This might seem like an odd topic for Giz Explains, our weekly "WTF is that?" series, but a bunch of comments last week revealed a need to plainly explain the tussle going on between internet service providers, the Federal Communications Commission, content providers and you, and how it's shaping the way you'll use internet over the next couple of years. First, a quick primer.

Comcast was caught slowing down BitTorrent traffic last year by the Associated Press. It (re)sparked cries for government-mandated net neutrality—treating all internet traffic equally, whether it's email, Skype or a bootleg of The Dark Knight over torrent. While that didn't happen, a complaint against Comcast went through the FCC, which ruled against it last week, saying that slowing down BitTorrent was a naughty thing to do, and that they must disclose all management practices to subscribers.

In the meantime, a different network management trend started to emerge among the major ISPs: metered broadband, aka data caps. It's like dial-up service or wireless data: After reaching your alotted amount of data for the month, you pay extra, maybe through the nose, as our northern neighbors in Canada are familiar with. Conveniently, it's "net neutral," since it doesn't discriminate against particular kinds of traffic, and it's fully disclosed to subscribers so it satisfies guidelines discussed by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. In case you're looking to file a complaint, Electronic Frontier Foundation Senior Staff Attorney Fred Von Lohmann told us, "There's certainly nothing to stop them from pricing that way if they want to."

Time Warner was the first major to float the plan, which is currently in testing, with a 40GB cap at the high-end. Comcast is considering a metered approach as well, its spokesman has confirmed. AT&T is the most recent major ISP to jump onboard, and it'll be testing caps in the fall. Not to mention Cox Cable and a whole mess of regional ISPs already implement them.

Here's the rub: The P2P apps ISPs point to as pillaging their networks are increasingly a nonexistant bogeyman. Video is now the actual bandwidth monster, and it's only getting hungrier and hungrier.

The thing about all that video is that it competes with what your ISP is probably delivering to your other screen in the living room. Why watch 30 Rock on your couch at specific time when you can grab it on demand on your laptop with Hulu, or on a Netflix Roku box? That awesome Vudu box you bought? Pulling in Transformers in HD uses your cable provider's pipes, but it doesn't see a dime from the transaction.

Suppose you decide to be pseudo-green and opt for an all-digital approach from Vudu or Apple TV, and you have a moderate habit of two movies a week. A 90-minute movie running at a constant bitrate of 2.5 megabits per second (you're talking HD here) will swallow 1.69 GB. If you've got a 40GB cap, eight movies will eat over a quarter of it. And that's just your rental habit, with today's specs. The 1080p flicks they'll be streaming tomorrow will be even more bandwidth intensive.

More importantly, today's geek frontier is tomorrow's mainstream playground. Like game demos on Xbox Live? Or games-for-purchase on Steam? Those are a gig or two a pop, and as more and more games are distributed digitally, the gigs will add up. Which is also part of the problem as far as the ISPs are concerned: AT&T's tech chief glibly notes that "traffic on our backbone is growing 60 percent per year, but our revenue is not."

While I wanted to tell you that data caps will destroy the internet as we know it, really video is what's actually facing the greatest threat. Time Warner has openly said content providers can't have it both ways. And the EFF's von Lohmann told us that while he hasn't "seen any evidence that [metered broadband] will radically change the internet" he is "worried that companies that have their own video they're delivering over the same pipe they deliver internet service will have an incentive to reduce caps" and it's a "valid concern worth watching." It would effectively have us paying twice for video delivered over the internet. Most people can barely stand paying for it once.

After adding flicks to your instant queue, you can access them directly from the player, just like with the Roku box. Basically, the BD-300 is a BD-Live Blu-ray player with an invisible bolted-on Roku box—and that's totally awesome, since it chops the number of boxes you need down by at least one (and shows why Netflix's strategy to win the set-top box war is brilliant). If you're a Netflix subscriber, this is three levels of win. We'll see this baby later tonight, but here's all the details we got in the meantime.

LG BD300 Network Blu-ray Disc Player to be Unveiled Tonight

NEW YORK, July 31, 2008 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ — Building on a groundbreaking technology partnership announced earlier this year, LG Electronics and Netflix, Inc. today announced plans for the first Blu-ray disc player that will have the added benefit of being able to instantly stream a growing library of movies and TV episodes from Netflix directly to the TV.

Available this fall, the LG BD300 Network Blu-ray Disc Player will play high definition Blu-ray discs, up-convert standard DVDs to 1080p and allow Netflix subscribers to instantly stream more than 12,000 choices of movies and TV episodes from Netflix to the TV for no additional charge.

