A Brief History Lesson

Viacom Vs Google can be traced right back to May 2005 before YouTube was under the protective wing of Google. A clip from Paramount Pictures’ Twin Towers was uploaded to the site, and Viacom demanded to know who the uploader was.

In October 2006 YouTube made a deal with Viacom to syndicate content. Then Google bought YouTube for $1.65 billion. February 2007 saw Viacom retract the previous deal and pull everything off the site.

March 2007 saw Viacom sue Google for 63,000 counts of copyright infringement, for which it was seeking $1 billion in damages. Google argues that YouTube is protected under the Safe Harbor provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

BetaNews has the full timeline with many more twists and turns. But it all builds to this point when Google and Viacom’s documents pertaining to the court case have been released. And they make for interesting reading, to say the least.

Google’s Claims

Google claims that Viacom wanted it both ways, continuously uploading its content to YouTube while publicly rallying against it. Google claims Viacom uploaded roughed up versions of videos so they looked stolen, hiring marketing agencies to do the dirty work.

Google claims that Viacom even uploaded many of the clips which it is now suing over. And maintains that it is protected by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as it removes videos suspected of infringing copyrights.

Google also makes the claim that Viacom was interested in acquiring YouTube at one point.

Viacom’s Claims

Viacom dismisses the DMCA defense as it insists YouTube is more than just a passive content host and is therefore responsible for what videos were being uploaded to the site.

What’s more, Viacom also accuses YouTube’s founders of at the very least turning a blind eye to copyright infringing clips, suggesting that traffic was sought by any means necessary in order to ensure a quick sale. Viacom also claims Jawed Karim (YouTube co-founder) himself uploaded infringing videos, using email correspondence between the founders as evidence.

In essence, Viacom argues that YouTube was “intentionally built on infringement,” and deserves no leniency in court despite the measures put in place to clean up the site since the lawsuit was issued.

Conclusions

The documents feel very much like each side is attempting to score points from the other. And it’s almost inevitable that the case will now end up in court.

The sides have until April 30 to file opposing arguments to each other’s motions, with a trial then set to take place later this year. And it’ll be a trial whose verdict could set a landmark in terms of copyright owners vs. online video sites.

Google

Google is, without a shadow of a doubt, the biggest name on the Internet right now. The search giant controls the search sector, is making gains with its Chrome Web browser, has Maps, Street View, and all those other cool apps, and, of course, owns YouTube.

Google has also made the move to smartphones with its Android operating system. But it’s yet to venture into the living room, at least until now.

Google Living Room

There have been rumors of Google attempting to enter the living room by way of a set-top box for a while now, but nothing was really known about the efforts, and whether they would actually amount to anything.

But the New York Times is now reporting that Google TV is its name, it’s very real, and Google already has partners lined up.

Google TV

Google, Intel, and Sony are alleged to be jointly developing the Google TV platform. Google TV would take the form of both hardware (set-top boxes) and software (built into TVs) and bring Google right into the living room.

Google TV would be based on the Android operating system and be open to software developers. The intention being to create a similar buzz and number of applications as experienced by the Apple App Store and other smartphone app platforms.

Google TV would allow users to browse and search the Web, watch online video via Web-based apps including YouTube and Hulu (although Boxee’s efforts to do the same thing have been shuttered), and play downloadable games.

Google isn’t doing this for nothing: it would allow the tech giant to place ads on the system and put it at the forefront of the move to connected TV platforms, of which there are an increasing number.

Conclusions

Google has enough clout to not only make this happen but to sweep away all the other connected TV platforms already out there or emerging from development. But it cannot afford any mistakes on this score, and there’s still no real evidence that people want these platforms in any great number.

More details, and an official announcement from Google and/or its partners are definitely needed before I’ll be getting too excited.

Online Video In The U.K.

Online video is veritably booming in the U.K.

The country already has the fantastic BBC iPlayer, my personal favorite 4oD from Channel 4, ITV Player, and Demand Five. And that’s just the catch-up services for the free-to-air terrestrial channels.

There is also Sky Player (for BSkyB subscribers), and the likes of YouTube, SeeSaw, and the MSN Video Player catering for people after older shows online. And Hulu is still endeavoring to kick-start its service in the U.K. as it breaks out of the U.S. and pushes into Europe.

MSN Video Player

Microsoft announced the MSN Video Player in July 2009. The beta version of the fledgling service then launched in August 2009 with an initial 300 hours of content, mostly from BBC Worldwide and All3Media.

Shows on offer from the start included Hustle, Mock the Week, Dead Ringers, That Mitchell and Webb Look, How to Look Good Naked, 10 Years Younger, and Peep Show. All of which were offered for free with advertising support.

Positive Changes

The MSN Video Player has now left beta and fully launched, and many improvements have been made since I reviewed the site over six months ago.

