Mobile video becomes an important resource provider for the Battle of Terror

Lead: U.S. It Web site PC today, as mobile video becomes an increasingly important resource, there is a "war" between content providers and mobile operators about competing for such resources. The following is the full text of the article: profit distribution with the rapid development of mobile video, how to profit from this area is still the challenge of content providers. Before finding a way to share costs and benefits, content providers and mobile operators may conflict over the distribution of benefits.　　Mobile video projects, led by mobile operators, web-building and local broadcasters, have been in trouble or are slow in the past few years. In the United States, Qualcomm closed its dedicated FLO television network earlier this year, while a nationwide service network for mobile phones and other services to provide local digital televisions Dyle Mobile TV, also postponed to the beginning of 2012 later this year.　　However, on the Open mobile Summit, held in San Francisco earlier this month, media executives said that mobile video would start exploding as an extension of Internet programming. Francisco Valera Francisco Varela, head of the YouTube global platform business, said mobile device users had 400 million hits on YouTube. At the same time, YouTube users uploaded two hours of homemade video content per minute.　　Executives at broadcasters and video sites such as ABC, CBS, Hulu and the BBC also say mobile internet will change their business model. According to Daniel Danker, general manager of the BBC's Online Services BBCi program and Daniel Dank, about 20% of Britons watch BBCi, and the ratio is expected to reach 80% in five years.　　But the content providers said they were not yet clear on how to get rich profits from mobile video. Network-neutral operators face the same challenges, which may lead to fierce competition for profits.　　Operators have repeatedly hinted that they will charge third-party content providers as a priority for their own networks, and that video channels will reach users with the help of these networks. Popular video also helps to make lucrative video services increasingly popular, in businesses like cable TV, where video providers can charge TV networks, and television networks return the right to use video in preference.　　But the situation is still unclear as to how the two sides can balance their interests in the mobile business. In 2006, at&t former CEO Eder Whitek (Ed Whitacre) eventually broke industry taboos and asked OTT service providers to help pay for the cost of building wired broadband networks. The proposal was strongly opposed to the "network neutrality" (net neutrality) principle. But industry insiders believe that the U.S. network neutrality principle in the mobile industry andNot strictly. At the same time, mobile network management tools now exist to prioritize traffic for specific content providers. Verizon and At&t declined to comment.　　Video providers say they have spared no effort to deliver content to the Internet to mobile users, and that this content distribution channel returns far less than traditional television broadcasts. "Today, as content providers, the biggest cost of connecting with viewers is through IP," Comtec said. Traditional methods have existed for a long time and are quite effective. The cost of connecting to an audience via IP is the same as the traditional method of establishing a connection with tens of millions of of users. "We are going to share the benefits of a different content provider that is offered to viewers for free video," said Albert Cheng, executive vice president of the Digital Media Division of Disney ABC TV Group, Albert Cheng.　　He pointed out that if the mobile operator network can not be charged with more content charges, then through the mobile platform to continue to publish video is impossible to do. Albert also said that the Disney ABC Television Group's distribution channel partners, such as broadcasters, cable operators, Apple's itunes store, and so on, they paid to buy content, but he did not want to say whether the company will be charging mobile operators to charge video usage fees. "The parties must together seek ways to profit from it," said Albert. "Mobile video may be a new focus of discussion on network neutrality," said Art Brodsky, public relations director Atte Blodsky Knowledge, a law firm focused on internet issues.　　Blodsky said he did not know whether mobile operators would charge users for certain video services, but the idea would have a significant impact on content providers. The failure of marriage Blodsky said: "Because the network is closed and non-discriminatory, content providers have lost a lot of things." "The principle of network neutrality is less restrictive to mobile networks than wired networks.　　The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) introduced the principle of net neutrality last year, and the U.S. Congress is currently examining whether to overturn the principle. Blodsky says it could spark a legal battle if mobile operators try to charge video providers an extra fee for priority. Phil Marshall, a research analyst at Tolaga, a marketing agency, said that because of the different responsibilities, the parties were naturally different in their approach to the problem. "Mobile operators value their networks more than content providers," Marshall said. It was a failed marriage. "But Marshall says the content distribution network (hereinafter referred to as" CDNs ") may eventually bring content providers and mobile operators together. Most Internet video Publishers store content in data centers closer to the audience through CDNs, such as the network operated by Akamai. Storing contentCan reduce latency and reduce the daily need for network connectivity. According to Marshall, mobile operators may be promoting this approach to users. Marshall's case was explained by an agreement between Akamai and Ericsson (Weibo) in February this year. According to the agreement, the two sides plan to integrate Akamai's storage capabilities into the mobile network.　　Akamai said the company had been experimenting with Ericsson, and the test results showed that the technology was promising and expected to be marketed in the second half of next year. The focus is that storage could eventually be applied to the phone itself. Content providers question the idea, largely because of concerns about copyright protection. In two years, the content provider may be willing to work with a service provider to store content in a data center closer to the audience, Marshall said. At that time, the two sides may hold the same view. Marshall said: "I think of CDN activity as a catalyst." "The content store does not violate the principle of network neutrality because it does not involve bandwidth throttling (bandwidth throttling) and other network management specifications," Marshall said. "Despite this, there is still some risk," said Roger Entner, analyst at Recon Analytics, a market research institute.　　He argues that content providers may sue operators who demand their fees, a move that will make the demand a focus. "If the group is too small, it's not worth the cost of letting the FCC or other regulators investigate you," Entner said.　　Entner that the main benefit of storing content on mobile networks is that the mobile operator's return capacity (backhaul capacity) can be retained, and is not excluded from content sources. Avi Greengart, market research analyst Avi Greengart, says that because mobile users can get video from different places, they can use video in different ways, and that business models involving advertising and subscription services vary, This makes content storage more complex over time. "I don't think there is any possibility of such a practice in the short term," Greengart said. "(Holy Oak)