LIVEdigitally

There’s only room for 4 devices in the average living room. They are: a display (LCD/plasma/whatever), a cable/satellite receiver (aka set top box or STB), a DVD player, and a game console. For travelers, you can add a Slingbox to that list, but that’s about where I draw the line (sounds like Erick at TechCrunch has a similar philosophy). Remember, I said “average” living room. I’ll expand on my four device theory at a later date.

Netflix was rumored to be building its own box, a project I was sure to see fail. Instead (or in addition or in replacement of) they are going to integrate their Internet delivery service into some future LG products. This is, in my opinion, the only path for success. By doing so they eliminate all risk of becoming a hardware company, which surely would have sent them on the path to failure.

Don Frommer at SAI asks 5 good questions, but of them I feel only one is extremely relevant: how much will they cost? On the PC you get one movie per dollar you spend per month with Netflix. If that model translates to the TV box, then we have a winner. If, on the other hand, I have to spend per movie, then Houston, we have a problem. That would put them squarely into competing with cable/satellite on-demand services, and Comcast has a much bigger war chest in that arena.

Over at NewTeeVee the question of competitive services is raised, citing AppleTV, VUDU, Amazon Unbox/TiVo as comparison products. In my eyes, none are competitive. The “smart” marketing of the (rumored) $799 HD/Blu-Ray player will simply label it as having Netflix “built in” or something like that. It won’t get marketed as “The Netflix Box” (except, of course, FROM Netflix). Consumers have shown resilience to these boxes, and the Netflix brand simply isn’t strong enough in that sense. We all know what movies are, and we are used to a bunch of existing models. Having the top-of-the-line LG DVD player include movies “as if by magic” is a winning combo.

My friend Dave Zatz is a little less enamored with it: “As I said recently, given content licensing fees and Netflix’s low-cost subscriptions, I don’t see how unlimited streaming could be an economically viable business plan… Time will tell if they stick with it.” I think it’s a fair point, with a big however. The however is I’m sure some math genius at Netflix has all sorts of cost/usage estimates that predict a certain quantity of movie watching. Again, just a guess of mine, but I would presume they have a long way to go before it becomes overly costly.

So to summarize - the path to success from here:

1. Integrate into a DVD player and NOT a “Internet STB”, and add NO extra fees for the service beyond existing Netflix monthlies.
2. ???
3. Profit.

I’ve seen lots of Top 10 lists on the subject, and I’ve decided to try a different format for my own prognostications. Instead of by rank, I’ll do a list by industry.  Also, I have way more than 10 predictions to make.

TV Technology

• Every major cable company will increase it’s rates by more than 3%. Nobody will complain, and our government will (again) fail to protect us from them.
• A resolution above 1080p starts appearing in demos and labs, I’d predict a bump up into the 4000 vertical lines space.
• Bluray and HD-DVD continue to duke it out while consumers continue to not care.
• One of Hulu, Joost, etc get integrated into the Xbox 360 and/or PS3.
• Google launches “Android for Set-Top Boxes” but gains little traction in the foreseeable future.
• Anyone who is not a telephone company that tries to launch an IP-streaming set top device has a very rough year.
• Despite near-constant predictions of their demise, TiVo makes it through another year, possibly getting acquired (by DirecTV, Comcast, Netflix, Blockbuster, or someone out of the blue like Amazon or eBay).

Portable Devices That Are Not Cell Phones

• Zune 3.0 launches. It’s very very good. Further, iPod’s market share dips, although they still have an increase in overall unit sales (in other words: the pie gets bigger faster than their sales do). That said, a new iPod is even more betterer than all previous versions, making everyone who recently bought a prior generation a wee bit annoyed, but gosh that Steve Jobs is so charming they just don’t care. After all, that’s technology!
• At least two major camera vendors introduce integrated wifi cameras, but no more than one uses an open service, the rest have some proprietary, closed, annoying-to-use system. Ideally one of them buys Eye-fi.
• Digital picture frames continue to grow in market share, but still don’t “tip” into the mainstream.
• More companies introduce e-book readers despite general malaise in the category. Kindle II is launched with mild improvements.