LG Electronics and Netflix will demonstrate the BD300 Network Blu-ray Disc Player for the first time tonight at LG's 2008 Summer Line Show at Morgan Library and Museum in New York City. (The event is open to invited media only.)

Instantly streaming content from Netflix to the TV via the LG BD300 Network Blu-ray Disc Player will rely on a wired broadband connection and Queue-based user interface. Netflix members will use the Netflix Web site to add movies and TV episodes to their individual instant Queues. Those choices will automatically be displayed on members' TVs and available to watch instantly through the LG player. Once selected, movies will begin playing in as little as 30 seconds. With the BD300's accompanying remote control, Netflix members will be able to browse and make selections right on the TV screen and also have the ability to read synopses and rate movies. In addition, they will have the option of fast-forwarding and rewinding the video stream.

"As Blu-ray player sales are expected to triple in three years, consumers are craving content and seeking a premium home entertainment experience," said LG Electronics USA President Teddy Hwang. "The BD300 is another LG industry first and provides consumers with an advanced high-def disc player with unparalleled flexibility and networked access for services such as Netflix."

Consumers craving more content will appreciate the BD Live feature, which provides real-time interactivity for movie enthusiasts seeking extras, new previews or special content while BonusView provides picture-in-picture access to Blu-ray disc special features. To further personalize and simplify the home theater experience, the BD300 includes
LG's SimpLink(TM) technology, which allows users to control similarly equipped LG TV and AV products via convenient on-screen menus or directly from the product itself.

In January, prior to the 2008 International CES(R), LG Electronics and Netflix announced their technology partnership to provide a set-top box for consumers to stream movies and TV episodes from the Internet to the TV beginning in the second half of the year.

"LG Electronics is establishing itself as the innovation leader in consumer electronics, combining the best of broadband and Blu-ray connectivity," said Netflix Co-Founder, Chairman and CEO Reed Hastings. "LG Electronics was the first of our technology partners to publicly embrace our strategy for getting the Internet to the TV, and is the first to introduce a Blu-ray player that will instantly stream movies and TV episodes from Netflix to the TV."

[Market Watch, Reuters, Engadget]

After posting this information on ripten, a Dell representative chimed in to say that the lack of a sound card Stereo Mix option was most likely due to an issue with laptops running XP, and that a driver existed to correct the problem. However, it is still not clear whether the driver works for all Dell computers or why the option was disabled in the first place. Nor does it address the possibility that the problem may not be confined to Dell products alone. Naturally, random forum threads do not confirm RIAA involvement with Stereo Mix as a fact—but it does have that slimy, fishy vibe we have come to expect from them. With that having been said, have you experienced similar problems? [ripten]

The VAIO was mentioned as a focal point of the strategy, and by that method, Windows. But Glasgow also mentioned that there would be additional software to help them achieve this goal and differentiate themselves from other computer makers, hopefully without the bloat you see in today's VAIOs. I have some concerns about their software expertise but they have been addressing that recently. I am more concerned about their expertise in hosting services, like Xbox Live versus the maturity of the Playstation store. Glaslow also went into slightly more detailed answers as to how their cross product connectivity is being shaped, continuing past what president Howard Stringer said about each group no longer being insulated from each other during development. He said that software development would start from the beginning of product cycles and that specific designers were in charge of setting up the UI similarities and setting up the common kernels. There were central groups that supposedly connect all the other groups.

I should hope the networking efforts happen within the next generation of product because this gen's examples are not that strong; Hancock will be, this fall, the first title available on the Bravia internet link streaming system released ahead of disc releases. But given the $299 price tag and the bad reviews of the movie, they need to do a lot better. As far as content streaming goes, I don't think that Sony's internet video strategy will fly until they build this hardware into every Bravia TV. Speaking of connectivity, Glaslow also mentioned that a Sony Reader E-book with wireless connectivity was being developed.

As a close, I'd asked Glaslow why there were so many Sony products and why were the names so confusing. He'd replied that he'd agreed it was an issue, but that there were many sides to the problem including tracking a specific model through design to manufacturing, when they had so many SKUs. And that it was possible to do different internal and external names, but the problem with iconic names is that submodels get lost in the shuffle. I thought to myself, I guess they should probably not release so many models because we find it pretty confusing when shopping Sony.

