BBC: Not in front of the telly: Warning over 'listening' TV

9 February 2015 Last updated at 06:20 ET  BBC

Samsung said personal information could be scooped up by the Smart TV
Samsung is warning customers about discussing personal information in front of their smart television set.
The warning applies to TV viewers who control their Samsung Smart TV using its voice activation feature.

Such TV sets "listen" to some of what is said in front of them and may share details they hear with Samsung or third parties, it said.

Privacy campaigners said the technology smacked of the telescreens, in George Orwell's 1984, which spied on citizens.

Data sharing
The warning came to light via a story in online news magazine the Daily Beast which published an excerpt of a section of Samsung's privacy policy for its net-connected Smart TV sets.

Smart TV owner Peter Kent: "It makes me think twice"

The policy explains that the TV set will be listening to people in the same room to try to spot when commands or queries are issued via the remote. It goes on to say: "If your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party."

Corynne McSherry, an intellectual property lawyer for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) which campaigns on digital rights issues, told the Daily Beast that the third party was probably the company providing speech-to-text conversion for Samsung.

She added: "If I were the customer, I might like to know who that third party was, and I'd definitely like to know whether my words were being transmitted in a secure form."

Soon after, an activist for the EFF circulated the policy statement on Twitter comparing it to George Orwell's description of the telescreens in his novel 1984 that listen to what people say in their homes.

Privacy experts wondered if the grabbed audio was protected as it was sent for analysis
In response to the widespread sharing of its policy statement, Samsung has issued a statement to clarify how voice activation works. It emphasised that the voice recognition feature is activated using the TV's remote control.

It said the privacy policy was an attempt to be transparent with owners in order to help them make informed choices about whether to use some features on its Smart TV sets, adding that it took consumer privacy "very seriously".

Samsung said: "If a consumer consents and uses the voice recognition feature, voice data is provided to a third party during a requested voice command search. At that time, the voice data is sent to a server, which searches for the requested content then returns the desired content to the TV."

It added that it did not retain voice data or sell the audio being captured. Smart-TV owners would always know if voice activation was turned on because a microphone icon would be visible on the screen, it said.

The third party handling the translation from speech to text is a firm called Nuance, which specialises in voice recognition, Samsung has confirmed to the BBC.

Samsung is not the first maker of a smart, net-connected TV to run into problems with the data the set collects. In late 2013, a UK IT consultant found his LG TV was gathering information about his viewing habits.

Publicity about the issue led LG to create a software update which ensured data collection was turned off for those who did not want to share information.

Streaming to blame as decline in U.S. live TV viewership accelerates

THINKSTOCK

Pulkit Chandna@PulkitChandna PCWorld

If 2013 and 2014 were disappointing, 2015 could turn out to be an annus horribilis for traditional television in the United States. Especially if the remainder of the year is anywhere near as bad as research firm Nomura says January was for live television.

In January, total live TV ratings plummeted as much as 12.7 percent year on year, Nomura said in a recent note to clients, citing Nielsen data. Putting things into perspective, analysts Anthony DiClemente and Benjamin Black wrote that it was “one of the worst declines” they had seen since the company began monitoring major TV networks. It was also the eighth straight month of double-digit declines in live TV viewership.

Although every media company tracked by Nomura suffered in January, some were hit harder than others. Viacom, for instance, witnessed a 23 percent ratings decline across its various TV networks, with MTV and Nickelodeon being the chief culprits. AMC Networks wasn’t too far behind either, with 19 percent. Meanwhile, Time Warner was at the other extreme of the spectrum with a fall of just 3 percent.

Why this matters: You don’t have to be an analyst like Messieurs DiClemente and Black to conclude, as the duo did in their note, that the fortunes of streaming services and live television are entwined. That is to say, they are inversely proportional.

The writing is on the wall for traditional television as more and more people are cutting the cord and moving to streaming services like Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, and Hulu—not to mention the growing population of so-called “cord-neversm” people so strongly opposed to the idea of cable-TV subscriptions as to never bother with them.

