[M4IF Discuss] hourly usage fee for MPEG4

[Fevzi Karavelioglu]

Hi folks, I am a new subscriber to this list.  I find this discussion 
very interesting.  I must admit I am not as familiar with it.  One 
question came to me while I was reading this thread.  What if the user 
records a movie (or any other video/audio content) but does not watch 
it, ends up deleting it?  This is a very common occurance with PVRs. 
 Another point is that the PVRs are not always integrated with a Set Top 
Box so if the STB is used to monitor what the user is watching the user 
would be charged for something their PVR recorded but they ended up 
erasing it.
Regards,
Fevzi.
Ken Goldsholl wrote:
> Ben,
>
>  
>
> Even at $30/year, over four years, that would mean the cost to the 
> consumer for this technology is $120!  What other technology embedded 
> in a low cost consumer electronic product costs that much?
>
>  
>
> In regards to the five cents per hour example, in a few years the cost 
> of VOD servers will be next to nothing (<$20/stream for the server), 
> and with servers located at the head end or DSLAM, the bandwidth costs 
> will also be free. If 30-year old tv shows and movies are avilable for 
> free on broadcast tv, there will be a limit to how much people will 
> pay for this.  Maybe its five cents or ten cents per show, maybe its 
> $7.95 for a whole month of reruns, talk shows, and other low value 
> content that the subscriber watches 75 hours per month of.  The MPEG 
> tax could represent almost 20% of that cost.  In the long run, content 
> retailers will have incentive to switch to alternative formats that do 
> not impose an hourly fee to use.
>
>  
>
> I actually don't think the billing part would be that difficult, but 
> it could ned up costing someone alot of money.  If a system is all 
> MPEG4 (the STB probably would be fixed for one delivery mode), then 
> the subscriber mgmt system just has to log the hours the STB is on.    
> If a viewer keeps their STB on all the time, the license fees could 
> run almost $15/month.
>
>  
>
> Given that a video display is required for viewing MPEG content, it is 
> unlikely that the cost of any product with a decoder in it would be 
> greatly affected by a one-time license fee of $3-5.  There won't be 
> too many $25 STBs around.  If someone does come up with a low cost 
> product that utilizes MPEG4 (like a cell phone), then they can 
> negotiate a different deal.
>
>  
>
> Ken
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>
>     From: Ben Waggoner <mailto:ben   interframemedia.com>
>
>     To: discuss   lists.m4if.org <mailto:discuss   lists.m4if.org>
>
>     Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2024 3:53 PM
>
>     Subject: Re: [M4IF Discuss] hourly usage fee for MPEG4
>
>
>     Ken,
>
>         Bear in mind that the total cost per consumer per day of the
>     license fee would be like $0.08 for someone watching four hours of
>     MPEG-4 TV a day. Nation-wide, we're only talking about $16M/day
>     assuming 200M Americans watch four hours of MPEG-4 content a day -
>     this is really a rounding error compared to the size of the
>     entertainment industry.
>
>         I don't see the actual cost of the license fee being a
>     problem, but the administration that it would require. I'm looking
>     at doing some on-line education for video compression, and based
>     on the realistic audience for my niche, I'd be looking at
>     something under $30/year (1500 user-hours).
>
>         As for the $0.05/hour for watching archival content, I'm
>     confident customer price sensitivity doesn't exist at that point -
>     you wouldn't lose 80% of your audience by going to $0.25 an hour,
>     so no one would ever charge that little. Maybe for radio, but
>     certainly not for video. Anyway, bandwidth costs and server
>     amortization would be many times $0.02/hour, so the extra fee
>     really wouldn't make or break a business (especially since your
>     competition would have to pay it too).
>
>         So, again, I feel the problem with the fee isn't the amount,
>     but the administrative burden it implies. If MPEG-LA can make the
>     terms very clear to implement. I'd hate to spend $900 of my time
>     figuring out how to pay them $10.
>
>         Perhaps waive the fee for anything under $100/year, easy to
>     use accounting integrated with servers, and a clear and generous
>     definition of what content isn't revenue producing?
>
>     Ben Waggoner
>     Interframe Media <http://www.interframemedia.com>
>     Digital Video Compression Consulting, Training, and Encoding
>
>
>
>     on 2/20/02 3:27 PM, Ken Goldsholl at kgoldsholl   oxygnet.com wrote:
>
>         When viewed in the context of paying $4 for watching a feature
>         film, two cents an hour does not seem unreasonable.  However,
>         for video on demand service to become ubiquitous, much more
>         content than recently released movies must be available on the
>         system, as that kind of service can not succeed with just a
>         handful of titles.  If content that is offered on free
>         television is also included in a service like subscription
>         video on demand, then the hourly usage fee can render such a
>         service unfeasible, which would have the ripple effect of
>         suppressing demand for all VOD.  There could very well be
>         reruns of old TV series that may cost viewers say, five cents
>         per hour.  This usage fee then eats up a big portion of the
>         revenue.
>
>         When viewed in the context of other technology, this proposal
>         makes even less sense.  Yes, a significant investment was made
>         by the patent holders to develop the MPEG4 intellectual
>         property.  But the same can be said for virtually all other
>         kinds of technology, almost all of which is paid for by the
>         user when they purchase the product.  What is so special about
>         MPEG4 that the creators deserve a perpetual revenue stream?
>          There are no recurring payments to the developers of the
>         technology utilized in cars, computers, audio systems,
>         basically every other electronic device.  
>
>         The idea that reducing the upfront cost of the equipment to
>         spread the proliferation of MPEG4 devices should be quickly
>         dismissed, as a $2.50 royalty for the decoder in a set-top box
>         will not slow down adoption of that device.  An what about the
>         other technology used in these products?  MPEG4 is just a
>         small part of the technology needed for the digital video
>         end-to-end solution. Will they be subject to hourly usage fees?
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/discuss/attachments/20020221/cf15c720/attachment.html