You’re Not Licensing Streaming Video? Why Not?! by deg farrelly, Arizona State University


Published on

Thursday, November 4, 2010
5:45 - 6:30 PM

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Nothing in this presentation should be construed as promotion of any specific product, vendor, or interface

    Certainly will refer to companies whose products and services I am familiar with, but these should be considered points of illustration
  • Essentially the question of building a digital video collection

    These other matters are important issues to, and some of the content presented here will apply to these applications, but the principal focus remains the digital collections
  • Historically one of the 3 silos on campus: Library, Computing, and “Instructional Support”

    Collections consisted primarily of 16mm films, acquired for curricular support, and operated as an income generating operation, renting to other institutions that could not afford the content and/or the upfront operating costs.

    Paper catalogs, not integrated with library collection

    What has been forgotten in the past quarter centruy, is that these titles were LICENSED.
  • We’ve seen three major paradigm shifts in media formats in the past 35 years

    Advent of videotape, specifically, HOME video recording and the VHS format changed everything

    Media became a familiar and welcome component in homes. Several major court rulings decided in favor of the access video provided, changing user behaviors and spurring the creation of an entirely new business model: video rental

    Growing volume of sales caused
    prices to decline,
    video became affordable with many titles well under $100,
    Vendors started selling educational titles in video

    Side effect : availability resulted in declining rentals from the film distribution centers. Many closed

    Libraries, many begrudgingly, took over the large collections these centers held

    As collections grow, not limited to entertainment in Public Libraries
    Not limited to educational content in Academic Libraries

    Video circulation becomes statistically significant

  • Shift from VHS to DVD

    Now, a single device for storing and playing not only media, but also data and any other type of information

    Ubiquity of media

    Demand unleashes a warehouse of earlier released content. (Warner Brothers has a DVD print on demand for a huge number of movies for which there is not sufficient market to generate commercial re-release

    Production software in the hands of the everyday consumer

  • Emerging consumer model,

    Corporate attempts to monetize content
  • First with journals

    Now with ebooks

    Increasing expectation of online access and immediate desktop access

    Increasing expectation that content will be available on mobile devices

  • Evolution of instruction in MANY forums, but significantly, the emergence of course management systems and asynchronous instruction
  • Evolution of instruction in MANY forums, but significantly, the emergence of course management systems and asynchronous instruction
  • Which takes us to 1998

    NOT that that is when video streaming started…. But rather
  • Which takes us to 1998

    NOT that that is when video streaming started…. But rather
  • Uncertainties of perpetual access

    Notice that we’re not talking about ejournals here… the issues of ejournals have (for the most part) settled down.
    Still questions of perpetual access, bundles, etc.

    Long tail of use

    Key differences tho in that ejournals have ongoing additional new content added regularly,

    Ejournal publishers never expected libraries to house and host the digital content
  • These are not necessarily mutually exclusive

    Encyclopedia Britanica incudes video clips and full length in it’s academic version

  • Enormous change in just the past three years

    What was true last year, is not necessarily true now

    Changing regularly

    Explained in greater detail in Gary Handman’s Library Trends article. Citation at the end of the presentation
  • More vendors coming on board with this: National Film Board of Canada

    May offer other value added services, such as play lists, clips, etc .
  • All the heavy players: Icraus, BullFrog, Women make Movies, etc.

    This is essentially the de-facto standard for most companies.

    REBUY content regularly
  • A few vendors are starting to offer, tho
  • Arguments that it models textbook purchase
  • Ambrose – bundles of minutes sliding scales

    As with most purchases the more you buy the cheaper the unit cost.

  • File source

    Not just a single file, but backup file, and antip-copy protectin

    New format wars – especially as we move to downloadable for mobile devices

    Few vendors are offering MARC records…. And then there is sthe question of the quality of the record

  • These are issues that swirled around the recent situation with the UCLA streaming

    Basis for Higher Education Digital Video Summit in NYC in March

    Many different points of view

    NO case law yet to determine this

    ARL funded by Mellon Foundation to develop Center for Social Research _ Best practices in Fair Use

    Vendors are beginning to see Blackboard as the extention of the classroom.

