I enjoy a good clean fight as much as the next guy, but watching Canadian cable companies simultaneously laying a social media beating on television broadcasters while showboating to seem to be on the side of consumers, while the broadcasters return blows from behind a human shield of local programming cuts is, well, too much for me. I prefer tuning into the UFC and if I want to go-Canadian, Georges St-Pierre, because the opponents seem to have more respect for each other.  As Corus Entertainment president, John Cassaday notes today to Canada’s broadcasting and telecommunications regulator, the CRTC, at hearings in Gatineau, QC, the current crisis mentality in the Canadian broadcast industry is in turn fostering cynicism, animosity and a risk of a rush to the exit for advertisers. Enjoy the CRTC hearings, if you can stomach them.

When I read in the Globe and Mail that Pirate Bay was being purchased for $9-million, I figured this could be a good example of how innovators, who often are branded as outsiders or scofflaws, eventually find their niche. Well, that still may be a path to success on the Internet, but apparently not in the case of Pirate Bay, where the new owners are attempting to set up a business that would sell the metrics of illegal file sharing back to the victims (i.e. to sell information back to movie, record and software companies about content uploads and downloads by the site’s estimated 20 million users). So far there has been a particularly frosty reception from the owners of those rights.

Started by a group of pro-piracy Swedes in 2003, Pirate Bay soon became one of the largest bit torrent trackers in the world.  From then until now the site has been involved in a number of lawsuits, which eventually led to the 2009 arrest and sentencing of the four main operators of the site. In June 2009 Global Gaming Factory GGF (a Swedish advertising company) announced they would buy Pirate Bay for approximately $9-million, a deal that was set for August 2009.  The time has arrived and as one might have expected GGF is facing criticism. Seems the only value to be extracted from this business model is notoriety.

Anyone who’s not on an iPhone might be Apple-green with envy over the amazing choice of apps available for download at the iPhone App Store versus the apps at Blackberry’s App World. There are far more iPhone apps, they tend to be less expensive, and they don’t run on Blackberrys. Is this inevitable, when apps are written for different operating systems because they have to be written in different languages? Is this a continuing, deliberate fragmentation of the market to create the appearance of separate solitudes between Microsoft and Apple operating systems and the devices that run on them (i.e. Blackberry and iPhone, respectively)? Maybe both, but what else is new? Well, crowd-sourcing efforts by developers to get their apps on both platforms with the least amount of effort, by creating more elegant code that shares the logical design of the app across both platforms.

What this means for the longer term is that as more and more software development kits (SDKs) in Objective-C (iPhone) and Java (Blackberry) get into the hands of grassroots developers hoping to make money selling their apps online, there is going to be a push toward cross-platform programming. As pointed out by developer Teabot on Stackoverflow.com, the core application code can be written so that it appears very similar on either platform, with API wrappers around the edges of the code that can be re-usable.

To achieve the same look and feel on each platform would require very different ‘physical components’ according to developer Grouchal on Stackoverflow.com, but Teabot goes on to claim that you should be able to share the logical design of your application if you carefully separate it into highly decoupled layers. This is still a big win because the logical application design probably accounts for a large part of your development effort, according to him.

This type of chatter shows it’s inevitable that the division of the apps market across operating system platforms will become eased, as grassroots developers become more inventive in finding ways to bridge the language barrier.

After ten years of refraining from involvement, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has turned its sights again on the Internet – not just to regulate data traffic, but arguably to regulate the creation of online content itself.

Having decided on a ‘hands-off’ approach at governing content on the information highway back in 1999, the CRTC currently is holding hearings on the question of whether a fund should be set up to develop Canadian content online – paid for through a levy on Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that surely will be passed along to consumers and business users.

Controversy at the hearings will center on the question of whether the CRTC should be stepping in and playing an influential and regulatory role within the new media/Internet sector.  Insofar as large pockets of the Internet have remained untouched by government intrusions in the past, the nature and character of Internet content has developed into something different than that of traditional media.  The expressed concerns of independent producers and artist groups such as the Alliance of Canadian Cinema Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA) or the Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA) are compelling in their depiction of Canadian content being washed away in a flood of potentiality for non-Canadian content, yet, while considering the reality of these worries, one must take account of the value in keeping the Internet as an organic medium, free from restrictions that want to make it conform to traditional notions of cultural and commercial value.

