Streaming Services Reviewed

Compare Streaming Options Available

This content shows Simple View


Tag Archives streaming providers

FCC Looking Into Comcast’s Potentially Unfair Broadband Capping

Posted on April 17, 2012 9:05 am by Streamer
Image representing Reed Hastings as depicted i...

Image via CrunchBase

In a recent article entitled Comcast Stirring the Net Neutrality Pot, we noted that Comcast appears to be giving themselves an unfair advantage by not counting Comcast on Demand content streamed through Xbox 360 against their data caps.  Data caps are definitely not conducive to viewing video online, which tend to munch through data at a much quicker rate than simple internet surfing.  Netflix CEO Reed Hastings recently posted on Facebook the following complaints about Comcast:


Comcast no longer following net neutrality principles.

Comcast should apply caps equally, or not at all.

I spent the weekend enjoying four good internet video apps on my Xbox: Netflix, HBO GO, Xfinity, and Hulu.

When I watch video on my Xbox from three of these four apps, it counts against my Comcast internet cap. When I watch through Comcast’s Xfinity app, however, it does not count against my Comcast internet cap.

For example, if I watch last night’s SNL episode on my Xbox through the Hulu app, it eats up about one gigabyte of my cap, but if I watch that same episode through the Xfinity Xbox app, it doesn’t use up my cap at all.

The same device, the same IP address, the same wifi, the same internet connection, but totally different cap treatment.

In what way is this neutral?

Comcast service van, Ypsilanti Township, Michigan
Comcast service van, Ypsilanti Township, Michigan (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Comcast’s monthly cap is 250 gigabytes, and there have been stories about customers actually having their service suspended by Comcast for just barely going over this cap.  If one SNL episode eats up one gigabyte, a family of four could easily chomp through the 250 gigabyte cap in a month.

What is even more suspect, though, is that Comcast On Demand is only available to customers who subscribe to Xfinity’s internet and TV services.  Subscription television is getting extremely expensive, and streaming service companies like Netflix and Hulu are gaining a lot of popularity because consumers can enjoy a lot of the same content for considerably less money.  So this move on Comcast’s part to not count streamed Xfinity content though Xbox against data usage could be a very strong incentive for consumers to not abandon their pay television subscription in lieu of a cheaper streaming service, because they will be able to protect data every time they stream Xfinity content.

Comcast defends itself, stating that Xfinity video is delivered via private networks, the same as their subscription television content, not the public internet.  Netflix and Hulu content is delivered over the public internet.

However, this move by Comcast has gotten the attention of the FCC, who stated on April 16 that it “takes seriously any allegations of violations of our open internet rules.”  These rules state that internet providers must treat all traffic moving over the public internet the same, but it does allow the ISPs to treat traffic moving over their private networks differently.  The FCC did note in December 2010 that there are risks to allowing them to provide specialized services, particularly if internet providers do not expand, or even constrict, public internet infrastructures in favor  of protecting their private networks, and essentially forcing people to choose them or lose out.

There will undoubtedly be a lot of consumer outrage as consumers, who are used to unlimited internet access, begin to enjoy streaming on a regular basis and find out that using data could cost them dearly – even get them booted by their internet provider in limited examples.  We hope that the FCC develops stricter rules regarding the advancement of the open internet so that consumers can have choice.  Data caps have really hampered the lifestyles of our friends in Canada, who are just beginning to enjoy streaming services like Netflix. Learn more here http://www.streaming-411.com/

This scenario just might provide a framework for both the United States and Canada to clamp down on potential mini-monopoly situations.

Source:  http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/04/16/netflix-ceos-comcast-complaints-draw-in-fcc/?mod=google_news_blog

http://www.facebook.com/reed1960

http://gigaom.com/broadband/lets-talk-about-the-broadband-cap-gap/

Enhanced by Zemanta



3 Strikes Law in France Cuts Piracy, But No Boost in Sales

Posted on March 31, 2012 10:29 am by Streamer
NEW YORK, NY - JANUARY 18: Protesters demonst...

NEW YORK, NY - JANUARY 18: Protesters demonstrate against the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA) outside the offices of U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) on January 18, 2012 in New York City. The controversial legislation is aimed at preventing piracy of media but those opposed believe it will support censorship. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

The entertainment industry has been very vocal for a long time about how piracy cuts into their revenues.  They even convinced lawmakers of the need for legal protection, which resulted in the SOPA and PIPA fiasco.  While most people would agree with the statement that piracy needs to be dealt with, the debate continues, with bi-partisan support among Congress and the heavy-hitters of the internet discussing new possible legislation on KeepTheWebOpen.com.

In the meantime, a new report has just been released by the French government about the effectiveness of their “Three Strikes” law.  The report claims that internet piracy has been cut in half in France based upon the consequences of the law.  However, TorrentFreak notes that what the report fails to mention is that the decrease in piracy did not translate into increased revenues for the copyright holders.

