Revision as of 19:11, 18 July 2005 editOmegatron (talk | contribs)Administrators35,798 edits →Streaming Bandwidth and Storage: a perfect example for Misplaced Pages:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Binary_unit_prefixes still no sure if i got it completely right← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 23:08, 9 January 2025 edit undoKvng (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers108,221 editsm unpiped links using script | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Multimedia delivery method}} | |||
'''Streaming media''' is ] that is consumed (read, heard, viewed) while it is being delivered. Streaming is more a property of the delivery system than the media itself. The distinction is usually applied to media that is distributed over computer networks; most other delivery systems are either inherently streaming (radio, television) or inherently non-streaming (books, video cassettes, audio CDs). | |||
{{Redirect-multi|2|Streaming|Streamed|other uses|Stream (disambiguation)}}{{Redirect|Media streaming|the feature in Microsoft Windows|DLNA}}{{About|streaming media in general|the music listening format specifically|Music streaming service}} | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=September 2024}} | |||
] depending on the user's internet connection, and the video is partially ] in the background.]] | |||
The word "stream" is also used as a verb, meaning to deliver streaming media. | |||
{{Ecommerce}} | |||
The remainder of this article discusses technology for streaming media over computer networks. | |||
'''Streaming media''' refers to ] delivered through a ] for playback using a ]. Media is transferred in a ''stream'' of ] from a ] to a ] and is rendered in real-time;<ref>{{Citation |last1=Patrikakis |first1=Charalampos |title=Streaming Content Wars: Download and Play Strikes Back |year=2010 |work=User Centric Media |volume=40 |pages=218–226 |editor-last=Daras |editor-first=Petros |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-642-12630-7_26 |access-date=5 May 2024 |place=Berlin, Heidelberg |publisher=Springer Berlin Heidelberg |doi=10.1007/978-3-642-12630-7_26 |isbn=978-3-642-12629-1 |last2=Papaoulakis |first2=Nikos |last3=Stefanoudaki |first3=Chryssanthi |last4=Nunes |first4=Mário |editor2-last=Ibarra |editor2-first=Oscar Mayora}}</ref> this contrasts with file ], a process in which the end-user obtains an entire media file before consuming the content. Streaming is more commonly used for ], ], and ]s over the Internet. | |||
While streaming is most commonly associated with multimedia from a remote server over the Internet, it also includes ] multimedia between devices on a ]. For example using ]<ref>{{cite web |url=https://campaign.odw.sony-europe.com/tvme/mySony/my008/BRAVIA_DLNA_EN.pdf |title=DLNA Network Guide |access-date=21 August 2024}}</ref> and a ], or in a ] between two devices using ] (which uses ] rather than ]).<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Fayyoumi |first1=Ebaa |title=L2CAP-based prototype media streaming via Bluetooth technology |last2=Idwan |first2=Sahar |last3=Muhared |first3=Hiba |last4=Matar |first4=Izzeddin |last5=Rawashdeh |first5=Obaidah |date=November 2014 |journal=International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organisations |volume=14 |issue=3|page=221 |doi=10.1504/IJNVO.2014.065785 }}</ref> Online streaming was initially popularized by ] and ] in the 1990s<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://boyetblog.s3.amazonaws.com/PCPlus/324.Streaming.pdf |title=The history of streaming media - PC Plus |year=2012}}</ref> and has since grown to become the globally most popular method for consuming music and videos,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Music consumption at all time high powered by streaming and video apps {{!}} Complete Music Update |url=https://archive.completemusicupdate.com/article/music-consumption-at-all-time-high-powered-by-streaming-and-video-apps/ |access-date=5 May 2024}}</ref> with numerous competing subscription services being offered since the 2010s.<ref name=":1" /> Audio streaming to ]s, often using Bluetooth, is another use that has become prevalent during that decade.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Bonnington |first=Christina |date=12 April 2018 |title=Even Ikea Has a Connected Speaker Now |url=https://slate.com/technology/2018/04/ikea-launching-connected-speaker-to-compete-with-amazon-echo-google-home.html |access-date=5 May 2024 |work=Slate |language=en-US |issn=1091-2339}}</ref> ] is the real-time delivery of content during production, much as ] broadcasts content via television channels.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What is live streaming? |url=https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/video/what-is-live-streaming/ |website=]}}</ref> | |||
Distinguishing delivery methods from the media applies specifically to, as most of the traditional media delivery systems are either inherently ''streaming'' (e.g., radio, television) or inherently ''non-streaming'' (e.g., books, ]s, ]s). The term "streaming media" can apply to media other than video and audio, such as live ], ], and ], which are all considered "streaming text". | |||
==Etymology== | |||
The term "streaming" was first used for ]s manufactured by Data Electronics Inc. that were meant to slowly ramp up and run for the entire track; slower ramp times lowered drive costs. "Streaming" was applied in the early 1990s as a better description for ] and later live video on ]s. It was first done by ] for video streaming and ] for audio streaming. Such video had previously been referred to by the misnomer "store and forward video."<ref name=":2">{{cite book| chapter = On buffer requirements for store-and-forward video on demand service circuits | publisher = ]| doi = 10.1109/GLOCOM.1991.188525 | title = IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference GLOBECOM '91: Countdown to the New Millennium. Conference Record | pages = 976–980 | year = 1991 | last1 = Gelman | first1 = A.D. | last2 = Halfin | first2 = S. | last3 = Willinger | first3 = W. | isbn = 0-87942-697-7 | s2cid = 61767197}}</ref> | |||
==Precursors== | |||
Beginning in 1881, ] enabled subscribers to listen to opera and theatre performances over telephone lines. This operated until 1932. The concept of media streaming eventually came to America.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Reason |first1=Samuel |title=Music Streaming Actually Existed Back In 1890 |url=https://blitzlift.com/music-streaming-actually-existed-back-in-1890/ |website=blitzlift.com |date=6 November 2020 |access-date=27 December 2020 |archive-date=1 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201201112651/https://blitzlift.com/music-streaming-actually-existed-back-in-1890/ |url-status=live }}</ref> | |||
In the early 1920s, ] was granted patents for a system for the transmission and distribution of signals over electrical lines,<ref>{{cite patent | url = http://www.google.com/patents?id=5pV5AAAAEBAJ&dq=1641608| title = Electrical signaling |country=US |number=1,641,608}}</ref> which was the technical basis for what later became '']'', a technology for streaming continuous music to commercial customers without the use of radio. | |||
The Telephone Music Service, a live jukebox service, began in 1929 and continued until 1997.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Greene |first1=Bob |title=GETTING PERSONAL WITH THE JUKEBOX |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1987-02-08-8701100626-story.html |work=Chicago Tribune |date=8 February 1987 |access-date=27 December 2020 |archive-date=8 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201108000218/https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1987-02-08-8701100626-story.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="pittsburghmagazine.com">{{cite web |last1=Furness |first1=Zack |title=Did You Know Music Streaming Has Roots in Pittsburgh? |url=https://www.pittsburghmagazine.com/did-you-know-music-streaming-has-roots-in-pittsburgh/ |website=pittsburghmagazine.com |date=17 October 2019 |access-date=27 December 2020 |archive-date=4 February 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204132439/https://www.pittsburghmagazine.com/did-you-know-music-streaming-has-roots-in-pittsburgh/ |url-status=live }}</ref> The clientele eventually included 120 bars and restaurants in the Pittsburgh area. A tavern customer would deposit money in the jukebox, use a telephone on top of the jukebox, and ask the operator to play a song. The operator would find the record in the studio library of more than 100,000 records, put it on a turntable, and the music would be piped over the telephone line to play in the tavern. The music media began as 78s, 33s and 45s, played on the six turntables they monitored. CDs and tapes were incorporated in later years. | |||