All this cord-cutting is beginning to adversely impact the bottom lines of TV companies. A case in point is Rupert Murdoch-owned media giant 21st Century Fox, which on Wednesday lowered its profit guidance for the fiscal year 2016 , owing, among other things, to the ongoing plunge in broadcast TV ratings.

The Internet Is Officially More Popular Than Cable in the U.S.

BY MARCUS WOHLSEN Wired
08.15.14 | 4:40 PM |


Photo: Getty
You can’t call them “cable companies” anymore.

For the first time, the number of broadband subscribers with the major U.S. cable companies exceeded the number of cable subscribers, the Leichtman Research Group reported today. Among other things, these figures suggest the industry is now misnamed. Evidently these are broadband companies that offer cable on the side.

To be sure, the difference is minimal: 49,915,000 broadband subscribers versus 49,910,000 cable subscribers. But even assuming a huge overlap in those numbers from customers who have both, the primacy of broadband demonstrates a shift in consumer priorities. Nearly all the major cable companies added broadband subscribers over the past quarter, for a total of nearly 380,000 new signups. Cable subscribers don’t have to worry about TV as they know it going away any time soon. But cable is on its way to becoming secondary, the “nice to have” compared to the necessity of having broadband access.

Not Bad for Business
Such a transition might suit the “cable companies” just fine. I first saw these numbers pointed out by Peter Kafka at Recode, who wrote: “Some smart people suggest that the cable guys would not be unhappy if most of their business moved over to broadband instead of video, since there are much better margins—and almost no competition—for broadband.”

The better margins boil down to the fact that broadband is purely about access, while cable is about content. The crux of the cable side of the cable business is hatching deals with the makers of sports, news, and entertainment so there’s something to send through the box. And the costs can be steep. ESPN, the most pricey by far, tops $5 per subscriber per month.

With broadband, the cable companies don’t have to put anything through those pipes themselves. They just have to be the plumbers. They may not like the way Netflix and its more than 36 million U.S. subscribers are eating into their TV businesses. But Netflix and other streaming services are helping drive demand for broadband—a service cable operators can provide without having to serve up any content themselves at all.

TV’s Broad Future
What this means for the future of TV is still tough to predict. While these figures may suggest the inevitable transition to an internet-dominated future, nearly 50 million cable subscribers don’t appear ready to cut the cord just yet. Even with a plethora of on-demand options, people are still watching TV like they used to, which means a business model still based around ads and subscription fees. But that’s still a loss of millions of cable subscribers over the past half-decade, while the number of broadband subscribers has climbed at a much faster clip.

Meanwhile, traditional TV as a format already is being engulfed by the open-endedness of the internet. From mainstream streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Instant Video to niche sites like Funny or Die to YouTube celebrities—to name just some of the options that fall under entertainment—the kinds of moving pictures available and the ways to consume them have never been greater. Within this broader spectrum, cable as a concept could become just another niche, one channel among many as the insatiable internet swallows everything it encounters.

Cable Broadband Surpassing Video: Moody's

Light Reading

In a potentially game-changing shift for the cable industry, US MSOs will soon have more broadband subscribers than video subscribers for the first time in the industry's 65-year history.

In a new report issued last week, Moody's Investors Service predicts that US cable operators will amass more high-speed data customers than pay TV customers by next year, as they keep gaining more broadband users and shedding video viewers. In fact, the debt-rating agency calculates that the crossover point is already occurring, with both services now boasting about 50 million subscribers.

Several major US MSOs already have more broadband customers than video customers, or are closing in on the crossover point. Both Time Warner Cable Inc. (NYSE: TWC) and Charter Communications Inc. -- the second- and fourth-largest US MSOs, respectively -- now have more broadband than video customers, while Cablevision Systems Corp. (NYSE: CVC) may well have reached the crossover point at the end of the second quarter. (See Cable Leaves Telcos in Broadband Dust.)

