A new online video creation service is available. This changes the video creation market. While it makes it easier for small businesses to create their own marketing videos, it challenges trained video professionals and storytellers to create more value in their service.
If you want to check out the new service called Promo go to: https://slide.ly/promo
The service includes footage, music and easy to use editor,just add your message and a logo!
What are videographers, video editors and storytellers for?
To help you create custom educational, entertaining and informative videos to truly engage, empower and create value for your audience!
We live in an age where cheap quality videos are available, but they are simple. Remember to get to the point. Make your marketing video 6 seconds, any longer and you’ve lost the audience.
Do you want to engage the audience with a story, teach them a new skill or provide some valuable information?
Contact notTV to hire a LOCAL storytelling team
and watch your community thrive.
Cloudflare turns seven years old today. We launched on September 27, 2010.
It was only a few days after our launch that we got our first request to support video streaming. Yet, until today, we’d avoided it.
Why? Simply put: the video streaming market is screwed up. While there’s a lot of money spent on video, there are only really about 1,000 customers that do any meaningful level of streaming.
This is in large part because it’s technically far too complicated. If you want to move beyond just uploading your videos to a consumer service like YouTube, then you have to use at least three different services. You need someone to encode your video into a streamable format, you need someone else to act as the content delivery network delivering the bytes, and you need someone else still to provide the player code that runs on the client device. Further, since video encoding standards keep evolving and vary across generations of devices, it becomes challenging to ensure a consistently high quality experience for all visitors.
And if that sounds like a technical mess, the business side is even worse. Encoding companies charge based on CPU usage, which is driven by the length and quality of the video and the number of streaming formats it’s converted into. Traditional CDNs then charge different rates for each region of the world based on the number of bytes delivered. Finally, player vendors charge at tiered levels based on the number of views.
Two companies said they were paid between $10,000 to $25,000 per episode for their shows. They’ll also receive 55 percent of the ad revenue while Facebook takes the rest.
In a move that could be seen as a direct competitive move to YouTube, paid series have to debut episodes on Facebook, according to the publishers. However, they are allowed to move episodes off-platform to their own owned-and-operated players or YouTube after a certain period of time. Though Facebook was encouraging publishers to use their player off-site, the goal is to get as many people watching Facebook shows on Facebook itself, multiple sources said.
Facebook has just made a case to increase the cost of advertising on the Internet. In a brazen move the corporate behemoth started paying content creators for a limited time license to their content. In a statement
If Facebook succeeds in getting more people to watch its original series on its platform, it could help the company solve a major issue they are facing: Having too many ads. The company has acknowledged its NewsFeed is growing overstuffed with ads. If people watch shows, they’ll be spending more time on Facebook. That would allow the company to charge more for ads because users are more engaged, without having to increase the number of ads on the platform.
What we like is that the Blockchain team, run by co-founders Peter Smith and Nic Cary, have built a platform that will allow them to be the custodian of any digital assets should alternate use cases of blockchain technology reach critical mass.
This is big news… notTV is re-inventing local television on a global scale, starting with Canada. Meanwhile, in the United States small Cable Operators have grave concerns over a potential merger between Sinclair Broadcast Group and Tribune Media which would give Sinclair an alleged dominance over the local TV marketplace.
Here’s an excerpt of the article published on variety.com:
A coalition of TV and media industry entities is urging the FCC to reject Sinclair Broadcast Group’s proposed $3.9 billion acquisition of Tribune Media, arguing that the combination would give Sinclair a dangerous level of power over the local TV marketplace.
What this basically says is that if the producer is hiring someone through a loan-out corporation the producer needs to consider:
“If the Composer is not an employee of the loan-out and there is no contract in place between the Composer and the loan-out, or there is a contract which expressly states that the Score is not a WMICE, then the Score is not a WMICE and it is subject to the reversionary interest. Meaning that the rights in the Score will revert to the Composer’s estate/heirs twenty-five years after the Composer dies.”
“If the Composer is an employee of the loan-out (which would make the Score a WMICE), or there is a contract between the Composer and the loan-out which has the effect of making the Score a WMICE, then the Score is not subject to the reversionary interest, and the producer’s ownership/control of the Score is not affected by the statutory reversion.”
get a copy of either:
a) an employment agreement between the person being hired and his/her loan-out corporation that says, “work made in the course of employment” belongs to the corporation
we would need to look at whether there is a contract in place between the Composer and the loan-out. If there is a contract, we need to determine whether it is “contract of service” (which would make the Score a WMICE), rather than a “contract for services” (which would mean the Score is not a WMICE).
If the Composer is an employee of the loan-out (which would make the Score a WMICE), or there is a contract between the Composer and the loan-out which has the effect of making the Score a WMICE, then the Score is not subject to the reversionary interest, and the producer’s ownership/control of the Score is not affected by the statutory reversion.