YouTube's Monumental Legal Defeat of Viacom's $1 Billion+ Copyright Case ... for Now ...

Score a monumental (and, to me, surprising) victory for Google's legal team -- and a monumental Internet copyright infringement case in general! YouTube has convinced a federal judge to toss out Viacom's $1 billion dollar plus copyright infringement suit prior to trial -- in what is known as the summary judgment phase. More here from NewTeeVee -- click here.

Huge victory for Google, yes!

Case over? Not on your life.

Expect immediate appeals by Viacom's legal team.

(By the way -- why was this surprising to me? Because the judge tossed this out PRE-trial on summary judgment, which is quite rare; given the issues and discovery to date in the case, I had assumed that the judge definitely would send it to trial -- at which time the parties would settle ...)

What Do Claims of Pandora's Profitability & The Loch Ness Monster Have in Common? Both Myths Debunked!

I have frequently blogged about online music service Pandora -- I like the service (am one of the small percentage of paid subscribers); and I like its distribution (50 million). But, I hate (okay, too strong of a word) its economics. And, I never understood its long-term business model and path to mega-profitability (despite the fact that pundits like TechCrunch frequently heap praise about the company's economics, which are unknown, of course, because it is privately held). In fact, I have always doubted its mythic story of profitability.

Well, serial entrepreneur Michael Robertson -- who founded MP3.com, Gizmo, and Lindows -- just wrote a detailed analysis that questions Pandora's claims of profitability, as well as the overall challenges of the company's economics. Robertson, of course, knows a thing or two about those economics. Consider him a guest blogger here -- I urge you to read this detailed analysis -- click here (it is found in today's TechCrunch).

One more thing. Robertson reports that Pandora now has 180 employees worldwide, including a sales force of 80 people. Really??? Almost half the company in sales????!!!!! Is that really necessary? As Scott Lomond and I used to say when we were at my former company SightSpeed, "Yowzer!"

Pandora ultimately may try to take its mythical standing to the public markets in the form of an IPO.

But, as I recently wrote, buyer beware ...

Apple WILL Build Its Own TV -- And, Google Made Them Do It!

Make no mistake -- Apple WILL build its own TV. Not a set-top box. Not Apple TV as we know it today (what Steve Jobs calls "a hobby"). Rather, a beautiful, pristine, all-in-one flat-screen TV that seamlessly marries the user experience/software with the hardware. Apple knows how to officiate these kinds of successful marriages, because they have done it time and time and time again (iPod, iPhone, iPad, iAmSureIFailedToMentionOthers). I have previously blogged about the inevitability of this "real" all-in-one Apple TV or iTV experience (here is the link again). I don't know when it is coming, but I bet it's coming sooner than we think -- my guess is in the next year.

Don't get me wrong, this was inevitable in any event -- Apple covets your living room as being the next great untamed frontier! Billions of dollars are at stake -- billions more than just about any other frontier.

But, as I previously observed, Google just recently raised the stakes in a big way with Google TV. Click here to see how Google itself describes Google TV via a guided video tour. Google covets your living room as well for obvious reasons (I describe them here) -- and enlisted an A-Team of others (Intel, Sony and Logitech) to make this full frontal assault.

This is why the growing feud -- and gulf -- between Apple and Google has gotten personal (Steve Jobs recently dismissed Google TV as being an inevitable failure). It is a knock-down cage death match between these two behemoths.

Who will win? I think both ... there will be no single winner. Never is (although the iPod and iPhone are damn close). We consumers will win ultimately, of course -- higher quality video, truly intuitive and easy-to-use Internet TV in the living room, and more -- much more -- content choice, whenever and wherever you want it. (For those of you doubters out there questioning whether Apple really would build its own flat screen TVs, just think about the iPhone -- initially, there were many (you know who you are!) who didn't believe Apple would get into the business of making its own mobile phones.)

But, tell me this ... where are Microsoft and Sony in this equation? Microsoft is M.I.A. While Sony is just part of Google's world for now (Google will certainly welcome all others to join its party).

Mobile Live Video & Apple's FaceTime -- It's All About Spontaneity & Sharing "The Moment"

Apple's headline story for its new iPhone 4 -- Steve Jobs' recent "one more thing" moment -- was mobile live video calling via FaceTime.

Why did this announcement deserve such a grandiose pronouncement from the King of Technology? Why does mobile live video calling matter?

As I have written several times previously, it is because mobile live video calling is a game-changer. Yes, desktop live video chat and conferencing has been here for years -- including via my former company, SightSpeed (acquired by Logitech in 2008) -- but desktop video chat for consumers is largely a planned or scheduled event***. You want to video call far-flung family members or friends? Then you both need to be at your desk (or at least on your laptop), both be online, and both generally expecting each other's call.