  • Non CONTER compliant

    But changing in that COUNTER has just implemented investigation into best practives for reporting use of images and videos and audio files.
  • SCCTV already handling many of the files for many of the big companies

    Value added services

    Safari mostly K-12

    Video-on-demand and digital media management enterprise solution for school districts

  • Many more options out there
  • Nothing in this presentation should be construed as promotion of any specific product, vendor, or interface

    Certainly will refer to companies whose products and services I am familiar with, but these should be considered points of illustration
  • You’re Not Licensing Streaming Video? Why Not?! by deg farrelly, Arizona State University

    1. 1. You’re Not Licensing Streaming Video?<br />deg farrelly<br />Arizona State University<br />Why Not?<br />
    2. 2. This presentation is available online:<br /><br />Images in this presentation are used within<br />Fair Use provisions of US Copyright Law<br />
    3. 3. Scope of this presentation<br />Not a discussion of processes for:<br /><ul><li>Converting existing analog collections to digital
    4. 4. Repositories/institutional archives
    5. 5. In-house approaches to course reserve videos</li></li></ul><li>“trends noticeable today … are as<br />remarkable as the shift from the scroll<br />to the codex over 2,000 years ago.”<br />Peter Kauffman & Jen Mohan<br />Video Use and Higher Education <br />
    6. 6.
    7. 7. Paradigm Shift<br />
    8. 8. Paradigm Shift, Part 2<br />
    9. 9. Paradigm Shift, Part 3<br />
    10. 10. Parallel Shifts<br />
    11. 11. Parallel Shifts<br />Print Publishing <br />and<br />Delivery<br />
    12. 12. Parallel Shifts<br />
    13. 13. Parallel Shifts<br />Modes<br />of <br />Instruction<br />
    14. 14. Parallel Shifts<br />
    15. 15. Faculty Use of Video<br />Joint study by:<br />Copyright Clearance Center<br />New York University<br />Intelligent Television<br />
    16. 16. Some key findings<br />
    17. 17. Some key findings<br /><ul><li>45% of faculty anticipate using more video</li></li></ul><li>Some key findings<br /><ul><li>45% of faculty anticipate using more video
    18. 18. 43% cannot find quality/appropriate material</li></li></ul><li>Some key findings<br /><ul><li>45% of faculty anticipate using more video
    19. 19. 43% cannot find quality/appropriate material
    20. 20. 45% find their video content from</li></ul>commercial sites<br />
    21. 21. Some key findings<br /><ul><li>45% of faculty anticipate using more video
    22. 22. 43% cannot find quality/appropriate material
    23. 23. 45% find their video content from</li></ul>commercial sites<br /><ul><li>@ half that number (23%) find content in the Library</li></li></ul><li>Faculty are bypassing<br />the library to find<br />content they need, in <br />the format they need<br />
    24. 24. Licensed Video<br />
    25. 25. Licensed Video<br />
    26. 26. Comparable to E-journals<br /><ul><li>Confusion and steep learning curve in libraries
    27. 27. Concern for maintaining revenue stream
    28. 28. Inflated view of value and/or anticipated use
    29. 29. Fear that content will “escape”
    30. 30. Lack of consistent pricing models
    31. 31. Absence of consistent delivery models
    32. 32. Uncertainty of perpetual access
    33. 33. Acquisition governed by contract law</li></li></ul><li>Multiple Approaches<br /><ul><li>Publicly available titles
    34. 34. Annenberg /
    35. 35. Public domain content
    36. 36. Individual titles
    37. 37. Ambrose Video
    38. 38. Films Media Group (FMG) Films On Demand
    39. 39. Media rich databases / Curated collections
    40. 40. Alexander Street Press
    41. 41. Vanderbilt Television News Archive
    42. 42. Clip collections
    43. 43. Intelecom Online Resources Network</li></li></ul><li>Licensing Models<br />Four dominant models have emerged:<br /><ul><li>Subscription
    44. 44. Term license
    45. 45. Perpetual rights
    46. 46. Pay per View</li></li></ul><li>Subscription License<br /><ul><li>Offered by a limited number of vendors
    47. 47. Alexander Street Press
    48. 48. Films Media Group
    49. 49. Generally provides access to entire content
    50. 50. Serials / Continuations
    51. 51. Non-renewal results in loss of content</li></li></ul><li>Term License<br /><ul><li>Individual title selection
    52. 52. Terms vary widely:
    53. 53. One time, one week, one month, one semester</li></ul> usually to meet reserve use<br /><ul><li>1 – 5 years
