The working title, which anyone who took my Entertainment Law class in 2012 or 2013 will recall, is The California Civil War. It's on the desire for entertainment content companies (Southern California) to ensure that the Internet content pipelines (Northern California) behave in the ways that Southern CA has found so mutually profitable in the past, why Northern CA is fighting back (foreshadowing: it's because of their business model), and why the way it's likely to end won't be in the best interests of consumers.
Put another way: it's a view from the inside of both the content creation and distribution industry on why the future of the entertainment content that you want to see won't likely be the one you want to see.
An early hint at what's to come...
- Should Net Neutrality require Google not to sell ads and not to apply PageRank against search results? Should it require that Facebook can't curate your feed? Why not? Because the people who want you to want Net Neutrality want you to believe that Net Neutrality has a very specific meaning. And they want that for very specific reasons that are in their own interest.
- Would movie studios and TV networks care so much about Net Neutrality if they didn't also own the content being distributed?
- Why does first mover advantage work well for content and not just platforms?
I think I'm in a good position to write this, having worked in the industry for over a decade (wow...). Added bonus: it'll finally be the thing that gets me back updating here pseudo-regularly. I'll also put up the practical tips that don't make it into the book, but this might give some interesting content too.
But first, I have to clean up 100,000 spam comments...
Now that is an interesting way to frame a contentious topic. I'm looking froward to your updates.
ReplyDeletepg-slot.game เว็บ ปั่นสล็อต ออนไลน์ คุณภาพได้เงินจริง 100 % สามารถเล่นได้ตลอด 24 ชั่วโมง เล่นง่าย ได้เงินไว เล่นได้บนมือถือ
ReplyDelete