Mobile live video calling is entirely different. It is all about spontaneity. It is all about living in the moment. It is not about planning at all. Why? Because your mobile phone is with you -- and all your family and friends -- at all times and wherever you are (it is "mobile", after all). In essence, it is always on. And, unlike desktop live video, live mobile video is not just about two-way video chat. It is also about one-way live "See What I'm Seeing." Wherever you are, whenever you are, now your friends and family can actually see and experience what you are seeing and experiencing ... and all in real-time! You're at the ball game? Show them! You're at the concert? Show them! You're at the top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris? Show them! You're at the grocery store and you're not sure which of two dog treats your spouse wants you to buy? Show them! You're out at an open house but your spouse couldn't make it and you wanted to walk them through the tour? Show them!

The possibilities are endless!

And, that's the point. That's why live mobile video calling and "See What I'm Seeing" represents a paradigm shift.

And, that's why it will be massive -- and just another part of our everyday lives sooner than you think.

And, once again, Apple will be at the core of bringing this experience into the mainstream -- that's why this was Jobs' most recent "one more thing" moment.

(***desktop live video chat/conferencing for business users is different than consumer live video chat -- unlike consumers, business users are frequently "at their desks" and available throughout the day, making it much more likely that spontaneous virtual face to face meetings are possible; scheduling is not needed nearly to the same extent.)

Sorenson Media in 3 Minutes -- Video Interview

Larry Kless interviewed me at the recent Streaming Media East show in NYC. He asked me what we do at Sorenson Media, why we do it, how we compete, how we are different from others, and how we plan to win.

Here is my 3 minute response to this question.

(Thanks Larry -- but, please use Sorenson 360 next time!)

Apple's Ever-Expanding iPad/iPhone Content Control -- Oh Yeah, It's About Google Too

The last two days, I have written about Apple's new Safari 5 browser -- which has received scant media attention, but which represents a direct line of attack against content owners and advertisers.

Well, surprise surprise -- Apple's ever-expanding content control freakishness is also about Google (move over Adobe!), as Apple has now implemented new rules that prevent developers from sharing iPad and iPhone usage data with many third party ad networks -- including Google's AdMob ad network for mobile devices. What does that mean? It means that Apple's new iAds mobile ad network will trump most others for iPad and iPhone users.

Click on this link for AdMob's/Google's full take on the matter.

The Apple v. Google knock-down cage match continues ...

(and, isn't it interesting that Microsoft is nowhere to be found these days in any of these conversations?)

iAds to Replace Your Ads & Brand On iPhones & iPads? Out of Control?

Yesterday, I blogged about a major Apple development that received scant media attention -- new Safari 5 -- and its enabling of the eradication of both content branding and advertising when serving up content. My bottom line point -- content providers and advertisers, "Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid."

Given that context, is it mere coincidence that Apple concurrently introduced iAds -- its own proprietary ad network specifically targeting iPhone and iPad users?

Well, I don't believe in coincidences.

So, what's going on here? Although I can't say for sure, it certainly seems like one possibility is that Apple now may be eradicating your ads in favor of its own "cooler" ads. Out goes one -- in goes the other (yet you still may be paying for impressions that, in effect, have been erased by Apple's invisible hand).

Even more than that, as discussed in my post yesterday, Safari 5 apparently enables the eradication of the brands of content owners. What does this mean? It means that content providers may be supplying the content that makes the iPad useful in the first place -- but, essentially without meaningful attribution (in Apple's own example, the Spin magazine is gone baby gone!). Does this mean that Apple also may be trying to, in effect, take credit for the labors of third party content providers? I know that sounds a bit twisted, but that is one of the effects.

At a minimum, all of this reflects Apple's relentless quest for total control of the iPhone/iPad experience, all of which sounds good for the user (but is bad bad bad for content owners and advertisers on which backs the iPhone's and iPad's value is built). And, at worst, perhaps it is more than that. Perhaps it is outright ad replacement with a different kind of ad ... Apple's!

And, Apple's next quest for overall domination? The living room. While there surprisingly were no Apple TV announcements in Steve Jobs' keynote on Monday, don't worry -- those will be coming soon. There is absolutely no way that Apple will not seek total control of your big screen experience as well.

Content Owners & Advertisers Take Note -- Mr. Jobs Forgot to Tell You Something!