The business had a succession of owners, notably Bill Purse, his daughter Helen Reutzel, and finally Dotti White. The revenue stream for each quarter was split between 60% for the music service and 40% for the tavern owner.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Bradley-Steck |first1=Tara |title=Complex Link-Up of Phone Lines, Old Phonograph Records : 'Human Jukebox' Spins Sounds for the Heart |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-09-04-mn-1987-story.html |website=] |date=4 September 1988 |access-date=27 December 2020 |archive-date=25 January 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210125214037/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-09-04-mn-1987-story.html |url-status=live }}</ref> This business model eventually became unsustainable due to city permits and the cost of setting up these telephone lines.<ref name="pittsburghmagazine.com"/> | |||
==History== | ==History== | ||
===Early development=== | |||
{{See also|Timeline of online video}} | |||
Attempts to display media on ] date back to the earliest days of computing in the mid-20th century. However, little progress was made for several decades, primarily due to the high cost and limited capabilities of computer hardware. From the late 1980s through the 1990s, consumer-grade personal computers became powerful enough to display various media. The primary technical issues related to streaming were having enough ] and ] ] to support the required data rates and achieving the ] performance required to prevent ]s and enable smooth streaming of the content. However, computer networks were still limited in the mid-1990s, and audio and video media were usually delivered over non-streaming channels, such as playback from a local ] or ]s on the end user's computer. | |||
Terminology in the 1970's was at best confusing for applications such as telemetered aircraft or missile test data. By then PCM was the dominant transmission type. This PCM transmission was bit-serial and not packetized so the 'streaming' terminology was often a confusion factor. In 1969 Grumman acquired one of the first telemetry ground stations which had the capability for reconstructing serial telemetered data which had been recorded on digital computer peripheral tapes. Computer peripheral tapes were inherently recorded in blocks. Reconstruction was required for continuous display purposes without time-base distortion. The Navy implemented similar capability in DoD for the first time in 1973. These implementations are the only known examples of true 'streaming' in the sense of reconstructing distortion-free serial data from packetized or blocked recordings.<ref>IEEE Aero & AES Magazine, May 2022 ISSN 0885-8985, Vol 37, No.5 pp. 40</ref> 'Real-time' terminology has also been confusing in streaming context. The most accepted definition of 'real-time' requires that all associated processing or formatting of the data must take place prior to availability of the next sample of each measurement. In the 1970s the most powerful mainframe computers were not fast enough for this task at significant overall data rates in the range of 50,000 samples per second. For that reason both the Grumman ATS and the Navy Real-time Telemetry Processing System employed unique special purpose digital computers dedicated to real-time processing of raw data samples. | |||
In 1990, the first commercial ] was introduced by ], which enabled the more powerful computer networks that led to the first streaming video solutions used by schools and corporations. | |||
Practical streaming media was only made possible with advances in ] due to the impractically high bandwidth requirements of uncompressed media. Raw ] encoded with ] (PCM) requires a bandwidth of 1.4{{nbsp}}] for uncompressed ], while raw ] requires a bandwidth of 168{{nbsp}}Mbit/s for ] and over 1000{{nbsp}}Mbit/s for ] video.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Lee |first1=Jack |title=Scalable Continuous Media Streaming Systems: Architecture, Design, Analysis and Implementation |date=2005 |publisher=] |isbn=9780470857649 |page=25 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7fuvu52cyNEC&pg=PA25}}</ref> | |||
=== Late 1990s to early 2000s === | |||
{{See also|Original net animation}} | |||
During the late 1990s and early 2000s, users had increased access to computer networks, especially the Internet. During the early 2000s, users had access to increased network ], especially in the ]. These technological improvements facilitated the streaming of audio and video content to computer users in their homes and workplaces. There was also an increasing use of standard protocols and formats, such as ], ], and ], as the Internet became increasingly commercialized, which led to an infusion of investment into the sector. | |||
The band ] was the first group to perform live on the Internet. On 24 June 1993, the band was playing a gig at ], while elsewhere in the building, scientists were discussing new technology (the ]) for broadcasting on the Internet using ]ing. As proof of PARC's technology, the band's performance was broadcast and could be seen live in Australia and elsewhere. In a March 2017 interview, band member Russ Haines stated that the band had used approximately "half of the total bandwidth of the internet" to stream the performance, which was a {{resx|152|76}} pixel video, updated eight to twelve times per second, with audio quality that was, "at best, a bad telephone connection."<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190129023330/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRa2pE5-Ny0&gl=US&hl=en |date=29 January 2019 }}. Via YouTube. Internet Archive – Stream Division. 5 April 2017. Retrieved 13 January 2018.</ref> In October 1994, a school music festival was webcast from the Michael Fowler Centre in Wellington, New Zealand. The technician who arranged the webcast, local council employee Richard Naylor, later commented: "We had 16 viewers in 12 countries."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Newman |first1=Keith |title=Connecting the Clouds: The Internet in New Zealand |date=2008 |publisher=Activity Press |location=Auckland |isbn=978-0-9582634-4-3 |page=90}}</ref> | |||
] pioneered the broadcast of a baseball game between the ] and the ] over the Internet in 1995.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/RealNetworks-Inc-Company-History.html |publisher=Funding Universe |title=RealNetworks Inc. |access-date=23 July 2011 |archive-date=11 July 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110711054958/http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/RealNetworks-Inc-Company-History.html |url-status=live }}</ref> The first symphonic concert on the Internet—a collaboration between the ] and guest musicians ], ], and ]—took place at the ] in ], Washington, on 10 November 1995.<ref>{{cite magazine |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title= Cyberian Rhapsody |magazine=Billboard |location= United States|publisher= Lynne Segall|date=17 February 1996}}</ref> | |||
In 1996, ] produced the first large-scale, online, live broadcast, the ]–led ], an event that would define the format of social change broadcasts. Scarpa continued to pioneer in the streaming media world with projects such as ], Townhall with ], and more recently Covered CA's campaign "Tell a Friend Get Covered", which was livestreamed on YouTube. | |||
=== Business developments === | |||
] was founded in 1989 and developed a JPEG streaming product called "StreamWorks". Another streaming product appeared in late 1992 and was named StarWorks.<ref name="StarWorks">{{Cite book |doi = 10.1109/CMPCON.1993.289623|title = Digest of Papers. Compcon Spring|year = 1993|last1 = Tobagi|first1 = F.A.|last2 = Pang|first2 = J.| chapter=StarWorks-a video applications server |pages = 4–11|isbn = 0-8186-3400-6|s2cid = 61039780}}</ref> StarWorks enabled on-demand MPEG-1 full-motion videos to be randomly accessed on corporate ] networks. Starworks was from ], which also pioneered live video streaming on Ethernet and via ] over satellites with ].<ref name="Starlight Networks and Hughes Network Systems">{{cite web |url=http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Starlight+Networks+and+Hughes+Network+Systems+Plan+Corporate...-a017588314 |title=Starlight Networks and Hughes Network Systems |access-date=10 May 2017 |archive-date=2 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190402180803/https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Starlight+Networks+and+Hughes+Network+Systems+Plan+Corporate...-a017588314 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Other early companies that created streaming media technology include Progressive Networks and Protocomm prior to widespread World Wide Web usage. After the ] in 1995 (and the release of ] with built-in ] support), usage of the Internet expanded, and ], including Progressive Networks (which was renamed "]", and listed on ] as "RNWK"). As the web became even more popular in the late 90s, streaming video on the internet blossomed from startups such as ] (later acquired by RealNetworks), VDOnet (acquired by RealNetworks), Precept (acquired by ]), and Xing (acquired by RealNetworks).<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Sullivan |first=Jennifer |title=Revived RealNetworks Buys Xing |language=en-US |magazine=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/1999/04/revived-realnetworks-buys-xing/ |access-date=5 October 2022 |issn=1059-1028}}</ref> | |||