Perhaps ISPs should stop whining and get used to the responsibilities they have as the bulk-providers of new media content?  I think the issue is more complex.  The CRTC’s move to levy a charge on ISPs to fund a program to develop Canadian content online mirrors the CRTC’s Canadian content efforts regarding traditional broadcasting and merely recognizes the significance of the Internet on our culture.  I am all for the funding of Canadian artists and producers, but the notion of Internet content regulation seems to me essentially idealistic, whimsical, and in fact, quite fantastic.  Not to mention unattractive, because it is dampening innovation.

On Tuesday, Alain Pineau, the national director of the Canadian Conference of the Arts made the claim that ‘broadcasting is broadcasting whatever the distribution platform.’  I disagree, not only on the basis that this generalizing notion is a slap in the face to many of the great media theorists of the last century, but also, and more practically, it disregards the unique character of the Internet and its nearly limitless potential.  One must be very careful to see the big picture here.

Internet streaming is still not ready for prime-time. Sir, I thought you should know. I’ve taken a few minutes today to watch history in the making online. After all, you’ve harnessed the Internet for your presidential campaign. You’ve used social networking sites and blogs to spectacular advantage for fund raising and getting the vote out. You are a young guy, with-it, Internet-savvy. You’ve got a lot of Facebook friends. You must be cool. In that spirit, I thought I’d try to keep up with you and watch your inauguration speech online. Boy was I underwhelmed. It felt like 1999 all over again, like I was on a dial-up connection, gamely trying to do something… revolutionary.

No matter which “live” feed I tried, they all were the same. Likely there were massive user demands on the big news media sites today, but I must report, be careful, they were not up to what we’ve come to expect from you online. President Obama, you need to know that you have not been well served today online by the conventional, television-based media. All the choppy, lagging or downright dead “live” feeds of your inaugural speech were a drag. If the medium is the message, then you should watch your back.

President Obama, I hope you can get on this problem, maybe tonight after work, hopefully not spending too much time on tech support while you’re fixing the rest of the world.

Exposing your music to the masses is getting easier.  With free or inexpensive digital distribution sites you can raise your musical integrity from basement band or bedroom dj to a position of indie rocker or electronic prodigy in a matter of clicks n’ scrolls.  Sites like MySpace are putting control back into the hands of musicians and in doing so are effectively disarming the corporate money making machine we have all grown to accept as the music industry.

1. MySpace.com.  An international social networking website that provides its users with personal mail, a forum for posting public messages, digital community or group affiliations, video streaming, and weblog space.  One of its primary uses is found in the self promoting potential of its platform; musicians can easily get the attention of their peers and people in the music industry.  This is a fully interactive realm, designed and proliferated via user content.

2. TuneCore.com came to be in 2005 when the makers of YourTunes (a Brooklyn based company), realized the demand for this digital distribution outlet.  As a refreshing alternative to traditional music distribution sites, TuneCore refrains from taking percentages from their users’ sales, or asking for the rights to their music.  It allows for musicians and other rights holders to put their music up for sale with multiple, digital, music stores including iTunes, Rhapsody, AmazonMP3, eMusic, and so on.

3. Last.fm. Said to be the world’s largest social music platform.  Last.fm is an online radio station that allows for both music streaming, and music sharing.  Users are able to create a digital profile in which they may express their musical preferences and share their own music.  Based out of the UK, beginning in 2002, this internet-radio and music community has more than 21 million active users around the globe.

4. Facebook.com. Like MySpace, Facebook is an international social networking website that provides its users with personal mail, a forum for posting public messages, digital community or group affiliations, video posting potential and facilitates highly interactive user discourse.  According to ComScore, in June 2008 Facebook has more than 132.1 million visitors!

5. Bebo.com is an entertainment oriented social networking site which allows users to post and share photos, music, personal blogs, and interact with one another via individual profiles.  It is a popular spot to promote and sell one’s music and has in the past, linked up with corporate music leaders including Apple.

6. CdBaby.net is an online music store specializing in the sale of physical compact discs and digital music downloads from independent musicians directly to consumers.  Additionally, the company has become a digital aggregator of independent music recordings, distributing content to several online digital music retailers (www.wikipedia.org/wiki/CD_Baby).

7. IndabaMusic.com is a social networking site that specializes in connecting musicians who may be interested in collaborating in online music projects.  It is free to sign up, and as a user you can personalize your profile, post and receive feedback on your own music and that of your peers.  Similar to other music collaboration sites such as Jamglue, Splice, WeMix, eJamming, Mix2r, NinJam, and YourSpins, Indaba Music profiles provide users with the ability to represent themselves within the music community.

8. YouTube.com.  Perhaps music exposure isn’t the first thing that comes to mind when one thinks of YouTube, yet once one disregards the video emphasis which has made this site a tremendous success, it becomes apparent that it contains all the key ingredients for getting one’s music successfully heard by masses upon masses of people.

