RE: [kFW] Kendra - An Introduction

["John Oliver" <joliver@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Daniel,

A late reply to your Introduction document for Kendra, but I some comments
to make to help me better understand the positioning of Kendra.

* "Essentially, Kendra is a layer of intelligence on the Internet/networks
that enables more people consumers, content owners/creators and service
providers to do more of what they want to do with content."
This sentence implies that Kendra has a unique technology or product for
that 'layer of intelligence'. Is this a reference to the metadata research
that has been carried out by City University? If so, a reference to the
origins of Kendra would be useful in your document.

On a more technical angle, what is the Kendra network trial aspiring to
beyond what is being done by the Content Alliance?

After reading the document, the impression is that Kendra is a
'entertainment content over the Internet' initiative (representing a threat
to proprietary based satellite channels etc.).  However, I take it that
Kendra wants to be much more pervasive and multi-platform - in this case,
the word Internet can be avoided.

Imagining a potential technology or content partner reading this
Introduction, reassurances that Kendra does not intend to become a portal
etc. (taking away branding) maybe useful in the document.  When reading
about the goal of a unique payment mechanism coming out of Kendra, the
immediate reaction of the larger players is likely to be that they will
loose the direct link with the end consumer.

I plan to make it to the next Kendra meeting, so I am sure some of the above
will become clearer for me!

Regards,
John Oliver

email: joliver@xxxxxxxxxx
Tel: +33 (0)6 18 49 51 15 mobile


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Kendra - An Introduction

Kendra Initiative - 2001
http://www.kendra.org.uk
Draft Version 1 - 20010822
http://www.kendra.org.uk/documents/kendra-an-introduction-draft-1.txt



One morning in the late 1990's...
"I want what I want, when I want and I want to pay for it!"

Same morning, 5 minutes later...
"So, how am I going to get what I want?"



Kendra - An Introduction

Contents:

- Why should you read this?
- What do you want?
- What's happening now?
- Hindrances to progress
- Requirements and solutions
- Where does Kendra fit into this? Or where does this fit into Kendra?
- Common comments/questions
- This document
- Get involved!
- Notes



Why should you read this?
=========================

If you want to make revenue from content you will be reading about making
money.

If you work in the free (open source) software space or are creating
standards for media or networking you will be reading about creating an
open architecture for content delivery.

If you're frustrated with the difficulty in getting the content that you
want you will be reading about how we can build a system that makes your
life easier.

If you're worried about people copying your content without you getting any
reward you will be reading about how we can reduce unauthorised copying.

Before you stop reading and delete this email or chuck this paper in the
nearest recycling bin, grant me one thought: What if this was some day in
the 1960's and the title of this paper was "Internet - An Introduction" how
many of the above statements, about why you should read this paper, would
get a good laugh. But could it be an opportunity lost? So, read on,
MacDuff!...


What do you want?
=================

Consumers? Do you want access to all content, when you want it and willing
to pay?

Content owners/creators? Do you want revenue from your content, or even
just exposure?

Service providers? Do you want to enable the above the consumers and
content owners/creators to achieve what they want and get paid for your
services?

Of course when answering these questions you will start with a "yes, but".
At least we have some common ground to go forward. Most people like these
ideas but once you get to the details of how they exactly "want it",
differences seems irreconcilable. Let's see if we can get consumers,
content owners/creators and service providers to all get what they want.
Let's see if we can reconcile.


What's happening now?
=====================

More and more video and audio is being webcast (both live and ondemand) and
downloaded over the Internet. The growth rate seems to be ever increasing.
Broadband Internet access services, such as ADSL and cable modems, are
currently being rolled out in many countries.

As the time/cost constraints of staying online are removed increasing
numbers of Internet users will demand more content. Also, as bandwidth
increases, they'll want it high-quality too.

There is masses of content being viewed/heard on the Internet but not much
revenue is being made from all this activity. The potential revenue is
staggeringly large.

