P1: IML/FFX P2: IML/FFX QC: IML/FFX T1: IML
Webcasting.HA WL040/Bidgolio-Vol I WL040-Sample.cls September 15, 2003 8:50 Char Count= 0
684 WEBCASTINGthere are still some issues to settle (full text of the bill
can be found at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/
getdoc.cgi? dbname = 107congbills & docid = f:h5469eas.
txt.pdf).
Because of the ease to duplicate in identical quality
as the original and to retrieve and store digital content
on the Web, webcasters must protect their own copyright
for original content. The U.S. Congress enacted the Digi-
tal Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act of 1995.
This act only applies to digital audio retransmission and
requires webcasters to obtain a performance license from
the owners of the sound recording rights. In addition,
the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), written
in 1998 under the treaties by the United Nation’s agency
World Intellectual Property Organization, provides for a
simplified but statutory licensing system for digital per-
formance of sound recordings on the Internet and via
satellite. Its provisions include a programming restriction
called the “Sound Recording Performance Complement”
(SRPC). The restriction includes no more than three songs
from a particular album, no more than four songs by a par-
ticular artist, and no more than three consecutively in a
three-hour period and no advance song or artist playlist
announcement may be published. The current contro-
versy over the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel’s re-
port and recommendation is a result of that Act.Competition for Audience
with Offline Media
Although some have argued that webcasting serves a to-
tally different type of audience from other traditional or
offline media such as television and radio with its inter-
active capabilities and niche programming, it is still a
medium that competes with offline media for both adver-
tising dollars and audiences. The growth of webcasting
will result in more audience fragmentation, as thousands
of webcasts are available on the Internet. Nevertheless,
webcasting also brings in new audiences—audiences at
work and audiences not served by niche programming or
limited by local programming in the past. In order to win
the competition for audiences, both webcast media and
other offline media must work even harder to understand
and discover an audience’s unmet needs and provide the
service that meets those needs.
On-demand webcasters may have a tough time in com-
peting with digital cable TV’s videos-on-demand service,
which offers consumers the choice to watch programs on
TV in digital quality whenever they want. The interactive
services provided on digital cable can be comparable to
the interactive devices in a webcast. In addition, the in-
creasing penetration of personal video recorders (PVRs)
that allow live recording and skipping of commercials on
television is another potential competitor to on-demand
webcasting to consumers. Consumers can shift their TV
viewing schedule and select the content they want easily
with PVRs, making webcasting a less appealing viewing
option. The advent of satellite radio may reduce the attrac-
tiveness of Web radio because satellite radio can provide
radio service with digital sound quality on the road on a
national basis without commercial interruptions. The ma-
jor selling point of webcasting is its transcendence of ge-ographic barriers because cable, satellite radio, and PVRs
are all tied to either a local or a domestic market.Broadband Access and Speed of File Delivery
High broadband market penetration is a prerequisite
for the growth in the use of webcasting because the
connection speed of dial-up modems is too slow to pro-
vide acceptable audio and video quality for entertainment
use. Currently, about 30% of Internet users in the United
States are broadband users (i.e., 33.6 million) according
to Nielsen/Netratings (January 2003). To users without
broadband access, viewing video is not only inefficient but
a frustrating experience because the gaps between stream-
ing data transmission created garbled and incomprehen-
sible images and audio sounds. The increase in broadband
use results in an increase in webcasting usage. Nielsen
estimated that about 12.7 million broadband Internet
surfers consumed streaming media content at home. The
bandwidth requirement for a large number of audiences
in webcasting is also a big hurdle for many webcasters
when the public Internet system is used. For example,
when Madonna’s live concert in London was webcasted
in November 2000, nine million streams were served to
the Internet audience. MSN produced the show to gen-
erate publicity. However, the webcast cost MSN so much
that MSN could not afford to pay Madonna the concert
rights.Development of Webcasting Content
The development of webcasting content must take into
consideration the bandwidth requirement and transmis-
sion quality. Videos, for example, take up a large amount
of bandwidth, and should therefore be used very selec-
tively. Short video clips and interactive features are much
more effective than full-length video in webcasting. Ani-
mation and showing images in a sequence ensure the re-
ception quality to the user because the loading time for
images and visuals is much less than a video. They can be
as effective as a video in many instances.
Navigation design is another important issue in devel-
oping webcasting content. Webcasters need to organize
the content offering into separate categories and display
the approximate playing time by the modem speed of the
user. A user-friendly menu will enable the user to quickly
locate the webcast content to be played and control the
pace of the webcast. If the contents have been used in
other offline media, a reference to the original aired dates
will be of high reference value to the users. Digital copy-
right management is another important aspect in webcast
content development.Regulatory Issues in Webcasting
Apart from copyright protection, there are several regu-
latory issues pertinent to webcasting: (1) extension of the
right of publicity online (state laws prohibiting the unau-
thorized taking of an individual’s name, likeness, voice
or other elements and using them for commercial pur-
poses); (2) invasion of privacy by the Internet’s ability to
collect data and customize information; (3) libels in bul-
letin boards and chat rooms; and (4) freedom of speech