Originally Posted by jayeff

Everyone wants something for nothing and in terms of anything which can be digitized, the internet is the perfect medium for granting their wish. The most interesting comment in that article was that some of the TV networks have stopped trying to turn the tide and instead make their programs available, complete with ads.

It isn't surprising that television executives are less protective of content, because to them the shows are just a hook to reel in the audiences which produce their advertising revenues. TV networks function exactly like many websites. At first glance and with a change in attitude, there really isn't a reason why the music and movie industries - porn too - couldn't go the same route.

One potential problem is the diversity of the 'net. A popular TV show will have an audience of 10+ million people for every episode and okay, they don't all remain glued to the screen through all the ads. But that apart, for around 20% of the time that audience is exposed to revenue-earning ads and station promos.

This is the context within which a production company can approach a network with an idea and if the execs like it, in one way or another the network foots the production costs. What would happen if instead of a major network with 10 million viewers, "TV" shows had to be made for 1,000 websites with 10,000 visitors each?

The problems are even more acute for those who cannot embed the revenue-earning element into their product. A pop song lasts 2 or 3 minutes: the idea of a 30-second commercial in the middle is ludicrous. So would the music industry, like those trying to sell still porn images, have to create some kind of stream with the ads embedded between each song or pic?

Because the hard fact is that internet advertising is not terribly effective. No-one would turn down the $1 million a year Pirate Bay is reputedly making, but even if that claim is accurate, it is taking over 1 million visitors per day to generate that sum. If PB were to buy or even just host the content they use to pull in visitors, their bottom line would look entirely different.

There is yet another issue facing online porn, which is that although giving it away to attract visitors is certainly possible, what then would we sell? Most non-adult products and services will not come near us and if all we had to promote was dating sites and sex toys, the future would be very bleak.

In the Chinese sense of the word, the next 20 years or so will be "interesting" and it seems to me that everyone except - possibly - the TV industry is between a rock and a hard place. Anti-piracy efforts are expensive and ultimately counter productive, yet so long as the latest rock band has a CD or a pornstar has a DVD free of ads for the bricks-and-mortar markets, those versions will find their way online. Regardless of how enlightened the producers may become in making their products available online cheaply and easily by legitimate means.

So if the pundits are right - and there is no reason to believe they will not be - that file-sharing will become increasingly popular, how can that trend be monetized? Not to the petty extent which allows a kid to buy a new motorcycle, but in corporate terms. And if it cannot be monetized to fully replace the billions of dollars that these industries are losing to piracy, who will be making movies, records and porn in 20 years time?