Filesharing systems

The needs of the consumers and the content owners/creators are not being
satisfied. Hence all content owners/creators and service providers are
missing out on this potential revenue. One example is the mass filesharing
that is going on right now with video and audio files. There is huge
potential revenue that is just not being collected because the systems are
just not in place.

One can attempt to kill off the filesharing systems so that consumers have
to use commercial websites and applications and pay for content. But it's a
real pain for consumers having to go to all these different websites with
their different payment systems, to get only a subset of what they really
want. So, if they can find a way around it then they will. And hence
consumers are drawn to the convenience of filesharing systems that manage
to give a good catalogue (a diverse and comprehensive list of titles) and a
quick interface but offer no system for payment.

I can't help but be reminded of that priceless line in Star Wars issued by
Obi-Wan Kenobi when he is just about to get splatted by Mr. Vader, "If you
strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly
imagine." Removing consumer convenience from Napster has meant a surge in
interest surrounding other filesharing systems (see Gnutella, Freenet,
WinMX, Morpheus for starters) many of which are not convenient single
entities (convenient for the lawyers, that is) that can be litigated
against. Or if they are then their systems are far more resilient and carry
on regardless of the creators. So, we've just moved the problem and maybe
increased it, we definitely haven't solved it.

If we want to take money off consumers then we need to have systems that
are far more attractive than filesharing systems are now. In general the
providers servicing the content industry are moving in this direction
(coming together) but they can always do with a bit of a nudge and a bit of
an end goal to focus on. Having a common content delivery platform that
will allow consumers the same type of convenience provided by the
filesharing systems.

Napster was so big because of the convenience of having all content in one
place. No matter what the music industry (or video/film or book or still
image industries for that matter) does in terms of packaging their content
they are going to loose out to the file sharing communities/systems unless
they can provide/deliver content more conveniently than these non-paid-for
systems. And that means giving the end user an interface (rather like a
Napster type interface) where they can get all content in one place when
they want it.


Hindrances to progress
======================

Narrow vision. Or not looking at the whole value chain

Organisations (technical or media focused) seem to be trying to come up
with solutions to content delivery within there own areas. But this is a
cross industry problem and can more easily be solved by groups coming
together and looking at the whole content value chain:

content owners/creators <-> service providers <-> consumers

All we are doing is moving blobs of digital stuff around the Internet so
what's inside the blob sometimes doesn't matter in terms of getting it to
the consumer. So, solutions can be more generalised.

Don't tell people what to do but help people do what they want

No one is the same and we must allow for these differences. No one likes to
be pigeon holed or backed into a corner. People react against it. We learnt
this as kids. Remember the story of the guy wearing a thick overcoat and
the Sun and Wind taking bets on who can get his coat off quickest?

In the past, technology companies have been all too quick to tell real
world companies how to change their business models to suit the online
world. But one industry can't dictate business models to another industry.
It just gets their backs up. None of us like to be told how to do our own
job. Each sector has to find its own business practices.

One example is the technology industry telling the music industry that from
hence forth they have to sell all their content on a subscription basis.
When the music industry has done quite well for 100s of years doing what
they do, selling music piecemeal, thank you very much.

Another example is the music industry telling consumers that they have to
buy their content piecemeal from many different sources, be they physical
(CDs) or electronic (MP3s from the Internet), giving the consumer an awful
experience trying to find the content they want and then having to use many
different payment systems to make purchases. When there are Internet
systems that provide far more convenience, faster searching and quicker
retrieval, thank you very much.

Inconvenience does not sell

By fragmenting the interface to content in this way the music industry left
a huge gap in the market which was unfortunately filled by systems that
have not allowed payment for content. Also, by confusing the consumer with
this fragmentation the consumer is naturally drawn to the most convenient
interface currently offered filesharing systems.

Payment methods

Users will pay for convenience. But they'll pay in the way they want, be
that subscription, pay-per-play, pay-to-own, pre-pay, pay-nothing,
pay-what-you-think-it's-worth (donations), pay-some-other-way or a
combination of all those options. For example perhaps we have a user that
pays a base subscription and then does a pay-to-own on stuff that's a bit
special. Whatever. It really doesn't matter. What I mean is it really
doesn't matter to us. It's not our concern how users pay. Let's just enable
it to happen.