9. MusicFreedom.com is a social networking site that maintains a focus on the distribution, promotion, and sale of digital music.  This site lets its users listen to Podcasts, purchase MP3s from up and coming artists, as well as providing an opportunity for users to network, and share their personal profile with others.

10. TaxiMusic.com is an online music hosting site.  It provides a space in which unsigned bands, artists and songwriters with major record labels, publishers, film & television industry folk can network.  This in an online A&R company, helping to get artists heard, and albums sold.

For more ideas, familiarize yourself with these other popular music-oriented sites: BlogSpot, CloudTrade, HypeMachine, iVideoSongs, MOG, MuxTape, Omnifone, Pandora, Qtrax, RCRDLBL, SeeqPod, Slacker, Jamglue, Splice, WeMix, eJamming, Mix2r, NinJam, YourSpins.

This is seriously cool, especially if users have better control over sound outputs (e.g. using guitar, bass, beats, synth, or samples). Guitar Hero, move over.

Cell phone symphony

As autumn approaches minds turn to harvests, turkey and reasons to give thanks, so I’ve asked my assistant, Tanaz Irani to gather us a bunch of ideas…! On how to monetize social networks.

Social Networking & the Power of Millions of Clicks by Tanaz Irani (Spec. Hon. B.A, Pol.Sci.)

The fundamentally fluid, non-centered and non-linearly controlled nature of the Internet, and the hundreds of social networking sites on it such as Linkedin, Facebook and MySpace, lends itself to a re-thinking of how ideas can be promoted, virally – and how value can be derived not only in the end result but also in the process. The innumerable array of site applications and groups are examples of how these sites are more than a simple digital diary, photo album, or IM program.

On the server side, with partnership programs these sites can earn revenue per click volume, while redirecting traffic towards sponsored pages. Via strategically targeted ads, applications, or user-generated groups, these sites are able to summons up traffic for everything from breast cancer awareness to local condominium projects. A college can generate interest and awareness using social networking sites popular with the student body to promote, image, or brand their institution. These are the online places where students/audience are, so they must be there too – not to control, but to send out a message, or reach out to prospective members of the group.

Another key element to the intricacies of these types of sites is the notion of advocacy or simply giving someone a voice. For example, recent copyright advocacy had tens of thousands (more than 40,000) individuals joining Facebook groups (click here for source) to speak out! At these numbers you can get effective media coverage and lend legitimacy to a campaign or proposal.

The “I am rich” iPhone app is an interesting counter example (Click here for article). Online protests like “I bet I can find 1 million people who dislike George Bush” show what potential these technologies hold for politics.

On the marketing side, it’s about leveraging metrics. The “I am rich” application boils down to some genius who figured he would tap into a highly specialized, but unrealized market segment, and it paid off. The breast cancer group on Facebook reaches hundreds of thousands of people each day, and they’ve found a way to generate enough revenue to offer free services to women. The breast cancer group members are invited to click to a specially directed site, and then click on partner websites (win/win/ hyper marketing). These partner sites (i.e. shopping sites, vacation sites) pay pennies per click, but it adds up and they then offer free mammograms to women in the U.S. based on the $$ they generate. So it is €˜win€™ for the companies, €˜win€™ for the women, and €˜win€™ for the breast cancer advocacy group. But it€™s also hyper because it depends on millions of clicks, each done individually.Š

Moses Avalon has written a short but well-reasoned defence of copyright entitled “Da Vinci On a Necktie.” Speaking about the “RIAA/ISP war” over music and how it should be delivered and consumed, Avalon sees copyright in terms of preventing the loss to our culture of the power and magic of music. It’s not yet posted on his website – so far as I can see, but likely you can get it by subscribing to his newsletter. It’s worth checking out. Avalon notes,

“[a]s the [music] medium moves more and more into a ubiquitous “liquid” form, existing everywhere, but less noticed, it moves into opposition to the way music has existed in our lives: as a listening experience, unique to itself and apart from other day-to-day functions. In the liquid future, music will be everywhere almost all the time, but we will not notice it much.”

Avalon asks everyone else who cares enough to listen,

“are the real enemies of music’s future the record companies who are trying to retard this “progress,” so that their product does not end up being the free toy at the bottom of a cereal box?”

As reported by Beet.tv on April 26, 2008, Eric Klinker, CTO of San Francisco-based BitTorrent explains how his company is working closely with Comcast and other ISP’s in solving network traffic issues.