Enterprise Services

• I have no clue, I don’t follow the space. Hello, this is a consumer tech blog!

Computers

• Apple’s new laptops will include an ultramobile, a tablet, and a “desktop replacement” OR a “gaming model” (they may combine the first two). Enhancements will include a card reader, 3G access as a built-in option, and new gestures. Market share continues to climb.
• Microsoft continues to spin about how amazing Vista is. Michael Gartenberg’s observations are probably the most poignant as to why it isn’t.
• Asus or Dell acquires or merges with one of HP, Acer, Toshiba, or other “meh” PC maker.
• Sony continues to make subpar Vaio laptops. And for the last time (I think) in 2007: don’t buy the Sony Vaio VGN-SZ4xx series laptops, they are just plain terrible. I’ve now had the chance to voice my discontent directly to the Vaio PR team (at Ruder Finn) who have yet to write me back on the topic.
• Nobody makes my awesome dual-screen laptop concept, thus leaving me the opportunity to make zillions one day.

Social Networking

• Facebook continues to get backlash from the media and tech community, meanwhile its user base continues to skyrocket. Further, they hire another 1000 people, yet only make modest improvements to the site itself. I’d add a 33% chance that they “pull a Netscape” and go after the desktop or the browser or some other place they really don’t belong.
• Randomly pick some names from the huge list of other social networking sites and some of them merge.
• Adults who didn’t grow up with social networking services experience burnout of being bitten by zombies after a few months, and many stop checking in four times per day. Those who went to school during the Facebook era continue to complain about all the old fogies (like me) polluting their sacred resting ground. They also continue to put radically inappropriate pictures of themselves online, blissfully unaware of the interviewing process.

Mobile Tech

• A few Android-powered phones ship, but not as many as the tech community would like to see. Again showing why the Razr can utterly dominate the market despite a closed architecture and terrible user interface.
• Apple launches the iPhone 3G, the iPhone nano, and the iPhonePro. Ok, I’m not 100% sure on the third, but I am betting on the first two. Also, one of these new phones comes unlocked OR on a carrier other than AT&T.
• Some major lawsuit occurs between a carrier and either a cable company or a broadcaster, all about mobile video rights. All parties involved appear as nothing but greedy to outsiders.
• Something new comes out in the phone space that’s more astounding than the iPhone. It’s possibly: uber-small, has a radically better battery life, does something funky like synchs with the Wii, or works with all US carriers.

Gaming

• With lots of stealth, a new console comes to market. It might only be a moderate shift from a prior model, or possibly be a whole new entrant.
• Rock Band 2 and 3, and Guitar Heros 4, 5, 6, and “Eddie Van Halen” editions come out, however nobody licenses the Harmonix engine to make “Jazz Trio”.
• Someone comes up with a really impressively new concept for the Wii. Good odds, however, that they wrap it inside a crappy game.
• More really amazing HD gaming occurs, continuing to drive HD adoption faster than the meager channels the cable companies try to placate us with, despite the fact that they raise prices again. Did I already say that?

Web Services/Misc

• A wide swath of “Web 2.0″ companies will go dark, primarily out of an inability to either figure out a business model for their product, or an inability to successfully market their service outside of the Bay Area.  They will quickly be forgotten and replaced by new ones with even goofier sounding names like Froobooloo.com.
• No major Wimax deployments occur.
• The digital transition date looms, starts creating a lot of media hype a la Year2000 mania.
• RFID continues to be a fun topic for the media, but all that happens is Walmart continues to make small vendors spend loads of money for the privelege of selling there.
• Bloggers fret about not being recognized as “press”, yet continue to spend too much time/energy gossiping about other bloggers, an activity the general public remains disinterested in and doesn’t give extra respect/credibility for.  This circular logic is baffling, I know.
• We lose even more rights to big media, because few Americans are willing to take even the tiniest steps to do anything about it.  PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG (start here)!
• I still don’t Twitter.