Broadband replacing video as the anchor product for the industry could have both positive and negative effects for cable companies, according to Moody's. On the positive side, the rating agency notes, fewer video customers will lower cable operators' programming costs, which have been sharply rising for years. In turn, operators' profit margins should improve, because high-speed data is a higher-margin product than TV.

On the other hand, the Moody's report points out, "an eroding subscriber base for video also poses risks" for cable providers. That's because their economies of scale may suffer for such areas as technical and customer service, driving up costs per customer. In addition, cable operators that seem to be giving up their video base easily may see their brands suffer, as well.

Given these factors, the report suggests that it may make sense for some cable providers to unbundle their broadband and video offerings, and put greater emphasis on broadband, especially in less-competitive markets. The report stresses that such small and midsized cable operators and overbuilders asRCN Corp. , Grande Communications , and Wave Broadband have all built "sustainable" businesses with relatively low video penetration rates but much higher broadband adoption rates.

However, Moody's contends that cable operators in more competitive markets will likely need to maintain strong video offerings because of the danger of losing double-play and triple-play subscribers to telcos. In particular, the agency warns that such MSOs as TW Cable, Cablevision, and Cox Communications Inc. could struggle because their regions have significant overlap with the fiber buildouts of Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ)'s FiOS and AT&T Inc. (NYSE: T)'s U-verse networks.

If you want to keep up with all the latest developments on the cable/telco broadband wars, keep your eyes glued to Light Reading's cable modem/CMTS channel.

"Cable providers' largely upgraded networks and high-speed capabilities can make them the first call for consumers seeking fast Internet connections," said Karen Berckmann, vice president and senior analyst for Moody's. "But if cable companies want to sell their video product as well, the onus is on them to provide a compelling video experience at an attractive price."

— Alan Breznick, Cable/Video Practice Leader, Light Reading

BBC: Giant rollable TVs on the horizon, says LG

10 July 2014 Last updated at 08:21 ET  BBC

Share this page

• Print

• Share
• Facebook
• Twitter

The flexible screens are high resolution but paper-thin

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• Samsung unveils its Bendable TV
• Concern over child-tracking tech
• LG promises fix for 'spying' TVs

LG has announced the release of two new paper-thin TV panels, with one that is so flexible it can be rolled into a 3cm diameter tube.

The company stated it is confident it will produce a 60in (152cm) Ultra HD rollable TV by 2017.

LG unveiled one of its first flexible TVs at CES - a global consumer electronics and technology trade show - earlier this year.

Experts say flexible screens could see TVs used in more creative ways.

The screens are so flexible, they can be rolled into tight cylinders

The new flexible panel has a resolution of 1,200x810, which is left undistorted even after it has been rolled into a 3cm cylinder.

LG says the flexibility was achieved thanks to using a backplane made of "high molecular substance-based polyimide film" instead of plastic.

The second panel is transparent and is said to greatly surpass earlier models, with the company boasting of a significant reduction in hazy images and a 30% increase in transmittance, which is responsible for the screen's transparent effect.

The company has claimed its new screens prove they are on track for much larger, Ultra HD-capable flexible screens in the near future, asserting they are "confident" they can deliver a 60in rollable panel by 2017.

The new transparent display has apparently reduced haze by "adopting the company's transparent pixel design technology".

"Flexible screens are an exciting prospect. First off, they're far more durable than conventional screens, meaning that we can expect to see bigger, better screens in, for example, aeroplanes," said Stephen Graves, online deputy editor at Stuff.tv.

"They also create the potential for some completely new gadget designs. Imagine a 10in (25cm) iPad that you can fold out into a 16in (40cm) screen - effectively doubling up as a small desktop computer or TV monitor."

Jeremy White, product editor of Wired magazine said that these new screens would be ideal for retail or exhibition display.

"Being able to curve screens around complex retail display units or using the transparency to have the screen envelop the product itself on a stand would certainly be eye-catching.

"And of course this is all leading to flexible tablets as well, which will possibly be the most useful application of flexible screens to the average consumer."