Yesterday was a big day for Apple and Steve Jobs -- his annual keynote at Apple's Worldwide Developers' Conference. Everyone in the tech/digital media world watched it -- and just about everyone (including me) wrote about it. Everyone, by now, knows the headlines -- the big stories (especially the iPhone 4 and video).

But how about those other stories? How about some of the stories that perhaps were intentionally under-emphasized? In that vein, a funny thing happened yesterday for the world of content owners and advertisers on whose backs Apple has built its products (let's not forget that without content -- and without advertising that funds content creation -- even the coolest gadgets are useless).

In a watershed moment -- that received scant media attention -- Apple has taken a big, nay massive, bite out of the hand that feeds -- i.e., from those very same content owners and advertisers whom Apple continuously privately woos with promises of riches.

What happened? Safari 5 happened, that's what. And, content owners and advertisers take note. Check out this little nugget from the "What's New in Safari 5" page -- specifically, new "Safari Reader." Apple's description of its new "Safari Reader" feature -- verbatim -- is as follows: "Safari 5 removes annoying ads and other visual distractions from online articles."

You may ask, what's the big deal? Apple just cares about its customers. How wonderful of them! Apple is simply once again optimizing the customer experience -- how can anyone argue with that?

But, remember, Apple would have no customers if it weren't for the content owners and advertisers! Think (different) about it. Look again at that page that is linked above -- and look at Apple's visual representation of what its mystical new "Safari Reader" can do. In Apple's example, the victimized content is from Spin magazine -- but, as you can see, with Safari Reader activated, the reference to Spin is scrubbed. Erased. Eradicated. Decimated. Destroyed. Rendered meaningless -- of no value whatsoever, DESPITE THE FACT THAT SPIN CREATED THAT CONTENT WHICH ENABLES THE APPLE PRODUCT TO CREATE VALUE FOR ITS CUSTOMERS IN THE FIRST PLACE! And, of course, if the content creator is utterly useless in the mind of Apple, then of course the advertisers are even a lower form of life. So, advertising too must go -- and it has -- nary an ad to be found. But, Madison Avenue and your clients listen up (Spin, again that's you in Apple's example) -- YOU LIKELY ARE STILL PAYING FOR THOSE AD IMPRESSIONS EVEN THOUGH THOSE IMPRESSIONS ARE NOW INVISIBLE AND, HENCE, OF NO VALUE WHATSOEVER!)

So, in the words of that immortal 60's folk song, "Where has all the value gone?" I'll give you one guess. Yes, to Mr. Jobs and his team!

Make no mistake -- this is wild wacky stuff. This is a big deal. While I love Apple products -- we own a gaggle full of gadgets -- has Apple gone so far as to now essentially say that no one else matters? Has Apple's need for control just taken it into previously unexplored dangerous territory?

And, more to the point, will anyone call them on it? (If you choose to do so, why not try a new video call on the new iPhone 4 -- there ain't any ads there either ...)

(Thanks to Eric Quanstrom to pointing all of this out and finding this "noise" amid the glowing Apple cacophony ....)

Why Mobile Video Calling? Apple Answers the Question -- Masterfully -- Via Video

THE big story with Apple's new iPhone 4 is mobile live video calling. This was the "aha!" moment when Jobs did his famous "One more thing" bit at the end of his keynote yesterday.

I have long believed in the power and promise of mobile live video calling (both two-way video chat and one-way "See What I'm Seeing"). And, I predicted in December 2006 -- okay, a bit early -- that it would be coming to the iPhone.

But, why is mobile live video calling a big deal? Apple answers the question masterfully, as usual, using video -- watch it here by clicking this link.

This truly DOES change everything. The wheels are now in motion for mobile live video calling to be a massive market opportunity (Gigaom's new study concludes that it will be a $3.4 billion market by 2015).

And, once again, Apple is the driver.

Apple's iPhone 4 Makes Cisco's Head "Flip"

Steve Jobs today announced the new iPhone 4 -- no surprise there.

And, as I expected (here's my blog from earlier today), video capture and calling is now front and center (the headline story, in fact). Now, the 4G is about HD video capture and management. And, now, there are cameras on both sides -- why? For live video calling of course! (Something I anticipated in December 2006 and am happy to see finally here!). The iPhone's version of iChat is called FaceTime.

So, industry blog NewTeeVee asks the provocative question -- "Did Apple's iPhone 4 Just Kill the Flip" (Cisco's Flip that is -- which Cisco paid $590 million to acquire merely 1.5 years ago)?

While "Kill" is a strong word, it certainly isn't a good day for the Flip. I have always doubted the Flip's long-term viability as a stand-alone video recording device. I have always felt that mobile video capture ultimately would become merely another feature -- an important one to be sure -- but just another feature in a compelling smart phone.

