The price of freedom: Reinventing the online economy (RSA Journal July 2009)

I was delighted to be invited to make a contribution to the RSA Journal's July 2009 edition, the printed version of which was just send out I believe, and the online edition that just went up on their website.

The complete title of my piece is: "The price of freedom - reinventing the online economy: Gerd Leonhard explains why ‘free’ content can still pay in the long term" and I really enjoyed writing this for them.

Following my last presentation at the RSA, in April 2009, on 'The Future of Content and Creativity' I have had many good conversations about this topic. The audio track from this event is here, btw; and the video is embedded again, below. Enjoy. And RT;)

I definitely recommend that you check out the other great features in the Juy 09 RSA journal, as well, there's some great gems in there.

You can read the entire thing on the RSA page, so here is just an excerpt:

"Free information, free music, free content and free media have been the promises of the internet (r)evolution since the humble beginnings of the World Wide Web and the Netscape IPO on 9 August 1995. What started out as the cumbersome sharing of simple text, grainy images and seriously compressed MP3s via online bulletin boards has now spread out to every single segment of the content industry – and even into ‘meatspace’ (real-life) services such as car rentals. Without a doubt, ‘free’ has become the default expectation of the young web-empowered digital natives and now the older generations are jumping in, too.

On top of the already disruptive force of the good old computer-based Web1.0, we are witnessing a global shift to mobile internet – a WWW that is, finally, so easy to use that even my grandmother can do it. While five years ago, we needed a ‘real’ computer tethered to a bunch of wires to port ourselves to this other place called ‘online’ and partake in global content swapping, now we just need a simple smart phone and a basic data connection. With a single click of a button, we’re in business – or rather, in freeloading mode. 

As users, we love ‘free’; as creators, many of us have come to hate the very thought. When access is de facto ownership, how can we still sell copies of our creations? Will we be stuck playing gigs while our music circles the globe on social networks, or blogging (now: tweeting) our heart out without even a hint of real money coming our way?

Daunting as it may seem, we can no longer stick with the pillars of Content1.0, such as the so-called fixed mechanical rate that US music publishers are currently getting ‘per copy’ of a song ($0.091). Nobody knows what really defines a copy any longer when the web’s equivalent of a copy (the on-demand play of that song on digital networks) may be occurring hundreds of millions of times per day. No advertiser, no ISP and not even Google has this kind of money to pay the composer (or rather, the publisher), at least not until the advertisers start bringing at least 30–50 per cent of their global US$1 trillion marketing and advertising budgets to the table.

Traditional expectations and pre-internet licensing agreements are exactly what are holding up YouTube’s deals with the music rights organisations such as PRS and GEMA: this is what the rights organisations used to get paid for the music that is being copied, and this is what they want to get paid now. This impasse is causing significant friction in our media industries worldwide. Yet, below the top-line issue of money, there lurks an even more significant paradigm shift: the excruciating switch from a centralised system of domination and control to a new ecosystem based on open and collaborative models. This is the shift from monopolies and cartels to interconnected platforms where partnership and revenue sharing are standard procedures. In most countries, copyright law gives creators complete and unfettered control to say yes or no to the use of their work. Rights-holders have been able to rule the ecosystem and, accordingly, ‘my way or the highway’ has been the quintessential operating paradigm of most large content companies for the past 50 years.

Enter the internet: now the highway has become the road of choice for 95 per cent of the population, the attitude of increasing the price by playing hard to get is rendered utterly fruitless. Like it or not, a refusal to give permission for our content to be legally used because we just don’t like the terms (or the entity asking for a licence) will just be treated as ‘damage’ on the digital networks, and the traffic will simply route around it. The internet and its millions of clever ‘prosumers’, inventors and armies of collaborators will find a way to use our creations, anyway. Yes, we can sue Napster, Kazaa or The PirateBay and we can whack ever more moles as we go along. We can pay hundreds of millions of dollars to our lawyers and industry lobbyists – but none of this will help us to monetise what we create. The solution is not a clever legal move, and it’s not a technical trick (witness the disastrous use and now total demise of Digital Rights Management in digital music). The solution is in the creation of new business models and the adoption of a new economic logic that works for everyone; a logic that is based on collaboration, on co-engagement and on, dare we mention it, mutual trust – an ecosystem not an egosystem. Once we accept this, we can start to discover the tremendous possibilities that a networked content economy can bring to us.  