Curved TVs, such as Samsung's latest 4K curved LED TV, are becoming more common.

Evan Kypreos, editor of TrustedReviews, said that rollable TVs could be produced by 2017 but warned they'd cost far too much for the average consumer.

"If you've got the cash to splash then a rollable TV could create an experience similar to owning a projector, where you can easily hide away the screen when not in use, but without the noise and complexity of an actual projector.

"Instead of 60in-plus TV screens I think the more interesting application of this tech could be in wearables. Curved screen smartwatches with a whole wrist screen are an obvious example."

Earlier this year LG unveiled a 77in flexible 4K OLED TV with a controllable curve, however this is not yet available and it is not known when it is likely to go on sale.

The 17 most important things Google announced at I/O

From a brand-new visual design to wearables, this is Google's vision for 2014 and beyond

By Verge Staff on June 25, 2014 03:07 pm  The Verge

Google’s main event of the year, I/O 2014, was chock-full of news: some expected, some decidedly not. The company showed off a colorful and playful new design style for all of its products, as well as a new version of Android, codenamed “L,” that won’t arrive until later this year. Google debuted a cheap but elegant Android One phone to court buyers on a budget. Android was everywhere at the developer conference: on smartwatches, in car dashboards, and even on your body with Android Fit, a new platform for fitness wearables and apps designed to rival Apple’s HealthKit.

But the carefully planned announcements may have all been upstaged by two vocal protesters: one calling Google to task for San Francisco housing evictions and the other warning about killer robots. Both were quickly escorted from the scene. The developer conference continues through the week, but it’s hard to imagine any bigger news coming after day one’s lively keynote.

Read more

Cable TV boxes become 2nd biggest energy users in many homes

LA Times



RALPH VARTABEDIANcontact the reporter

Cable TV boxes could be as energy efficient as smartphones, experts say

The technology exists to make giant strides in energy efficiency, but economic incentives are often missing
Total energy use is projected to grow 29% by 2040 in the U.S.

In the middle of the night, when most Americans are sound asleep, their lights and appliances off, a power hog is wide awake and running at nearly full throttle: the boxes that operate their cable or satellite television service.

The seemingly innocuous appliances — all 224 million of them across the nation — together consume as much electricity as produced by four giant nuclear reactors, running around the clock. They have become the biggest single energy user in many homes, apart from air conditioning.

Cheryl Williamsen, a Los Alamitos architect, has three of the boxes leased from her cable provider in her home, but she had no idea how much power they consumed until recently, when she saw a rating on the back for as much as 500 watts — about the same as a washing machine.


The 224 million cable boxes across the nation together consume as much electricity as produced by four giant nuclear reactors, running around the clock. (Patrick T. Fallon / Bloomberg)

A set-top cable box with a digital recorder can consume as much as 35 watts of power, costing about $8 a month for a typical Southern California consumer. The devices use nearly as much power turned off as they do when they are turned on.

"I could yank the power supply cord," Williamsen said, "but that's not a very consumer-friendly way to reduce energy consumption."

The boxes have been at the center of a battle between the cable industry and conservationists who believe the devices could be far more efficient.

"It is a classic case of market failure," said Andrew McAllister, a member of the California Energy Commission. "The consumers have zero information and zero control over the devices they get."

The industry agreed recently to voluntarily reduce the power consumption of new devices,which it said would save consumers $1 billion annually. But experts say the deal will provide only a fraction of the potential gains and take years to realize.

The fight over set-top boxes is a stark illustration of the difficulty of wringing energy efficiency improvements even in an era when Americans are trying to reduce their energy footprint over concerns about global warming and family budgets are strained by rising electricity prices. The recent announcement by the Obama administration of plans to reduce carbon emissions from power plants by 30% and reduce electricity costs to the nation by 8% will require unprecedented improvements in efficiency.