Extra profiles wont' be merged, they'll be deleted, come Sept 1st, 2008. When asked to comment on "WHY OH WHY?!" Netflix responded that it was in the best interest of most customers. I'm not sure that makes sense to me, since the majority who don't need the extra profiles can just opt out of using them.

Let's submit customer feedback and complain if you feel the way I do and don't want your significant other's terrible movie tastes infecting your queue! Here's a petition.

Important News Regarding Netflix Profiles

Dear Brian,

We wanted to let you know we will be eliminating Profiles, the feature that allowed you to set up separate DVD Queues under one account, effective September 1, 2008.

Each additional Profile Queue will be unavailable after September 1, 2008. Before then, we recommend you consolidate any of your Profile Queues to your main account Queue or print them out.

While it may be disappointing to see Profiles go away, this change will help us continue to improve the Netflix website for all our customers.

If you have any questions, please go to http://www.netflix.com/Help?p_faqid=3962 or call us anytime at 1 (888) 638-3549. We apologize for any inconvenience.

- The Netflix Team

Wavexpress to Provide Internet Video Download Service for NBC’s Coverage of the Beijing Olympic Games

Free Service to Allow Media Center Users the Ability to Download Content During NBC’s Coverage of the Beijing Olympics, August 8-24, 2008

NEW YORK – June 23, 2008 – Wavexpress, a provider of broadband media technology and services, majority-owned by Wave Systems Corp. (NASDAQ: WAVX), has been selected by NBC Universal, Inc., to develop, host, and support a service for viewing NBC’s coverage of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games in Microsoft’s Windows Vista Media Center. The announcement was made today by Perkins Miller, Senior Vice President, Digital Media, NBC Sports and Olympics, and Michael Sprague, President of Wavexpress.

The “NBC Olympics on the Go” service will take advantage of Wavexpress’ TVTonic Internet video service to allow Media Center users to watch channels of NBC’s coverage of Olympic events in up-to-HD quality on the go on their laptop. The free service will enable viewers to watch NBC’s extensive coverage of the Beijing Games on a sport-by-sport basis, with channels designated to match the hundreds of events included in the Games. Users can simply sign up for the channels they are interested in, and the service will automatically synchronize NBC’s video clips as they become available, so viewers will have a fresh slate of Olympic content to watch on their morning commute.

“This service will provide a fantastic viewing experience for Olympic fans with Windows Vista Media Center,” said Sprague. “They can choose their favorite sports, from diving to water polo to gymnastics, and extended coverage is automatically synchronized to their PC in the middle of the night. With a laptop, they will get a high-quality video experience to view on the train, the plane, or in the college quad.”

“As we prepare to broadcast the Beijing Olympic Games, we are committed to reaching as many viewers as possible,” said Miller. “Our partnership with Wavexpress will enable us to reach viewers seeking high-quality in-depth coverage of the wide range of sports that make up the Olympics. The service will especially appeal to fast-paced fans who want to catch up on their favorite sports offline.”

It is more or less accepted that a minority of users use disproportionate of bandwidth, but what they're using it for is changing. It's increasingly video, not BitTorrent. The whole pro-BitTorrent thing is a smokescreen, because BitTorrent is less and less of an issue—video, and increasingly, HD video will be the real one. (Along with any number of other increasingly bandwidth-intensive apps.) And it'll be more and more competitive with providers' TV offerings—we've already seen Time Warner cry about it. But there's no legitimate way to block it and protect their content.

They can, however, make it more expensive for you to download with bandwidth caps (which is conveniently net neutral). And that's what I think this is partially about—protecting their TV business, not just curbing voracious bandwidth appetites. Regardless of the motivations, it's definitely coming. Comcast's tests will probably start soon, Time Warner's are already underway and regional ISPs have been doing it for a while. It's looking very much like the future of broadband here.

At least if we're using it less maybe the internet won't explode now. [Wired]

She'd been warming me up to the idea for months, unsuccessfully. We would ditch the cases and file the media neatly into more efficient storage boxes. And given that a.) I wanted to be a good husband b.) we're soon moving from our large house into a tiny city apartment and c.) I'd get to keep using the cases of my 100+ video games, I finally gave in to her request.

Here's the sequence of painful events that followed.

During a quick trip to one of those red and white office supply stores, she picked up a set of boxes (coffins) and sleeves (coffin liners). Then on one particularly sunny afternoon, she sat down at our coffee table and transformed into some split personality I'd never seen in the 12 years I've known her. With crisp, militaristic movements, she quickly studied each case, noted its contents, and ripped its silver heart from inside.

