• Designed to bring “everything into one place” for Mgt Committee companies’ use and key reference
• Target for first fully-complete version of this is January 4, 2011, after which…
– This will be kept current with updated “of record” things that fit within the table-of-contents
– This document will contain most of the materials that are to-be-discussed at any given MC call or meeting (mix of key-update items and issues-discussion/decision materials)
• Currently, in this draft, we have materials that are current as the week of 12/20/10
• This is not designed as an orientation / executive summary document for executive sponsors and other colleagues of DECE reps who are not already familiar with UltraViolet
• With questions on this material, or to help communicate with colleagues for whom this “expert” material is not usable in standalone fashion, please contact Mark Teitell at [email protected] (617-797-5076).
1b. MC Agenda Items for Call December 21, 2010• Arrival & Roll Call (3 minutes)
1. Specs-revision Timing: update from TWG Chairs on work-planning + lock-down of target plan for “what we’re announcing” at CES (15 minutes)
2. DRM Next Steps: Proposed draft letter to DRM proponents on info needs and next steps for full approval / deployment (30 minutes)
3. Policy Issues:
a.Possibility of UX issues created by Linked-LASP limit now that all Retailers are / cooperate with LASPs. # of likely LASP relationships is thus potentially greater, and “de-linking LASP relationships” may also result in effectively “de-linking” Retail accounts. (15 minutes)
b.Next steps to have small team assess “Licensor of Last Resort” need states, implementation options and recommendation for Jan 10-11 meetings (15 minutes)
4. Quick Process check-in’s (10-15 minutes)
a.Mgt Committee voting rules – confirmation of interest in making ‘absent’ and ‘abstain’ votes not be de facto ‘no’ votes
b.PR / Marketing reviews (confirming timing for Press Release, internal PR prep docs, UVVU.com web site)
Possibility of UX issues created by Linked-LASP limit now that all Retailers are / cooperate with LASPs.
# of likely LASP relationships is thus likely greater, and “de-linking LASP relationships” may also result in effectively “de-linking” Retail accounts (especially since more/more-types-of “Linked” distribution than envisioned ~2 years ago)
Potential solution: have Linked LASP limit only apply to “standalone” LASPs (alternative: simply raise Linked LASP limit to e.g. 6)
1B-3. Policy Issues. Licensor of Last Resort (“LoLR”)
9
Updated
Negative Cases that LoLR designed to prevent or
addressConsiderations in Solution Design
• Consumer owns Content and possessed downloaded files – but can’t play Content on an UltraViolet logo device because no Retailer has granted right to serve License
• Retailer obligated to support 1+ Approved DRMs for which DSP Licensor support has ended (problem even if temporary issue)
• Others?...
• Would Approved DRM still need a (non-last-resort) DSP to be operational in order to be deployed)?
• Is there one mandated LoLR or is DRM simply obligated to identify/operate one? (and what happens if that fails?)
• What are the economic terms from a DRM to the LoLR? LoLR to Retailers? (bi-lateral or DECE-stipulated like costs for Coordinator)
• Others?...
Suggestions for ~15 minute discussion as input to LoLR small
Contents1. Upcoming MC agenda plans & Decision-Support Materials for WIP MC Decisions
MC open-issues list and current agenda plans for now through early January, 2011 (post-CES F2F)
Decision support materials for pending items
2. High-level Calendar
3. Key Project/Program plans & status summaries
a) Coordinator deployment
b) PR
c) Marketing and 1st-gen UVVU.com for early 2011
d) DRM engagement & deployment
4. Reference Items
13
Indicative Schedule - v1.0 Release• Neustar will support v1.0 and Phased Retailer on 4/23/11 per the MSA and current Plan Of Record (including CIQ/Testing time
(outside Neustar control))
• APIs for testing and integration will be ready for DECE members by 4/7/11
• Neustar IS examining ways to make APIs available earlier for early CIQ commencement/on-boarding (likely but by no more than 2-3 weeks)
• DRM support will be part of v1.0 release, provided DRMs onboard per MSA timelines (Jan, Feb); currently, 3 of 5 are on track
Summary of select key policy points: Phased Retailer
SUMMARY. In the interest of motivating support from interested Retailers as soon as possible, and to provide benefits in exchange for that support, DECE will allow and invite Retailers to become “Phased Retailers” with certain rights and obligations.
By executing a Retailer License Agreement before March 31, 2011 (and paying per its terms), Phased Retailers will have the option to “jump start” UltraViolet offers to their consumers by (a) selling content with UltraViolet usage rights (“UltraViolet Content”) and placing associated tokens in the UltraViolet Rights Locker before CFF is available; and (b) fulfilling downloads to Legacy Devices which can be treated as one of a consumer account’s registered devices in the UltraViolet Account.