    54. 54. Most commonly offered option by most media</li></ul>distributors<br /><ul><li>Treats video acquisition as continuations</li></li></ul><li>In-Perpetuity License<br /><ul><li>Often identified by media buyers as the preferred</li></ul>license agreement<br /><ul><li>Distributors have been resistant to perpetuity but</li></ul>environment is shifting rapidly<br /><ul><li>Distributor concerns
    55. 55. Limitations of distributor (distribution license)
    56. 56. Right clearances
    57. 57. Format conversion issues</li></li></ul><li>Pay Per View<br /><ul><li>Already common in commercial application: Amazon, iTunes, cable/satellite TV (“on demand”)
    58. 58. Few educational distributors offer
    59. 59. Expectation that end-users will be willing to pay small fee to view
    60. 60. Off-loads financial commitment
    61. 61. Potentially prohibitively expensive </li></li></ul><li>Pricing Models<br /><ul><li>No common pricing structure
    62. 62. Early model mirrored early ebook pricing
    63. 63. 1.5 – 3 X hard copy price
    64. 64. New models emerging
    65. 65. FTE based
    66. 66. Institution type based
    67. 67. Consortial pricing
    68. 68. Subscription
    69. 69. Patron-driven</li></ul>Most vendors offer flexible approaches<br />
    70. 70. “It is clear that librarian involvement<br />in scenario planning and the practical dimensions of licensing will be essential for any innovation to take place.”<br />Peter Kauffman & Jen Mohan<br />Video Use and Higher Education<br />
    71. 71. Critical considerations<br />and decisions will <br />necessitate libraries<br />taking the lead in forming partnerships<br />
    72. 72. Critical Considerations and Decisions<br /><ul><li>File source
    73. 73. Vendor provided vs locally generated
    74. 74. File format
    75. 75. .mpg vs Windows media vs QuickTime vs Flash vs ?
    76. 76. Digital Rights Management (DRM) issues
    77. 77. Hosting
    78. 78. Vendor vs in-house vs outsourced
    79. 79. Access and Discovery
    80. 80. Portals
    81. 81. MARC Records</li></li></ul><li>“One-stop” shopping is not an option<br /><ul><li>Jobbers cannot provide licensing rights (in most cases)
    82. 82. No equivalent of EBSCO’s EJS services to link hard copy to streaming/digital copy
    83. 83. No equivalent of Copyright Clearance Center for managing reserve or other short-term use</li></li></ul><li>Swirling Issues<br />“Swirling” by Exper Giovanni Rubaltelli, 2007. <br />
    84. 84. The move to <br />streaming video<br />is a <br />Pendulum Swing<br />
    85. 85. Implications for Libraries<br />Positives:<br /><ul><li>Single copy can serve multiple users/locations
    86. 86. Elimination of loss from theft, wear & tear
    87. 87. Savings in staff time for processing, circ, stacks maintenance
    88. 88. Space savings
    89. 89. Collections that address user expectations and use patterns</li></li></ul><li>Implications for Libraries, continued<br />Negatives:<br /><ul><li>Media becomes “continuations” with ongoing financial obligations – comparable to serial commitments
    90. 90. Increased initial cost in titles
    91. 91. Increased staff time for license negotiation
    92. 92. Minimal use statistics from providers
    93. 93. Diminished capability of ILL to fulfill demand</li></li></ul><li>Commercial Services<br />SCCTV/Iris Education -<br />LearningCore -<br />TelVue -<br />Safari Montage -<br />Swank Digital Campus -<br />
    94. 94. Open Source Options<br />Omeka -<br />Kaltura -<br />
    95. 95. Useful Resources<br />Handman, G. (2010). License to look: Evolving models for library video acquisition and access. Library Trends, 58(3), 324-334.<br />White paper version:<br />Kaufman, P.B., & Mohan, J. (2009). Video use and<br />Higher education: options for the future. Intelligent Television.<br />Retrieved from:<br />
    96. 96. More Useful Resources<br />OLAC Cataloging Policy Committee & Streaming<br />Media Best Practices Task Force (2009). Best practices for cataloging streaming media. <br />Retrieved from:<br />Selected Media Vendors<br /><br />Digital Rights by Vendor<br /><br />
    97. 97. Communities of Practice<br />American Library Association Video Round Table<br /><br />VideoLib Discussion List<br /><br /><br />National Media Market<br /><br />Consortium of College and University Media Centers (CCUMC)<br /><br />
    98. 98. Contact Information<br />deg farrelly<br />Arizona State University<br />4701 West Thunderbird Road<br />Phoenix, Arizona 85029<br />Phone: 602.543.8522<br />Email:<br />
    99. 99. This presentation is available online:<br /><br />Streaming Video Libguide:<br /><br />