See you in 366 days to see how I scored!

To The Honorable Nancy Pelosi,

This morning I read about Chairman Conyers’ proposed PRO IP act, and as others in the technology industry have, I lowered my head sadly. While I only recently became an American citizen, it seems quite clear to me that this is yet another sad sign of how our government continues to lose its way. Instead of taking the clear, high road and working to protect the needs of its citizens, the government is instead taking the low road and protecting the needs of big business. I call this the low road as it is the only one paved with the campaign contribution dollars represented by big media.

While there are some good intentions described in the external “spin” of the bill, it seems clear that it is nothing more than a vehicle to enable the 5 major media companies to further harass and persecute Americans. This is an unfortunate trend that Congress seems to follow, and I write this letter to implore you to try to get deeply involved, learn about, and ultimately break.

Historically, Congress never used to side with major media companies. Throughout the 20th century, our leaders addressed new issues based on the wants and needs of the American people. Lawsuits have emerged over virtually every technology innovation as it pertained to media and content, from vinyl through compact disk. In virtually every case, Congress always put the pressure on the traditional companies to learn how to grow and change based on new technologies. That is, however, until the emergence of the broadband Internet and the MP3 music compression format.

For some reason, still not clear to me, these two technologies together caused the government to effectively switch teams. Instead of protecting the wants and needs of the many by forcing big media firms to evolve and adapt to the new technologies, the laws sprung up to protect these companies and allow them to live in the older world. PRO IP is yet another example of such laws.

It is bad enough that we have so few major media companies. It is bad enough that they can exert financial pressure to dominate the movie theaters and the airwaves. It is bad enough that they control the enormous quantities of media we as Americans consume. One could argue oligopolies, but that is a big enough topic on its own, and frankly, individual creativity combined with the distribution power of the Internet is finally allowing people to slowly retake control of the media they consume.

Historically it is this effort, individual creativity, that our government has helped protect and thrive. Not the demands of the rich and famous. It is in fact ironic that the major media companies of today were built on the shoulders of enabling laws, not crippling laws.

Now truth be told, I am no legal expert, nor am I an expert in copyright. But I am pretty good at common sense. Common sense tells me that the maximum penalty for transmitting an MP3 file should not be over 1000-fold the maximum penalty of shoplifting a CD from a store. Common sense tells me that if over 80 MILLION people are transmitting files to each other, there is something wrong with our system that makes such an activity illegal.

To be pointedly clear, I very much believe that record labels, TV studios, networks, producers, actors, writers, and everyone else involved in media production deserves their fair share, or even more than their fair share. I do not believe that these peoples’ livelihoods should be infringed simply because the American public is doing a lot of free downloading. What I do believe, on the other hand, is that when faced with new business challenges that technology innovation has spurred, these companies should be forced to meet these challenges head-on. They should not be sheltered and coddled by Congress, with their proverbial heads in proverbial ostrich holes.

I highly recommend that you take this issue up personally. I further recommend that you and your staff become familiar with the book Free Culture by Lawrence Lessig, a gentleman who understands these topics with much greater depth and clarity than I ever will. My government is elected to protect its citizens and our rights, not to protect big business. There will always be big business, and as the multi-hundred-billion-dollar Google has proven, there will always be new big business. Congress is not protecting newspapers as they are faced with massive business challenges due to technology. The same should be true in big media.

Sincerely,

Jeremy Toeman, concerned American

To my readers, you are welcome to copy any portion of the above content in an attempt to reach out to your elected officers. Click here to write to your representative.

