Very sad, I'm sorry to say. Acacia has announced it's signed 64 new licensing agreements, and the streaming media industry is still sitting around hoping the situation will go away.
Many of us would be willing to join and support an industry group dedicated to fighting the Acacia patents, but no one has stepped forward to take the lead. A lot of us are small "mom & pop" shops without the wherewithal or clout to start a meaningful effort but would do all we could under a larger umbrella.
I think we all hoped Comcast and a few other big players would have the clout to fight this all the way for the rest of us. That remains to be seen. Meanwhile, Acacia is still making money from a technology they couldn't care less about.
Nate Elliott, in today's "Rich Media Insider" column, is complaining about the Eyeblaster awards going to ads that are "ho hum" at best.
This "lack of creativity" complaint isn't new and is being echoed throughout the online advertising community.
Come on, people. You know what's wrong - you're still hung up on the TV thing. I'm tired of reading about how 30 second spots are too long and need to be pared down for Internet consumption.
Can't you get it through your heads people don't expect nor want a TV experience online? You all keep talking but nothing happens. And then you wonder why people aren't viewing your ads.
Wonderful article by Sean D'Souza today in Marketing Profs. He talks about the power of demonstrations when it comes to selling products, and he makes excellent points!
He says "demonstration begs for involvement." And involvement is a real enticement to purchase or take other positive actions.
I've been advocating demonstration via rich media for a long time. It doesn't have to be complicated or expensive - it just has to do enough to entice the visitor to stay and make a purchase.
And now that rich media can be readily enjoyed by most surfers, the use of product demos should be carefully evaluated for your product line.
I received two "special" messages today from services to which I subscribe. Both were touting the benefits of the Instant Video Generator. (I think these are the same folks who brought you Instant Audio Generator!) This must be the latest affiliate craze for the information marketing crowd.
Comment on all this for you folks who really care about what you place on your web sites - this stuff looks and sounds amateurish at best. The quality of the audio is rough, which can be tolerable, I guess, if the message has meaning. The video looks like it was created on a webcam, which it is, and is painful to watch.
High quality encoding and compression services can be had at very reasonable rates and probably cost less in the long run than doing this stuff yourself. Why do you want to foist multimedia garbage on those visitors you've worked so hard to get to your site?
MSNBC reports they served up 250,000 streams on Election Day. There were 81,000 SIMULTANEOUS demands for both Kerry's concession and Bush's acceptance. That number doesn't cover the "on demand" streams served since the live speeches.
Is there anybody left out there who thinks video on the Web isn't viable?