] developed a media player known as ] in 1995 that supported streaming media and included a proprietary streaming format, which was the precursor to the streaming feature later in ] 6.4 in 1999. In June 1999, ] also introduced a streaming media format in its ] 4 application. It was later also widely adopted on websites, along with RealPlayer and Windows Media streaming formats. The competing formats on websites required each user to download the respective applications for streaming, which resulted in many users having to have all three applications on their computer for general compatibility. | |||
In 2000, Industryview.com launched its "world's largest streaming video archive" website to help businesses promote themselves.<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Hebert |first=Steve |date=November 2000 |title=Streaming Video Opens New Doors |magazine=Videography|page=164}}</ref> Webcasting became an emerging tool for business marketing and advertising that combined the immersive nature of television with the interactivity of the Web. The ability to collect data and feedback from potential customers caused this technology to gain momentum quickly.<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Reinstein |first=Bill |date=25 June 2001 |title=Webcasts Mature as Marketing Tool |magazine=DM News|page=24}}</ref> | |||
Around 2002, the interest in a single, unified, streaming format and the widespread adoption of ] prompted the development of a video streaming format through Flash, which was the format used in Flash-based players on ] sites. The first popular video streaming site, YouTube, was founded by ], ], and ] in 2005. It initially used a Flash-based player, which played ] video and ] audio, but now defaults to ].<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://youtube-eng.googleblog.com/2015/01/youtube-now-defaults-to-html5_27.html|title=YouTube now defaults to HTML5 <nowiki><video></nowiki>|work=YouTube Engineering and Developers Blog|access-date=20 February 2018|archive-date=10 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180910204225/https://youtube-eng.googleblog.com/2015/01/youtube-now-defaults-to-html5_27.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> Increasing consumer demand for live streaming prompted YouTube to implement a new live streaming service for users.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-9883062-2.html |author=Josh Lowensohn |year=2008 |title=YouTube to Offer Live Streaming This Year |access-date=23 July 2011 |archive-date=10 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110810020943/http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-9883062-2.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> The company currently also offers a (secure) link that returns the available connection speed of the user.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/my_speed# | title=YouTube Video Speed History | via=YouTube |access-date=30 April 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120426225550/http://www.youtube.com/my_speed |archive-date=26 April 2012 }}</ref> | |||
The ] (RIAA) revealed through its 2015, earnings report that streaming services were responsible for 34.3 percent of the year's total ]'s revenue, growing 29 percent from the previous year and becoming the largest source of income, pulling in around $2.4 billion.<ref>{{cite web|title=News and Notes on 2015 RIAA Shipment and Revenue Statistics|url=https://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/RIAA-2015-Year-End-shipments-memo.pdf|publisher=Recording Industry Association of America|access-date=5 January 2017|archive-date=6 June 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190606161536/https://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/RIAA-2015-Year-End-shipments-memo.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Streaming made more revenue for music industry in 2015 than digital downloads, physical sales|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/23/streaming-made-more-revenue-for-music-industry-in-/|newspaper=The Washington Times|access-date=5 January 2017|archive-date=5 January 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170105180057/http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/23/streaming-made-more-revenue-for-music-industry-in-/|url-status=live}}</ref> US streaming revenue grew 57 percent to $1.6 billion in the first half of 2016 and accounted for almost half of industry sales.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Shaw|first1=Lucas|title=The Music Industry Is Finally Making Money on Streaming|newspaper=Bloomberg.com|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-20/spotify-apple-drive-u-s-music-industry-s-8-first-half-growth|publisher=Bloomberg L.P.|access-date=5 January 2017|date=20 September 2016|archive-date=22 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190522143903/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-20/spotify-apple-drive-u-s-music-industry-s-8-first-half-growth|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
=== Streaming wars === | |||
{{See also|List of streaming media services}} | |||
{{Redirect|Streaming wars|the South Park film|South Park The Streaming Wars}}{{For|competition between music streaming platforms|#Music streaming platforms}}{{History of American television}} | |||
The term ''streaming wars'' was coined to describe the new era (starting in the late 2010s) of competition between video streaming services such as ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and many more.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|url=https://www.theverge.com/streaming-wars|title=Streaming Wars|website=The Verge|access-date=1 December 2019|archive-date=6 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191206031626/https://www.theverge.com/streaming-wars|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Chalaby |first1=Jean K |title=The streaming industry and the platform economy: An analysis |journal=] |year=2024 |volume=46 |issue=3 |pages=552–571 |doi=10.1177/01634437231210439 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
The competition among online platforms has driven them to find ways to differentiate themselves from the rest. A key differentiator is offering exclusive content, often self-produced and created for a specific ]. When Netflix first launched in 2007 it became one of the more dominant streaming platforms. This changed when Disney+ came out offering exclusive content that wasn't available on any other platforms. Disney+ took advantage of owning popular movies and shows like Frozen and Moana drawing in more subscribers and making it a big competitor for Netflix.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Why the Streaming Wars Will Change the TV Industry Forever {{!}} Paramount |url=https://www.paramount.com/news/why-the-streaming-wars-will-change-the-tv-industry-forever |access-date=2024-12-09 |website=www.paramount.com |language=en}}</ref> Research suggests that this approach to streaming competition can be disadvantageous for consumers by increasing spending across platforms, and for the industry as a whole by dilution of subscriber base. Once specific content is made available on a streaming service, piracy searches for the same content decrease; competition or legal availability across multiple platforms appears to deter online piracy. Exclusive content produced for subscription services such as Netflix tends to have a higher production budget than content produced exclusively for ] services, such as Amazon Prime Video.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Streaming wars (Creative Economy Notes Series)|url=https://www.wipo.int/edocs/infogdocs/creative_industries/en/streaming-wars|access-date=29 December 2021|website=wipo.int|language=en}}</ref> | |||
This competition increased during the first two years of the ] as more people stayed home and watched TV. "The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a seismic shift in the film & TV industry in terms of how films are made, distributed, and screened. Many industries have been hit by the economic effects of the pandemic" (Totaro Donato).<ref name=":2" /> In August 2022, a CNN headline declared that "The streaming wars are over" as pandemic-era restrictions had largely ended and audience growth had stalled. This led services to focus on profit over market share by cutting production budgets, cracking down on password sharing, and introducing ad-supported tiers.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/11/media/streaming-disney-netflix/index.html |title=The streaming wars are over |publisher=] |author=Frank Pallotta |date=11 August 2022 |access-date=19 August 2022 |archive-date=19 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220819180708/https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/11/media/streaming-disney-netflix/index.html |url-status=live }}</ref> A December 2022 article in '']'' echoed this, declaring an end to the "golden age of the streaming wars".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Cranz |first=Alex |date=14 December 2022 |title=The golden age of the streaming wars has ended |url=https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/14/23507793/streaming-wars-hbo-max-netflix-ads-residuals-warrior-nun |access-date=29 December 2022 |website=] |archive-date=29 December 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221229202957/https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/14/23507793/streaming-wars-hbo-max-netflix-ads-residuals-warrior-nun |url-status=live }}</ref> | |||