• The site has been redesigned, and is now much easier to navigate.
• As well as TV Shows, there are sections dedicated to TV Clips, Movie Trailers, and even the best Viral Video clips.
• There is a lot more content available now than during the beta. It’s still all archive content, but that was always going to be the case.
• Video quality has been vastly improved, with a shift away from Adobe Flash to Microsoft’s own Silverlight technology.
• The Video Player has a Dim Lights feature, as well as the option to share the clip on a number of social networking sites.

Conclusions

Microsoft has clearly used the extended beta period to improve the MSN Video Player considerably. And it has therefore moved several places up the league table. Although there’s no guarantee that there’ll be content on the service you’ll want to watch, the chances are high. And the user experience now makes watching that content more of a pleasure than a chore.

Online Video Viewing Figures

Online video viewing figures are generally on the up. To a vast degree. As more and more people start turning to the Web for new ways of watching movies and television content, the big players are generally picking up new viewers left, right, and center.

But it isn’t exactly plain sailing, especially for everyone other than YouTube who is currently fighting to maintain or steal second place behind the Google-owned site.

January 2010 ComScore

ComScore today revealed the online video rankings for January 2010. After declaring after the December figures were released that online video is “showing no signs of slowing down in growth,” the inevitable happened: a slowing down in growth.

Overall viewing figures dropped by around 2.5 percent, from 33.2 billion views in December 2009 to 32.4 billion views January 2010. Unique viewers also dropped, from 177.9 million to 173.4 million.

YouTube, listed as Google Sites, is still number one, and by a huge margin. The site accounted for 39.5 percent of the total views in January 2010, although that was down on its total for December 2009.

Hulu & Vevo Suffer

Hulu’s sweet victory last month was only short-lived. While it hit one billion video views in December for the first time in its history, that figure dropped back massively to 903 million in January. The obvious explanation is a lack of must-see episodes as shows such as Glee take mid-season hiatuses. And the loss of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report won’t help Hulu recover in the future.

Vevo actually gained video views in January, rising from 28.1 million in December to 32.4 million. However, as the site didn’t launch until December 9, this actually constitutes a drop in real terms. And that’s despite comScore including YouTube music videos in Vevo’s numbers.

Conclusions

Is this merely a short-term glitch or a sign that the growth of online video has suddenly and inexplicably hit its peak? The fact is that the same sites are dominating and until a new venture rises up the charts a certain amount of leveling off should be expected.

Google’s YouTube

Google acquired YouTube for a whopping $1.65 billion in October 2006, just 18 months after the domain name was registered. Google CEO Eric Schmidt has since stated he thinks the company paid way over the odds for the startup, but that it was a necessary purchase.

What Google got was a YouTube that’s very different than the one we see today. Piracy was still rife, with unauthorized clips all over the site. Although these were eventually removed it took a lot longer than it does these days.

YouTube Revenue

YouTube has likely never made money for Google, at least if analysts’ previous attempts to estimate the incomings and outgoings of the company are to be believed.

However, according to MediaMemo, Citigroup’s Mark Mahaney has a different view. He estimates that YouTube made around $727 million in revenue in 2009, will make $945 million in 2010, and $1.1 billion in 2011.

He doesn’t mention the expenses YouTube carries with it, which are likely to be vast. However, with those sorts of revenues there’s a strong chance that YouTube is either already turning, or about to turn, a profit for Google.

Mahaney’s methodology was simple: transpose MySpace’s revenue-to-page view ratio with YouTube’s. Which is hardly scientific but is as good a method as any with Google continuing to keep official figures confidential.

Google Vs. Viacom

Today has also brought new news in the continuing legal battle between Google and Viacom. The latter sued the former for $1 billion in damages way back in 2007, alleging “massive intentional copyright infringement.”

Viacom’s complaint is that Google profited from the 160,000 unauthorized clips on the site before new methods were introduced to combat uploading of pirated video clips.

According to CNET, both sides are filing motions for summary judgment. In essence, this means that the talking is over with both sides now confident enough to put their case forward. It’s now up to the judge to decide the next course of action but the case is likely to come to a head very soon.

Hulu Loses Big Names

Two of the most popular shows on Hulu are The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Unfortunately, neither will be available to watch on Hulu after March 9 as Viacom has decided in its infinite wisdom to pull all Comedy Central content from the site.

This is a big deal when you consider The Daily Show is only behind Lost and Family Guy in terms of the number of viewers it gains on Hulu. So if even those kinds of viewing figures aren’t making it worth Viacom’s while what about the less popular shows?

Hulu’s Big Problem

This sums Hulu’s problem up in a nutshell. While it’s the most popular TV catchup service on the Web in the U.S., it is wholly reliant on the networks and content creators for its product. If that disappears then Hulu is left with nothing to sell. Or at least no content to sell advertising against.

