« alt.groceries | Main | Q Train from 34th to Union Square »
March 27, 2006
content objects vs. media instances.
(this post consists of five months of loose notes to be sifted through and properly organized later. Try not to bite down too hard. -kc.)
We all know that 'Media' is made up of masters and duplicates. But we forget that media is an answer to the question of content. And perhaps if we stopped thinking of our content as masters and duplicates, we could better tackle the problems we're facing around issues of digital media ownership and tracking.
Taking a brief and oversimplified look at the history of idea sharing, we find a series of content distribution solutions built on top of the master-duplicate model. Media is our general solution to the problem of spreading ideas, information, and influence beyond our person. Speech, handwriting, Gutenberg's press, photographic negatives, phonographs, film prints are our particular solutions for caching content to be used across time and/or space. And while intellectual property issues have existed for centuries (give me some paper, some pens, and the slave labor of a dozen monks and I'll copy your Bible with a certain amount of user error) they were largely ignored because the resources necessary to transcend time and space were almost exclusively owned by the content owners and licensees or members of their professional or social classes (a small enough of a group of people that they were either self-regulating or could be dealt with through rule of law.) If the cost of pursuing the opportunists (content pirates) outweighed your potential loss of profits, you just let them go.
So sixty years ago, broadcast shows us what could happen if we separated the content from the object. Pretty cool. But broadcast is tightly controlled on its legislative and operational levels (through restrictive licensing and equipment and staffing costs) that keep illegitimate opportunism to a minimum. The advent of recorded media (tapes and optical discs) made content duplication more affordable, but as physical objects, their costs limit their effectiveness.
Meanwhile, we're also working outside of the established "content" industry on solving that original problem of spreading ideas beyond our person. So we create the digital file. We perfect the process of content duplication reducing its cost to a simple keyboard shortcut (CTRL-C). We link these digital files through a peer-based network and poof goes time and space. We can disseminate memes for the small cost of our social networks. And those IP issues we ignored seem louder than ever....
Let's jump midstream to a different log: since I've worked in media I've been obsessed with the idea of archiving and permanence. Unless we deem a particular piece of media "important", even our own videotapes and notes and photos will probably disappear within our own lifetime. Collier's was one of the most widely read American newsweeklies of its time and yet I can't find a copy from the 1920's without a good amount of sleuthing. How do we provide content permanence in a world of dark distribution.
Our content now exists in a world of weightless ones-and-zeros, where a master has little value but we continue to legislate our activities as if our content are made of objects. We put ridiculous warnings at the beginning of DVDs and videotapes and film reels stating that if we don't continue this folly, this act, this charade, we will do bad things to you for not pretending that it's an object. We erect complex smokescreens called DRM that ruin the user experience and prosecute anyone who finds a crack it its facade. A lot of people who sit outside of the profit centers of the established content industry look at everything that's going on and label it absurd. They realize that the problem isn't with the users, the problem is with the implementation. The problem is with Gutenberg.
If you excuse the assumptions, in a near-future world of near-ubiquitous wireless bandwidth and increasing processing power, perhaps it's not so important to cache audio and video anymore. Perhaps content can sit permanently in one place, always reachable with a single IP address, CRID, url, ID, ASIN, whatever, authenticated per user with citations and derivatives works enabled through SMIL-like schemas.
Perhaps we need to stop thinking of our content as media and instead start thinking of it as discrete content objects.
A content object is audio, video, or text intended for distribution such as a movie or a song. It exists online in one place and one place only. It can be reached anywhere by any device that can facilitate your user authentication (biometrics for user auth instead of device auth?) and can decode and play the file. The content object transcodes a stream in real time appropriate to processing speed and bandwidth available to the device are connecting with. The content object remembers where you last left off. You can start watching a video on your computer at home, pick up on your mobile then continues on your big screen TV at home. A content object is platform agnostic in the sense that it uses the internet. If the content producer chooses the right licensing, the content object can use SMIL like technology to allow users to cite and "use" portions of the video in derivative works. You can play your favorite scene in a blog post. You can make your own non-destructive remixes of the work. You can create open source edit decision lists (thx, revgeorge.). All without the need to hand out copies (yeah, I haven't figured this out for the "offline" world, I know.)
I'm still trying to flesh all of this out as a single idea. Of course, the first steps are already being implemented through processes like open authentication systems and music library subscriptions.
Posted by yatta at March 27, 2006 8:18 PM
Comments
The other nice thing about this scenario is that you'd have a unique identifier for media (which is easy in theory but rather difficult in practice) which would unify the community and meta-content that surrounds a "content object": comments, tags, links, references, playlists, EDLs, friends, groups, etc...
Posted by: Josh at March 29, 2006 2:18 AM