And, THE single most compelling smart phone remains the iPhone -- which just got a whole lot more compelling ...

I See This -- iChat on iPhone Announced Today -- Mobile Video Chat Revenues $3.4 Billion by 2015

I have always believed in the promise -- and ultimate reality -- of a massive live mobile video chat marketplace. Not only one-to-one live mobile video chat -- but also one-way live "See What I'm Seeing" mobile video (imagine being at a concert, for example).

A new report just issued by respected tech industry blog Gigaom backs this up -- in a big way. It predicts mobile video chat revenues to reach $3.4 Billion by 2015.

In my view, Apple will be a significant driver in the mainstreaming of mobile video chat, in much the same way it has mainstreamed mobile music (with the iPod), mobile truly smart phones (with the iPhone), and most recently mobile tablet computing (with the iPad).

And, one of my predictions for big announcements later today by Steve Jobs will be just that -- i.e., that Apple's new iPhone 4G will feature iChat and video cameras on both sides. I first made this prediction in December 2006. Okay, I was a bit early, but I always merely said that it was inevitable!

In other words, the sea change begins later today ...

Kazaa Guys Launch Online Music Site (Do We Need Another One?) With A Little Help From Their ... Former Enemies

Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom -- two names burned forever into the minds of music execs -- two names who, in their minds, began the dismantling of the music industry's entire business model (and countless careers) with Kazaa, the infamous P2P service that many considered to be enable -- nay, promote -- outright theft.

Funny how the world works. Now, a decade later, those same gents are viewed as heroes by many of those same music industry execs (at least, by those dwindling few who are left). Now, the music industry is outright championing them (remember, these guys also started that little company known as Skype after all).

Case in point -- Rdio -- the new online music service founded by these two former industry pariahs, soft launches today on an invitation-only basis -- but with the full support of the major music labels who have licensed their full catalogs. In other words, these guys bit the hand that now feeds! Isn't it ironic, don't ya think?

Now, Rdio is not the first new online media venture from this dynamic duo that was fully embraced by media companies. That was Joost -- the online video site that launched with great fanfare -- and media support (including financing) -- a few years back, but later crashed and burned despite all the hype. Joost ultimately sold for pennies on the dollar ("scrap" in the parlance of VCs).

So, Rdio is anything but a "sure thing" -- especially with the tens of other online music/radio services already out there, many of whom established for years. Let's see, there's Pandora (I just wrote about the company yesterday), Rhapsody (I am a subscriber), Napster (the legitimate one of course that is operated by Best Buy), Slacker (founded by my former colleagues at Musicmatch), Spotify (another over-hyped music service with roots in Europe), MySpace music and on ... and on .... And, I certainly don't see anything -- at least from its description -- that significantly differentiates Rdio from these others.

Will Rdio "Fly Like an Eagle" -- like Skype -- or "Crash Into Me" -- like Joost (sorry, that is the only song I could think of at this ungodly early hour)?

THAT is the question.

(I'll make a bold prediction though ... Rdio will briefly soar with its tremendous notoriety, but ultimately won't make the playlist of profitability ....)

Pandora -- I Still Don't "Get" It! -- Buyers Beware of Its Box

Online music service Pandora just closed another round of VC funding, the amount of which is undisclosed. That brings the service's total VC "take" to significantly more than the $57 million to date -- yes, simply to date -- i.e., PRIOR to this latest round! That prior number includes the $35 million that it just raised last year.

Now, don't get me wrong -- I like Pandora. In fact, I am one of the few paid subscribers. The service is primarily free (i.e., ad driven), but two paid upgrade options exist: (1) $.99/month; and (2) $36/year for "Pandora One" (no ads and unlimited skipping of songs). I was one of the few who opened up my wallet and paid the whopping $36 for the entire year.

And, there's the rub. Yes, Pandora has great distribution. In April, the service crossed the 50 million registered user mark. But, registered users and "active" users are not the same thing -- they are very very different. And, registered users certainly does not mean active paying users. And, how many actually do pay? Not many, that's for sure. And, let's not forget, there are significant COGs involved -- music licensing fees and bandwidth for streaming, among others.

So, I don't "get it." I really don't. The service itself is good -- not great (I have many complaints about its repetitive playlists and I have not experienced its music recommendation engine to be significantly better than the competition's). BUT, most importantly, how does Pandora become a compelling, immensely profitable business that throws off loads of cash?

