Workshop Presentation V 17 10 08

User-Created Content: Supporting a participative Information Society Support document for the workshop Brussels, 7th November 2008 With partners

Table of contents Objectives and scope of the study........................................ 3 Methodology ......................................................................... 5 Access issues - Will broadband networks sustain UCC growth?...................................................…............................ 9 Business models - Is the value of UCC platforms in the content?.................................................................................. 12 User as a producer, or the end of professional content?...... 25 Legal and Policy issues - Is self-regulation the solution?..... 37 2 2

Objectives and scope of the study 3 3

Objectives and scope of the study The objective of the study was threefold: To analyse the developments taking place in the field of user-created content, To assess their economic, social, technical and legal implications, and To consider how these affect EU policies in the field of ICT and media. In this context, User-Created Content refers to : Content made publicly available through telecommunication networks, which reflects a certain amount of creative efforts, and is created outside of the professional routines and practices. It does not deal only with content made publicly available on the Internet but with content made available through any telecommunication network and platform. The analysis should cover: Europe and the most advanced countries in the world, in particular the USA, Japan and South Korea 4 4

Methodology 5 5

Methodology Some literature already exists in the field of user-created content and has been collected by the consortium and used as a basis throughout the mission. 50 case studies have been elaborated on the basis of information collected from the web sites of the companies as well as from the press and some dedicated web sites. 55 interviews (face to face and phone interviews) have also been conducted during the mission. A workshop with a representative set of stakeholders is organised in Brussels in order to present and validate the major findings of the study. 6 6

List of the 50 case studies North America Japan& South Western Europe Southern Europe Nordic countries Eastern Europe Korea Video sharing Pandora.TV DailyMotion Tuclip Neogen.tv Photo sharing Flickr Fotosik Photobucket Social network Islandoo Cyworld Serious Talent Dada LunarStorm MySpace Knowledge sharing/ Wikipedia Wer.weiss.was Wikilengua Collaborative work RocWiki Citizen journalism OhmyNews AgoraVox Skoeps Virtual World VirtualMe VirtualMe Habbo Hotel SecondLife Video Games Machinima WeGame Kongregate Recommendation LibraryThing Last.fm Biblioteket.se Deezer Talent Search Ziddio Manuscrit Blurb Sellaband Lulu Backstage KijkmijTV/SeeMeTV MTV Flux Zizone Social bookmarking Mister Wong Mobile specific services Qik Perso TV Mobango Mobango ShoZu Betavine UCC service on the TV Fame TV set TV Perso Audiobooks LibriVox Content ranking Threadless Government 2.0 FixMyStreet 7 7

List of interviews AFP Frank Alsema Myvideo (SBS) AgoraVox Frankwatching Neogen Akamai Freshnetworks (Freshminds) Netlog Alain Bensoussan Avocats Garage TV News corporation andUNITE Geenstijl OECD BBC Google (Youtube) Orange Brainsonic Habbo Hotel (Sulake) Red Chocolate (GoSupermodel) British Telecom Havas Digital RIA Novosti Buma/Stemra IJsfontijn RTL Netherlands Charlie Becket Khaeon Games ScreenTonic Cory Doctorow Lagardère Active Skyrock Dailymotion Lego Swinxs Endemol Livejournal Telecom Italia e-TF1 / WAT Marketingfacts Telekom Austria European Federation of Magazine Publishers Mediaedge:cia Twingly European Newspaper Publishers' Association Mobibase William Dutton Eyeka Moshi Monsters (Mind Candy) WoZZon Federation of European Publishers MySport 8 8