Free, feels-like-free and freemium

Much has been written on the persistent trend towards free content on the net. It is crucial that we distinguish between the different terms so that we can develop new revenue models around all of them. ‘Free’ means nobody gets paid in hard currency – content is given away in return for other considerations, such as a larger audience, viral marketing velocity or increased word of mouth (or mouse). I may be receiving payment in the form of attention, but that isn’t going to be very useful when it’s time to pay my rent or buy dinner for my kids. Free is... well, unpaid, in real-life terms.

 ‘Feels-like-free’, on the other hand, means that real money is being generated for the creators while their content is being consumed – but the user considers it free. The payment may be made (ie sponsored or facilitated) by a third party (such as Google’s recently launched free music offering in China, Top100.cn); it may be bundled (such as in Nokia’s innovative ‘Comes With Music’ offering, which bundles the music fee into the actual handsets) or the payment may be part of an existing social, technological or cultural infrastructure (such as cable TV or European broadcast licence fees) and therefore absorbed without much further thought. Feels-like-free could therefore be understood as a smart way to re-package what people will pay for, so that the pain of parting with their money is removed or somewhat lessened – everyone pays, somehow, but the consumption itself feels like a good deal...."     Read on.  PDF: Download RSA - The price of freedom Gerd Leonhard July 2009

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Future of Music & Media: Gerd Leonhard at Plugg 2009 (blip.tv)

TV generation vs Internet generation: no more monopolies of attention, the new control is...Trust!

The Net Generation (some call them the digital natives) is indeed drastically different than the TV Generation - see my bullets below. There is no way anyone can sell or market to them in the same way that still worked (well...somewhat) only 5 years ago. There is no way anyone can still monopolize their attention in the same way that mass media (TV, Radio, Print) did until now (sorry, IFPI and MPAA;). There is no way that anyone can 'own' or 'control the customer' any longer, period. The more you try to control your users, the less you will receive from them.

It's the End of Control and the beginning of Trust. If you want to know more - well, yes, you remember, I did write half a book on this in 2008, and it's still quite accurate, so check out the End of Control chapters (free PDFs, too), here. And please 'pay' for the book by spreading the word  - use the sharing tools provided below. Thanks!

Related articles by Zemanta

• Some Internet companies are becoming more like Public Utilities and integral parts of our Social Infrastructure (mediafuturist.com)
• Just discovered: powerful free book 'MetheMedia - Rise of the Conversation Society' - a must read. (mediafuturist.com)

What would Google do? A must read / watch for pretty much anyone (Jeff Jarvis)

 

Jeff Jarvis rocks - no doubt about it. I have been reading his new book "What would Google do" and in my view it's at least as important as Wikinomics or the LongTail. Check out Jeff's slideshow and video below (yes, you can fast-forward thru the first 8 mins of German intro;) - no matter what business you are in, this will give you some serious food for thought; if you're in the content business - well... watch it 5 times!
Some of his key points:

• The link changes everything    
• Do what you do best and link to the rest
• Join a network / Be a platform
• Think distributed
• If you’re not searchable, you won’t be found
• Everybody needs a little SEO
• Life is public, so is business
• Your customers are your ad agency
• Small is the new big
• Manage abundance (not scarcity)
• Join the open-source, gift economy
• The mass market is dead—long live the mass of niches
• Google commodifies everything
• Welcome to the Google economy

WWGD? - The PowerPoint

View more OpenOffice presentations from jeffjarvis.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Printing Press brought us Copyright, the Internet brings... Usage Right! (mediafuturist.com)
• Google Wave May Reshape Newsgathering (socialmediatoday.com)

A key topic for 2009: EGOsystem becomes ECOsystem, yelling becomes talking, traditional Marketing...dies!

Image by gleonhard via Flickr

I touched upon this in my presentation at the Mobile Monday event in Amsterdam: I think we are going through a totally amazing and very challenging paradigm shift, right now (and this may still be a somewhat delayed consequence of the Internet (r)evolution and the first .com bubble): From EGO to ECO, from Control to Openness, from Domination to Collaboration. A few examples:

• The amazing shifts in U.S. policy and America's new global role: when President Obama implements his far-reaching plans to rewire how America works we will see this new trend towards win-win solutions rub-off everywhere else, too, and kick off chain-reactions in many other, traditionally more dominance-focused countries such as Russia, as well (and the reverse is also true). The old Bushinator mantra 'You lose - we win' has simply become unsustainable in today's networked economy, and America will doubtlessly struggle with this shift from domination to partnering for quite some time. However, I definitely anticipate a strong trend towards open systems and open platforms in the global economic and political spheres - as well as in technology and content / media - with utter transparency and TRUST becoming the key requirements for success, everywhere. There will no doubt be considerable debate on what this trend means for copyright and patent laws, globally, too, since these laws have traditionally been used for shoring up market-shares and protecting the interests of the large, dominant players in many industries.
• The music industry: the decline - or shall we say gradual vaporization - of most major record industry players due to their amazingly persistent obsession with control, makes a great case study. Rather than to finally permit new revenues to be co-developed via collaborating on win-win scenarios, the IFPI and RIAA are still looking for new enforcement and protection mechanisms such as the now flamed-out '3 strikes & out' legislation - it does make you wonder if their 'leaders' have lived under a rock for the past 5 years!  In any case, the music industry is the prime example why monopolistic and totally centralized structures will simply not work in the future, and why we need governme