The same is true for any content aggregator, of course, but Hulu is slap-bang in the middle of an emerging market which could still evolve in a number of ways. And it could turn out that Hulu is crowded out of the market by initiatives such as TV Everywhere.

Viacom Threatens To Sue

For viewers this news won’t mean too much. Both shows will still be viewable online (in the U.S. only, naturally) on their own Web sites. However, the art of embedding is going to be affected.

While Hulu has the whole show and allows users to crop whichever section they want to, Comedy Central only makes certain clips available. Which is bound to lead to unauthorized clips being uploaded on sites such as YouTube.

The Hollywood Reporter quotes PR rep Tony Fox in saying, “My feeling is if (websites) are making money on our copyrighted content, then that is a problem.” he also answered, “Yes, we intend to do so,” when asked if Viacom will now target sites and bloggers who post clips from the shows in question.

Ars Technica got spun a different story, but it’s clear the company will be closely monitoring online video sites after The Daily Show and The Colbert report are removed from Hulu.

Conclusions

Viacom and Hulu were reportedly discussing a deal right up until the last minute, but one which pleased both sides couldn’t be found. My guess would be Viacom was after a bigger slice of the revenue pie, and Hulu cannot really afford to give up any more at this time.

Maybe when Hulu starts charging Viacom will have a change of heart. In fact, I’d suggest it’s inevitable.

Netflix Mobile?

Netflix has grown in popularity massively over the last few years as it shifts from physical mailings to offering movies and TV shows via instant streaming over the Internet. And yet despite now being on a huge range of CE devices, it hasn’t yet made the move to mobile.

But that could be about to change, with a survey question from the company suggesting it’s at least toying with the idea of a Netflix iPhone app. And that same app would also be compatible with the Apple iPad, the oversized iPod Touch launching soon.

Netflix Asks The Question

The survey question comes via Hacking Netflix, which received it from a reader. It asks Netflix users:

“Imagine that Netflix offers its subscribers the ability to instantly watch movies & TV episodes on their iPhone. The selection availability to instantly watch includes some new releases, lots of classics and TV episodes. There are no advertisements or trailers, and movies start in as little as 30 seconds. You can fast-forward, rewind, and pause or watch again. The movies & TV episodes you instantly watch are included in your Netflix membership for no additional fee.”

“Whenever you want to instantly watch content on your iPhone, your iPhone must be connected to a Wi-Fi network (such as one you might have at home or at work, or in public places like coffee shops, book stores, hotels, airports, etc.)”

“If this functionality were available, how likely would you or someone in your household be to instantly watch movies & TV episodes on your iPhone via a Wi-Fi network?”

If you believe the source, and there’s no reason not to, then the implication is clear; Netflix is seriously considering developing and releasing an iPhone app which would allow users of the Apple smartphone to access ‘Watch Instantly‘ content.

Netflix ‘Watch Instantly’ is already available on home devices such as Internet-enabled TVs, Blu-ray players, and home consoles, the Xbox 360, Wii, and PS3. As well as set-top boxes dedicated to streaming online video.

Apple App Apparent

While a survey question is in no way a confirmation of an app being on its way, similar survey questions were asked about Netflix integration on the Xbox 360 and Wii. And both those devices consequently secured the service. Which suggests this is very real possibility.

If it does happen it would be a change of strategy for Netflix. In September 2009, CEO Reed Hastings stated that the company was focusing on home devices for now, with no plans for a move to mobile (including the iPhone) “in the short term.”

It could be that Netflix is now available on enough home devices to warrant a move to mobile as the next stage of a continuing strategy to be available in as wide a variety of ways as possible.

Conclusions

I think this will will happen, and soon. And I would bet that the iPad was the ultimate cause for this bringing forward of the mobile strategy. Although the Apple tablet isn’t mentioned by name, it is bound to figure in any mobile streaming plans.

Unlike Hulu, which is also rumored to be considering a mobile app, Netflix doesn’t need Adobe Flash, using Microsoft Silverlight instead. Making this even more likely to happen.

Related Ad

Buy a new ‘32GB Apple iPod Touch’ on Amazon

YouTube Redesign

YouTube began testing its new redesign as part of TestTube, YouTube’s ideas incubator, last December. And while not all of the features and changes of Feather made it through to the final redesign, most have.

The redesign proper began in January, with all extraneous and unnecessary elements removed in favor of a more minimalist look and feel. Those first changes of a month ago were mostly aesthetic, but the newly-unveiled changes are a little more nuts-and-bolts.

Playlists Galore

Playlists have been given a makeover, with a new interface making the whole idea more seamless and a more integral part of YouTube as a whole.

There is, thankfully, an option to turn AutoPlay on or off, but the default is to have one video queued up and ready to play as soon as the one you’ve chosen to watch ends. This could increase the number of videos each user watches on YouTube considerably.