And she didn't shed a tear.

I realize that the future of my movie collection is with digital downloads and that all this packaging is horrible for the environment. I know that with current technologies, it's just plain stupid to waste your shelf with codecs better suited for hard drives. But that didn't make the experience any easier.

"Maybe we could just keep the box sets intact," I offered.
"Why?" she responded, her eyes emotionless like a killing robot.
"They're just nice to have. I like looking at them," was all I could say. That was enough to keep a few on display.

But I knew how defeated I sounded. Many of these DVDs hadn't been watched in years. And a sickening amount of them were never even opened before the unceremonious gutting by my wife. So why had I bought them in the first place?

I think that I just liked having them on the shelf. It wasn't about having a particular movie to watch. It was about owning a particular movie.

To her credit, my loving wife was being extremely thoughtful in her digital cleansing (while I was too distraught to help). She noted all sorts of details from each box that I might want to know, like bonus features and episode titles. And when I pressed her again on keeping some of the more loved cases around, she reminded me that her larger plan was to store the DVD cases for when we move back into a house one day, or at least a larger apartment.

"So we're going to store the storage?" I ask.
"Why not?"
"That's ridiculous. We'll just throw them away."

After all, I have iTunes' Cover Flow and programs like Delicious Library to curb that craving for packaging and album art. But still, my stomach dropped with every case tossed to the wayside, my trophies of consumerism simultaneously helpless and useless upon our rug.

At the moment, my once-cherished shelf of DVDs stands as a temporary monument to a once-thriving civilization. The cases sit empty—soulless—awaiting a trip to the trash in fleeting tribute to an era gone by.

The plan is to have a fee of about $10 a month as well as a free device, but the pilot test in the Dallas area will only work with Archos players. Individual movie rentals will be $3.99, but if you're going to have to go down to the store AND pay about the same amount for a movie as you do already, why not just rent a DVD? [Hollywood Reporter]

Update: Looks like we heard about this before. Well now it's official.

Zune Marketplace Video Store Update Schedule:

· Wednesday, May 28: COMEDY CENTRAL

o "The Colbert Report"

o "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart"

· Friday, May 30: NBC Universal

o "Friday Night Lights"

o "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit"

o "Law & Order"

o "Life"

o "Lipstick Jungle"

o "Saturday Night Live"

· Tuesday, June 3: SCI FI Channel

o "Battlestar Galactica Classics"

o "Destination Truth"

o "Ghost Hunters International"

o "Ghost Hunters"

o "Who Wants to Be a Superhero?"

· Friday, June 6: USA Network

o "Dr. Steve-O"

o "In Plain Sight"

o "Law & Order: Criminal Intent"

o "Monk"

o "Psych"

o "The Starter Wife"

Install
You boot up the box, set the network to wireless or Ethernet connectivity. You get a five digit code, head over to netflix.com/activate using a browser on a PC or other device, log into your Netflix account and enter the code. The Roku box gets your queue and the movie/show cover art. There are HDMI and optical connections on top of the standard video outs, but those cables are not included.

Using
The box itself doesn't have menus. No, instead, you use Netflix's brilliant website to load up your queue. You just use the remote to scan through your instant viewing queue (now separate from the disc queue) select a movie and play. It starts streaming. (Remember, there's no download/purchase program here and the device has no HDD, just 64MB of buffer.) The box is completely quiet, again, due to its fanless design. Movies stream in at different VC-1 bitrates of 500kbps, 1Mbps, 1.6Mbps and 2.2Mbps, depending on connection speed. Quality is not great, even at 2.2 Mbps, but I'm happy enough considering viewing is instantaneous. Note: Unlike Apple TV, scrolling between cover art is not done in an animated way. HDMI res is 480p, while all the other outputs are 480i. Fast forwarding is handled by key-framing movie content every 10 seconds, so you can FF to parts of the movie that haven't been downloaded yet, at three speeds. Once you hit play, the movie buffers for a few seconds and resumes. Speaking of resuming, the player itself does remember where you left off last in a movie and will continue playing from that point. One nice touch: You can score movies from the movie detail page. One bad thing: You can't search the Netflix website specifically for instant titles.