Electricity demand is growing far more slowly today, thanks to conservation over the last decade. But total use is still projected to grow 29% by 2040, according to the Energy Department. Slower growth could reduce the pressure to build new gas-fired power plants as the nation retires low-cost coal-fired generators that cannot meet pollution standards.
It is a classic case of market failure. The consumers have zero information and zero control over the devices they get.- Andrew McAllister, a member of the California Energy Commission


While the technology exists to make giant strides in energy efficiency, the economic incentives are often missing. In many cases, there is no connection between who pays for electricity and who decides how much electricity gets used.

Steve Kelley, a senior vice president at Green Charge Networks, a Santa Clara, Calif., electronics firm that produces devices that help businesses lower their power bills, offers a case in point. The nation's shopping malls annually use hundreds of millions of dollars of electricity, he said, but their owners are often indifferent about reducing power consumption because tenants pay the bills.

"The mall owners often won't consider spending $50,000 on a system that would pay for itself, because they don't share in the savings," Kelley said.

Similarly, tenants in millions of apartments pay for electricity, but landlords decide whether they get efficient appliances, modern air conditioning systems and good building insulation. Many landlords, particularly those who rent modest apartments to working-class families, do not believe they can charge higher rents for units with improved efficiency, studies show.

The opposite problem exists at workplaces, where employees control much of the power use but do not pay the bills. Employees commonly use energy intensive space heaters under their desks, plug in incandescent lights or leave computers running all night.

It has fallen to the federal and state governments to clamp on mandatory standards in many cases, though they are fiercely opposed by the industry. Federal standards on refrigerators and televisions have driven down their energy use by 75%, even while the retail prices have dropped, said Ralph Cavanagh, an energy expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

"There are still lots of $20 bills lying on the sidewalk," he said. "The potential is huge."

The set-top box issue is part of a much larger group of personal electronic devices in homes that represent one of the fastest-growing parts of residential electricity use. Americans are spending more than $12 billion a year on electricity to run computers, smartphones, game consoles, modems and other devices in their homes — one price of the nation's connected culture, according to estimates by the Consumer Federation of America.

"It is a very tough case to make to tell consumers don't use these devices," said Severin Borenstein, director of the UC Energy Institute. "People, as they get wealthier, are getting new toys and almost all of the things we do use electricity."

The set-top boxes consume power when turned off because of spinning hard drives, program guide updates and software downloads, leaving consumers with one choice to reduce that load: Unplug the device. The downside is that turning the system back on requires a convoluted reboot.

Energy experts say the boxes could be just as efficient as smartphones, laptop computers or other electronic devices that use a fraction of the power thanks to microprocessors and other technology that conserves electricity. Ideally, they say, these boxes could be put into a deep sleep mode when turned off, cutting consumption to a few watts. At that rate, a box could cost less than $1 a month for power, depending on how much it is used.

McAllister said the commission was closely watching the voluntary agreement and may still impose binding state standards.

The deal signed late last year by 11 cable and satellite companies, which control the bulk of the nation's communications services, calls for a power reduction in the range of 10% to 45% by 2017. It requires an independent audit of the program, detailed public reports and disclosures to consumers.

Brian Dietz, a spokesman for the National Cable & Telecommunications Assn., said that by 2017 about 90% of the boxes would meet a standard set by the federal government, though a more ambitious standard was already being established. Dietz said the new boxes would provide all the current functionality for consumers, allowing them to program their television watching and to record shows, while still saving energy.

But Mark Cooper, research director of the Consumer Federation of America, takes a dim view of the deal, saying, "This voluntary agreement is very modest, to say the least."

Noah Horowitz, research director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, which was one of the organizations that signed the deal, said, "It is a good first step, but a lot more needs to be done." It does not require the devices go down to a trickle when turned off, for example. And the agreement has no penalties for noncompliance.

Horowitz said the council agreed to the deal because a federal standard could have taken eight years.