  I

  nt intervention when a market place is clearly dysfunctional. Many of my readers know that I have been talking about this for a looooong time, but now we are finally seeing it take shape: the music rights organizations and their related content licensing processes will undergo significant and sweeping changes in the next 2-3 years; everything is moving from a 'not allowed / not possible' default mindset to a more collaborative, open, flexible, transparent and public rights licensing logic - and they must adapt or get out of the way. The bottom line: If it's not based on a web-centric and connected logic it will cease to exist. As an example, the current conflict between the Music Performing Rights Organizations (PROs and MROs) such as PRS, GEMA and Youtube is based on this basic paradigm disparity: PRS and GEMA are thinking of the music rights still being firmly and exclusively their business (i.e. an EgoSystem), and Youtube/Google think of music rights as being a crucial component of a new, 21st century content ecosystem that concerns everyone and should not be governed by monopolies and cartels.  Therefore, for Google I reckon that the music rights issue is  something that must go far beyond the traditional structure that's based on 'I own the rights, exclusively, and you'll need to pay whatever I ask for'. My prediction is that if the traditional rights-holders and the many societies that represent them don't materially change their thinking on this very soon, they may wall see a wide-spread revolt of their younger, more progressive members, because they know that not permitting the use of music on Youtube (and Google!) is simply a suicidal move, in terms of getting attention and building your brand. Get off the Ego and think Eco!
  

  Image by gleonhard via Flickr

• Microsoft's Windows OS is becoming less and less dominant (and relevant, too) as 'free' and cloud-based operating systems are gaining ground everywhere (Linux, Google)
• Most telcos, mobile operators and ICT companies are trying to switch from the traditional 'total control of the network, the infrastructure and the users' to open platforms as fast as they can (e.g. AT&T's open source plans, Skype's open Silk codec, Nokia's Open Symbian Foundation, Google's Android Mobile OS)
• In software, the continuing trend towards open-source and crowd-sourcing is clearly visible everywhere (e.g. the huge success of Firefox vs IE, and the rise of open-source DMBS)
• Many large corporations are starting to move into crowd-sourcing, wanting to pursue increased openness in return for a chance to realize network-economy benefits. E.g. Glaxo Smith Kline's recent move to release a huge amount of cancer research data into public domain (Note: in this context, I highly recommend Yochai Benkler's fantastic book "The Weath of Networks")
• The mind-boggling popularity and global success of API-driven web portals and platforms (Twitter's amazing growth, Friendfeed, the new Facebook 'River', widgets, the UK Guardian's open API etc)
• For many large companies as well as for SMEs (small medium size enterprises),  Social Media is quickly becoming CRM (customer relationship management) - rather than running expensive ads that talk about 'Me' and how great the new product is (i.e. Ego), the switch to 'having conversations with the customers aka users' is visible everywhere: Ford's new Fiesta campaign, Kraft's cool iPhone app. Brands can no longer be just BIG EGOs - they are part of Ecosystems, too.
• In Advertising, the entire paradigm of 'we'll yell until you listen' is finished - this concept was all about the Ego of the brands, and about us, the people formerly known as consumers, listening. Now it's all about the Ecosystem: Do you come recommended?  Who trusts you? What makes you worthy of my consideration? Why should I pay attention to you? Who vouches for you? Who has told me about you? Are you open and transparent? Here, too, Egosystem has become Ecosystem, and a Trillion $ industry is changing as a consequence - from Push to Pull, from Yelling to Talking / Listening. Tough gig but... a gold mine if you can make it  ;)

 

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Future of ICT / TIME: Futurist Gerd Leonhard in Cologne (NSN) (slideshare.net)
• The End Of Control and the Future of Content: Futurist Gerd Leonhard Authors@Google (San Francisco) (slideshare.net)
• Mobile Content Futures: Gerd Leonhard at Mobile Monday Amsterdam March 30 2009 (slideshare.net)
• The End of Control and the Future of Content: new Video of my Authors@Google Talk in San Francisco (mediafuturist.com)