Access Issues Will broadband networks sustain UCC growth? 9 9

The technical environment: broadband everywhere? Penetration of broadband Internet access among European households in 2007 The development of UCC services is 90 80 currently sustained by the quick 70 broadband adoption… 60 50 40 …But cable is also widespread and 30 the digitization of the networks is on 20 10 the right path 0 Hungary Czech Republic Italy Slovenia Malta Latvia Slovakia Portugal UK Germany Cyprus Sweden Finland Luxembourg Austria France Spain Lithuania Ireland Poland Bulgaria Greece Netherlands Denmark EU Countries (27) Belgium Estonia Romania IPTV also experiences a strong development in some market and % of HH with Internet acces s % of HH with broadband Internet acces s could complement the access to Source: IDATE based on Eurostat UCC services 90% Evolution of 3G subscribers in Europe from 2007 to 2011 80% Last but not least, 3G penetration is 70% 60% still low but is expected to 50% 40% experience a tremendous growth in 30% 20% the coming years 10% 0% Italy Czech Republic Hungary Slovakia Slovenia Malta Latvia Germany Cyprus Portugal Sweden Austria Spain Ireland Luxembourg France Finland Greece Lithuania Bulgaria Poland United Kingdom Belgium Total EU countries (27) Denmark Netherlands Estonia Romania Mobile is seen as the future Eldorado for UCC services 2007 2011 Source: IDATE 10 10

Drivers and obstacles The most important technological driver is access to broadband internet, determined by the availability and affordability. Important for the further development of UCC is the access to mobile broadband internet, also as this might become an alternative for fixed networks. Broadband enables people to upload content produced with the widely available digital equipment and edit / share it by means of easy-to-use (online) tools. However, when these conditions are not right in regions the drivers become obstacles. When there is a lack of access to broadband in terms of availability and affordability the development of UCC is hindered. Moreover, even if there is sufficient access to broadband, insufficient upload capacity is a barrier. 11 11

Business models Is the value of UCC platforms in the content? 12 12

UCC services and advertising revenue: an impossible equation? UCC sites with global audience + increasing Internet advertising spending = no advertising revenue for UCC sites A spectacular growth in the audience of UCC sites: the number of users of video sites nearly doubled from the end of 2006 to the end of 2007 + A tremendous increase in Internet advertising expenditures : 69% of additional advertising spending around the globe from 2007 to 2010 will go to the web (~61 billion USD in 2010) = A modest take-off of advertising spending on UCC services: Estimates of UCC advertising expenditures for Western Europe and the USA (in billion USD) 2007 2008 2009 2010 Internet advertising expenditures (Western Europe) 9 997 12 752 15 857 19 516 Of which UCC spending 77 136 206 289 Internet advertising expenditures (USA) 16 112 19 173 20 611 22 611 Of which UCC spending 162 278 391 519 Source: IDATE for UCC spending estimates in Western Europe, eMarketer for estimates in the USA and ZenithOptimedia for the Internet advertising expenditures 13 13

No future for donation revenue? Most wikis websites totally or partially rely on revenues derived from donation, as non-profit organizations. Wikipedia = The most emblematic wikis: Nearly a quarter of a billion people visiting Wikipedia every month Generating nearly 4 billion page views (Comscore worldwide, February 2008), Total income (mainly donations) = USD 1.5 million in 2006 and USD 2.7 million in 2007. Total expenses of about USD 2.1 million. Wikipedia would be seriously considering proposals to become financially independent via advertising on the site. 14 14

Could paying models be a credible alternative to advertising? The Internet is traditionally seen as the temple of free, but… … several UCC services have developed various paying models – not necessarily directly linked to UCC – contributing to generate complementary revenue: Monthly, quarterly or yearly subscription fees to access to premium services (for example extra storage capacity for photo-sharing sites), Subscription fees to access content (like for a TV premium channel, like PersoTV), Revenues generated by the sale of user created content (like Lulu) or the sale of goods/items derived from UCC (for example the sale of tee-shirts or mugs created with photos uploaded by users). UCC platforms also derive revenues from the licensing of content and technology to third parties, from the sale of personal data and/or of aggregated data for statistical analyses. Isn’t the value of UCC services in the technical expertise or the quality of services rather than on content itself? 15 15

