Distributor and/or filmmaker control all copyrighted digital files and
stream on a pay-per-view basis. Universities can not buy files/DVDs
therefore no need to argue about pricing and what is worth what. Every time
you want to watch, you pay a "rental" fee. Filmmaker is paid "true"
royalties as all the streams are totally protected and filmmaker has a real
understanding of exactly how many people watched his/her work. Universities
save money as they do not have to pay for what they do not use; or not save
money as they may end up paying a lot more that the outrageous licensing
fees. Unless they push away the cost on the students (most likely).
Isn't it what Google is working on?
You never answered about what format files you're buying; you just got mad.
[mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Mark Richie
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Streaming Videos from the Collection
Geeez Catherine - I don't know where to begin. Let's start with this
from June 21,07
> SNIP> Libraries are buying FILES instead of a DVD or VHS? What format do
you need? > 6/21/07
Yea, there's a news flash. Some video libraries have been buying video
files (and the associated license) instead of VHS or DVD and converting
them since at least 1999 . . . .
Then about this one:
Multiple copies bought? Are you kidding me? Universities are buying 1
at the home video price (between $20 and $30) and that is it for--your
numbers--240 to 300 students. Go ahead and point the finger at the bad
distributor that wants so much money as much as you can, but if you do
have the digital rights and do not want to pay a license fee, do not
at all and let the distributors figure out how to deliver that format
your students legally.
No, I'm not kidding. Universities buy at $20 to $30 because a distributor
agreed to sell it at that price. "My numbers" ?? Great, let's remember
that you started with 10,000 students as part of the justification for
digital rights pricing. Good argument strategy - turn the realistic numbers
around against the other guy . . .
And the best part: "point the finger at the bad distributor that wants so
much money . . ." OK, I will. And I and others should continue to point
fingers (and not buy from) the distributors who have a flawed business model
that charges for the same content two and three times, set rates that would
make a loan shark blush and hold their customers hostage with outrageous
Finally, and let me check this . . . nope, I never said I didn't want to
pay license fees.
Never said that.
I also never advocated streaming without paying for a license. In
fact I pointed out why it would be WORTH the extra cost for digital rights
e.g.: "not having to stock two or three hard
copies that are subject to damage and loss, yea - that's worth a premium .
I will argue that when a classroom video/DVD is sold for $30 to a
university library there is never a question of how many potential viewers
there will be, what the student population is, or a requirement to report
the number of annual circs. Again, why is video on demand so different that
these counts became an issue? No reasonable librarian is advocating an open
stack video server that anyone on the web can access 24/7. There are
passwords, secure servers, proprietary download clients and registered user
lists to preserve the integrity of the collection.
The economics of providing digital files to university and other
academic libraries does not warrant $500 plus pricing for 3-5 years.
And the argument that without higher pricing there will be no new
product or filmmakers won't bother making films for so little return is
nonsense also. Go tell it to the educational film producers that started up
after 1985 when educational pricing went from $200 for a 12 minute 16mm film
to $69 for the same thing on video. Filmmakers want to make films. Like
actors want to act. Content will still get made and distributed - both
pedantic educational content and evocative, passionate documentaries. Check
out the NMM web site > http://www.nmm.net/market_notebook.shtml < for 55
distributors offering content to universities and K-12 centers. Five years
ago they had 38 exhibitors.
Business is about relationships. And for at least seven years this
issue of digital rights pricing has been one of the most divisive in the
industry. Libraries are trying to stay relevant and distributors are trying
to stay in business. The physical academic/k-12 video library will become
irrelevant unless it can make digital delivery cost effective. Without the
video library, the market place is diminished to the loss of all.
VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues
relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control,
preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and
related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective
working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication
between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and
VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.