Podcast of my Authors@Google speech in San Francisco: The End of Control and the Future of Content

MP3 file is here
Details are here.  Some snippets: Bottom Lines: The fight for Control was a fight for Distribution. The flight for Attention is a fight for Trust. The beneficiaries of Control were Monopolies. The beneficiaries of Trust are those that Collaborate. Advertising 2.0: Information becomes Conversation.  Interruption becomes Engagement. Annoyance becomes Entertainment. 'This is an Ad' becomes 'This is Content'.  The Sharing Economy Logic: Sharing...the Output (i.e. publish, re-mix, co-create, life-stream...) the Input  (i.e. remuneration in cash, attention, reputation...) ... the Thruput (i.e. usage data, meta content, attention trails >> New Data Economics)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Interview & Podcast on Telcos/ISPs and Content 2.0 (prior to speaking at the Emerging Communications Conference next week) (mediafuturist.com)
• The End Of Control and the Future of Content: Futurist Gerd Leonhard Authors@Google (San Francisco) (slideshare.net)
• Mobile Content Futures: a narrated slideshow (video). From EGOsystem to ECOsystem. (mediafuturist.com)

Mobile Content Futures: a narrated slideshow (video). From EGOsystem to ECOsystem.

I just uploaded this new video (below) to my video channel on GerdTube.net (Blip.tv); it's somewhat similar to what I presented at Mobile Monday Amsterdam on March 30, 2009.  Topics:  A drastically different Broadband Culture is imminent - total mobility, always-on, low-cost Internet access, constant peering and pervasive social media, rivers of news and oceans of content. Developing nations will go straight to digital content-access, straight to mobile EVERYTHING and straight to next generation advertising and marketing. Control, Domination and Push / Monolog is out; Openness, Collaboration and Conversation is in. From EGOsystem to ECOsystem.  More: check out the GerdTube RSS feed (download all shows via iTunes)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Mobile Content Futures: Gerd Leonhard at Mobile Monday Amsterdam March 30 2009 (slideshare.net)
• The Future of Music & Media: Gerd Leonhard at Plugg 2009 (blip.tv)
• Shifting values and the Future of Advertising (blip.tv)
• The End of Control and the Future of Content: My presentation at Google San Francisco (March 2, 2009) (mediafuturist.com)
• The Future of ICT / TIME: my presentation at the NSN Transformation Forum in Cologne (mediafuturist.com)

THIS is the Future of Content: Attention Revenues first, copies second!

Clearly a major shift. It will be a huge task to build this new ecosystem. Deep and sincere collaboration is required. Domination is toast. Control is - like email, soon - for yesterday's emperors. Google and the Telcos need to dive into Content 2.0. Openness becomes a default requirement, not just a 'nice to have'. Friction is Fiction. Really. It's hard work. Yes.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The End Of Control and the Future of Content: Futurist Gerd Leonhard Authors@Google (San Francisco) (slideshare.net)
• The Future of Content & Telecom: my presentation at the Emerging Communications Conference in San Francisco (mediafuturist.com)

Join us for an exciting evening at the Royal Society for the Arts in London (April 8): "New Media Futures"

If you happen to be in London on April 8, 2009 (6pm), please join me and my fellow speakers for a talk and presentation at the Royal Society of the Arts. The evening is entitled:  New Media Futures - what next for content and creativity? and promises to be quite entertaining;) Thanks to the RSA, this event is free of charge and seating is limited so be sure to register early. A few more details about this event:

"The internet is radically disrupting most of the traditional content distribution and selling models, starting with music and games, followed by TV, film, books and print publishing. Once everyone is always-on, mobile and hyper-connected, and everything is available everywhere, how will content be created, distributed, marketed, consumed, and paid for? Who will do what, for whom, and how will the traditional players such as broadcasters, record labels, publishers and distributors adapt? If new players, starting with telecoms, device makers, advertisers and brands, indeed move into the content business, what will be their challenges and opportunities. 

Given the challenging financial climate, how do we reconcile the need to reward enterprise and secure sustainable revenue streams, with the expectations and demands of the “freeconomics” generation? What kind of legal, regulatory and cultural framework do we need to ensure that this new eco-system of creators, consumers and intermediaries generates more benefits for all involved?  A panel of media visionaries convene at the RSA to predict the innovations in technology, business models and user behavior that will shape the media landscape in the coming decade.

Speakers: Gerd Leonhard, media futurist, author and blogger; Richard Titus, Controller of Future Media, Audio, Music & Mobile, BBC; David A. Smith, chief executive of Global Futures and Foresight (GFF). Chair: Ralph Simon, CEO, The Mobilium Advisory Group and Chairman Emeritus & Founder, Mobile Entertainment Forum - Americas.