Successful UCC services’ business models: still a work in progress… The UCC phenomenon is still too recent to ensure that business models should be definitively set. UCC platforms are still struggling to find out viable business models. These latter will probably evolve in a near future: Advertising will hold a major place in the financing of UCC services: since users seem reluctant to pay for accessing the content proposed on UCC platforms, the latter will have to find other sources of income and will develop in particular free models based on advertising revenue. This implies that advertising adapts first to a 2.0 environment; Subscription and paying models will only be possible for premium services: it seems that users are willing to pay only for services such as extra storage capacities, or music downloading or dating services. But that will concern only a minority of users and specific services; Donation models should remain quite limited to very specific services, such as non profit organizations with a confidential audience (so as to limit the operational costs); Licensing and e-commerce should also play a growing role in the future economy of UCC services 16 16

Could the authors benefit from their creations? Examples of revenue sharing between UCC services and content creators Category Service Description Video sharing YouTube YouTube paid out more than USD 1 million in total revenue to user partners as part of the Partner Program between December 2007 and April 2008. The amount of the revenue sharing depends on the notoriety of the content. TuClip Authors of the videos selected on Antena 3 receive 100 EUR Author of the video selected as being the best of the week receives 600 EUR Social Netw orks MySpace Developers will be given the right to monetize themselves, through advertising, the applications they created on the MySpace Developer Platform and to keep all revenue. Citizen Journalism AgoraVox In the long run, the authors of the best stories w ill be remunerated depending on the traffic and interest they generate. OhMyNews The author of a story published on the website’s main page receives KRW 20 000 (about 13 EUR). Before September 2007, an artic le published anywhere else on the site was also remunerated with a KRW 2 000 payment. Skoeps 50% of the revenue (~€50) from content sales was shared with users that generated the content. Part of the advertising revenues was shared with the skoeps reporters Video Games Kongregate Kongregate shares between 25% and 50% of ad revenue generated by games with their respective developers Kongregate pays skilled developers between USD 20,000-80,000 to create premium games to provide their community w ith quality games. 80% of the revenue from in-game micro transactions goes to the game creator WeGame The top 5 placers can w in prizes. First place gets a USD 250 Amazon.com gift certif icate, 2nd gets a USD 100 gift certif icate, 3rd gets a USD 50 gift certif icate, and 4th and 5th both get a USD 25 gift certif icate Talent search SeeMeTV Each video download normally costs 25 Eurocents. From this amount, 10% is shared with the video owner Manuscrit Le Manuscrit Publisher pays commissions to its authors: •For electronic files: betw een 25% and40% of DF price according to the number of copies sold •For print on demand books: between 8% and 15% of DF price according to the number of copies sold MTV Flux Users keep 100% of the advertis ing revenue generated on the web pages that they are hosting. On the additional pages hosted by Flux - such as profile pages, community pages, etc. – Flux splits with the users (50/50) the Flux advertising revenue generated each month. Sellaband The advertising revenue generated on the website w ill be credited to the Artists corresponding with the number of free downloads related to their music titles in relation to the total number of downloads. The profit of the standard album w ill also be split equally between The Artist, The Believers and SellaBand. Ziddio Ziddio regularly holds contests where w inners are awarded w ith quot;exoticquot; prizes such as a TV production deal, a gaming system, a stack of cash, etc. UCC on the TV set Fame TV To urge users to submit content, Fame TV grants a GBP 0.10 reward to an author each time its content generates a premium SMS vote, charged GBP 1 to users Content ranking Threadless Threadless shares its revenues with tee-shirt designers and slogan authors, and also pay members who contribute to sales. Source: IDATE according to companies 17 17

Generating revenue: not the main driver for people sharing their content on UCC services Main motivating factors for authors: Expressing oneself, Being famous (even if fleeting) Or stay tuned to one's community turn Probably two different attitudes depending on the main intention of people: When it deals with quot;real amateurquot; content, people do not expect revenue and accept to share their content for free When it deals with potentially talented people, who could expect to derive income from their content, the fact is that they could accept to share their content for free since their primary goal is not to make money directly through the Web but to have the opportunity to become famous and then to make money in a more quot;old-fashionquot; way (by selling CDs or working for a TV channel for example). 18 18