Users will have a set of ideals about the way they want to pay. Content
owners will have a set of ideals about the way they want to be paid. Both
will make exceptions based in specific circumstances. A user may pay much
more for a song they heard when they were a kid but now can't find
anywhere. As time goes on content owners will make adjustments to their
ideal payment methods to increase profit or audience. As will the users
change their habits. And so they will work it out and it's not for us to
get involved just to make sure they are able to do what they want.

Too much Internet congestion with streamed content

Streaming content over many router/host can introduce latencies in a
streamed signal. Also, the further you are away (network wise) from the
streaming source the more likely there'll be some kind of network traffic
disturbance along the way. This may cause the streamed content to reduce in
quality or even stall and wait for rebuffering. One way to tackle this
problem is to move the content closer to the end user thereby reducing
risks of latency and network congestion. So, now we have the rush of the
content delivery network companies (CDNs) which do just that.

So, we have many different CDN players all with their own network of
servers hosting content at the "edges" of the Internet. The number of
servers that each CDN has can range from 10s to 1000s. Even if you have
1000s of servers there's still no assurance that the CDN will be close
enough to the Internet user to avoid problems with the quality of service.
In order to provide much higher quality of service we need to allow all
these CDNs and ISPs to exchange content so that the reach of each
particular piece of content is far greater.

Incompatible payment systems

Consumers want convenience. That also applies to the ways that we make
purchases. What we don't want is to have to register with 100s of different
payment systems at all the 100s of different websites that we go to in
order to make purchases. We can get by with one cheque book and one credit
card so why not one payment system? That doesn't mean there is only one
payment system for all. I may want a green one and you may want a blue one.
However, what it does mean is that all the payment system can talk to each
other, can reconcile transactions, rather like our current real world
banking system.


Requirements and solutions
==========================

Start looking at the bigger picture of the whole content value chain.

Look at where we want to get to and how we're going to get there.

Continue to build on the idea of a shared content space, that the Internet
provides us, but with more intelligence for caching locally and making
payments.

Build test beds for network models and interface models.


Where does Kendra fit into this?
================================
Or where does this fit into Kendra?
===================================

Kendra is an open architecture, format independent, research project
developing a transport system for content distribution over the Internet.
An Internet distribution and delivery system for the entertainment and
content industries.

Kendra is constructing a framework that will allow all companies and
individuals in the content distribution industry, from ISPs and production
houses to independent artists, to be rewarded for their efforts. Kendra is
a not for profit organisation creating a forum for those that wish to
define and realise content delivery within the future of convergent media.

Essentially, Kendra is a layer of intelligence on the Internet/networks
that enables more consumers, content owners/creators and service providers
to do more of what they want to do with content.

Essentially, Kendra Initiative is a group of people that are using their
Initiative to bring Kendra to reality.

Marketing

By calling this very ambitious system "Kendra" we can market the concept
far easier than if it was a description. Works in much the same way that
has benefited the "Internet".

The people in Kendra need to be able to look both at the big picture and at
the same time interface with groups looking at smaller areas in more detail.

Tasks

Look at interface requirements first and then build/interface with
underlying technologies.

Flag waving. Provide a stick in the sand. A direction for industry to head
for.

Look at the total requirement for the content value chain. The big picture.
All the standards definition people need access to a bigger picture to see
how they fit in.

Make constructive comments and suggestions to standards bodies to help
improve their protocols and make them more applicable/relevant to end users
requirements.

Improve the viewing experience (reducing net congestion) by hosting the
content as close to the viewer as possible.

Investigate intelligent, distributed, caching mechanisms to improve
accessibility, performance and reliability while minimising storage space
and network utilisation.

Investigate tools for content copyright management and accounting systems.

Bring together specialists in industry and academic to collectively build
and investigate a model for future delivery of broadband content over the
Internet.

