Business

Apple and ad-skipping

giant_gavel

I stopped putting a lot of stock in TV-related Apple rumors awhile ago, so I don’t want to over-analyze today’s edition, by former Wall Street Journal reporter Jessica Lessin, citing unnamed “media executives” that Apple is in talks with the networks about some sort of combined live-and-on-demand video service via Apple set-top box (or perhaps a TV). But for the sake of conversation, here are a few speculative thoughts on what they might be talking about.

Apple already offers ala carte downloads of TV content via iTunes, so presumably what we’re talking about here is a streaming service, probably via subscription. Recreating the full cable bundle wouldn’t make a lot of sense for Apple (and would likely be cost-prohibitive) so, again presumably, we’re talking about some sort of smaller bundle of channels or (less likely) an ala carte channel offering. For the most part, those deals would simply be a matter of price…

Read the rest at GigaOM Pro.

Following the Flipboard flip-flops

iindex

Publishing The New York Times and Conde Nast each reversed its policy recently regarding aggregation of their content through the iPad and Android reading app Flipboard, and the reversals are revealing on the question of value-capture for online content publishers.

After originally allowing all digital content from The New Yorker and Wired to be pulled into the Flipboard app, Conde Nast is now pulling back. From now own, Flipboard users will be limited to a hyperlinked headline and a few sentences for stories from those publications. To read the full story, users will have to click through to the magazines’ own web site — that is, out of the Flipboard app. Conde Nast is also pulling back from its efforts to sell ads in the Flipboard feeds for the two publications. Read More »

Old media falling out of favor at DOJ

Antitrust The U.S. Justice Department has opened a “wide-ranging antitrust investigation” into whether cable operators are illegally using bandwidth caps and other tactics to try to squash growing competition from online video services like Netflix, the Wall Street Journal reported last week.  Subsequent reporting by the Journal revealed the investigation also covers the satellite TV services Dish Network and DirecTV, and that the feds are also looking into whether pay-TV operators are using so-called most-favored nation clauses in carriage agreements with the networks to restrict the network’s ability to license their content to online, over-the-top distributors.

The investigation and the issues at stake, particularly the department’s apparent focus on most-favored nation agreements, carry distinct echoes of the lawsuit the Justice Department filed in April against Apple and several leading publishers over an alleged conspiracy to fix prices in the e-book market. As in the cable industry investigation, the e-book lawsuit charges Apple with using most-favored nation clauses in its agency licensing agreements with the publishers to ensure that neither Amazon nor any other e-book retailer gets a better deal than Apple got or can sell e-books at prices lower than Apple’s price. Read More »

Aereo combat: Why the networks should be worried

Copyright There are certainly cheaper markets to operate in than New York City. And if you were preparing to launch a risky media startup, you might be expected to try opening out of town, where the downside would be smaller, before taking your show to Broadway. Not so for Aereo, the Barry Diller-backed startup formerly know as Bamboom, which offers to stream broadcast TV channels to subscribers over the Internet for viewing on connected devices for $12 a month. Subscribers will also be able to record programs as they would with a DVR and store them in the cloud for later viewing.

Perhaps Diller just craved the spotlight, and wanted to launch in center of the media universe. But a more likely reason for picking New York is that it’s the seat of the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2008 handed down an opinion in Cartoon Network, et. al. v. CSC Holdings, better known as the Cablevision remote-DVR case.  That case, in which the cable operator’s cloud-based DVR service was challenged unsuccessfully by the networks,  is Read More »