Business models vary depending on the nature of UCC services (1/2) Principles of UCC classification A classification has been developed Type of content Economic Social Examples Category name during the mission so as to provide an Revenue No revenue Happy Few Large/Open access analysis framework for UCC services. Personal X X Souvenir photos Private Content This classification is based on a content Personal X X Funny videos Personal Content and user approach as opposed to a Story telling X X Wedding book Stories for my friends platform or service approach. It is based Story telling X X Collaborative Enlightened work amateur on the three following criteria: Story telling X X Book in Limited series commemoration Type of content; of a specific event Social aspect; Story telling X X Mini series Semi-pro Economic aspect. Main characteristics of the UCC categories Open/Large Criteria used for the UCC classification access Criterion Definitions refers to content developed without editorial views (example: Enlightened Amateur Type of content Personal souvenir photos) Semi-Pro Story telling refers to content developed with editorial views (example: online photo album integrating comments, music, etc.) Personal Content Social aspect Happy Few refers to a restricted access to content. The creator appoints the people who will be authorized to access his/her content No revenue Revenue refers to a large or totally open access to content, that is to say Large/Open access that every people having access to the service (either through a registration process or not) will be able to access content Private Content Economic aspect Revenue when it is possible for the creator to earn money (even if it is not Limited series systematic) Stories for my friends when it is not possible for the creator to derive revenue from No Revenue his/her creation (even if the UCC service could earn money thanks to this content) Happy Few Personal Story telling Source: IDATE 19 19

Business models vary depending on the nature of UCC services (2/2) Almost all types of UCC services integrate advertising revenues in their business models. Main sources of revenues for services of each category of the UCC classification Donations and public funding mainly Open/Large access fuelled the quot;enlightened amateurquot; Enlightened Amateur category. Advertising +donations +public funding Semi-Pro Personal Content Advertising + e-commerce The subscription models are essentially Advertising + subscription fees +e-commerce to be found in the four quot;no revenuequot; No revenue Revenue categories (cf. on the left-hand-side of the Private Content classification). Advertising + subscription fees Limited series E-commerce Stories for my friends Advertising + subscription fees Revenues derived from e-commerce are common in the two “revenue” categories Happy Few (cf. on the right-hand-side of the classification), Personal Story telling but not limited to them. Source: IDATE 20 20

The value chain also varies depending on the possibility for UCC to generate revenues (1/3) The value chain for the quot;Semi-Proquot; and quot;Limited seriesquot; categories: This model is the only one in which users/consumers pay for UCC and the only one in which the users/creators derive revenue from their works. Creation Distribution Consumption Other websites / Content providers content publishers Consumer Consumer electronics electronics manufacturers manufacturers Users/creators Software providers UCC platforms Software providers Users/consumers ISPs and telcos ISPs and telcos Advertisers Investors UCC flows Content/service flows Revenue flows Revenue flows (different from UCC) (revenue generated by UCC) (revenue not generated by UCC) Source: IDATE 21 21

The value chain also varies depending on the possibility for UCC to generate revenues (2/3) The value chain for the quot;Enlightened Amateurquot; and quot;Personal contentquot; categories: In this model, UCC platforms can only hope to monetize UCC thanks to partnerships with other Internet players or content publishers. Otherwise, neither the platforms, nor the creators derive direct revenue from UCC. Creation Distribution Consumption Other websites / Content providers content publishers Consumer Consumer electronics electronics manufacturers manufacturers Users/creators Software providers UCC platforms Software providers Users/consumers ISPs and telcos ISPs and telcos Advertisers Investors UCC flows Content/service flows Revenue flows Revenue flows (different from UCC) (revenue generated by UCC) (revenue not generated by UCC) Source: IDATE 22 22

