Indie Telco Local Content Workshop Information
Quick Jump Menu to this Issue’s Articles September 1st, 2004 Overview Content Protection and the Cable Programmer: Parks Associates View of Digital Rights Management: Underlying Fee: Be aware!: The Independent Telco Space According to Viodi:
Parks Associates View of Digital Rights Management
by Ken Pyle ([email protected]), Viodi, LLC
September 1, 2004 Issue
The Parks Associates Digital Rights Management provided a global view of DRM and the need for conditional protection. This webinar was a good primer on the reasons why DRM has become a must-have for anyone considering electronic distribution of content. Kurt Scherf, Vice President of Research for Parks Associates, led this webinar and discussed various research with regards to consumer reactions to DRM.
From a consumer viewpoint, the inability to be able to transfer content from one device to another – the portability of content is a real concern. Scherf pointed out that it will be important for service providers to be able to bridge between the various devices in their household and on their person. For instance, today there is no DRM solution that would allow a consumer to download a movie to a cable set-top in their house and then view it later in their car (I know, one should not watch and drive, but the kids might want to watch a video on a long car trip).
The point is that consumers do expect portability of the content they provide. Parks Associates’ research indicates that consumers are willing to have some restrictions as to what they can do with the content, providing they get some sort of discount on the retail price of the content. Parks categorizes content customers into three categories:
- Consumer Luddites – don’t set the clock on the VCR. Must work with $19 DVD player.
- Consumer Enthusiasts – content protection must be flexible and easy to use.
- Content Pirates – “stick it to the man” or just cheap.
The challenge for service providers is to create DRM solutions that meet the needs of content owners, while satisfying these groups (or at least the first two groups).
One of the things that Scherf point out, that I have not really heard from other commentators, is how the on-demand worlds of cable television and Internet have produced different protection methodologies. That is, the DRM and Conditional Access solutions for Internet applications have used Microsoft, Real and other proprietary methods, while the cable world, in the U.S., has been dominated by Scientific Atlanta and Motorola. Scherf did suggest that the advent of Open Cable and solutions like Sony’s Passage will probably not make a big impact with regards to opening up this market in the near-term.
And the opportunity for entities that are deploying IP networks to differentiate themselves from the competition might be in the Digital Rights Management System. If they can create DRM solutions that serve as a bridge between the services traditionally considered to be cable and those considered to be Internet services, then they may have a unique value proposition as they would be providing customers the portability they desire.
All displayed trademarks, logos and service marks are the property of their respective owners. © 2004, Viodi, LLC. All Rights Reserved
IP Video Conference Agenda
Economic and Product Feature Considerations for Telecom Network Architectures
The Consumer Electronics Interface – Can You See Me Now?
Regulation 101 – What a Telco Has to Consider When Deploying Video & Other New Services
Get in the Game – How do Games Play in a Service Providers’ Plans?
Advertising and other Alternative Revenue Sources
Integrating VoIP Content Into a Telco’s Bundled Service Offering
Making Sticky Bundles – Baking up new ways to gain and retain customers
Leave a Reply