In September 2023, several streaming services formed a ] named the Streaming Innovation Alliance (SIA), spearheaded by ] of the ] (MPA). Former ] ] and former ] (FCC) acting chair ] serve as senior advisors. Founding members include AfroLandTV, America Nu Network, ], ], ], ], ], For Us By Us Network, ], ], the MPA, MotorTrend+, ], ], ], ], ], ], ], Vault TV, and ]. Notably absent were ], ], ], and ].<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Huston |first=Caitlin |date=26 September 2023 |title=Netflix, Max, Disney and More Form Streaming Industry Trade Alliance |url=https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/netflix-max-disney-and-more-form-streaming-industry-trade-alliance-1235600700/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230926171324/https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/netflix-max-disney-and-more-form-streaming-industry-trade-alliance-1235600700/ |archive-date=26 September 2023 |access-date=26 September 2023 |magazine=]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Davis |first=Wes |date=26 September 2023 |title=Streaming giants have banded together for lobbying power |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/26/23890778/streaming-companies-trade-group-sia-regulation-net-neutrality |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230926171450/https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/26/23890778/streaming-companies-trade-group-sia-regulation-net-neutrality |archive-date=26 September 2023 |access-date=26 September 2023 |website=]}}</ref> | |||
== Use by the general public == | |||
] at a zoo by ]]] | |||
Advances in ]ing, combined with powerful home computers and operating systems, have made streaming media affordable and easy for the public. Stand-alone ]s emerged to offer listeners a non-technical option for listening to audio streams. These audio-streaming services became increasingly popular; music streaming reached 4 trillion streams globally in 2023 -- a significant increase from 2022 -- jumping 34% over the year.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Sherman |first=Maria |date=2024-01-10 |title=Music streams hit 4 trillion in 2023. Country and global acts — and Taylor Swift — fueled the growth |url=https://apnews.com/article/music-streams-2023-luminate-54aa3735ed707c1d5e9649724cc78c1f |access-date=2024-11-21 |website=AP News |language=en}}</ref> | |||
] receiver playing music being streamed via Bluetooth from a smartphone]] | |||
In general, multimedia content is data-intensive, so media storage and transmission costs are still significant. Media is generally ] for transport and storage. Increasing consumer demand for streaming ] (HD) content has led the industry to develop technologies such as ] and ], which are optimized for streaming HD content. Many developers have introduced HD streaming apps that work on smaller devices, such as tablets and smartphones, for everyday purposes. | |||
{{quote box | |||
| quote = "Streaming creates the illusion—greatly magnified by headphone use, which is another matter—that music is a utility you can turn on and off; the water metaphor is intrinsic to how it works. It dematerializes music, denies it a crucial measure of autonomy, reality, and power. It makes music seem disposable, impermanent. Hence it intensifies the ebb and flow of pop fashion, the way ] rise up for a week or a month and are then forgotten. And it renders our experience of individual artists/groups shallower." | |||
| source = —], 2018<ref>{{cite web|last=Christgau|first=Robert|author-link=Robert Christgau|url=http://robertchristgau.com/xgausez.php|title=Xgau Sez|date=20 November 2018|website=robertchristgau.com|access-date=21 November 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180726005540/https://robertchristgau.com/xgausez.php|url-status=live|archive-date=26 July 2018}}</ref>| | |||
| width = 20% | |||
| align = right | |||
| style = padding:8px; | |||
}} | |||
A media stream can be streamed either ''live'' or ''on demand''. Live streams are generally provided by a method called ''true streaming''. True streaming sends the information straight to the computer or device without saving it to a local file. On-demand streaming is provided by a method called '']''. Progressive download saves the received information to a local file and then plays it from that location. On-demand streams are often saved to files for extended period of time, while live streams are only available at one time only (e.g., during a football game).<ref>Grant and Meadows. (2009). Communication Technology Update and Fundamentals 11th Edition. pp.114</ref> | |||
Streaming media is increasingly being coupled with the use of social media. For example, sites such as YouTube encourage social interaction in webcasts through features such as ], ]s, user posting of comments online, and more. Furthermore, streaming media is increasingly being used for ] and ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.inxpo.com/casting-calls/bid/113793/The-Future-of-Webcasting|title=The Future of Webcasting|last=Kellner|first=Scott|date=28 February 2013|publisher=INXPO|access-date=15 May 2013|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130703142337/http://web.inxpo.com/casting-calls/bid/113793/The-Future-of-Webcasting|archive-date=3 July 2013}}</ref> | |||
The ] State of Pay TV, OTT, and SVOD 2017 report said that 70 percent of those viewing content did so through a streaming service and that 40 percent of TV viewing was done this way, twice the number from five years earlier. ], the report said, streamed 60 percent of the content.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Horowitz: Streaming Is the New Normal|last=Umstead|first=R. Thomas|journal=]|date=5 June 2017|page=4}}</ref> | |||
=== Transition from DVD === | |||
One of the movie streaming industry's largest impacts was on the DVD industry, which drastically dropped in popularity and profitability with the mass popularization of online content.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Durrani |first=Ana |date=27 March 2023 |title=Top Streaming Statistics In 2024 |url=https://www.forbes.com/home-improvement/internet/streaming-stats/ |access-date=28 September 2024 |website=Forbes Home |language=en-US}}</ref> The rise of media streaming caused the downfall of many DVD rental companies, such as ]. In July 2015, '']'' published an article about ]'s DVD services. It stated that Netflix was continuing their DVD services with 5.3 million subscribers, which was a significant drop from the previous year. On the other hand, their streaming service had 65 million members.<ref>{{cite news|author=Steel, Emily|title=Netflix Refines Its DVD Business, Even as Streaming Unit Booms|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/business/while-its-streaming-service-booms-netflix-streamlines-old-business.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170621135707/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/business/while-its-streaming-service-booms-netflix-streamlines-old-business.html |archive-date=21 June 2017 |date= 26 July 2015|work=The New York Times|access-date=4 November 2019}}</ref> The shift to streaming platforms also led to the decline of DVD rental services. In July 2024, ] reported that ], a DVD rental service that had operated for 22 years, would shut down due to the rapid incline of streaming platforms. As the rental services has been rapidly declining since 2010, the business had to file for bankruptcy, with 99% of households now subscribing to streaming services. Further reflecting the shift away from physical media, BestBuy has ceased selling DVDs.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-07-11 |title=Redbox set to close as DVD market withers in streaming's shadow |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/redbox-set-close-dvd-market-withers-streamings-shadow-rcna161407 |access-date=2024-12-09 |website=NBC News |language=en}}</ref> | |||
=== Napster === | |||
] is one of the most popular ways in which consumers interact with streaming media. In the age of digitization, the ] of music has transformed into a ], largely due to one player in the market: Napster. | |||
], a ] (P2P) file-sharing network where users could upload and download ] files freely, broke all music industry conventions when it launched in early 1999 in Hull, Massachusetts. The platform was developed by Shawn and John Fanning as well as ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://fortune.com/2013/09/05/ashes-to-ashes-peer-to-peer-an-oral-history-of-napster/|title=Ashes to ashes, peer to peer: An oral history of Napster|website=Fortune|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=9 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190309220739/http://fortune.com/2013/09/05/ashes-to-ashes-peer-to-peer-an-oral-history-of-napster/|url-status=live}}</ref> In an interview from 2009, Shawn Fanning explained that Napster "was something that came to me as a result of seeing a sort of unmet need and the passion people had for being able to find all this music, particularly a lot of the obscure stuff, which wouldn't be something you go to a record store and purchase, so it felt like a problem worth solving."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2009/05/31/an-interview-with-napsters-shawn-fanning/|title=An interview with Napster's Shawn Fanning|last1=Evangelista|first1=Benny|date=31 May 2009|website=The Technology Chronicles|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=21 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210521093345/https://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2009/05/31/an-interview-with-napsters-shawn-fanning/|url-status=dead}}</ref> | |||