The value chain also varies depending on the possibility for UCC to generate revenues (3/3) The value chain for the quot;Stories for my friendsquot; and quot;Private contentquot; categories: In this model, where the access to UCC is restricted to a quot;happy fewquot; base, no direct monetization of UCC is possible. Creation Distribution Consumption Other websites / Content providers content publishers Consumer Consumer electronics electronics manufacturers manufacturers Users/creators Software providers UCC platforms Software providers Users/consumers ISPs and telcos ISPs and telcos Advertisers Investors UCC flows Content/service flows Revenue flows Revenue flows (different from UCC) (revenue generated by UCC) (revenue not generated by UCC) Source: IDATE 23 23

Drivers and obstacles Due to the need for self-expression and social interaction UCC platforms can potentially achieve a large target audience / market. Companies can use UCC to get involvement / engagement of users with their products or services. Although still limited in relation to the availability of UCC, use of UCC by traditional (media) companies provides an additional driver for UCC. However, in spite of the large quantities of UCC produced there is a lack of original and high quality content which is due to technical quality (video made with mobile phones) but also artistic and professional quality. Moreover fragmentation of UCC makes it difficult for platforms to achieve critical mass to be able to monetise UCC. Investments in the platform are necessary, such as storage capacity and bandwidth, while revenues are very uncertain. Also the large amount of UCC that is available to large platforms makes it difficult to monitor content to prevent any unwanted content (offensive content, illegal content). This makes the threat of legal action an obstacle. Getting the users involved by means of UCC also means there is loss of control over image and brand. 24 24

User as a producer Or the end of professional content? 25 25

Individual Internet skills: tomorrow, all literates? % of individuals using Internet regularly (at least once a week during the last three months) 90 80 A growing use of the Internet closely 70 60 linked to the home penetration of the 50 Internet, and in particular of broadband… 40 30 20 …but strong disparities between the 10 North and North-West of Europe on the 0 Hungary Czech Republic Italy Latvia Slovakia Slovenia Malta Germany Cyprus Portugal UK Finland Sweden Luxembourg Austria France Ireland Lithuania Spain Poland Bulgaria Greece EU Countries (27) Netherlands Denmark Belgium Estonia Romania one hand and the East and South of Europe on the other hand 2005 2006 2007 Source: IDATE based on Eurostat Breakdown of the Internet heavy users by country and by age, in 2007 Men and young people are more heavy users but women and elderly are closing the gap Source: EIAA, Mediascope Europe 2007 26 26

Online activities: directly from the producers to the consumers! Top ten online activities Monthly usage of Social Computing applications in 2007 Content is definitely the main driver of the Internet’s growth A quick adoption of the UCC services but +150% since 2006 +42% since even heavy Internet users are more 87% 81% 2006 “spectators” than “actors” 42% 37% 31% 31% 30% 27% 26% ~ 83% have already watched videos 20% online s ng l o ip s ai s g s ip s ad di ew cl um n Em te hi cl ra gi o o si c vi sa r o nl de ar to fo re de g w ~ 38% have already uploaded a videoclip es Se vi kin on ng do d vi tm an or or i or s en ic ht V tw n gs us V st ta ,T g ne ,T Li in M ou s m to a video sharing site In at m al th fil R ci f il g a so in g ng in ar a ch di vi Sh oa at g tin W nl ow ica D un m om C The main activities related to social media platforms Source: EIAA Mediascope Europe 2006 and 2007 [Base: All Europe Internet users (n=4017)] UCC services = a new way of discovering talents, but each single Internet user IS NOT a new talent Source: Universal McCann, Power to the people – Social Media Tracker Wave 3 (March 2008) 27 27

Participation to the Information society: enthusiasm comes from Eastern Europe… Comparison of the actual reach of social media platforms' activities by country (March 2008) in percentage of Internet users Romania South Korea 100% 90% Hungary South Korea 80% Romania Czech Republic 70% 60% Romania Poland 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Watching Reading blogs Belonging to a Uploading Uploading Podcasting Writing blogs Subscribing to videos social network photos videos a RSS feed South Korea Poland Romania Spain UK Greece Austria Netherlands Czech Republic Japan Italy Germany Denmark USA France Hungary Source: According to Universal McCann, Power to the people – Social Media Tracker Wave 3 (March 2008) 28 28