Video Queuing

The queuing of videos is now possible within search results. So when you search for a topic from the video page, you’ll now be able to select the video which will follow the one currently playing.

This should mesh well with the new playlist options to keep people on the site and watching videos for longer periods. But it’s a feature which has been on most Web-based music players for a long time, so Google is really just catching up.

Integrated Video Comments

Lastly, the comments section will now include text and video responses as standard. The text comments on YouTube are where arguments and insults occur on a daily basis, although that does mean they’re never dull.

The inclusion of video comments as an integrated feature should break up the conversation in a good way.

Conclusions

The YouTube redesign is still very much a work in progress, and I’m sure some features will prove more popular than others. All in all though, they’re so far improving YouTube in a big way. And I hope there is a lot more to come.

Rickrolling Phenomenon

Any regular Web user will no doubt be aware of the phenomenon that is Rickrolling. In fact, everyone has probably been Rickrolled on more than one occasion.

Rickrolling began on the 4Chan message board back in 2007 but soon spread to the rest of the Web. In essence, you post a link to something you describe as interesting, cool, or must-see, when in fact the link leads to the music video for Never Gonna Give You Up, a Rick Astley track that sums up 1980s cheese in one three-minute package.

Rickrolling became so big that Google used it as one of its April Fool’s Day pranks in 2008, linking all the featured videos on YouTube’s front page to the Rickroll video. And then Rick Astley himself turned up during the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade in November of that year lip-syncing the lyrics to the millions of people watching at home.

Although according to Pete Waterman, the song still didn’t make a fortune, despite its new-found fame.

Original Video Removed

As first noticed by Neowin, the original Rickroll video, which has been up since May 2007, disappeared on Wednesday morning, with a “This video has been removed due to terms of use violation” message displayed instead.

A collective gasp then went round the blogosphere and social networking sites as people reacted to the news. Could the art of Rickrolling really have been killed off? And why, after nearly three years on the site, had the video now been pulled?

Original Video Restored

It was a mistake, pure and simple, with YouTube spokesperson issuing the following statement while restoring the video to its former glory.

“With 20 hours of video uploaded every minute to YouTube, we count on our community members to know our Community Guidelines and to flag content they believe violates them. We review all flagged content quickly, and if we find that a video does violate the guidelines, we remove it, on average in under an hour. We also have a team that is dedicated to identifying and removing spam from YouTube.”

“Occasionally, an account flagged by users or identified by our spam team is mistakenly taken down. When this is brought to our attention, we move quickly to take appropriate action, including restoring videos that had been mistakenly removed and channels that have been mistakenly suspended.”

Conclusions

After the absurd decision by Italy to convict three Google executives over a UGC video which had nothing to do with them, maybe YouTube is being a little overcautious and overzealous in its take-downs at the moment.

Whether that’s the case or not, I’m glad the Rickroll video is back. It’s one of those Web phenomenons that is sure to fall in and out of favor but never truly disappear. Unless YouTube removes it again, and for good next time.

Related Ad

Buy ‘Rick Astley’s Greatest Hits’ on Amazon

Vudu

Vudu is one of the many companies which started out offering a set-top box for serving Web video to consumers. When that strategy didn’t work, it became one of the many companies which switched to focusing on software rather than hardware.

This means Vudu’s service is now included on a number of other Web-connected devices instead, including televisions and Blu-ray players. The Wal-Mart deal will inevitably affect deals in place with Mitsubishi, Sanyo, Sharp, and Toshiba, but quite how isn’t clear.

Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart is one of the largest chain of department stores in the States. It also operates under different names outside of the U.S.

This acquisition of Vudu isn’t the company’s first attempt at offering video streaming. In 2007, Wal-Mart began to offer customers TV and movie downloads in partnership with Hewlett Packard. But it wasn’t successful, and the service was stopped just a year a later.

Wal-Mart Acquires Vudu

After months of speculation concerning an acquisition of Vudu, Wal-Mart has bitten the bullet and done a deal. The New York Times reports that Wal-Mart beat the likes of Best Buy, Amazon, Comcast, and EchoStar to grab Vudu.

No details of the deal have been revealed, but MediaMemo is claiming Wal-Mart will pay in excess of $100 million for Vudu. Vudu will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wal-Mart but continue to develop its App Platform.

Eduardo Castro-Wright, vice-chairman for Walmart, said:

“The real winner here is the customer. Combining VUDU’s unique digital technology and service with Walmart’s retail expertise and scale will provide customers with unprecedented access to home entertainment options as they migrate to a digital environment.”

Conclusions

Wal-Mart is taking a bit of a gamble with Vudu, especially paying the kind of money being reported. There’s no doubt this is a brilliant time to enter this market but whether Vudu is the right option remains to be seen.

What is clear, however, is that both companies will benefit from the deal, at least in the short-term.