“Legacy Device*” means a device or software application that is not UltraViolet compliant (does not support CFF, an approved DRM, Output Policies, etc.) and is managed by only one Phased Retailer who is responsible for adding/removing device to Coordinator and delivering content to the device. A Legacy Device must be registered by the Phased Retailer in an end-user’s UltraViolet Account no later than Dusk (anticipated being 3/31/14). Once a Legacy Device is added to an Account, it is grandfathered forever.
* Some devices can be upgraded from Legacy to UltraViolet Devices via a software update, while others would be permanently in Legacy status because they cannot be updated in this way.
Recent MC decisions: Media Format (as of 11/17/10)
32
PD: • Remove general requirement that all Device SHALL support dynamic subsampling. • PD Devices are not required to support subsampling, either dynamic or static.
SD: • SD Device SHALL support Static subsampling (horizontal and vertical) • Devices must support subsampling of the (full resolution) picture formats listed in the SD table, at 50% and 75% in each of
the horizontal and vertical directions. • Minimum resolution frame size for content to qualify for SD Download Profile is 360 lines (with proportionally fewer active
lines for wide aspect ratio content that does not fill the frame vertically). • TWG should simplify the tables where appropriate by listing the full resolution image sizes, and showing the NTSC, PAL,
75% and 50% subsampled derivatives, overscan, and underscan with minimum complexity (not as separate picture formats).
HD: • HD Devices SHALL support Static subsampling (horizontal and vertical) • Devices must support subsampling of the (full resolution) picture formats listed in the HD table, at 50% and 75% in each of
the horizontal and vertical directions. • Minimum resolution frame size for content to qualify for SD Download Profile is 720 lines for at least 80% of file duration
(with proportionally fewer active lines for wide aspect ratio content that does not fill the frame vertically). • TWG should simplify the tables where appropriate by listing the full resolution image sizes, and showing the 75% and 50%
subsampled derivatives with minimum complexity (not as separate picture formats).
The picture format tables listing the full resolution picture formats for 4:3 and 16:9 aspect ratio content will be prefaced by the clarification – “Video with active picture shapes other than the aspect ratios indicated in the table SHALL encode only the active picture area, framed as specified in Section 4.” (which describes active image encoding)
Publishers creating files in CFF who expect there to be dynamic ad insertion and should not use vertical static sub-sampling.
Recent MC decisions: CP/Retailer oblig’s to include streaming w/ original purchase + min. level of no-extra-charge bundled streaming / downloads w/original purchase (as of 11/18/10)
33
Change the DECE policy and direct the appropriate working groups to specify:
• A Content Provider SHALL include rights sufficient to fulfill the obligations below in bilateral agreements for all Content licensed to a Retailer
• A Retailer SHALL provide streaming services available for Content it sells and MAY stream content sold by other Retailers either by:
o becoming a LASP, oro subcontracting with a LASP using an Approved Streaming Protection Technology or one approved by
the associated Content Provider in their bilateral agreement with the Retailer
• A Retailers’ fulfillment obligation that will be included in the purchase SHALL include:o 1 year of streaming following purchase, consistent with the resolution purchased in accordance with
the LASP streaming limitso 3 downloads during the year following purchase, of any resolution consistent with the resolution
purchased and below
• Notwithstanding the above, LASPs could still be standalone and would not need to be a Retailer
Recent MC Decisions: approved Licensing Approach as of 12/1/10
Content Provider Retailer LASP DSP Device
Fixed Annual fee per Geo* $50K $50K $50K $50K N/A
Single Role cap (unltd-Geo’s) *$150K $150K $150K $150K 2011-2015 ramp :
$75/75/100/125/150K
Multi-Role Caps (1 Geo / WW)* $175K for unlimited Roles in one Geo / $300K for unlimited Roles WW
Acceleration offer: Choice: [Pay for 2 years, get 4 years] or [Year 2 @ 50% off] – if License by [3/31/10] U.S. or [Coord launch + 90d] in other Geo’s
Coord cost per each new sell-through unit reg’d in UV Account
Type 1: ($0.075$0.025)Type 2: ($0.005)
Type 1: ($0.075$0.025)Type 2: ($0.005)
N/A N/A N/A
Vol-driven Fees for all-other DECE OPS: UNITS
New Sell-through Unit reg’d in UV Account(Types 1 and/or 2) – ILLUSTRATIVELY SPLIT 50-50 B/W
ROLESStream N/A
Registration in Domain slot – SW/HW
Vol-driven Fees for DECE OPS: • UNIT-COSTS• WW INDIV-CO CAP • Type 1: $0.05 $0.025
• Type 2: $.005• CAP 2011-2015+:
$250/250/250/200/200K
• Type 1: $0.05 $0.025 • Type 2: $.005• CAP 2011-2015+:
$250/250/250/200/200K
• Legacy device “slot” fee: same as vol-driven Device Role fees in column to right
• $0.01 per Stream• CAP 2011-2015+:
$250/250/250/200/200K
N/A• $0.25 per Reg’d Device• CAP 2011-2015+:
$250/250/250/200/200K
AGGREGATE ROLE CAPS (on fixed + vol-driven fees for DECE OPS)
• 40% of DECE CY budget baseline (thus max “over-collect” in a year = 2x planned budget if all 5 Role-types hit this cap)• If Agg-Role cap hit for a Role, then pro-rata reduction made to fixed and per-unit fees driving credits for next [period]
* Small-Co Tier < $100M Rev = 20% of fixed amounts …normal as-above volume-driven units, unit-costs…individual-co cap = [as-above caps + amt. of fixed-fee discount]
Recent decisions : CFF for use in Streaming (as of 12/16/10)
38
Instruct the LWG to include the following concept in the CP agreement:
• “If and only if the MC (via heightened vote) approves the inclusion of new profiles for the Media Formats Specification to support adaptive streaming (describing the number and types of files for each resolution and their data rates), Content Providers shall be required, when requested by a Retailer and/or LASP, to make or have made such files available to such Retailer and/or LASP under the financial terms negotiated bilaterally.”