Not only did this development disrupt the music industry by making songs that previously required payment to be freely accessible to any Napster user, but it also demonstrated the power of P2P networks in turning any digital file into a public, shareable good. For the brief period of time that Napster existed, mp3 files fundamentally changed as a type of good. Songs were no longer financially excludable, barring access to a computer with internet access, and they were not rivals, meaning if one person downloaded a song, it did not diminish another user from doing the same. Napster, like most other providers of public goods, faced the ]. Every user benefits when an individual uploads an mp3 file, but there is no requirement or mechanism that forces all users to share their music. Generally, the platform encouraged sharing; users who downloaded files from others often had their own files available for upload as well. However, not everyone chose to share their files. There was no a built-in incentive specifically discouraging users from sharing their own files.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Ethics of Anonymous Computing: Napster |url=https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/anonymous-computing/technology/napster.php3 |access-date=21 September 2023 |website=cs.stanford.edu}}</ref> | |||
Attempts to display media on computers date back to the earliest days of computing, in the mid-20th century. However, little progress was made for several decades, due primarily to the high cost and limited capabilities of computer hardware. | |||
This structure revolutionized the consumer's perception of ownership over ]; it made music freely replicable. Napster quickly garnered millions of users, growing faster than any other business in history. At the peak of its existence, Napster boasted about 80 million users globally. The site gained so much traffic that many college campuses had to block access to Napster because it created network congestion from so many students sharing music files.<ref name="expertise1">{{cite web|url=https://www.lifewire.com/history-of-napster-2438592|title=The History of Napster: Yes, It's Still Around|last1=Harris|first1=Mark|website=Lifewire|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=15 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190315210151/https://www.lifewire.com/history-of-napster-2438592|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
Academic experiments in the 1970s proved out the basic concepts and feasibility of streaming media on computers. | |||
<!-- need examples and references --> | |||
The advent of Napster sparked the creation of numerous other P2P sites, including ] (2000), ] (2001), and ] (2003). The reign of P2P networks was short-lived. The first to fall was Napster in 2001. Numerous lawsuits were filed against Napster by various record labels, all of which were subsidiaries of ], ] Entertainment, ], or ]. In addition to this, the ] (RIAA) also filed a lawsuit against Napster on the grounds of unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material, which ultimately led Napster to shut down in 2001.<ref name="expertise1"/> In an interview with the ''New York Times'', Gary Stiffelman, who represents ], ], and ], explained, "I'm not an opponent of artists' music being included in these services, I'm just an opponent of their revenue not being shared."<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/18/arts/record-labels-answer-to-napster-still-has-artists-feeling-bypassed.html|title=Record Labels' Answer to Napster Still Has Artists Feeling Bypassed|last=Strauss|first=Neil|date=18 February 2002|work=]|access-date=11 March 2019|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=23 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190323004314/https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/18/arts/record-labels-answer-to-napster-still-has-artists-feeling-bypassed.html|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
During the late 1980s, consumer-grade computers became powerful enough to display media. The primary technical issues were: | |||
* having enough CPU power and bus bandwidth to support the required data rates | |||
* creating low-latency interrupt paths in the OS to prevent underrun | |||
<!-- need references --> | |||
However, computer networks were still limited, and media was usually delivered over non-streaming channels. In the 1990s, ]s became the most prevalent method of media distribution to computers. | |||
==== The fight for intellectual property rights: ''A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.'' ==== | |||
The late 1990s saw: | |||
The lawsuit '']'' fundamentally changed the way consumers interact with music streaming. It was argued on 2 October 2000, and was decided on 12 February 2001. The ] for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a P2P file-sharing service could be held liable for contributory and vicarious infringement of copyright, serving as a landmark decision for Intellectual property law.<ref name="wustl1">{{cite web|url=https://onlinelaw.wustl.edu/blog/case-study-am-records-inc-v-napster-inc/|title=Case Study: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. – Blog {{!}} @WashULaw|date=1 August 2013|website=onlinelaw.wustl.edu|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=31 May 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200531145508/https://onlinelaw.wustl.edu/blog/case-study-am-records-inc-v-napster-inc/|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
* greater network bandwidth, especially in the ] | |||
* increased access to networks, especially the ] | |||
* use of standard protocols and formats, such as ], ], and ] | |||
* commercialization of the Internet | |||
These advances in computer networking combined with powerful home computers and modern operating systems to make streaming media practical and affordable for ordinary consumers. | |||
The first issue that the Court addressed was ], which says that otherwise infringing activities are permissible so long as they are for purposes "such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching scholarship, or research."<ref name="cornell2001">{{cite web|url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/239_F3d_1004.htm|title=A&M RECORDS, INC. v. NAPSTER, INC., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001)|website=law.cornell.edu|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=12 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412213747/https://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/239_F3d_1004.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> Judge Beezer, the judge for this case, noted that Napster claimed that its services fit "three specific alleged fair uses: ], where users make temporary copies of a work before purchasing; space-shifting, where users access a sound recording through the Napster system that they already own in audio CD format; and permissive distribution of recordings by both new and established artists."<ref name="cornell2001"/> Judge Beezer found that Napster did not fit these criteria, instead enabling their users to repeatedly copy music, which would affect the market value of the copyrighted good. | |||
==Technology== | |||
The second claim by the plaintiffs was that Napster was actively contributing to ] since it had knowledge of widespread file sharing on its platform. Since Napster took no action to reduce infringement and financially benefited from repeated use, the court ruled against the P2P site. The court found that "as much as eighty-seven percent of the files available on Napster may be copyrighted and more than seventy percent may be owned or administered by plaintiffs."<ref name="cornell2001"/> | |||
A streaming media system is made of many interacting technologies. | |||
Video cameras and audio recorders create raw media. | |||
Editors use ''composition tools'' to combine raw media into a finished work. | |||
'']s'' store media and make it available to many people. | |||
'']'' retrieve media from servers and display it to the user. | |||
Servers and clients store media in various '']s''; | |||
they send and receive it in various ''stream formats''. | |||
The ] ordered against Napster ended the brief period in which music streaming was a public good – non-rival and non-excludable in nature. Other P2P networks had some success at sharing MP3s, though they all met a similar fate in court. The ruling set the precedent that copyrighted digital content cannot be freely replicated and shared unless given consent by the owner, thereby strengthening the property rights of artists and record labels alike.<ref name="wustl1"/> | |||