Participation to the Information society: … but the habits are in the Netherlands and in South Korea Comparison of the actual reach of social media platforms' activities by country (March 2008) in percentage of total population Netherlands 50% 45% Netherlands Netherlands 40% Netherlands South Korea 35% 30% Spain South Korea 25% South Korea 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Watching Reading blogs Belonging to a Uploading Uploading Podcasting Writing blogs Subscribing to videos social network photos videos a RSS feed South Korea Poland Romania Spain UK Greece Austria Netherlands Czech Republic Japan Italy Germany Denmark USA France Hungary Source: According to Universal McCann, Power to the people – Social Media Tracker Wave 3 (March 2008) 29 29

The heyday of amateur photographers and videographers % of active Internet users who have uploaded photos to a photo sharing site, by country Photos = the most popular online content created by users Wide spreading of digital cameras, increase in bandwidth, development of photo sharing sites and of storage capacities. % of active Internet users who have uploaded videos to a video sharing site, by country Source: According to Universal McCann, Power to the people Social Media Tracker Wave 3 (March 2008) Video sharers = less numerous, but generally more active 21% upload videos on a daily basis 33% on a weekly basis Italians are particularly active since 31% of them upload videos daily. At the opposite, less active users can be found in the UK and in Germany Source: According to Universal McCann, Power to the people Social Media Tracker Wave 3 (March 2008) 30 30

More photographers than videographers than bloggers, but a strong heterogeneity throughout Europe Writing blogs Uploading photos Uploading videos Number of Number of Number of % total % total % total users (in users (in users (in population population population millions) millions) millions) Austria 0.30 7.2% 0.60 12.7% 0.50 9.2% Czech Republic 0.62 9.5% 1.00 15.9% 0.40 6.4% Denmark 0.30 9.4% 0.40 12.9% 0.30 10.4% France 3.80 10.8% 3.90 10.5% 2.50 6.7% Germany 5.20 10.7% 8.10 16.3% 6.30 12.7% Greece 0.30 4.7% 0.60 8.5% 0.40 6.9% Hungary 0.06 2.0% 0.40 7.8% 0.20 4.0% Italy 3.40 9.8% 5.00 10.2% 3.10 8.8% Netherlands 1.70 16.2% 2.80 28.0% 1.90 18.3% Poland 1.10 4.4% 2.00 8.1% 1.30 5.3% Romania 0.50 3.4% 1.30 9.0% 1.00 7.6% Spain 4.20 18.2% 8.50 20.3% 3.40 13.6% UK 4.30 12.3% 8.70 23.8% 5.70 15.6% Total 13 EC Countries 25.78 43.30 27.00 USA 26.40 14.5% 47.10 25.9% 25.30 13.9% Japan 14.10 18.5% 6.20 8.2% 6.10 8.0% South Korea 9.90 30.5% 7.30 23.0% 5.90 18.6% In blue: highest rates / in red: lowest rates Source: According to Universal McCann, Power to the people – Social Media Tracker Wave 3 (March 2008) 31 31