Marketing: Research Exec Summary (1 of 2)In October 2010, DECE conducted a web-based survey of 1,025 adults & teens in the U.S. and Canada.
• We surveyed:
– A mix of ages, genders, and household compositions
– A range of movie/TV consumption levels, buy/rent/subscribe patterns, and video distribution sources
– Various device ownership profiles for living room and mobile devices
• Participation requirements were liberal, but we captured “quotas” of high-interest consumer types to ensure a large-enough sample for statistically-valid analysis
– Screened for at least some HE use
– Quotas on demographic/HH composition, media/tech behaviors
The ~25-minute survey had three parts:
1. Understanding current HE behaviors, trends and satisfaction / pain-points
2. Exposure and explanation of the UltraViolet concept via video overview and info-graphic walk-through
3. Response to UltraViolet• Overall interest• Measures of specific willingness to change behaviors
for UltraViolet’s benefits• Prioritization of demand for various UltraViolet features
and use cases.• Most-likely skepticisms to overcome• “Bottom-line” expected use of UltraViolet among
Marketing: Research Exec Summary (2 of 2)• Findings corroborate and flesh out reasons for stalled EST market.
– Perceptions of both value and quality-of-experience substantially lower than other Home Entertainment options – 25+% of current EST users say they have reduced, or soon plan to reduce, EST usage
– Notable dissatisfaction in areas targeted to be improved by UltraViolet: overall value, moving content among devices/brands, helping keep track of everything, sharing with family and feeling safe from crashes/loss
• Positive overall reaction to UltraViolet. Strong general stated-interest – “very likely to use if buying movie/TV show” especially high among:
– High-value behavioral segments: current EST buyers, Blu-ray buyers and Blu-ray renters/subscribers, iTunes and tablet users
– Targetable demographic segments: HH’s with teens/kids, 18-34 in general and especially males, and male teens
• Beyond simple stated-interest: willingness to change behavior for UltraViolet benefits. Data shows consumer willingness to take action:
– More than half say they’d likely switch retailers, device-brands, or even one title vs. another, to get UltraViolet benefits
– Given choice between a movie without UltraViolet and one with it (at $1, $2 or $5 incremental hypothetical cost for randomized subsets of sample) up to 50% of respondents show willingness to “pay” in some form for UltraViolet (and a higher % among base of just today’s buyers). [note on presumption of re-downloads/streaming being free / nominal cost]
• Important skepticisms – but seemingly addressable ones. When asked, consumers underscored many we expect and need to address. Notably, “I can already do these things” and “only if iTunes is part of it” are NOT among important indicated skepticisms.
• Importance of UltraViolet capabilities. Consumers’ view on value of specific planned features/benefits shows that most are valued to a material degree. In particular, “choice” components of retailer and device interoperability, and content all-in-one-place, rank highest. Data here also shows that downloads and streaming are both viewed as important, at about equal rates.
• Bottom-line: affirmation of consumers’ adoption likelihood and material role for UltraViolet in the HE landscape, if deployed and marketed.
– About 30% of respondents asserted a strong likelihood that UltraViolet would likely make them buy movies/TV shows a higher proportion of the time (vs. rentals/subscription)…and more than 10% say UltraViolet would likely increase their overall use of HE
– In trade-off exercise to predict usage of UltraViolet-enabled buying vs. rental, subscription and other options…data suggests that broadly deployed and effectively marketed UltraViolet offers could have ~25% of HE unit volume. INTERPRET THIS AS PRELIMINARY AND VERY FORWARD-LOOKING, BUT ENCOURAGING DATA FOR NOW.
Source: UltraViolet Consumer Insights Survey, Oct. 2010; conducted for DECE by AbsolutData Technologies; n = 1,025