Servers and clients communicate over ]s'', | |||
using agreed upon network '']''. | |||
Servers encode media into a stream for transmission; | |||
clients receive the stream and decode it for display. | |||
'']s'' perform the en'''co'''ding and '''dec'''oding. | |||
=== Music streaming platforms === | |||
Media is big. | |||
{{Main|Music streaming service}} | |||
Under current (2005) technology, | |||
] | |||
media storage and transmission costs are still significant; | |||
therefore, media is often ] for storage or streaming. | |||
Although music streaming is no longer a freely replicable public good, streaming platforms such as ], ], ], ], ], and ] have shifted music streaming to a ]. While some platforms, most notably Spotify, give customers access to a ] service that enables the use of limited features for exposure to advertisements, most companies operate under a premium subscription model.<ref>{{cite news |title=Battle of the Streaming Services: Which Is the Best Premium Video Service? |url=https://www.gadgets360.com/internet/features/best-streaming-service-app-tv-movies-india-price-netflix-amazon-prime-disney-plus-hotstar-google-apple-2223556 |access-date=11 May 2020 |work=NDTV Gadgets 360 |language=en |archive-date=17 June 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220617065514/https://gadgets360.com/internet/features/best-streaming-service-app-tv-movies-india-price-netflix-amazon-prime-disney-plus-hotstar-google-apple-2223556 |url-status=live }}</ref> Under such circumstances, music streaming is financially excludable, requiring that customers pay a monthly fee for access to a music library, but non-rival, since one customer's use does not impair another's. | |||
A media stream can be ''on demand'' or ''live''. On demand streams are stored on a server for a long period of time, and are available to be transmitted at a user's request. Live streams are only available at one particular time, as in a video stream of a live sporting event. | |||
An article written by the ] in 2021 states that "streaming saved music." This is because it provided monthly revenue. Especially Spotify offers its free platform, but you can pay for their premium to get music ad-free.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2021-03-22 |title=Streaming Saved Music. Artists Hate It. (Published 2021) |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/22/technology/streaming-music-economics.html |access-date=2024-12-09 |language=en}}</ref> This allows access for people to stream music anywhere from their devices not having to rely on CDs anymore. | |||
==Streaming bandwidth and storage== | |||
There is competition between services similar but lesser to the streaming wars for video media. {{as of|2019}}, Spotify has over 207 million users in 78 countries,<ref>{{Cite web |date=7 February 2024 |title=Decoding Artist Compensation: Streaming 2024 |url=https://mariahpedia.com/decoding-artist-compensation-streaming-2024/}}</ref> {{as of|2018}}, Apple Music has about 60 million, and SoundCloud has 175 million.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2018/05/25/the-top-10-streaming-music-services-by-number-of-users/|title=The Top 10 Streaming Music Services By Number Of Users|last=McIntyre|first=Hugh|website=Forbes|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=8 November 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191108105345/https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2018/05/25/the-top-10-streaming-music-services-by-number-of-users/|url-status=live}}</ref> All platforms provide varying degrees of accessibility. Apple Music and Prime Music only offer their services for paid subscribers, whereas Spotify and SoundCloud offer freemium and premium services. Napster, owned by Rhapsody since 2011, has resurfaced as a music streaming platform offering subscription-based services to over 4.5 million users {{as of|January 2017|lc=on}}.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/08/21/realnetworks-napster-profitable/|title=Napster Proves That Streaming Music Can Be Profitable|date=22 August 2018|website=Digital Music News|access-date=11 March 2019|archive-date=1 March 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200301050307/https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/08/21/realnetworks-napster-profitable/|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
Streaming media storage size (in the common file system measurements ]s, ]s, ]s, and so on) is calculated from streaming bandwidth and length of the media with the following formula (for a single user and file): | |||
The music industry's response to music streaming was initially negative. Along with music piracy, streaming services disrupted the market and contributed to the fall in US revenue from $14.6 billion in 1999 to $6.3 billion in 2009. CDs and single-track downloads were not selling because content was freely available on the Internet. By 2018, however, music streaming revenue exceeded that of traditional revenue streams (e.g. record sales, album sales, downloads).<ref name=":0">{{Cite news|url=https://www.ifpi.org/downloads/GMR2018.pdf|title=Global Music Report 2018: Annual State of the Industry|year=2017|work=GMR|access-date=12 March 2019|archive-date=9 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200709091121/https://www.ifpi.org/downloads/GMR2018.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> Streaming revenue is now one of the largest driving forces behind the growth in the music industry. | |||
storage size (in mebibytes) = length (in ]s) · ] (in ]) / 8,388.608 | |||
=== COVID-19 pandemic === | |||
(since 1 ] = 8 * 1,048,576 bits = 8,388.608 ]s) | |||
By August 2020, the ] had streaming services busier than ever. The pandemic contributed to a surge in subscriptions, in the UK alone, 12 million people joined a new streaming service that they had not previously had.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Rajan|first=Amol|date=5 August 2020|title=TV watching and online streaming surge during lockdown|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-53637305|access-date=24 November 2021|archive-date=24 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211124103617/https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-53637305|url-status=live}}</ref> Global subscriptions skyrocketed passing 1 billion.<ref>{{Cite web |last=X |last2=Instagram |last3=Email |last4=Facebook |date=2021-03-18 |title=Streaming milestone: Global subscriptions passed 1 billion last year |url=https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-03-18/streaming-milestone-global-subscriptions-passed-1-billion-last-year-mpa-theme-report |access-date=2024-12-09 |website=Los Angeles Times |language=en-US}}</ref> Within the first 3 months, back in 2020, nearly 15.7 million people signed up for Netflix.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Lee |first=Edmund |date=April 21, 2020 |title=Everyone You Know Just Signed Up for Netflix |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/business/media/netflix-q1-2020-earnings-nflx.html?login=email. |website=New York Times}}</ref> With people stuck at home and facing lock-downs Netflix provided a much needed distraction. | |||
An impact analysis of 2020 data by the ] (CISAC) indicated that remuneration from digital streaming of music increased with a strong rise in digital royalty collection (up 16.6% to EUR 2.4 billion), but it would not compensate the overall loss of income of authors from concerts, public performance and broadcast.<ref>{{Cite web|last=CISAC|title=CISAC Global Collections Report 2021 (for 2020 Data)|url=https://www.cisac.org/Newsroom/news-releases/cisac-global-collections-report-shows-creators-royalties-down-eu-1-billion|url-status=live|access-date=30 December 2021|website=CISAC|date=27 October 2021|archive-date=30 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211230051614/https://www.cisac.org/Newsroom/news-releases/cisac-global-collections-report-shows-creators-royalties-down-eu-1-billion}}</ref> The ] (IFPI) recompiled the music industry initiatives around the world related to the COVID-19. In its State of the Industry report, it recorded that the global recorded music market grew by 7.4% in 2022, the 6th consecutive year of growth. This growth was driven by streaming, mostly from paid subscription streaming revenues which increased by 18.5%, fueled by 443 million users of subscription accounts by the end of 2020.<ref>{{Cite web|title=IFPI issues Global Music Report 2021: Global recorded music revenues grow 7.4%|url=https://www.ifpi.org/ifpi-issues-annual-global-music-report-2021/|url-status=live|access-date=30 December 2021|website=IFPI.org|date=23 March 2021|archive-date=25 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210325201021/https://www.ifpi.org/ifpi-issues-annual-global-music-report-2021/}}</ref> | |||
Real world example: | |||