"The industry was putting up a big fight," he added, "threatening litigation."

ralph.vartabedian@latimes.comCopyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times

NYT: Comcast Deal Seeks to Unite 2 Cable Giants

FEBRUARY 12, 2014, 10:24 PM
By DAVID GELLES

Comcast announced on Thursday an agreement to acquire Time Warner Cable for more than $45 billion in stock, a deal that would combine the biggest and second-biggest cable television operators in the country.

For Comcast, which completed its acquisition of NBC Universal, the television and movie powerhouse, from General Electric less than a year ago, the latest deal would be its second big act to radically reshape the media landscape in the United States. And the merger is almost certain to bring to an end a protracted takeover battle thatCharter Communications has been waging for Time Warner Cable.

Brian L. Roberts, the chief executive of Comcast, said in a statement on Thursday that Time Warner Cable’s executives “have created a pure-play cable company that, combined with Comcast, has the foundation for future growth.”

For Time Warner Cable, the deal provides a neat solution to its problems. It will receive just about the $160-a-share price it said was its true value, and possibly more. It will no longer have to slog ahead with a turnaround plan being run by a new chief executive, Rob Marcus. And it will allow it to become part of the company that is already the dominant force in cable television services.

Despite combining the two largest cable operators in the country, a merger may have little impact on consumers. Comcast and Time Warner Cable do not compete directly in any markets.

Nonetheless, regulators will surely look carefully at the impact on the deal to consumers, and may also focus on whether the combined company will have additional power in negotiations with cable networks, a recent source of tension in the industry. The two companies said they expected the deal to close by the end of the year.

Comcast has about 22 million television customers, according to the National Cable and Telecommunications Association. Time Warner Cable has about 11 million video subscribers, according to people familiar with the company.

In a bid to appease antitrust regulators, Comcast is expected say it is willing to divest three million of Time Warner Cable’s roughly 11 million pay television subscribers.

It was not immediately clear if Comcast would propose certain markets to divest, but shedding those subscribers should keep Comcast with less than 30 percent national market share for pay television, a level the company believes will satisfy antitrust regulators.

Under the terms of the deal, Time Warner Cable shareholders will receive 2.875 shares of newly issued Comcast common stock for each of their shares, people briefed on the matter said on Wednesday evening. Based on Comcast’s closing price of $55.24 on Wednesday, that values each Time Warner Cable share at about $158.82 each.

If Comcast stock rises on news of the deal, the price could go up, while if the stock falls, it could go down.

The deal is subject to approval by both shareholders of both companies. Because it is an all-stock deal with newly issued shares, Comcast will not have to take on any new debt.

Should a deal be completed, Time Warner Cable shareholders will own roughly 23 percent of the combined company.

For Comcast, the deal, extending its leadership in the cable industry, is another transformative step in the evolution of what is now America’s most influential media company. It comes less than a year after Comcast completed the acquisition of NBC Universal And it will further extend Comcast’s lead as the nation’s largest cable operator.

Charter, however, is left in the lurch. Charter is one of the nation’s smaller cable operators, but had big ambitions to compete with Comcast. Last year Liberty Media, the conglomerate backed by billionaire John C. Malone, acquired 27 percent of Charter, and urged the company to pursue deals, a process that could have led Mr. Malone back to the heights of American cable, an industry he once ruled as head of TCI, then the country’s largest operator.

Beginning last year, Charter made overtures to Time Warner Cable, privately offering a succession of higher prices, all of which were rejected. Last month, Charter went public with an offer of $132.50 per share for Time Warner Cable, which Mr. Marcus dismissed as inadequate. He countered by saying the company would consider a bid of $160 per share, which Comcast has now nearly matched.

On Tuesday, Charter nominated a full slate of directors to Time Warner Cable’s board, its most aggressive move to date.

At the same time, Charter was negotiating with Comcast about a deal through which Comcast would acquire certain markets from Time Warner Cable if Charter was about to buy the entire company. Comcast, however, had other plans.

Charter may buy the subscribers that Comcast has pledged to divest, giving it added scale but not nearly the boost it had hoped when it set its eyes on acquiring all of Time Warner Cable.