Related stuff:
Plugg 2009 Video "Future of Media"
Authors@Google Talk March 2009

Related articles by Zemanta

• The End of Control and the Future of Content: My presentation at Google San Francisco (March 2, 2009) (mediafuturist.com)
• The Printing Press brought us Copyright, the Internet brings... Usage Right! (mediafuturist.com)
• Interview & Podcast on Telcos/ISPs and Content 2.0 (prior to speaking at the Emerging Communications Conference next week) (mediafuturist.com)
• The Future of Content & Telecom: my presentation at the Emerging Communications Conference in San Francisco (mediafuturist.com)

The End of Control and the Future of Content: new Video of my Authors@Google Talk in San Francisco

The Google guys have just published a video with my talk at Authors@Google, in San Francisco, March 2, 2009 (see the details here Pdf: The End of Control Gerd Leonhard at Google SF PDF *22MB). Due to some technical issues my fancy slides (i.e. the stuff on the screen) come across very nicely in this video while I am left a bit 'in the dark' - but if you use the HQ version on the Youtube site you can still get a much better idea of what my face actually looks like (I guess always wearing black is not ideal when the lights are bad;).  Anyway, I do think this is one of my best talks, so... watch the entire 55 Mins 22 Secs.  As far as the End of Control Book is concerned, I will have an announcement on my plans within the next 10 days...stay tuned.

Here is the official Google Talks description: The End of Control & The Future of Content:  The tough issue of control emerges, again and again, as the key contention point within TV companies, publishers, record labels, and broadcasters: How can a commercial venture that is based on so-called intellectual property thrive and prosper in an environment that seems to continuously and progressively remove control from the creators/owners/providers of content, and hands it over to the people formerly known as consumers (aka the users), effectively making them more powerful every single day?  But the reality is that every click inadvertently makes another case for the consumers ever-increasing rise in importance. Within all the conversations I have had about things like commercial content versus shared content, about the read-only or the read-write web, and about copyright versus Fair Use, the crucial question always seems to boil down to WHERE IS THE CONTROL HERE, i.e., questions such as Who will control this new media universe and How much control do I need to run a revenue-generating business?

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Printing Press brought us Copyright, the Internet brings... Usage Right! (mediafuturist.com)
• Great read on "Intellectual Property and new Copyright Law" with some nice Media Futurist -ic Quotes (via Japaninc.com) (mediafuturist.com)
• The Future of Content & Telecom: my presentation at the Emerging Communications Conference in San Francisco (mediafuturist.com)
• Interview & Podcast on Telcos/ISPs and Content 2.0 (prior to speaking at the Emerging Communications Conference next week) (mediafuturist.com)

The gloves are off: now Google needs to really get involved in the new Content Economy, asap

I already blogged about the Youtube / PRS show-down (hey - that's a great word for this) in the UK, earlier today. After reading, twittering and talking to lots of 'real' people about this today, this is my conclusion: This conundrum is not Google's 'fault' but still: Google needs to really, materially and boldly get involved with facilitating the construction of a new content logic and economy, and lead content creators, owners and representatives into a new ecosystem that will actually work for all involved parties. Because it can.

Conflicts like Youtube vs. PRS are unavoidable because the canyon between Google - imho still pretty much the primary driver of Net-fueled innovation and disruption- and the content creators (never mind the industry) gets bigger by the minute. And, in my humble opinion, Google isn't doing nearly enough to explain this to them, and to guide them more conclusively into this new domain where content isn't always king, and where it won't matter if it is or not (if it ever did).

I talked about this in my speech at Authors@Google in SF last week; hopefully we will have that video available soon. The bottom line is that this will take deep, serious, multi-lateral, honest and open collaboration between these (and other) key constituents:

1. Content creators and the content industries (in that order;)
2. Telcos, ISPs, mobile operators and other telecommunications companies
3. Advertisers, brands, and their agencies
4. Social media and social networking platforms (of course all Internet companies, other search engines and portals)
5. Governments and governmental bodies

Welcome to a new Data Economy, a new Advertising Economy, and a New Content Economy.

Your turn, Google.

I will write more about this, but here's a quick illustration (thanks to Kevin Kelly for the power-lines & copy pic)

Youtube will remove UK music videos, no agreement with PRS - when will they ever learn??

Image via CrunchBase

The UK / EU web is buzzing with the news that Youtube (Google) has started to block or remove UK music videos because they have not been able to strike a new music licensing deal with the PRS-For-Music, the UK rights society which represents the songwriters and the publishers. I particularly like the coverage of this issue by TelecomTV.com, here, but a lot more links to other coverage can be found below.