The COVID-19 pandemic has also driven an increase in misinformation and disinformation, particularly on streaming platforms like YouTube and ]s.<ref>{{Cite news|last1=Hsu|first1=Tiffany|last2=Tracy|first2=Marc|date=12 November 2021|title=On Podcasts and Radio, Misleading Covid-19 Talk Goes Unchecked|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/12/business/media/coronavirus-misinformation-radio-podcasts.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20211228/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/12/business/media/coronavirus-misinformation-radio-podcasts.html |archive-date=28 December 2021 |url-access=limited|access-date=24 November 2021|issn=0362-4331}}{{cbignore}}</ref> | |||
One ] of video (3,600 sec) encoded at 300 kbit/s (this is a typical broadband video for 2005 and its usually encoded in a 320x240 pixels window size) will be: | |||
=== Local/home streaming === | |||
(3,600 sec · 300 kbit/s) / 8,388.608 = 128.7 MiB of storage | |||
]]] | |||
Streaming also refers to the offline streaming of multimedia at home. This is made possible by technologies such as ], which allow devices on the same local network to connect to each other and share media.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Enabling and configuring DLNA media server |url=https://docs.qnap.com/operating-system/quts-hero/5.1.x/en-us/enabling-and-configuring-dlna-media-server-86443D8B.html |access-date=27 October 2023 |website=docs.qnap.com |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Connected Digital Home |url=https://www.manifest-tech.com/ce_products/digital_home.htm |access-date=27 October 2023 |website=manifest-tech.com}}</ref> Such capabilities are heightened using ] (NAS) devices at home, or using specialized software like ], ] or ].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Brookes |first=Tim |date=30 March 2023 |title=No Plex App, No Problem: Using Plex as a DLNA/UPnP Server |url=https://www.howtogeek.com/880945/no-plex-app-no-problem-using-plex-as-a-dlna-upnp-server/ |access-date=5 May 2024 |website=How-To Geek |language=en}}</ref> | |||
==Technologies== | |||
if the file is stored on a server for on-demand streaming. If this stream is viewed by 1,000 people, you would need | |||
=== Bandwidth === | |||
A broadband speed of 2 Mbit/s or more is recommended for streaming ],<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.broadbandchoices.co.uk/guides/internet/watching-tv-online | title=How to watch live TV online: The complete guide | work=broadbandchoices | date=20 May 2016 | access-date=1 October 2016 | author=Staples, Kim | archive-date=16 May 2016 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160516142628/http://www.broadbandchoices.co.uk/guides/internet/watching-tv-online | url-status=live }}</ref> for example to a ], ], ] or a Sony TV Blu-ray Disc Player. 5 Mbit/s is recommended for high-definition content and 9 Mbit/s for ].<ref>Minimum requirements for Sony TV Blu-ray Disc Player, on advertisement attached to a NetFlix DVD{{Nonspecific|date=March 2011}}</ref> Streaming media storage size is calculated from the streaming bandwidth and length of the media using the following formula (for a single user and file): storage size in ]s is equal to length (in seconds) × ] (in bit/s) / (8 × 1024 × 1024). For example, one hour of digital video encoded at 300 kbit/s (this was a typical broadband video in 2005 and it was usually encoded in {{resx|320 × 240}} resolution) will be: (3,600 s × 300,000 bit/s) / (8 × 1024 × 1024) requires around 128 ] of storage. | |||
If the file is stored on a server for on-demand streaming and this stream is viewed by 1,000 people at the same time using a ] protocol, the requirement is 300 kbit/s × 1,000 = 300,000 kbit/s = 300 Mbit/s of bandwidth. This is equivalent to around 135 ] per hour. Using a ] protocol the server sends out only a single stream that is common to all users. Therefore, such a stream would only use 300 kbit/s of server bandwidth. | |||
300 kbit/s · 1,000 = 300,000 kbit/s = 300 ] of bandwidth | |||
In 2018 video was more than 60% of data traffic worldwide and accounted for 80% of growth in data usage.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The myth of the green cloud|url=https://www.eib.org/en/stories/digital-footprint |first1=Shirley |last1=Rizk |date=21 June 2019 |access-date=17 September 2020|website=European Investment Bank|language=en|archive-date=14 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210414035732/https://www.eib.org/en/stories/digital-footprint|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title= Cisco Annual Internet Report (2018–2023) White Paper|url=https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/executive-perspectives/annual-internet-report/white-paper-c11-741490.html|access-date=17 September 2020|website=Cisco|language=en|archive-date=7 February 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140207074720/http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns341/ns525/ns537/ns705/ns827/white_paper_c11-520862.html|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
This is equivalent to 128.7 MiB per hour. | |||
== |
=== Protocols === | ||
] | |||
Video and audio streams are compressed to make the file size smaller. ]s include ], ], ] and ]. ]s include ], ], ] and ]. Encoded audio and video streams are assembled in a container ] such as ], ], ], ] or ]. The bitstream is delivered from a streaming server to a streaming client (e.g., the computer user with their Internet-connected laptop) using a transport protocol, such as Adobe's ] or ]. | |||
Designing a network protocol to support streaming media raises many issues. | |||
In the 2010s, technologies such as Apple's ], Microsoft's Smooth Streaming, Adobe's HDS and non-proprietary formats such as ] emerged to enable ] over ] as an alternative to using proprietary transport protocols. Often, a streaming transport protocol is used to send video from an event venue to a ] transcoding service and ], which then uses HTTP-based transport protocols to distribute the video to individual homes and users.<ref>{{cite web|title = Streaming the London Olympic Games with the 'Go Live Package' from iStreamPlanet and Haivision |url = http://www.istreamplanet.com/casestudy/the-london-olympic-games-go-live-package/|website = iStreamPlanet |access-date = 11 November 2015|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160101140531/http://www.istreamplanet.com/casestudy/the-london-olympic-games-go-live-package/|archive-date = 1 January 2016|url-status = dead}}</ref> The streaming client (the end user) may interact with the streaming server using a control protocol, such as ] or ]. | |||
] protocols, such as the ] (UDP), send the media stream as a series of small packets, called ''datagrams''. This is simple and efficient; however, packets are liable to be lost or corrupted in transit. Depending on the protocol and the extent of the loss, the client may be able to recover the data with ] techniques, may interpolate over the missing data, or may suffer a ]. | |||
The quality of the interaction between servers and users is based on the workload of the streaming service; as more users attempt to access a service the quality may be affected by resource constraints in the service.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Sripanidkulchai|first1=Kunwadee|last2=Maggs|first2=Bruce|last3=Zhang|first3=Hui|title=Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement |chapter=An analysis of live streaming workloads on the internet |year=2004|series=IMC '04|location=New York, NY, US|publisher=ACM|pages=41–54|doi=10.1145/1028788.1028795|isbn=9781581138214|s2cid=1742312}}</ref> Deploying clusters of streaming servers is one such method where there are regional servers spread across the network, managed by a singular, central server containing copies of all the media files as well as the ]es of the regional servers. This central server then uses ] and ] algorithms to redirect users to nearby regional servers capable of accommodating them. This approach also allows the central server to provide streaming data to both users as well as regional servers using ] libraries if required, thus demanding the central server to have powerful data processing and immense storage capabilities. In return, workloads on the streaming backbone network are balanced and alleviated, allowing for optimal streaming quality.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Zhao |first1=Hong |last2=Chun-long |first2=Zhou |last3=Bao-zhao |first3=Jin |title=Design and Implementation of Streaming Media Server Cluster Based on FFMpeg |journal=The Scientific World Journal |date=3 February 2015 |volume=2015 |pages=963083 |doi=10.1155/2015/963083 |pmid=25734187 |pmc=4334929 |doi-access=free }}</ref>{{update inline|reason=2017 academic source. This is now normally accomplished automatically in CDNs.|date=April 2023}} | |||
The ] (RTP), the ] (RTSP) and the ] (RTCP) were specifically designed to stream media over the network. They are all built on top of UDP. | |||