Choices
While appearing to have double the collection of Apple TV or Vudu, what do you get in Netflix's 10,000 movie collection? Basically, you get a lot of back catalog (classic movies) and a lot of TV shows (unheard of in rental situations!) right as they hit the market. But you don't get the same blockbusters on day one release that you'd get from Apple TV or Vudu. That makes the Netflix box and disc system a great supplement to those systems, which seem to specialize in new releases. (Kudos to Saul from the NYTimes for discovering this initially.) The business model behind a flat rate unlimited streaming system is unheard of. Sure, they're taking a lot of older content, which is inherently cheaper. But think of it this way: For a nine-dollar-a-month account, you can hold off on buying older DVDs or watching TV shows. A box set of Ghost in the Shell or 30 Rock costs over 50 bucks on DVD or by renting individual downloads, but you can stream many of these episodes for nine bucks a month. Buying the Karate Kid, an old movie not on many download services, costs a few bucks on DVD, but I can just watch it whenever I want as long as I'm a Netflix customer. (And consider that the number of great back catalog titles like that will probably outpace new releases you'd find on Vudu or Apple TV.) It's basically the same as Netflix's current model, but instead of being limited by the postal service, you're limited by your spare time and interest in older titles. (And don't forget Netflix's disc-by-mail service, which still covers new titles.)

The Future
Netflix is planning HD streaming, and this box will support it. When Netflix gets HD streaming content, they'll update the box by firmware to support HD resolutions at higher bitrates of 4-6mbps, including 5.1 surround (everything is stereo now). The menus will also be upgraded to HD res, too. In the future, the Roku-branded box will be upgraded to accept non-Netflix content, too. (And btw, the update on the Mac client situation is that they're just trying to sort out the DRM issues, or lack of a suitable system they can stream to Macs on.)

The box will be sold on Roku's website directly. Worth buying if you're a Netflix customer (or thinking of becoming a Netflix customer) and can find enough titles for Instant Viewing on their site. [Roku and Netflix]

NETFLIX TEAMS WITH STREAMING MEDIA INNOVATOR ROKU ON PLAYER
THAT INSTANTLY STREAMS
MOVIES FROM NETFLIX DIRECTLY TO THE TV

Priced at Just $99.99 and Available Starting Today,
The Netflix Player by Roku™ is Compact,
Easy to Set Up and Intuitive to Use



LOS GATOS and SARATOGA, Calif., May 20, 2008 - Netflix, Inc. (Nasdaq: NFLX), the world's
largest online movie rental service, and Roku, Inc., an innovator in digital media streaming
technology, today announced the introduction of The Netflix Player by Roku™, a device that
enables Netflix subscribers to instantly stream a growing library of movies and TV episodes from
Netflix directly to the TV. Priced at just $99.99, the player is available for purchase starting today at
www.roku.com/netflixplayer.

The player is simple to install, easy to use and gives Netflix members instant access to more than
10,000 movies and TV episodes.

"We're excited to bring the first Netflix ready device to the market, " said Anthony Wood, CEO and
founder of Roku. "The seamless integration of the Netflix service into our player has resulted in
true ease of use for the consumer. Now, streaming video isn't limited to people sitting in front of
the PC; it's ready for the TV in the living room."

"The key breakthroughs of The Netflix Player by Roku are simplicity and cost," said Reed Hastings,
chairman and CEO of Netflix. "First, it allows consumers to use the full power of the Netflix Web
site to choose movies for their instant Queue, and then automatically displays only those choices
on the TV screen. That's a major improvement versus the clutter of trying to choose from 10,000
films on the TV. Second, there are no

- more -




2-2-2-2-2-2
extra charges and no viewing restrictions. For a one-time purchase of $99, Netflix members can
watch as much as they want and as often as they want without paying more or impacting the
number of DVDs they receive."
About The Netflix Player by Roku
The Netflix Player by Roku is surprisingly compact - roughly the size of a paperback book - and
can integrate easily into any home entertainment system. All it takes is connecting the player to a
TV and to the Internet. For homes with wireless Internet connectivity, the player is Wi-Fi enabled
and offers the ultimate in placement flexibility.

From the Netflix Web site, members simply add movies and TV episodes to their individual instant
Queues, and those choices are then displayed on the TV and available to watch instantly. With
the player's accompanying remote control, members can browse and make selections right on
the TV screen and also have the ability to read synopses and rate movies. In addition, they have
the option of fast-forwarding and rewinding the video stream via the remote. In all, the Queue-
based user interface creates a highly personalized experience that puts members in control.