As is my habit, at times, I want to quote and comment. Before I get started, though, I want to point that obviously I don't know the terms of the license that were suggested by either Youtube or the PRS, so therefore I cannot comment on whether either one of them is realistic or not. I just know from my own experiences (among many others, with the now defunct - RIP - Sonific) and from many other deals that I have observed, that very often the respective proposals are 20-50x apart, i.e. one party may suggest 1 cent per stream while the other party wants 20-50 cents - mostly, simply because they can; after all, the rights holders enjoy the protection of having the exclusive rights to license their songs. I would not be surprised if that was the case, here (my exact guess is something like 10:1)

Anyway, here we go, from TelecomTV.com "Yesterday YouTube  announced that it was going to take down all the premium music content currently available to UK YouTube users because it had failed to hammer out a new licensing deal with the UK's Performing Rights Society (PRS) for Music, a notoriously hard-line royalty collector. YouTube said the PRS wanted more royalty payment for each video view than YouTube could ever make from the ads situated next to each"

My comment: this points to the root of the problem, right away. Any deal between the mighty Google and the still-trying-to-find-the-right-$-model Youtube and the rights-holders' representatives has to be about sharing the revenues that are actually achievable, in the market, here and today, and jointly building a system that can generate more and more revenues, tomorrow and beyond. Again, as Larry Lessig says, and as I have proudly annexed from him, it's about Compensation Not Control!  To the PRS: NO, you cannot have both - and it looks like you just decided against Compensation???

Unfortunately, this detrimental mindset has become a default seeting: many if not most of the rights societies in the so-called developing world, and now apparently the PRS, too, have adopted one of these 2 strategies: a) if a potential licensee is still too small and economically insignificant to warrant their consideration, they will not offer any license at all, unless it neatly fits one of the existing templates b) if a potential licensee is large, juicy, popular and financially connected to an entity that seems to have verrrrry big pockets (see Last.fm, Myspace, Youtube, Facebook... maybe), they will ask for the moon and try take them to the cleaners. Even better if that entity has been previously in-breach of the existing licensing traditions and regulations - more leverage is always a good thing, right? Just study the mind-boggling story of my favorite web-radio service, Pandora. Never mind that this kind of 'it's my right and I will fully exploit it as I see fit' - thinking is also pretty much what has gotten us into this horrible economic crisis, as well - but that's another story.

None of this has anything to do with real, honest and open intention of building a mutually beneficial and future-oriented model, and everything to do with what I like to call Economic Egoism that is effectively set in stone i.e. law by some outmoded laws from over 20 years ago. As long as rights organizations -whose tasks it is to license music not to forbid its use - are pursuing this strategy we will not get to a point of 'peace' with all those new entities that clearly want to use, and pay for their music.

The PRS published a very revealing statement when Youtube announced their decision to play hard-ball and remove the music videos - here is the nugget: "Google had revenues of $5.7bn in the last quarter of 2008". What does that have to do with negotiating the fair and equitable licensing rates for music? PaidContent.org has some great comments on this issue, interviewing YouTuber Patrick Walker, including this one:  "to suggest that, because Google’s a big company, we should just suck it and pay a ridiculous rate is not something that we’re going to stand by...it’s hard for new models to emerge when the starting point is a massive loss on a per-stream basis".

In fact, I believe that this kind of attitude from rights organizations, publishers and record labels will most certainly lead to government  intervention, sooner rather than later, since a dysfunctional market is not good for anyone - and clearly, this is what we have now, and it appears to be here to stay. I think... I have said it before:)

So here is my message to the PRSForMusic (as they are now called) and their members (hopefully they have a say in this, too): pleasssse get off this bizarre and decidedly Web 0.0 idea that Google should now be paying for everything that you think has been 'stolen' from you on the Internet. Instead, give YouTube a flexible, open, transparent and realistic license that gives everyone room and time to MUTUALLY develop this model, going forward. There is nothing to be gained by refusal! Start to cooperate rather than to try to dominate these conversations. COMPENSATION NOT CONTROL. And do it now, or have somebody else force you to.

