Jason Unger

Digital Distribution Isn't Important, If It's Still Locked Down

Posted by junger - 12/05/08 at 01:12:33 pm

I'm amazed at the progress the technology and entertainment community has made when it comes to the restrictions on digital music.

Instead of locking everything down like they used to, labels are starting to open up to DRM-free music. A visit to the Amazon MP3 store shows that tons of huge artists are making their music available without digital right management. It's a huge leap from where it was even 3 years ago.

But we're falling into the pattern again — this time, with digital video. Services like the iTunes store and VUDU are offering up some great video, but it's all locked down.

What's frustrating is that we, as consumers, seem fixated by the distribution method these services are using — and not that we're repeating the battle for digital rights. It's not like digital distribution is new; cable has been offering up a crappy selection of content for on-demand viewing forever.

The 'next' format war isn't downloads vs. discs; it's locked down video vs. DRM-free.

The promise of digital media is the freedom that you have to use it. The distribution method is a nice bonus, but it's not the most important aspect.

Complete story: Why Digital Copies (Not Downloads) Really Matter

SmartHouse Admits to David Richards' Content Theft

Posted by junger - 05/01/08 at 02:05:14 pm

A representative for 4SquareMedia, the Australian company owned by mass plagiarist David Richards, has admitted to Richards' theft of content, despite his "ghost hacker" excuses.

In an email sent to me, Nicole Bence, a "director" at 4SquareMedia, has the audacity to ask if they can use content from CE Pro — after I asked them AGAIN to remove a story they stole from us (emphasis is mine).

Hi Jason,

My name is Nicole Bence and I am a Director at 4Square Media. I understand David has put up some of your stories in the past without permission. Obviously with web content stories are shared on a daily basis and I was hoping to get some feedback from you in regards to our sites. We have removed this story, but we would like to be able to push our readers to your content when necessary. Is this a possibility and if so what are your guidelines for ensuring CE Pro are given the correct reference.

Thanks Jason – appreciate your help.

Regards,

Nicole

The number of comments and emails I've received from people who have worked for David Richards is constantly growing, and they all have one theme: how horrible it was.

At this point, it's pretty obvious he is not going to change (even if he is exposed all over Australian TV).

For anything to happen, his advertisers need to stop supporting him. But from rumblings I've heard, he doesn't make it easy for them to do that.

Honestly, I'm sick and tired of dealing with this guy.

(BTW – this admission started after SmartHouse copied an article from CE Pro with no permission to do so, despite giving "CE Pro" the byline. I emailed them, and Bence's response followed.)

HDMI vs. Component: The New Format War

Posted by junger - 04/17/08 at 12:04:47 pm

Searching for a new format war?

Look no further than HDMI vs. Component Video. Yeah, it's not a new battle, but it sure is one that's being fought pretty tooth and nail by custom installers.

In the HDMI vs. component debate, plenty of people have strong opinions on the subject. CE Pro recently solicited these opinions via an e-mail blast.

The vast majority of respondents far prefer to use component video for a number of reasons. Most of the complaints about HDMI center around distance issues, the challenge of terminating in the field, the fact that the connections easily disconnect, the fragility of the cables, the large connector size and HDMI’s far greater expense.

There were also a number of complaints about compatibility issues, the lack of HDMI standards, HDCP issues and a negligible quality improvement.

In the Unger household, we use both: component from our cable box, and HDMI from our upconverting DVD player. It's a pretty simple solution and we haven't yet run into any problems.

But for guys who are making their living setting up home entertainment systems, non-functioning equipment is a huge problem. And as much as you may argue otherwise, a lot of it has to do with HDCP (the content protection scheme used in HDMI to "prevent piracy."

When I caught up with Steve Venuti of HDMI Licensing at EHX, he pretty much admitted that a lot of the early problems could have been avoided if HDCP didn't exist.

HDMI would have entered the market easier without HDCP, but the studios wouldn't have let it happen. "It's a situation not everyone is happy with," he says. "But the reality is, they own the content."

So if I buy a Blu-ray disc, they still own the content? That's the problem with content "protection" in general: it assumes that consumers are thieves. What business gets away with treating its customers like that?

Component video does not have HDCP. And that's one of the big reasons installers like it — there's no handshakes to go along with it.

But this war is not new: it's not like component video has come out as an alternative to HDMI — it's been around for much longer. So think of it more as SACD vs. CD — which one do you buy?

Exactly.

PS – thanks to Gordon for making the comparison to HD DVD to me, which inspired this post.

Experiences in Management: Week 3

Posted by junger - 04/02/08 at 08:04:37 pm

Believe it or not, I'm a manager now. At the ripe old age of 24, I have an assistant Web editor for CE Pro — meaning that things are changing for me and for the site.

So far, things are going well. Steve — the assistant editor — is catching on quick and picking up a lot of the stuff that was slipping through the cracks previously. The site has grown a lot in the past year and we've needed more hands, so he's a welcome addition.

Because of this, my role has changed as well — in addition to doing the things that I need to do, I need to make sure Steve has things to do. There's no shortage of work to be done, but I'm not just looking out for myself anymore; I'm looking out for him, too.

Add into the fact that I'm managing virtually — literally. He's in Boston, I'm in DC. So while I was there for his first few days, the rest of our relationship has been over IM. It's not bad; it's just different. When you're doing things over IM, words matter much more. There are no body signs or emotions you can pick up on — it's only what the words say and mean.

So as he picks up some of the things keeping me from new ventures on the site, I'm working on developing an expanded community and growing our lead-gen content.

Change is good; I'm honestly not sure where I would be if change wasn't always happening. Doing the same thing over and over again is mundane. When people my age are changing jobs every 18 months, I've been with the same company for 3 years (but am now in my third position).

I'm excited for the future.

Blogging is One Thing, But Stealing Content is Another

Posted by junger - 12/26/07 at 03:12:51 pm

Slashdot picked up a story CE Pro ran last year (like, June 2006) on The Batcave Home Theater, a custom theater room up in Maine.

It's not new, but the link from Slashdot (a huge source of traffic) went to a site called Slashfilm (not related, as far as I know). So, Slashfilm was getting tons of traffic from content that they didn't create.

Normally, I'm okay with that — obviously, I'd like to get the traffic, but you have to live with the fact that sometimes you don't get what you want.

The problem, however, is that
1) Slashfilm didn't bother to link to the original article on CE Pro (a quick mention of the "June 2006 issue of CE Pro" was all we got)
2) They took the entire slideshow, cropped out our watermark, and posted it

The non-linkage isn't right, but can be easily remedied. On the other hand, taking the images and cropping out the watermarks is stealing content.

This is the second time in two weeks I've had to deal with people stealing content without proper attribution.

I emailed Slashfilm's editor, Peter Sciretta, asking him to add a link to our story and replace the images with the original, watermarked versions.

I haven't heard back from him (and it looks like his site is down now), but in reality, it doesn't matter if he replaces them or not. The images have already been cropped, our watermark is gone, and anyone who sees them can distribute them without attribution.

So, what are you supposed to do in this situation?

I emailed CmdrTaco (aka Rob Malda), who originally posted the story at Slashdot, and told him the story. It's not like I'm worried about bloggers promoting and sharing content we create — it's doing it without proper attribution and basically stealing credit for other's work.

CmdrTaco went ahead and changed the link in the Slashdot story to the original article on CE Pro, and now we're getting the influx of traffic.

What's the moral of the story?

Don't steal and properly attribute or it will come to bite you in the ass.