The time has come to replace my Syntax Olevia 32″ LCD.  My decisions so far:

• I’ll either get a 42″ plasma or a 45-47″ LCD.  My rationale is that the room I’m currently in could fit below 50″ reasonably, anything else would be awkwardly big.  No reason to go smaller than 42.
• I’m open to either a plasma or LCD, as neither provide a conclusively better picture than the other for the content I watch (HD from my DVR, some SD hockey games, and Xbox).
• My budget is under $2000, as I have seen enough screens in person to state, without a doubt in my mind, that anything more than that is a waste of money.  The marginal returns on the more expensive set are exactly that: marginal.
• I will not buy a Sony, specifically due to the poor experience I had with the Vaio VGN-SZ460N, the worst laptop I’ve ever used.  Incidentally, I apologize for leaving this out of so many recent posts, I don’t know what came over me.
• I’d prefer to buy a model that’s been on the market for less than 6 months, since I anticipate a less-than-one-year cycle until it’s outdated.
• On the techie side, I want 2+ HDMI inputs and 1080p max resolution.  I don’t need any other inputs than those since my Pioneer receiver handles video crossover itself.  And while I know there’s virtually no content available at 1080p today, it seems silly to save a few hundred bucks and not be more future-ready (since future-proof isn’t possible, I’d at least like to be close).

I was at Best buy yesterday taking a look at a few sets in person.  The ones I liked were a 46″ Sharp Aquos LCD, a 47″ Samsung LCD, and a 42″ Panasonic Plasma.

It really amazes me the challenge it is to make such a decision.  I’ve researched and it appears there’s two types of advice: outdated (even worse) and/or too much irrelevant details.  I tried getting help from CNET, but they categorized into 44-57 inches, which didn’t help me much (although they otherwise have great advice on the topic).  I’m browsing through Amazon’s search results, but I literally need to weed through 120 sets that technically meet my needs since they don’t offer quite enough criteria.  The other site I like for this is Wize, which I’m still browsing.

So if anyone has any specific advice to help eliminate a few units or consider more, would love to hear them.  I’m also debating between buying online vs Costco, as online is convenient, but Costco has amazing return policies…

New gadgets are neat.  Social networking is neat.  Congress passing terrible laws into place that arbitrarily restrict consumer rights is not neat.  It’s a big deal, and the more passively we as society treat the topic, the worse the world we will live in.

It’s nineteen minutes long, and worth every second.  You don’t even have to “watch” just make sure you hear.  Actually, make sure you listen.  It’s important.  More important than Facebook’s ad platform.  More important than Leopard.  More important than Android. Much much much more important than social graphs, grafts, and starfishes (gah!).

Then go buy (and read) Free Culture.

It seems fairly apparent that AppleTV is nowhere near the runaway success the company’s enjoyed recently.  It’s been called a “hobby” by some, and that’s about as flattering as it gets.  It might actually be the best examples of why…

• Convergence products suck - they are too hard to explain to consumers, too hard to get working properly (yes, you need a computer running iTunes to get content into it, but no, it doesn’t have to be on all the time.  gah!), and they can’t satisfy even their own users all the time due to incompatible networks, formats, codecs, etc.  Sneakernet is a better solution for getting digital media off a computer, as the standalone products violate my “4-boxes in the living room, and no more” rule (which I have not yet written, but will do soon).
• Good UI isn’t enough - it doesn’t matter how nice it looks if there isn’t enough substance to support the product.  Yes, the AppleTV has a better UI than the NETGEAR Digital Entertainer HD and probably any other streaming media device in the past, but it’s still a convergence product (see above).
• Walled gardens are clearly annoying customers - let’s face it, there are just too many content options available today to try to trap consumers into a limited set.  The only reason the iPod was more successful at this game is that it’s main value proposition when it came out was about the ease of ripping and synchronizing, not the iTunes store.