More: Techdirt's ueber-brain Mike Masnick comments:  Google has simply pulled music videos down in the UK. Basically, Google is making the point to PRS: you need us much more than we need you". The UK Telegraph has a few nice quotes (even though I don't agree with their conclusion that Youtube has a lot more to lose than the songwriters)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Failed Negotiations: YouTube Will Block Music Videos in the UK (readwriteweb.com)
• Amazon Kindle: rights-holders oppose robotic reading feature, Amazon makes it an option (mediafuturist.com)
• YouTube's UK Music Deal Breaks Down Over Costs; Thousands Of Videos Blocked (paidcontent.org)
• YouTube row reflects online minefield (bbc.co.uk)

The Future of Content & Telecom: my presentation at the Emerging Communications Conference in San Francisco

As promised, here is the PDF with the slides from my presentation at today's eComm Conference in San Francisco (sorry for the delay in posting this - had to have dinner first;)

Download Future of Content & Telecom Gerd Leonhard @ eComm Conf 2009 PDF

Summary: " Imagine a world where unfiltered and limitless access to content is bundled directly into your access to the networks. A world where 'your cloud' holds all kinds of content, your social network connections, your community, and your context (i.e. meta-content), your meta-data and your interaction-trails, and where access to all of this is feels-like-free, legal, always-on and fully mobile, on any and all platforms. This is the future we are heading into, and telecoms, content-owners and brands / advertisers must forge entirely new partnerships.  We are starting to see content creators and rights-owners aborting their long-standing quests for total control, and instead looking to build their audiences and share revenues. So where is this trend going to take us, what do we need to do in order to turn content (music, video, TV, news, games, books...) into a new and truly growing business that is really web-native, where are the big opportunities for telecoms, operators, social networks and rights-holders, and what will the new business models look like? In this context, Gerd will also address topics such as the flat rate for digital music, ISP/Operator + Content bundling examples in Europe and Asia, copyright 2.0 and the future of content commerce, the shift from control-economy to attention &  trust economy, the latest developments in next generation advertising, and the growing economic power of those 'new generatives' (> Kevin Kelly)..."

Related articles by Zemanta

• Interview & Podcast on Telcos/ISPs and Content 2.0 (prior to speaking at the Emerging Communications Conference next week) (mediafuturist.com)
• The Printing Press brought us Copyright, the Internet brings... Usage Right! (mediafuturist.com)
• The End of Control and the Future of Content: My presentation at Google San Francisco (March 2, 2009) (mediafuturist.com)

Amazon Kindle: rights-holders oppose robotic reading feature, Amazon makes it an option

Image via CrunchBase

Read: E-Commerce News: E-Commerce: Amazon: Only Copyright Holders Can Unzip Kindle's Lips.
This is an interesting debate that once again shows that many rights holders will need some serious hand-holding when it's about understanding new technological implementations. I think this will be a major task, and very powerful if somewhat tedious opportunity, for the likes of Amazon, Google (Youtube), Yahoo and Facebook (yes... why? Stay tuned!) and very soon, the big agencies such as DDB, Ogilvy and Saatchi, as well as for all those Telecoms that want to play in the content & experience business (and which one does not?).

The creators and rights holders urgently need to understand and embrace the web-fueled paradigm of 'giving something' in return for 'getting something' - and the increasing empowerment of the people formerly known as consumers (aka the users) means that the creators will have to give more before they can get something back. Some people would call that the pressure of the Attention Economy - but this is the undeniable reality of the hyper-connected and mobile world we now live in, and it is not something we can switch on or off as we see fit. Ignore this trend at you own peril - witness the music industry's refusal to give more value before the purchase, and where it has taken them.

Now, Spotify, Last.fm, Myspace and iMeem provide free music on-demand, Hulu and Youtube provide free TV shows on-demand, Amazon and Google let people search-and-read-inside-the-book. And now the new Kindle will allow you to listen to a robotic voice rendition of a book - hardly a competition with the audio book, I would argue. In fact, this feature would probably drive people towards buying more audio books - free added values convert to sales based an getting better interfaces and higher quality. Sounds familiar?

This whole debate is very much like, years ago, the issue of Amazon's Search-Inside-The-Book feature. After a lot of deliberation, the publishers found out that the new feature really did increase sales (I think by something like 10%) and what's more, it got a lot of people 'addicted' to the book right there and then - which is usually the best way of snagging a new customer.

I think that Amazon should consider offering an additional, small monetary incentive to the publishers as well as some clever reporting on who is listening where (based on opt-in), and maybe even some promotional, highly targeted audio 'advertising' options to the participating book publishers, and thereby sweeten the deal.

But most importantly, the publishers need to start looking beyond their constant fears of cannibalization of existing revenues, and look at all these new options with less toxic assumptions (as social media expert and fellow bloggerati Neil Perkin likes to calls them). In addition, drastically lowering the price on digital books (the audio versions, too) would go a long way in boosting the take-up of electronic reading. And beyond that: what if you could use Kindle to have actual conversations with the readers - wouldn't that be a boon to writers and publishers?