Though the companies are set to announce the deal, it could still come undone. Shareholders of either company could vote it down, though that seems unlikely.

Charter could still play spoiler with a new bid, though that seems unlikely too, given its limited financial resources.

Or Comcast shares could collapse, leading Time Warner Cable shareholders to shun a deal.

Advising Comcast are JPMorgan Chase, Barclays and Paul J. Taubman, the former top Morgan Stanley deal maker. Davis Polk & Wardwell and Willkie Farr & Gallagher are its legal advisors.

Morgan Stanley, Allen & Company, Citigroup and Centerview Partners are financial advisers to Time Warner Cable and its board. Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom are legal advisers.

The two companies will hold a conference call at 8:30 a.m. on Thursday morning.

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 13, 2014

An earlier version of this article misstated the competition between Comcast and Time Warner Cable. They compete in no markets, not very few.

A version of this article appears in print on 02/13/2014, on page A1 of the NewYork edition with the headline: Comcast Deal Seeks to Unite 2 Cable Giants.

Google Offers $35 Chromecast Streaming Video Device

by Karl Bode Thursday 25-Jul-2013

 

In addition to unveiling their latest Nexus 7 tablet, Google yesterday turned heads with the release of Chromecast, a $35 device that plugs into a television's HDMI port and allows users to stream content from their phone, tablet or PC directly to their television. According to the Google blog announcement, the device works with Netflix, YouTube, Google Play Movies & TV, and Google Play Music, with more services on the way.

The device is already on sale over at Amazon, where quite amusingly it already has 42 user reviews despite the fact nobody has really used it yet.

Netflix takes Disney pay-TV rights from Starz

By Ben Fritz and Joe Flint Los Angeles Times

December 4, 2012, 12:27 p.m.

Netflix has acquired the exclusive U.S. rights to movies from Walt Disney Studios films, beginning in 2016, in a three-year deal that catapults the Internet video-on-demand service into direct competition with pay-TV giants such as HBO and Showtime.

The news is a blow to the pay channel Starz, which previously had the rights to Disney movies, including its Pixar animated films and Marvel superhero pictures.

Disney has also agreed to immediately give Netflix non-exclusive streaming rights to more of its older library titles including "Dumbo," "Pocahontas" and "Alice in Wonderland."

Starz's sole remaining movie provider is now Sony Pictures. That agreement ends in 2016.

Netflix Chief Executive Reed Hastings and chief content officer Ted Sarandos have long said they wanted to get pay-TV rights to films from one of Hollywood's six major studios to boost their company's online entertainment service. Currently, it has recent movies only from independent studios such as Relativity Media and FilmDistrict, as well as pictures more than a decade old from every studio, and a wide variety of television reruns.

In a statement, Sarandos called the deal a "a bold leap forward for Internet television and we are incredibly pleased and proud this iconic family brand is teaming with Netflix to make it happen."

Disney movies will become available to stream from Netflix seven to nine months after they are first shown in theaters. A Netflix spokesman said that time frame is "accelerated" compared with when Starz currently gets new releases.

Although terms were not disclosed, a person close to the matter said Netflix could ultimately pay more than $300 million annually for Disney movies.

Earlier this year, HBO cut a deal with 20th Century Fox for its movies, at an estimated price of more than $200 million annually.

In so-called output deals, pay-TV providers typically pay between 10% and 12% of the U.S. box office of each film up to $200 million.

For Starz, losing the Disney movies means the channel will have to create more original content to fill the void. The network has had a mixed track record with its original shows. It succeeded with the gladiator show "Spartacus," but recently canceled "Boss," an ambitious drama starring Kelsey Grammer as a corrupt mayor of Chicago.

"Starz will continue to be the exclusive home of all Disney movies, including the Lucasfilm, Marvel and Pixar releases, and their accompanying digital streaming rights, into 2017," the company said in a statement. "Our decision not to extend the agreement for Disney output past that time allows us the opportunity to implement our plan to dramatically ramp up our investment in exclusive, premium-quality original series which will best meet the needs of our distributors and subscribers."