Meanwhile, a number of prominent music artists have been quietly pulling their content out of music streaming services because, it appears, piracy is actually good for them.  It seems that people who engage in peer-to-peer file sharing are also the biggest purchasers of their content.

So what’s the answer – let people keep stealing because copyright holders make more money in the long run?  Or deal with the piracy issue and still nobody (monetarily) wins.  There is an alternative, but the entertainment industry is still very distrustful that they will be able to continue to enjoy the huge profits of yesteryear.

Problem is, yesteryear is a blip, an anomaly.  It is highly unlikely that we will continue to enjoy the fat economic times indefinitely.  Economies ebb and flow, expand and contract.  The entertainment industry simply needs to recognize that while they got to enjoy some really profitable times post World War II through the 1990s, that’s not today.

I asked the question above – so what’s the answer?  Video streaming.  It’s convenient, cost-effective, and deals with the piracy issue.  It also has some added benefits.  Television shows have gotten a huge boost in Nielsen ratings after making past seasons available on streaming services.  It is likely to increase the number of seasons that the show is in demand as well, because new fans can “catch up” on shows made available from stream services like Hulu or Netflix.

An unskippable anti-piracy film included on mo...

An unskippable anti-piracy film included on movie DVDs equates copyright infringement with theft. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

While streaming service subscriptions tend to put less money in the entertainment industry’s pocket, there are still other options that will maximize royalties.  Let’s go back to piracy and the musician example.  People who engage in piracy also tend to spend the most amount of money on content!  So, if you give them what they want legally, they will gladly still put money in your pocket.  But the entertainment industry is biting off it’s hand to save it’s foot, so to speak.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta



Russians Gaining Access to Streaming Providers Like Netflix & Hulu?

Posted on February 11, 2012 11:52 am by Streamer

According to a Russian news report from newspaper Vedemosti, popular streaming service providers Hulu and Netflix both met with Russia’s top entertainment companies, including content owners and video companies, to discuss launching their respective services in Russia.

This immense, untapped market apparently already has a large online video following with more viewers than any other European country, according o comScore Video Metrix, which stated “Russian video is catching up with penetration of other major markets.”  Russian DVD’s and other digital media options are already doing a brisk business in that segment of the world, as well.  This would likely be a significant new revenue stream for these streaming service companies, enabling them to have more clout with American entertainment companies over time as well.




All Is Not Lost For Hollywood – But Snuffing Out Pirates Isn’t the Answer

Posted on December 22, 2011 6:20 pm by Streamer

The recent bills that have darkened the steps of Capitol Hill are Hollywood’s attempt at protecting their antiquated business model, which in a nutshell is to control it’s distribution venues in order to maximize their profits.  The journey of a film goes something like this:  it is first hyped up and released in theaters (or, in some cases it goes straight to DVD, or is released in the independent film arena).  Once it has run it’s course in the theaters, it’s released to DVD (after another round of hype).  About 30 days after that, it’s available as a pay-per-view on television subscriptions (or in some cases, it’s made available to streaming providers, depending on the film and the clout that the streaming service has).  Finally, it gets distributed to streaming services, and then network TV.  Each source represents a money-making opportunity for the Hollywood set.

It’s not a bad model, but it certainly has lost it’s usefulness in light of bootleg websites on foreign soil.  So Hollywood’s answer is to force advertising networks, internet providers and search engines to cut off traffic to the sites of the bootlegged content, in the form of bills like SOPA and the Protect Intellectual Property Act.  Internet providers are already cooperating with Hollywood by throttling the speeds of consumers who download copyrighted materials from bootleg sites, but the onus is on Hollywood to identify the perpetrators; the internet providers are not monitoring who downloads what.  So the question remains how will these people be identified and prosecuted, when there are simply not the resources to handle the numbers of offenders.

Of course, internet companies like Google are dead-set against these acts, because in essence it would shut down how the internet operates today, including Google’s pet project YouTube.  On the other hand, it’s not just Hollywood, but the entire U.S. economy that is being robbed by these offshore pirates.  Also, consumers are getting fed up with cable and satellite TV providers telling them what channels they must purchase (and what high price points they must pay) in order to subscribe to the handful of channels they want to watch.

Streaming TV shows or movies is one answer to giving consumers affordable media consumption. Read more here http://www.streaming-411.com/  A la carte options from pay television is another.  And they can coexist together and still remain a viable revenue stream, but just not at the levels that Hollywood demands.

What is the answer?  Hollywood must adopt the mindset that if they can’t beat them, they must join them . . . in playing a new game, that is.  For starters, it can take it’s cue from the Napster debacle that has transitioned nicely into a very different model for music stars.  They now make their money by touring, rather than selling discs.  Perhaps the Hollywood darlings will have to start embracing their fans more, and not counting on the control of distribution to get rich.  Hmmmm . . . have we relegated the Hollywood elite to a new working class?