The bottom line: switch to Openness and find new revenues.  Now. Look at Nokia / Symbian, Firefox, Apache, Adobe, Android... Openness is tough but it always wins the users.

Ceck out this video on 'Compensation not Control' (MidemNet 2009)- this Lessig-inspired meme applies here, too!

Related articles by Zemanta

• A key trend for 2009: Conversation Enablement (mediafuturist.com)
• The End of Control and the Future of Content: My presentation at Google San Francisco (March 2, 2009) (mediafuturist.com)
• Glen Hiemstra, Gerd Leonhard - The Future of Communication and Conversation (mc.conversationsnetwork.org)

The End of Control and the Future of Content: My presentation at Google San Francisco (March 2, 2009)

Image by gleonhard via Flickr

As promised, here is the PDF with most of what I presented at my Authors@Google Talk in San Francisco, today (March 2, 2009). Hopefully we will have a video available very soon as well.
The End of Control Gerd Leonhard at Google SF PDF *22MB

Some snippets: Bottom Lines: The fight for Control was a fight for Distribution. The flight for Attention is a fight for Trust. The beneficiaries of Control were Monopolies. The beneficiaries of Trust are those that Collaborate. Advertising 2.0: Information becomes Conversation.  Interruption becomes Engagement. Annoyance becomes Entertainment. 'This is an Ad' becomes 'This is Content'.  The Sharing Economy Logic: Sharing...the Output (i.e. publish, re-mix, co-create, life-stream...) the Input  (i.e. remuneration in cash, attention, reputation...) ... the Thruput (i.e. usage data, meta content, attention trails >> New Data Economics)

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Future of Broadcasting: My presentation at the Dutch Broadcasting Convention (NPOX 2008) in Hilversum (mediafuturist.com)
• The Future of Content: Free, Shared...Paid? My presentation at FICOD 2008 in Madrid (mediafuturist.com)
• Should software face the flat-rate music future? (Gerd quoted in CNET News) (mediafuturist.com)

The End Of Control and the Future of Content: Futurist Gerd Leonhard Authors@Google (San Francisco)

View more presentations from Gerd Leonhard. (tags: gerd gerdleonhard)

Facebook's CEO on the ToU debacle: "Governing the Facebook Service in an Open and Transparent Way" - Adios Control!

Read Zuck's post: Facebook | Governing the Facebook Service in an Open and Transparent Way.
When Facebook changed their Terms of Use last week, making it look a lot more 'controlling', all hell broke loose.  Even in Switzerland (where I live), the national TV news reported on the uproar that followed. Everyone hated Facebook's new ToUs and lots of people were considering ditching their accounts. Even though their new ToUs did not surprise me, and I already consider everything I do on Facebook to be kind of  'in public domain' (under the Creative Commons license I use for pretty much anything), I do think that they way they have gone about this left a lot to be desired. Their brilliant and decidedly Web2.0 move was to immediately back-paddle and return to the old ToU - very smart, and something that probably got them extensive media coverage all over the world (hey - there's a lot more room to grow, from their measly 160 Million or so users;).

So Zuck wrote in this blog-post:  "Our main goal at Facebook is to help make the world more open and transparent. We believe that if we want to lead the world in this direction, then we must set an example by running our service in this way. And... we came to an interesting realization—that the conventional business practices around a Terms of Use document are just too restrictive to achieve these goals. We decided we needed to do things differently and so we're going to develop new policies that will govern our system from the ground up in an open and transparent way. Beginning today, we are giving you a greater opportunity to voice your opinion over how Facebook is governed"

Well-done. Sure sounds a lot like Facebook will be more like a 'Public Utility' ... kind of like the BBC, maybe? Now, there's another blog-post, right here!

But here is the key point, for me: It is now abundantly clear that the WE-THE USERS can control and influence what happens - not (just) the 'Network Owner' or 'Provider' or 'Media Company' or 'Studio' or 'Label' or "TV / Radio Network".  If we-the-users, the people formerly known as consumers, don't like it, we'll leave, taking all our friends with us, deflating the platform's value very quickly - just imagine what would happen to Google if we pulled our trust from them. Control has now shifted to the Users - and that's a good thing.

This is,  of course, the topic of my next book (download some previews, here).  More soon.  Facebook ToU tag cloud by Flickr, AuntieP

Related articles by Zemanta

• What Facebook's Users Want In The Next Terms Of Service [Facebook] (consumerist.com)
• Glen Hiemstra, Gerd Leonhard - Commercial vs. Shared Culture (mc.conversationsnetwork.org)
• 6 survival tips to prepare for a tough 2009: time-wasters will become life-savers (mediafuturist.com)