Users’ creativity boosted by UCC services, but already some signs of slowing down? Examples of the vitality of content creation by users Category Amount of content Creation Visitors/Trends Video sharing August 2006: YouTube stored 6.1 million More than 65 000 videos uploaded daily in August 2006: YouTube registered ca. 500 000 videos (requiring about 45 terabytes of storage YouTube (June 2006) user accounts space) In a single month (August 2006) the April 2008: YouTube = 3.75 million user June 2007: an estimated 40 million videos on number of videos on the site grew 20% channels and 300 million unique visitors video sharing sites In April 2008, 10 hours of video are worldwide January 2008: Pandora TV = 2.5 million videos posted to YouTube every minute! In January 2008 alone, nearly 79 million users inventory 15 000 new videos uploaded daily on watched over 3 billion videos on YouTube (Yen April 2008: YouTube = 80 million videos DailyMotion (January 2008) 2008) 2012: over 160 billion videos produced in the Number of videos appearing to decrease year (In-Stat) since March 2007 On DailyMotion, 800 million videos viewed by 50 million UV in January 2008 In France, 10 million of users watched more than 350 million videos, or an average 35 videos per viewer Photos sharing 1+ billion images in photo sharing sites 900 000 new photos are uploaded daily Growth levelling off (Aug 2007) on average in Flickr (August 2007) Flickr claimed more than 7 million registered 2 billion photos stored by Flickr (beginning 3 to 5 million new photos are uploaded users in August 2007 and 20 million at the end 2008) daily on average on Flickr (end 2007) 2007 5 billion images and videos stored by 10 million new images are uploaded daily Flickr: 27 million UV/month in February 2007 / Photobucket in May 2008 on average on Photobucket (May 2008) 42 million UV in February 2008 Photobucket: 40 million unique users in March 2008 Wikis/Knowledge 7.5 million articles in all combined Wikipedia has over 75 000 active Growth in number of articles in English sharing Wikipedia sites in approximately 250 contributors wikipedia tailed off since Sep 2006 languages (Oct 2007) The rate of new account registration in In April 2008 Wikipedia consisted of over 10 Wikipedia declined by 25% in 2007[1] million articles in 253 languages. The English Wikipedia has 683 million visitors per year edition had more than 2.3 million articles (April 2008), wer.weiss.was has 4 million (Wikipedia 2008), i.e. 22% of all articles on users/month (September 2007), Wikilengua Wikipedia (German= 8%, French= 7%, Polish= 3 000 daily visitors (April 2008), Rockwiki 1 500 5%) daily UV (1st half 2007) Source: Wikipedia, company sites, blogs, press, etc. [1] http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/10/11/wikipedia-hits-mid-life-slow-down/ 32 32

A poor proportion of creation in comparison to the number of visits The 20-80 rule becomes the 1-19-80 rule (source Hitwise): 1% of Internet users are creating user-generated content; 19% of users are interacting with that content; And 80% simply view that content. Source: Hitwise US Research Note – Measuring Web 2.0 Consumer Participation – June 2007 33 33

Content creators: a limited caste of young Happy Few? Typology of the Internet users All Internet users 15-24 year-old Internet users Inactive : 25 % Inactive : 56% Reader only : 10% Occasional participant: 25% Reader only : 16% Regular participant: 9% Occasional participant: 15% Occasional creator : 20% Regular participant: 4% Occasional creator : 6% Acti ve creator : 3% Acti ve creator : 10% Base : All Internet users Source : IDATE, Use-IT 2007 survey Category Definition Category Definition Acti ve creator Updates his/her blog at least once a week Occasional participant Posts occasionally comments on others blogs Occasional creator Updates his/her blog less than once a week Reader only Reads blogs but does not post comments Regular participant Posts regularly comments on others blogs Inactive Does not read blogs 34 34

Will online videos replace theatres and home cinema? Watching videos online has experienced a tremendous expansion in the past two Frequency of watching videos years: 32% of the Internet users surveyed by Universal McCann in September 2006 and 82.8% in March 2008 The EIAA Mediascope Europe survey shows a 150% increase in the % of European Internet users watching TV, film or video clips online in 2007 A Pew Internet and American Lifestyle Project's survey shows a similar evolution: • 48% of Internet users have ever visited a video-sharing site, i.e. a 46% growth year-to- year •15% used a video-sharing site the day before they were surveyed (8% a year ago) On an average day, the number of Source: According to Universal McCann, Power to the people users of video sites nearly doubled from Social Media Tracker Wave 3 (March 2008) the end of 2006 to the end of 2007. 35 35