Additional features of the product include optimization of the Netflix video streaming technology,
which eliminates the need for a hard disk drive associated with video downloads, and built-in
connectivity for automatic software upgrades, which will keep the device current with service
enhancements.
Technical Details
In the Box
• The Netflix Player by Roku set-top box (approximately 5"W x 5"D x 2"H)
• Remote control (including 2 AAA batteries)
• A/V Cable (Yellow/Red/White RCA)
• Power Adapter
• Getting Started Guide

- more -


3-3-3-3-3
Video and Audio Connections
• HDMI
• Component Video
• S-Video
• Composite Video
• Digital Optical Audio
• Analog Stereo Audio
Network Connections
• Wired Ethernet
• Wi-Fi (802.11 b/g)

FINAL FANTASY® CRYSTAL CHRONICLES®: My Life as a King™ (Square Enix, 1 player, Rated E for Everyone - Mild Fantasy Violence, Mild Suggestive Themes, 1,500 Wii Points): FINAL FANTASY CRYSTAL CHRONICLES: My Life as a King takes a legendary franchise and launches it into the realm of simulation gaming. Players are challenged to rebuild a kingdom, leading its young king on a path of discovery through an adventure bristling with mystery and intrigue.

LostWinds™ (Frontier Development, 1-2 players, Rated E for Everyone - Mild Fantasy Violence, 1,000 Wii Points): A fresh, enchanting platform adventure that puts the power of the wind in the palm of your hand - from raging tornados to the gentlest breeze. You'll wield your Wii Remote™ controller to power Toku's jumps and glides, suspend and smash enemies, meet friends and solve puzzles using LostWinds' novel, intuitive and playful control system.

Defend your Castle™ (XGen Studios, 1-4 players, Rated E for Everyone - Cartoon Violence, 500 Wii Points): Defend your Castle takes place on a grassy plain surrounded by invaders. You are the commander of your castle, and it is your duty to fling the invading enemies sky-high, watching them plummet to their demise. As you progress, add powerful spells and upgrades to your arsenal for repelling the attacks. How long can you hold them off?

Pop™ (Nnooo, 1-4 players, Rated E for Everyone, 700 Wii Points): Pop bubbles to score points and stop the timer from running out. Pop can be enjoyed by anyone - casual gamers can simply play to pop bubbles and keep the game moving, whereas advanced players will need to pick their shots rapidly and accurately and generate combos to maximize their score.

V.I.P. Casino: Blackjack™ (High Voltage Software®, Inc., 1-4 players, Rated T for Teen - Simulated Gambling, 700 Wii Points): V.I.P. Casino: Blackjack re-creates the casino experience, with fully animated players and a realistic Las Vegas dealer. Single players can increase their bankrolls, while multiple players can engage in a head-to-head mini-blackjack tournament.

TV Show King (Gameloft, 1-4 players, Rated E for Everyone, 1,000 Wii Points): TV Show King transforms your living room into a real TV quiz show studio where you'll face the challenge of answering more than 3,000 questions across six different categories. Compete against family and friends and use your Wii Remote controller in original ways to make it to the finals to see who can win the greatest amount of cash in one final, deciding duel.

Hughes' argument centers around subscriptions: "(Recently) I made a list of the 22 ways to sell music and 20 of them still require DRM...any form of subscription service or limited play-per-view or advertising offer still requires DRM. So DRM is not dead." And he thinks subscription services are where we're headed (or at least the industry hopes so), meaning DRM for all.

But the fact that he's pinning DRM's survival on subscriptions—as opposed to advocating for it on all tracks you buy online—shows that we actually have come a long way, and DRM is dead, at least in one sense. Contrast with the MPAA's rep, whose industry is still in the beginning of the DRM life cycle: "We need DRM to show our customers the limits of the license they have entered into with us." The RIAA is a veritable Lessigian copyright hippie in comparison. [CNET]

They're putting their shows out online in a million different ways (you can even download 30 Rock, The Office, Conan and Leno direct to your desktop now) and more than happy to pipe 'em to you, as long as it's in a controlled sandbox of some sort. NBC Direct requires a walled-garden player install with loads of DRM, and they wanted copyright controls from Apple and Microsoft to give just two examples, not to mention Hulu. It's sorta surprising that the QuickTime feed for iPhone is unprotected, but theoretically it's restricted to two devices. You know, if they'd just relax a bit, overall, they'd be in a good place online. [Silicon Alley Insider, Thanks Peter!]

"In the long term, the consumer wants there to be quality premium-produced content, and in order for that to continue to be a viable business, there needs to be significant protection around it." This is the same NBC that was working with AT&T to build a network-wide dragnet for pirated content, so color us totally not surprised. Just don't know why Microsoft would agree to this and give people a reason to avoid Zunes (whether it's a legitimate one or not), when they're already way behind the iPod (which told NBC to take a flying hoo-ha).