Kendra Network Trial (kNT)

Kendra's aims include bringing about one logical global cross vendor
caching network because it's only from really getting the content as close
to the consumer as possible that we can increase its quality and hence its
value. Also, we need all the various payment/wallet systems out there to
come up with a "banking" system that allows them to resolve financial
transactions between each other. This would then mean that consumer
wouldn't have to sign up to 100 different payment systems and could just
use one. Rather like most of use only have one bank account. What
convenience!

The aim is to provide a practical test bed for these and other questions to
be answered. And to provide useful research into video-on-demand and live
TV over the Internet. Gain demographics for usage patterns. Provide a
report at the end of a one year period. And allow participating companies
access to logs and statistics through out the duration. Encourage multicast
enabled networks.


Common comments/questions
=========================

Content wants to be free...

A: Eh? Content doesn't want anything. Content can't think, last time I
looked. It's people that want things. If people want content to be free
then let them have available free content. If people want to provide
content at no cost then let them give it away. If people want to pay for
content then let them buy it. Finally, you've guessed it, if people want to
sell content then let them earn a reward.

But, but people don't want to buy anything anymore, I tell you! Look at all
the file sharing going on! We've got to encrypt all content and if they try
to get around it we'll blow up their hi-fis!

A: OK, OK... Take a deep breath... That's better... Firstly, look at all
the nice people in the real world buying CD's and DVD's, etc and see that
people are really happy to pay for all this stuff. You haven't even
bothered to provide those filesharing users with anything that even comes
close to the convenience of a filesharing system. Yet you are branding all
those filesharing users as thieves before you've given them the option of
using a system where they can pay for the content. Is that fair?

Let's just leave it to market forces to sort this all out...

A: Eh? Please define market forces? Is it not everybody on the planet? kI
participants are a subset of the world's population (no aliens, last time I
looked). So, totally agree, let's leave it up to market forces and that is
us!

We tried all this before and it didn't work...

A: Did you really try "all this"? Did you really work at it over years or
were you expecting a quick solution? Did you really look at the whole
content value chain or only a small part of it?

This sounds like the end of all websites...

A: Not an end to websites at all. But now, as these things go, there's no
going back. Napster, and the rest, have shown us an interface that is
better than what we had. But you should be able to click on a piece of
content in a webpage (just like you would in a local filesharing
application) and be able to view/listen and pay for it.

This is going to take all the fun out of finding content and make life too
easy...
Give me inconvenience any day!

A: Hmm... Well you don't have to use it if you don't want to. So, if you
don't like the idea of Kendra then the Internet must really get your goat.

What can I do to help?...

A: Go to the kI website and get on to the email discussion lists and
participate in kNT and ask a more specific question!


This document
=============

This document is meant to be fun and engaging. Though the tone is
light-hearted, it is not meant to trivialise the issue and as you'll see
from discussions on the kI website kParticipants are very serious about
sorting this out.

This introduction to Kendra must be accessible to a cross spectrum
readership. I hope this serves as a point of reference for discussion.

This is not a final version. It will get updated from comments, suggestions
and discussions and as ideas progress. So, it should be in draft form until
the Kendra system is with us and working. Then we can all go home and
slouch in front of our HDTVs and watch anything we want and pay for it!


Get involved!
=============

Go and have a look at the website: http://www.kendra.org.uk . If you have
streaming servers then join the Kendra Network Trial (kNT) and host some
test content.

If you have any comments or questions about this document then please join
the Kendra Framework email discussion list (kFW) and post there. Use:
Email: <k-framework@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: "Re: Kendra - An Introduction"

Instructions on joining discussion list on the Kendra website. Ironically,
to participate in Kendra Initiative and the email discussion lists involve
a small inconvenience: exposure. It is important that what happens within
Kendra is open and accessible. So, everyone taking part has to show they
are taking part. The list of kParticipants looks impressive further goes to
market the concept of what we're all trying to achieve.


Notes
=====

For the purposes of this document certain assumptions have been made about
the meaning of words:

content - refers to all digital content or anything that can be digitised:
films, video, music, text, still images, etc



Kendra - An Introduction
Author: Daniel Harris