So now let’s take a step back.  Apple makes a beautiful (yet pricey) 30″ LCD monitor - it’s more expensive than the 46″ Samsung LCD I’m considering.  One of the reasons it’s so expensive is the resolution is so high.  They could easily drop it down to 1080p, up the sizes to 36, 42, and 46 inches, and pow, it’s a TV.  Next, they could throw the guts of an AppleTV inside, and you’ve got a great-looking display with built-in media streaming capabilities, and they could probably hit a pretty affordable price point.  My hunch is it would sell better as a $1999 TV set than the $299 box does today.

While they are at it, I’d love to see them apply some Apple-goodness to the EPG, and throw a DVR into it. There’ve been rumors that they’d buy TiVo for years, I hope they don’t.  They can out-TiVo TiVo in my opinion.  Better yet, they should throw in the ability to synch it back to an iPod, or to your .Mac account online (for an additional fee).

That’s a winning convergence product in my eyes.

I’ll open by saying that despite switching to a Mac recently (because the Sony Vaio SZ-VGN460N is a terrible, terrible laptop) I’m not completely drinking the Steve Jobs Kool-Aid. I don’t like iTunes, and I don’t understand how more people aren’t crying foul at the Apple monopoly that is the iPod + iTunes music store. If it were any company other than Apple, the phrase monopoly would get used a heck of a lot more often. But, as a good friend of mine likes to say “the rules of physics do not apply to Steve Jobs.” He’s right.

So I like the Amazon MP3 store because it is open, not closed. Open content is good for consumers, period. You choose the software player on your computer, as opposed to it choosing for you. You choose the gadget to play it on, whether its your MP3 player or your cell phone. You burn it to your own custom mix CD, or you just listen to it on your PC.

Regardless of how much the current players (RIAA, music labels, Apple, etc) like or dislike this flexibility, this has been the de facto standard for music since the dawn of the cassette deck in the 70s. Let me repeat this, because it’s important: if you are 60 years old or younger, you were brought up in a world where purchasing music gave you rights to consume where, when, and how you chose.

My how this world has changed, and all thanks to the Internet, and for the worse. As consumers our rights are diminishing rapidly, all under the banner threat of “illegal downloading”. In fact the punitive damages surrounding “illegal downloading” are so severe you’d think Al Qaeda invented Napster and BitTorrent.

If I’ve piqued your curiosity, if any of this rings true and you want to learn more about how much the media industry has spent bribing congress to take away your rights, please pick up a copy of Lawrence Lessig’s Free Culture. If you are familiar with it, and want to use the most effective weapon you have (aka your checkbook), go buy a few MP3s from Amazon (and read this too). Showing monetary support for an open initiative is important. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but definitely in the long term.

To the best of my knowledge, deregulation of utilities and services in the USA have generally led to price gouging. The cable industry in particular raised rates over 50% in the first six years since being deregulated in 1996 (source). Even with competition from satellite and phone companies, your living room TV is about the biggest cash cow companies like Comcast, Charter, Cox, Time Warner, and others have ever seen. Sure we’re seeing money flow to new services (see my buyshifting articles for more thoughts on that topic), and Joost (and others) are enabling free, or virtually free TV services. But that’s not stopping the cable companies.

The AP reported today that cable companies intend to increase rates by $2-3/month in 2009, blaming the FCC-mandated digital transition for the hike.

Time Warner Cable Inc. spokesman Alex Dudley said the company agrees with the cable industry’s stance that the FCC cable card rule is a “tax” on consumers.

This is a bad thing. Not just because they want to increase prices, which they are entitled to do, despite being either a network of monopolies or oligopolies, depending on how you look at it. Not just because despite deregulation over 90% of Americans only have a single cable service provider option. And not just because the cable companies have seen fit to exploit their entrenched position to impose rate hikes at a rate of over three times inflation.

Chris Murray, senior counsel at Consumers Union in Washington, said it’s convenient for cable companies to blame regulators when they’ve stalled about complying with the FCC rule for years. Cable operators also have had no problem raising rates regularly for various reasons.