Update 2: Saul has since updated the original post with Zune Insider's retort, but he also adds what Microsoft spokesman Adam Sohn told him yesterday when he asked about the copyright stuff:

"I don't think they are wrong, but we are not going to characterize those discussions. We have agreed to work with NBC across a range of topics, and protection of copyrighted material is certainly one of them."

"It was one of those things where we were in the position of everyone asking us what we were going to do," Yorke told the Hollywood Reporter." I don't think it would have the same significance now anyway, if we chose to give something away again. It was a moment in time."

Yorke and Co. have remained tight-lipped about whether they think the move was a success or not, but the freebie method has been adopted by other artists, notably Nine Inch Nails. The latest group to jump on the freebie bandwagon is Coldplay, aka Radiohead Lite, who announced on Monday that their new single, Violet Hill, would be available for free, and promptly b0rked the interweb* with their selfless gesture. [Reuters]

*The band's official website crashed.

While Apple won't be turning off FairPlay's authentication servers anytime soon, I do have this semi-dystopian fantasy of them all simultaneously, spontaneously combusting and watching billions in legally purchased music go up in smoke as it all becomes basically unmovable, save circumventing the tracks' DRM, if only so the average consumer finally learns what those three little letters really mean. Good times. [Last 100 via Dave Zatz]

No, p2p is no longer the single biggest traffic whore, responsible for only 20 percent of total traffic. It's streaming video, like YouTube and Hulu, which is now 50 percent of total traffic. During peak congestion—the times when Comcast will slow you down for hitting the pipe too hard—70 percent of it is http.

Which explains Comcast's flip on network management and why it's a total smokescreen. P2P is no longer the number one leech on networks, it's streaming video across regular old http. So they don't need to throttle p2p exclusively anymore—they need to slow the whole pipe down, hence the new "protocol agnostic" scheme. But they can look good showing off how much they love p2p. It remains to be seen how much of it the FCC will eat up. [GigaOM]

"If you look at studies about MP3 players, especially leading MP3 players and what portion of that content is pirated, and think about how that content gets onto that device, it has to go through a gatekeeping piece of software, which would be a convenient place to put some antipiracy measures. We are financially harmed every day by piracy. It results in us not being able to invest as much money in the next generation of film and TV products."

After all, since then, iTunes has passed even Wal-Mart's massive moving power in its B&M stores to become the US's biggest music retailer. Plus, all Big Four have already signed on with Amazon for DRM-free music, making it the no. 2 digital retailer. At this point, they've either gotta step up or step aside. [Listening Post]

[LimeWire Music Blog]

[download via crave]

Michael Arrington points out that a $5 tax—besides essentially turning music into a service requiring us to perpetually suck on the industry's teat—would double its size, from $10 billion to $20 billion. So of course the labels are all for it. It's guaranteed revenue that would flood their coffers like never before. Warner's plan calls for the cash stream to flow into a pool that'll be split between copyright holders and artists. But we all know how hard labels want to screw artists.

And as Arrington points out, it would basically freeze innovation in the industry, meaning labels would be able to ream them that much harder. Not to mention, thanks to the fine print, we'd probably no longer own our music. But that's the whole point. [Portfolio via TechCrunch]

"Protocol agnostic" sounds a lot like net neutrality, treating all data equally, be it P2P or FTP. Except in this case, it means slowing all packets equally when traffic reaches an unacceptable volume. Under the current system, which was described as "surgical" in its precision when we talked to Comcast about it just a few days ago, only the torrent uploads of super traffic hogs (something like the 5 percent worst abusers, similar to Time Warner's estimation) are delayed, and only when and where there's heavy congestion. So, you could be hammering the shit out of your connection on FTP, and you wouldn't see the kind of management being applied to someone on the block using torrent if the network was congested.

Now, it doesn't matter how you're raping the connection—they slow your whole pipe down if you're "disproportionately" swallowing bandwidth when the network's congested (I'm repeating that phrase to emphasize that's the only time they hit the nuke button), whether it's BitTorrent or you have 100 YouTube vids running at once. It's a nice marketing move: Comcast actually gets to engage in stiffer throttling while gaining credit for easing off BitTorrent. What's good is that it's promising to be extremely upfront and transparent about how and why it manages traffic, which takes the evil bite out of the practice.