Undoubtedly, Pandora is gunning for an IPO -- selling its distribution and dream to the public markets. And, it does have a good story to tell.

But, a story is not the same as business reality. So, potential buyers beware. You may want to think twice before you open Pandora's box!

Music Vid Service Vevo Victorious So Far (But Can It Monetize?)

I believed in the promise of online music video service Vevo when it first launched 6 months ago (here is the link to my blog post back then). The service -- backed by major music labels and the gargantuan reach of YouTube -- held strong promise.

And, that promise is being realized so far. Vevo is now the #1 music video site in the country -- and #4 online video site overall. Not bad for a start. (Click on this link to read the Los Angeles Times' feature story about the company published today.)

But, although distribution is promising, will the service be able to effectively monetize? It's business model is purely advertising-based, and the company has no plans to change this any time soon. And, the company certainly ain't profitable yet.

... and speaking of profits in the online music game, then there's Pandora. Pandora just closed yet another round of VC funding (the amount of which is undisclosed). Up to this point -- with emphasis on "up to this point"! -- Pandora had raised $57 million, including a $35 million round less than one year ago! (More on this in my separate post coming now ...)

Apple's All-in-One iTV is Coming -- Forget Jobs' AppleTV Hobby, Its iTV Will Be Transformative

The iTV -- Apple's "all in one" flat screen TV -- simple plug-and-play, with a pristine flat panel, seamless integration of software with hardware, and no set-top box -- is coming. Make no mistake, it's coming. And, it likely is coming sooner than we think, precisely because Google has now laid down the gauntlet with its recently announced Google TV initiative.

Just like Apple transformed your personal music experience with the iPod. Just like Apple transformed your mobile phone experience with the iPhone. And, just like Apple is transforming your personal computer experience right now with the iPad, Apple's next great frontier undoubtedly is the living room. And, if Apple succeeds here -- which it most assuredly will in my view -- Apple's current #1 market cap in the tech sector is only Act I. I first made this prediction -- which I deem to be inevitable -- only last week. But, Steve Jobs' own words at Walt Mossberg's annual D Conference back it up.

Oh sure, Apple already has experimented in your living room with its Apple TV "box." But, Steve Jobs once again called Apple TV a mere "hobby." He also pointedly said that the "breakthrough" product will not include any form of additional set-top box of any kind. In his words from the D Conference:

“The television industry fundamentally has a subsidized business model that gives everyone a set-top box, and that pretty much undermines innovation in the sector. Ask TiVo, ask Roku, ask Google in a few months. The only way this is going to change is if you start from scratch, tear up the box, redesign and get it to the consumer in a way that they want to buy it. But right now, there’s no way to do that….The TV is going to lose until there’s a viable go-to-market strategy. That’s the fundamental problem with the industry. It’s not a problem with the technology, it’s a problem with the go-to-market strategy….I’m sure smarter people than us will figure this out, but that’s why we say Apple TV is a hobby.”

Sound familiar? Hmm, first he disses Google and Google TV for lack of innovation. Then, he disses his own current AppleTV as being a mere "hobby." Then, he says that the "right" Television experience has no separate box of any kind and the solution is NOT a technology problem. And, then he says "I'm sure smarter people than us will figure this out ...." And, who are these smarter people?

In the mind of Jobs, it certainly ain't Google. It could be only one company -- his company -- Apple of course! It's the perfect set up!

That's because Apple is THE master of the user experience. Making the hard easy. And making the hardware cool and fun.

My guess is that the iTV is coming sooner than anyone thinks. Could it be announced as soon as June 7 at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference (Steve Jobs has promised some very big announcement on that date)? That's pretty fast -- so close to its recent iPad announcements and introduction into the marketplace. But, don't be overly surprised if Jobs nonetheless goes there and announces availability for this coming holiday season. And, if not then, my bet is that the iTV would launch in 2011 at the latest.

Why else would Jobs be dissing Google TV already? Why has Apple spent so much time in the past several months breaking away every remaining remnant of its relationship with Google (in its latest move, Apple just ousted Google search in favor of Microsoft Bing!).

And, why else would Sony and other be lining up behind Google TV? Sony already lost the personal music battle when its walk-man dominance was killed in one year by Apple's iPod. To date, Sony has never recovered. And, Sony's last bastion is the living room, where it cannot afford to lose again to Apple.

But, it will. When Apple introduces its inevitable iTV experience, all bets are off in the current television marketplace. The faithful will flock to Apple -- and others will follow this flock.

Apple's disruption to and dominance in the living room will be its second act. Even with Apple stock soaring already, it still may be a good time to buy ....

The iTV, it's coming ...