one, that has lost my business entirely.

Normally, I’d be bothered by a dirty room or poor customer service, but in this case, it was a big fat sticker, that cautioned their guests about hooking up your outside equipment, to their television sets. Five years ago, I wouldn’t have cared about something like this, but with the explosion in the number of laptop to TV solutions, this has become an important issue for consumers to think about. What good does it do you, to be able to take your PC on the go, if hotels end up freezing you out, by neutering their TV sets?

I know that hotel PPV is a huge business, but I would think that tech savvy consumers would be a juicy demographic, that the casinos would be after. In the past, the hotels haven’t had to compete against outside video sources, but as technology has gotten better, we’ve seen new possibilities emerge. Instead of leaving your TV at home, you can placeshift it with Sling or Orb. With the proliferation of portable DVD players, it’s easy to take movies on the go. Whether it’s the newly announced Sansa TakeTV or the upcoming SlingCatcher, we are seeing an increase in the number of solutions for getting digital video to the television, on an almost daily basis.

I’ve never thought about checking to see if a hotel offers open access for their TVs, but in the future, it will be something that I make sure to ask about. I understand that the casinos would rather have me gambling, then watching TV, but being able to placeshift local sports, makes betting on them all that much more exciting.

In my dream world, casinos would charge $20 more per night and I’d get unlimited broadband, along with a TiVo that can record content during my stay, but I’m not holding my breath on this one. Right now, this is only an issue for early adopters, but as PC to TV technology goes mainstream, it will be something that more people will want to think about.

Some hotels may try to lock people into their proprietary systems, but in the future, I’m going to insist on free wifi and open television, even if it means that I’m staying at motels, instead of clowning around with Circus Circus.