“They raise rates three times faster than inflation every year, for more than a decade,” he said. “Cable companies want to have absolute control. We don’t think they should have it.”

Cable companies have known about the digital transition for years. It’s been delayed time and time again. They’ve had ample opportunities to build infrastructure and save the necessary funds to make the transition painless. Instead, they wait to the 11th hour, and then attempt to pass the buck.

Here’s an easy way to do something about it.  Click here to send a simple email to your legislator on the topic.  Note that this is focused on A La Carte cable, but joining into this campaign will most certainly be the best possible first step down a very important road.  Take 5 minutes, it’s worth it.

Just saw The Transformers movie. Had a grand ol’ time. Kudos to Michael Bay for, well, not over-Michael-Baying it. I’m not doing any sort of review here, I’ll leave that to the pros, but I will say it most certainly stirred all the memories playing with the toys and watching the cartoon as a 13-year-old.

What’s bad:

• Dialogue could only be worse had George “metachlorians” Lucas written it himself.
• Way too many characters with way too many mini-plots.
• Couldn’t always tell which Transformer was which during the action scenes.
• Did I mention the dialogue?
• The scene Bay lifted from The Rock (his own movie).
• Little too much time in the backyard (you’ll know what I mean).

What’s good:

• Best. CGI. Ever. Seriously, only after walking out did I have that realization of “those weren’t really robots!”
• Novel action sequences - it wasn’t just one long punch-em-up.
• Solid(ish) plot. Look, it’s a comic book movie, so you have to start with fairly low expectations. That said, they weaved together a decently credible storyline with only a few “really?” scenes here and there.
• Not scared of a little violence, but also not gory or nauseating. I think Gears of War actually has more violence in the opening sequence than the whole movie had.
• Not too ridiculous a use of technology (other than the whole cars-turning-into-robots thing), although “hand me a screwdriver” was a bit silly.
• Quite a few throwbacks/references to the original cartoon.
• It’s just plain fun, and doesn’t take itself too seriously!

Considering I don’t get to see many movies these days, I was glad to make it through the 2.5 hour (OMG yes) flick and not do a watch-check or anything else. I had a lot of fun. It’s no masterpiece theatre, but I have a hunch this’ll go down as the most fun movie of the summer.

Happy 4th o’ July everybody!

I recently had a lengthy discussion with my Rabbi talking digital media and more specifically on content piracy. One area we focused on was about people’s awareness of right and wrong, and their tendency to do wrong, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Many have conjectured that consumers would stop “stealing music” if there were “better systems” in place to buy it and use it legally. At this point, I think it’s fair to say the systems are there, and they aren’t really working.

First, to stop a counterpoint in its tracks - I know iTunes sells a bunch of music to a lot of people. Even Steve Jobs himself stated that Apple estimates about 3% of music (max) on iPods is purchased, leaving 97% ripped or copied/downloaded. When I did a music survey several months ago, over 60% of the people who completed it acknowledged a peer-to-peer download within the past 30 days. Let me repeat: 2 out of 3 people are actively illegally downloading content.

Over the past month I’ve randomly been asking friends and strangers the following questions:

• Do you download music that you don’t pay for?
• Is that wrong?
• Would you walk into a Best Buy and walk out with a CD without paying for it?

In almost every case, the answers are, predictably, YES, NO, and NO. Interestingly, there’s no reason to ask people if shoplifting a CD is “wrong” - they know the answer to that one. More importantly is the focus of the second question and the corresponding response. People today, in general, do not believe the act of downloading or copying music files is wrong.

Marc Cuban has some excellent thoughts on the future content, including this one (source):

Can the music industry be saved ? Yep. It would be so easy its scary. Make music available anywhere and everywhere.