But it also makes it more acceptable to the average Joe, clearing the way for every ISP to do so: "Hey, we told you we might do it."

Another reason they made the switch? To try to keep the FCC from laying down net neutrality rules, which no ISP seems to want. Head honcho Kevin Martin has a huge hard-on for reaming the cable industry, in particular Comcast, and the recent dustup with BitTorrent had the FCC seriously considering laying down net neutrality rules for the first time. In my dealings, Comcast and BitTorrent execs actually seem pretty friendly toward one another; presumably they wanted to work it out without the government stepping in.

The people who want net-neutrality regulation may get their wish in the end, since Martin still isn't impressed with the show of friendship:

"While it may take time to implement its preferred new traffic management technique, it is not at all obvious why Comcast couldn't stop its current practice of arbitrarily blocking its broadband customers from using certain applications. Comcast should provide its broadband customers as well as the Commission with a commitment of a date certain by when it will stop this practice.

One big question is how the DRM would work, since subscription music is obviously totally tied up, but not all players support the same DRM scheme: Zune's got its own set of chains and the iPod's got FairPlay. So they'd probably have to have player-specific subscription setups.

But here's the real problem: A subscription to a single label for $10 a month? The only way it makes any sense for consumers is if they're sitting on a fat pipe to all four of the majors, and likely, it's the only way they'll bite. And maybe still, only with Apple mojo to boot, if history's any guide. [AP; CNNMoney]

The labels, particularly Universal, are known to be hot on a subscription deal, since it'd provide more reliable revenue from iPods—BW notes the average iPod owner buyers "fewer than 30 than songs" and rips or steals the rest. Apple, on the other hand, is already balling with iTunes just the way it is—now the no. 2 music retailer in the country—and it's really just money icing on the wildly profitable hardware cake. And if it's not busted, why tinker with it?

Since the labels really want a subscription model, it makes sense that label sources would play it up to the press, giving them more leverage at the negotiating table by showing the heavy buzz/demand the rumor is generating. Apple-side sources would spin the opposite way, since—if they really were considering a subscription model—it would give them weight to push down the price, both what they'd give labels and what they'd charge us. And as both the FT and NYT have noted, price is likely to be the major sticking point.

Conclusion? Be hopeful, not wistful. [Businewss]

[Myka]

In the fine print that you "agree" to, Amazon and Sony say you just get a license to the e-books—you're not paying to own 'em, in spite of the use of the term "buy." Digital retailers say that the first sale doctrine—which would let you hawk your old Harry Potter hardcovers on eBay—no longer applies. Your license to read the book is unlimited, though—so even if Amazon or Sony changed technologies, dropped the biz or just got mad at you, they legally couldn't take away your purchases. Still, it's a license you can't sell.

But is this claim legal? Our Columbia friends suggest that just because Sony or Amazon call it a license, that doesn't make it so. "That's a factual question determined by courts," say our legal brainiacs. "Even if a publisher calls it a license, if the transaction actually looks more like a sale, users will retain their right to resell the copy." Score one for the home team.

There's a kicker, though: If a court ruled with you on that front, you still can't sell reproductions of your copy, an illegal act tantamount to Xeroxing your Harry Potters. You'd have to sell the physical media where the "original" download is stored—a hard drive or the actual Kindle or Sony Reader. Our guess is that it only gets more complicated from here. What happens when the file itself resides only on some $20-per-month Google storage locker?

For more details, have a look at the original, surprisingly readable legal summary:

The (Potential) Legal Validity of E-book Reader Restrictions By Rajiv Batra, John Padro, Seung-Ju Paik and Sarah Calvert

Many users are unhappy that e-book readers, such as the Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle, restrict the sharing, borrowing and transferring of e-books. While some argue that the "first sale" doctrine should allow users to transfer an e-book in the same manner as a hard-copy book, these contentious restrictions may be valid under current law.

The Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle

The Sony Reader and the Amazon Kindle are portable media devices designed to carry and display e-books and other electronic documents. Kindle has a mobile broadband function that allows users to browse online content and download e-books while on the go. Alternatively, the Sony Reader requires users to download and manage their library of e-books via a home computer.

The contentious characteristic of both products is that they bar users from sharing their e-books with other users. For example, Kindle's license agreement grants a "non-exclusive right to keep a permanent copy...solely for your personal, non-commercial use." Consequently, Kindle users may "not sell, rent, lease, distribute, broadcast, sublicense or otherwise assign any rights to...any third party." The Sony Reader has similarly restrictive language in its license, but does allow users to copy e-books