TV 2020 in the networked society

A nice video interview on NscreenMedia with Simon Frost, Head of Communications Marketing for Ericsson about what TV will be like in 2020 as a summary of a panel discussion at NAB2015.

Some interesting remarks:

  • In 2020 50% of video will be on demand, 50% linear ( I believe this)
  • 55% of traffic in mobile networks will be video (I do not believe this: I am a bear on mobile video)
  • Content aggregation in this new on-demand age is the key challenge. Large players will challenge todays TV providers. Counter this is the trend to content providers seeking independence towards the viewer.

nScreenNoise – TV 2020 in the networked societynScreenMedia.

BBC moves to internet by 2025

Herewith an interesting blog by Matthew Postgate, CTO of BBC. Internet will be increasingly in the focus for BBC as a distribution medium.

I had the opportunity to be on a pannel with the head of BBC R&D 8 years ago. I suggested internet distribution might replace broadcasting by 2025. “there shall always be broadcasting” was the counterargument. Maybe less so now.


BBC Blogs – About the BBC – Engineering a more flexible and efficient BBC for the future.

Posted in OTT

Video codec with 2x the performance of HEVC?

A private company from the UK called V-nova claims to have developed a new codec called PERSEUS that is at least twice as efficient as HEVC. It is licensing the codec, similarly as with other codecs. The article from Videonet provides more information.

v-nova-logo-blue.1781268It will take some time to verify if the claims hold up; the first demo’s are quite convincing. Keep in mind HEVC compression today is not mature yet: there is a lot of improvement possible. So a side by side comparison now is not a “full story”. Nevertheless: if the codec performs significantly better today than HEVC will do in the foreseable future it may make serious impact in the industry. A factor 2 bandwidth gain is worth billions in the fast growing OTT industry for example.

An intrinsic property of the codec is that it seems to be “hierarchical”; a property often aspired to but never deployed. Practical value is low – the bold statement and comparisons presented from the hierarchical advantage perspective by V-Nova degrade confidence.

Stealth compression company claims mind-blowing performance gains | VideoNet.

Update: April 10, 2015

V-net has gathered opinions from the industry. Key issues for PERSEUS to overcome:

  1. Proving the claim of 2x+ compression gain holds up under a broad set of content inputs and compression rates
  2. Gaining traction with consumer decoder silicon manufacturers in firmware/hardware.
  3. Ensure the third party patent situation is clarified: the compression field is littered with patents; lawsuits may come to V-Nova and their customers if PERSEUS implementations violate those patents.

In view of the problems of (2) and (3) broad consumer product implementation will take quite a while even if the compression rates prove to be robust.

Here is new the Videonet article link.

Which DCAS for what

Downloadable CA is a returning topic for the FCC: the regulator in the USA. It has recently revived discussions in the form of a new committee: DSTAC (Downloadable Security Technology Advisory Committee).

The article in the link below provides a glimpse on the growing complexity of media distribution, rights and the consequences for protection technologies that DSTAC is facing. Given the impetus of key participants to make DSTAC a success you may want to follow this from some distance.

In Europe there is an initiative ongoing without direct regulatory involvement called ECI (Embedded Common Interface). Maybe Europe can make a success where the US failed (like with Cablecard and CI+).

FCC Suffers Content Security’s Growing Pains | Light Reading.

Virgin Media clocks up 10th Rovi win

It must make business sense for Rovi to keep going with court cases against Virgin and loose them, invalidating its own patents along the way. 10 times: it is almost ridiculous. Maybe it is the savings on patent fees (which cost more and more as patents mature) which is making these court cases pay for themselves for Rovi. But there are probably cheaper ways to pay less patent maintenance fees. So what might it be….

Is it conceivable that Rovi’s very significant license income would be at serious risk if they admitted loss? Since then every TD&H operator and CE manufacturer might just ignore the license fee claims and just let the court cases come.

It is amazing how many Rovi patents have been found to be invalid. Maybe having a somewhat more rigorous assignment procedure for patents would be a good idea.

Virgin Media clocks up 10th Rovi win.

Posted in IPR