Gerd Leonhard: TheEndOfControl

Why Apple Won't Allow Adobe Flash on iPhone (Wired.com) - but not for long I think

Good story here: Why Apple Won't Allow Adobe Flash on iPhone | Wired.com. The marvels:

"Don't hold your breath waiting for the iPhone to support Adobe's Flash software: Apple's terms-of-service agreement prohibits it....Allowing Flash — which is a development platform of its own — would just be too dangerous for Apple, a company that enjoys exerting total dominance over its hardware and the software that runs on it. Flash has evolved from being a mere animation player into a multimedia platform capable of running applications of its own. That means Flash would open a new door for application developers to get their software onto the iPhone: Just code them in Flash and put them on a web page. In so doing, Flash would divert business from the App Store, as well as enable publishers to distribute music, videos and movies that could compete with the iTunes Store"

Plausible explanation but of course there is no way Apple can let this continue in the long run - everyone wants Flash on their mobile devices. Zero chance for Apple to keep the lid on like this, imho. What do you think?

Picture via Flickr - well done Martin!

Micro Trends by Bernard Lunn: Listen up!

Told ya so: Micro Trends Emergent Business Networks.

So he says:

   1. Transparency.
   2. Relocalization.
   3. Reduced power of gatekeepers.
   4. Micro-trend Slopes replace Chasms
   5. Changing balance of power between big and small businesses.
   6. Self-organizing networks beat command and control structures.
   7. The end of mass markets.
   8. The reduction in information arbitrage fees.
   9. Ad $$$ will flow to measurable ROI models.
  10. Bubbles will form and pop faster.
  11. The end of 10 point lists.

Wow. We speak alike I guess;)

Copyright extension is the enemy of innovation -Times Online

This open letter is a very hard-hitting and on-the-money response to the planned extension of copyright terms: Copyright extension is the enemy of innovation -Times Online.

"The simple truth is that copyright extension benefits most those who already hold rights. It benefits incumbent holders of major back-catalogues, be they record companies, ageing rock stars or, increasingly, artists’ estates. It does nothing for innovation and creativity. The proposed Term Extension Directive undermines the credibility of the copyright system. It will further alienate a younger generation that, justifiably, fails to see a principled basis. Many of us sympathise with the financial difficulties that aspiring performers face. However, measures to benefit performers would look rather different. They would target unreasonably exploitative contracts during the existing term, and evaluate remuneration during the performer’s lifetime, not 95 years..."

Read my various comments comments on Copyright 2.0 here

BPI: We don't believe that society can allow the free consumption of content to persist

From the BBC's excellent coverage of VirginMedia's plan to enforce the bizarre 3-strikes+out plan presented by the French Olivennes commission (and now under consideration in the UK): "BPI chief executive Geoff Taylor told BBC News that the body was prepared to ... take ISPs to court. "There is a phenomenal amount of piracy out there and we believe that the idea that 95% of content on the net is free is not sustainable. We don't believe that society can allow the free consumption of content to persist"

Now here is the problem, Geoff (and I think you know this): a free society does not have the option of disallowing something that is easy to do and undertaken by a majority of the population IF there is a plausible alternative that could make it legal without harming either party, i.e. just because your economic model of selling copies is broken it does not mean the government should protect you by turning the Internet into a police-state. The solution is a LICENSE to everyone that cares to have it, everyone that wants to offer music, everyone that wants to add music to their offerings. A license that RADIO has had for almost 100 years.  Get on with it and make that happen rather than trying to enforce the unenforceable.

Note: on the subject of so-called piracy check out Matt Mason's book "The Pirates Dilemma"

Update: good comment from MillionMedia here

Microsoft May Build a Copyright Cop Into Every Zune (via New York Times Blog)

Link: Microsoft May Build a Copyright Cop Into Every Zune - Bits - Technology - New York Times Blog.

"Mr. Perrette said the plan was to create “filtering technology that allows for playback of legitimately purchased content versus non-legitimately purchased content.... At the same time, it will be difficult for Microsoft to add features that consumers don’t like to its Zune products, which already lag far behind Apple in the market. Mr. Perrette said NBC understands the potential resistance. “In the short term, this will not win us a lot of friends,” he said. “In the long term, the consumer wants there to be quality premium-produced content, and in order for that to continue to be a viable business, there needs to be significant protection around it.”

Bizarre story - I can help wonder WHO WILL BUY A ZUNE if this is what happens. Help me out here...anyone?

Google: Viacom lawsuit threatens Internet communication - USATODAY.com

Another nice example for the Fight for Control: Google vs Viacom: lawsuit threatens Internet communication - USATODAY.com.

The back-and-forth between the companies has intensified since Viacom brought its lawsuit last year, saying it was owed damages for the unauthorized viewing of its programming from MTV, Comedy Central and other networks, including such hits as The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. In papers submitted to a judge late Friday, Google said YouTube "goes far beyond its legal obligations in assisting content owners to protect their works. It said that by seeking to make carriers and hosting providers liable for Internet communications, Viacom "threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information, news, entertainment and political and artistic expression...To the contrary, the availability on the YouTube site of a vast library of the copyrighted works of plaintiffs and others is the cornerstone of defendants' business plan," Viacom said.