Previously a DVD-by-mail company that started offering streaming movies and TV shows on computers, Netflix has begun to be a direct competitor to cable channels as more and more people are accessing its video-on-demand content through Internet-connected televisions.

 

It previously offered movies from Disney and Sony under an agreement with Starz, but that deal ended early this year after the two companies couldn't agree on renewal terms.

 

The ending of that agreement accelerated a trend that has seen Netflix evolve into a television company, with reruns accounting for more than 60% of the content streamed by users.

 

The addition of recently released Disney films should slow down that trend and make Netflix more closely resemble premium television networks such as HBO.

 

In addition, like virtually every cable channel, Netflix has begun moving into original programming. New series such as the Kevin Spacey political drama "House of Cards" and original episodes of the cult comedy "Arrested Development" are to launch in 2013.

 

Netflix stock skyrocketed on the news, trading up 15% at $87.59 Tuesday afternoon.

 

Times staff writer Meg James contributed to this report.

FCC Votes To End Analog TV Requirement For Cable

Cable companies are applauding a Federal Communications Commission vote to end a requirement that cable stations continue to provide analog feeds of certain broadcasts.

The FCC voted late Monday to allow its "viewability " rule to expire in December. That rule requires cable companies to ensure customers that haven't purchased digital converter boxes still have access to certain broadcast TV signals.

Local TV stations switched to digital signals three years ago. The cable rules would have expired this week without the FCC vote, but the commission made it clear it sees the rules as quickly becoming unnecessary.

"We find the viewability rule is no longer necessary to ensure must-carry signals are viewable to all subscribers and therefore will allow the rule to sunset," the FCC said in its order, which was unanimously approved.

National Cable and Telecommunications Association CEO Michael Powell called the order a "forward-looking, pro-consumer" step toward new innovation. Cable companies, he said, will continue to help people who haven't yet converted to digital.

Broadcasters, most of which were required to switch to digital signals three years ago, say dropping the requirement could hurt smaller TV stations.

National Journal

Global broadband snapshot: Hong Kong throttles the rest of the world

"...According to an informal survey of advertised global broadband speeds conducted by IDG publications around the world (IDG publishes Network World), East Asian countries boast some of the fastest advertised connections around, with four countries featuring at least one carrier claiming average download speeds of 100Mbps or higher...

"The leader of the pack is Hong Kong, with advertised broadband download speeds of a whopping 300Mbps and 300Mbps upload speeds to match. Other East Asia countries in the 100Mbps download club include Taiwan, South Korea and Japan, all of which have at least one ISP advertising those rates. Other countries that have ISPs advertising 100Mbps or higher speeds are Poland, Germany and Canada...

"What's even more impressive than some of the advertised speeds in many of the 100Mbps+ countries is the service prices. Hong Kong's 300Mbps service, for instance, costs just $40 a month and includes television service. Taiwan's 100Mbps service, meanwhile, costs $24 a month, while South Korea's costs $31 a month. In the United States, by contrast, 25Mbps Internet access will run you about $75 per month and doesn't include television...


"In terms of bang for the buck, Hong Kong came out on top in the informal survey when you look at cost per megabit (which we calculated by dividing the cost by the combined download and upload data rates). Hong Kong only charges six cents per megabit, followed by South Korea (16 cents per Mb), Taiwan (22 cents per Mb) and Bulgaria (27 cents per Mb). The United States' top service, meanwhile, charges $1.50 per megabit..."

Network World

Meet DOCSIS, Part 1: the unsung hero of high-speed cable Internet access

Technical exposure to CATV data transmission technology.

Ars Technica

Women in Cable TV: Future of TV Consumption Invitation

March 16, 2011, from 9:30 to noon in San Ramon, you are invited to a panel discussion on the "Future of Television Consumption" presented by the Northern California chapter of Women in Cable Television.

Learn more