In my eyes, this isn’t nearly enough.  If people don’t think of it as wrong, then the problem the music industry faces is deeper than availability, access, DRM, synching, devices, mobility, PCs, iPods, or anything of the sort.  The problem is morality can’t be spun.  Morality is exceptionally hard to market.

Consider the cases where the RIAA has prosecuted college students (and others) for peer-to-peer sharing.  Without fail, bloggers and even mainstream media tend to leap to the defense of the sharer, rarely to the side of the RIAA.  Deep in the hearts and minds of modern technology culture, there is a belief that sharing music files isn’t wrong.

My suggestion to the industry at-large is two-fold:

1. Publishers/Labels: Enjoy sales why they last, but intensely build out ad-supported models.  Figure it out, and do it soon.  There should be plenty of money to keep publishers and producers in business.  Also, while you are at it, stop throwing money at sensationalist acts that are only good for a track or two - it is a model that has led to the problems you face today.  Focus on spreading your promotional and development budgets much wider across many genres and acts.
2. Artists: Continue to focus on the live shows.  It’s fairly accepted that that’s how you make most of your money anyway, so work on deals that heavily emphasize your touring and live revenue.  Also, figure out how to do live streaming for micropayments, and enable a revenue source from a fan base you can’t otherwise touch.

I could probably come up with another dozen or so models that would work, from unlimited subscription plans to “donation” options.  At the end of the day, when they say “if you can’t beat em, join em” it’s time to realize that there is a massive groundswell of people who do not, cannot, and will not accept the concept that music sharing is wrong.  No number of lawsuits or failed DRM experiments is going to change that, nor cleverly phrased advertisements at bus stations.

I was reading my daily news over at the ol’ Tennessean, and saw that EMI is claiming their DRM-free tracks on iTunes are selling well.  Another (possibly untrustworthy) source claims:

Since EMI ditched the DRM on iTunes it has seen sales of Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon increase by between 272 and 350 percent

This is an excellent sign.  With the massive increase in power to conglomerates (in every industry, actually), the only real way consumers have to voice their preferences is with their checkbook PayPal account. Plus it’s a lot more “friendly” than waiting to deal with lawsuits from the RIAA.

If you believe, like many of us do, that DRM is eviler than Google, I can only recommend two paths:

1. Write your congressperson
2. Buy a DRM-free track for $0.99

Pick whichever one you find easier, and, as the swoosh says, just do it.

note: big props to Mr Underpants for finding the typo in my post today. 

Important Disclosure: I was born in Montreal, Canada, home of the greatest NHL team of all time as well as the baseball team “that got away” - and yes, I’m bitter.

Sling Media and the NHL just announced (although my friend Om seems to have gotten a bit of an earlier scoop than old JT) that they are working together to enable NHL content within the forthcoming Clip+Sling technology (more from SlingCommunity, refresher details here, beta signup here - don’t know if they are still taking, but it can’t hurt to sign up!).  Now if this were any decade prior to the 90s, I would probably insert nice gloating comments about how much I would use this to show my Habs trouncing their opponents, but, uhm, they, er, kinda, sorta missed the playoffs this year. 

Now granted, NHL’s TV licensing business isn’t quite the same as MLB’s.  Furthermore, this deal isn’t about to change the bottom line for the organization during the 2007-08 season.  But that’s not the point: it’s that they are working with Sling to see what the future holds, not working against them to see how lovely the fresh air was back in the 1970s.  MLB can’t act like the music industry when it comes to Internet distribution, they must make deals with tech companies, experiment, and look to increased revenue through innovation, not lawsuits (refresher on this one here).

While Bettman’s antics over the past 15 years haven’t done much to bring the NHL out of 4th place when it comes to professional sports in the US, he’s certainly enabled his organization to test the waters when it comes to new technology.  It’s not quite enough to excuse him for moving teams to North Carolina and Florida (two of em, in fact), but it’s certainly a step in the right direction.

Disclosure: I’m a former Sling Media employee, but I think the hockey/Canadian disclosure was more important.