Drivers and obstacles The availability of broadband internet, digital devices, easy-to-use online editing and uploading tools, and a wide variety of UCC platforms gives users the chance to be producers. New generations incorporate the web in their everyday life and grow- up with the skills necessary to take full advantage of the services on the web. They are more then willing to share skills and knowledge via the web. There is a lack of original and high quality content which has a number of reasons: limited upload capacity of fixed and particular mobile broadband, the limited capabilities of equipment used (e.g. mobile phones) and a lack of skills of users. Once users are able to produce high quality content, which can attract revenues, they will move away from the general UCC platforms to specialised platforms. 36 36

Legal and Policy issues Is self-regulation the solution? 37 37

Are users as producers still consumers? Many rules in information law operate on the assumption that the roles of traditional, professional suppliers and users as amateurs and consumers can be clearly distinguished, and that the production and dissemination of digital content is reserved to the professional industry. Users take over functions that so far were reserved to professional suppliers. When should prosumers be treated in the same way as professionals? Even if they have not the same legal knowledge, capacities and market power? And when should they benefit from the same privileges and rights? The law is largely silent on this question. If users are producers and not any longer consumers, they still might require “prosumer protection”. This is particularly true for underage “prosumers”. Other fields that require attention are cyber- crime, issues of data protection but also the exploitation of the amateur through UCC platforms and professional media. 38 38

Are platforms responsible for UCC? UCC platforms are exposed to considerable threats from law suits because of the (un)lawfulness of user created content. Platforms fall in between two concepts of liability for third party content: the concept of full liability of publishers and the hosting model where liability is the exception, not the rule. Neither model fits the case of most UCC platforms. The publisher model overburdens platforms with responsibilities they are not able to take. The hosting model ignores the active role that platforms have in aggregating and commercializing UCC. Neither model takes sufficiently into account the rights of users. The E-Commerce Directive has failed to incorporate user rights and put- back procedures. Audiovisual law ignores the active user. Should users and platforms share the responsibility for the lawfulness of user created content? One reason why the traditional publisher model does not fit the situation of most UCC platforms is that content is uploaded upon the initiative of users, not of platforms. 39 39

Is YouTube a broadcaster? The recent expansion of the Audiovisual Media Service Directive has paved the way for treating some UCC platforms as audiovisual media services. The consequence are strict provisions regarding e.g. advertising, European works and consumer protection. The situation of most UCC platforms, however, is only partly comparable to the situation of broadcasters. Major differences are the active role of the user, and the lack of editorial control. 40 40

UCC and social networks – the end of privacy as we know it? Users value their privacy, and yet they make the most intimate personal information publicly available on the internet. Do users need to be protected from themselves, and how much? Users who publish own personal data and the data of their friends on the internet are “data controllers” in the sense of European data protection law. Yet, European data protection law has not been written with amateurs in mind, burdening them with unproportionate duties. Personal data is the new currency of web 2.0. Existing data protection law offers only little protection against the exploitation of personal data, in form of re-selling or “behavioral advertising”. One blank spot in European data protection law is the protection of personal data of children. It is important to take into account the specific interests, experience, situation and behavior of minors on the internet. 41 41

Who regulates in web 2.0? New laws are not always the best solution to problems in web 2.0. Users can be part of the solutions in web 2.0. Technology enables users to take a more active role in the prevention of unlawful behavior, but also in the monitoring, policing and making of Information Law. Technical solutions can be effective in addressing some problems in web 2.0. Technology, however, is no excuse to ignore fundamental rights and lawful interests. The lawfulness of technical solutions must be part of their design. Self regulatory solutions can provide useful and important alternatives to formal regulation. An analysis of existing tools in this field demonstrated, however, that some issues are better fit for self regulation than others. Major, yet to be overcome difficulties with self regulation are the lack of adequate monitoring and compliance mechanisms, as well as the absence of users in the self regulatory process. 42 42

Workshop Presentation V 17 10 08

by content creation on Nov 12, 2008

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 1

Statistics

Workshop Presentation V 17 10 08 — Presentation Transcript