Designing a network protocol to support streaming media raises many problems. ] protocols, such as the ] (UDP), send the media stream as a series of small packets. This is simple and efficient; however, there is no mechanism within the protocol to guarantee delivery. It is up to the receiving application to detect loss or corruption and recover data using ] techniques. If data is lost, the stream may suffer a ]. The ] (RTSP), ] (RTP) and the ] (RTCP) were specifically designed to stream media over networks. RTSP runs over a variety of transport protocols,<ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-07-08 |title=RTSP: The Real-Time Streaming Protocol. What is RTSP and How Does It Work? |url=https://antmedia.io/rtsp-explained-what-is-rtsp-how-it-works/ |access-date=2025-01-06 |website=antmedia.io |language=en-US}}</ref> while the latter two are built on top of UDP. | |||
Reliable protocols, such as the ] (TCP), guarantee correct delivery of each bit in the media stream. However, they accomplish this with a system of timeouts and retries, which makes them more complex to implement. It also means that when there is data loss on the network, the media stream stalls while the protocol handlers detect the loss and retransmit the missing data. Clients can minimize the effect of this by buffering data for display. | |||
HTTP adaptive bitrate streaming is based on HTTP progressive download, but contrary to the previous approach, here the files are very small, so that they can be compared to the streaming of packets, much like the case of using RTSP and RTP.<ref>Ch. Z. Patrikakis, N. Papaoulakis, Ch. Stefanoudaki, M. S. Nunes, "Streaming content wars: Download and play strikes back" presented at the Personalization in Media Delivery Platforms Workshop, , Venice, Italy, 2009.</ref> Reliable protocols, such as the ] (TCP), guarantee correct delivery of each bit in the media stream. It means, however, that when there is data loss on the network, the media stream stalls while the protocol handlers detect the loss and retransmit the missing data. Clients can minimize this effect by buffering data for display. While delay due to buffering is acceptable in video-on-demand scenarios, users of interactive applications such as video conferencing will experience a loss of fidelity if the delay caused by buffering exceeds 200 ms.<ref>Krasic, C. and Li, K. and Walpole, J., ''The case for streaming multimedia with TCP'', Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 213–218, Springer, 2001</ref> | |||
Another issue is that firewalls are more likely to block UDP-based protocols than TCP-based protocols. | |||
<!--I'm accepting this from the original draft but we need a reference for it--> | |||
] | |||
Unicast protocols send a separate copy of the media stream from the server to each client. This is simple, but can lead to massive duplication of data on the network. Multicast protocols undertake to send only one copy of the media stream over any given network connection, i.e. along the path between any two network routers. This is a more efficient use of network capacity, but it is much more complex to implement. Furthermore, multicast protocols must be implemented in the network routers, as well as the servers. | |||
] protocols send a separate copy of the media stream from the server to each recipient. Unicast is the norm for most Internet connections but does not scale well when many users want to view the same television program concurrently. ] protocols were developed to reduce server and network loads resulting from duplicate data streams that occur when many recipients receive unicast content streams independently. These protocols send a single stream from the source to a group of recipients. Depending on the network infrastructure and type, multicast transmission may or may not be feasible. One potential disadvantage of multicasting is the loss of ] functionality. Continuous streaming of radio or television material usually precludes the recipient's ability to control playback. However, this problem can be mitigated by elements such as caching servers, digital ]es, and buffered ]. | |||
As of 2005, most routers on the Internet do not support multicast protocols, and many firewalls block them. <!--a reference would be nice--> Multicast is most practical for organizations that run their own networks, such as universities and corporations. Since they buy their own routers and run their own network links, they can decide if the cost and effort of supporting a multicast protocol is justified by the resulting bandwidth savings. | |||
] provides a means to send a single media stream to a group of recipients on a ]. A connection management protocol, usually ], is used to manage the delivery of multicast streams to the groups of recipients on a LAN. One of the challenges in deploying IP multicast is that routers and firewalls between LANs must allow the passage of packets destined to multicast groups. If the organization that is serving the content has control over the network between server and recipients (i.e., educational, government, and corporate ]s), then routing protocols such as ] can be used to deliver stream content to multiple ] segments. | |||
] (P2P) protocols arrange for media to be sent from clients that already have it to clients that do not. This prevents the server and its network connections from becoming a bottleneck. However, it raises technical, performance, quality, business, and legal issues. | |||
Newer ]s stream video to a computer over a ] connection. This uses a system of time-based reservations to ensure throughput, and can be received by multiple clients at once. | |||
] (P2P) protocols arrange for prerecorded streams to be sent between computers. This prevents the server and its network connections from becoming a bottleneck. However, it raises technical, performance, security, quality, and business issues. | |||
==Social and legal issues== | |||
]s (CDNs) use intermediate servers to distribute the load. Internet-compatible unicast delivery is used between CDN nodes and streaming destinations. | |||
Some streaming broadcasters use streaming systems that interfere with the ability to record streams for later playback, either inadvertently through poor choice of streaming protocol or deliberately because they believe it is to their advantage to do so. Broadcasters may be concerned that copies will result in lost sales or that consumers may skip commercials. Whether users have the ability and the right to record streams has become a significant issue in the application of law to ]. | |||
=== Recording === | |||
In principle, there is no way to prevent a user from recording a media stream that has been delivered to their computer. Thus, the efforts of broadcasters to prevent this consist of making it inconvenient, or illegal, or both. | |||
Media that is livestreamed can be recorded through certain media players, such as ], or through the use of a ]. Live-streaming platforms such as ] may also incorporate a ] system that allows automatic recording of live broadcasts so that they can be watched later.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://help.twitch.tv/customer/portal/articles/1575302-videos-on-demand|title=Videos On Demand|access-date=8 May 2017|archive-date=15 December 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181215225249/https://help.twitch.tv/customer/portal/articles/1575302-videos-on-demand|url-status=dead}}</ref> YouTube also has recordings of live broadcasts, including television shows aired on major networks. These streams have the potential to be recorded by anyone who has access to them, whether legally or otherwise.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Burroughs|first1=Benjamin|last2=Rugg|first2=Adam|date=3 July 2014|title=Extending the Broadcast: Streaming Culture and the Problems of Digital Geographies|journal=Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media|volume=58|issue=3|pages=365–380|doi=10.1080/08838151.2014.935854|s2cid=144577408|issn=0883-8151}}</ref> | |||
Recordings can happen through any device that allows people to watch movies they don’t have access to or be at a music festival they couldn’t get tickets to. These live streaming platforms have revolutionized entertainment, creating new ways for people to interact with content. Many celebrities started live streaming during COVID-19 through platforms like ], ], and ] offering an alternate form of entertainment when concerts were postponed. For example, ] hosted a series where she live streamed and sang songs during the pandemic. She even had other celebrity guests like ], ], ], and more! Who were able to join in from their home through their device. Many other people joined in on this like ] who sang songs for over 10,000 people while live streaming.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Peisner |first=David |date=July 21, 2020 |title=Concerts Aren’t Back. Livestreams Are Ubiquitous. Can They Do the Job? |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/21/arts/music/concerts-livestreams.html |website=New York Times}}</ref> Live Streaming and recording allow for fans to communicate with these artists through chats and likes. | |||
Broadcasters can make it inconvenient to record a stream, for example, by using unpublished data formats or by encrypting the stream. Of course, data formats can be ], and encrypted streams must be decrypted with a key that resides—somewhere—on the consumer's computer, so these measures are ], at best. | |||
=== View recommendation === | |||
Efforts to make it illegal to record a stream may rely on ]s, ]s, ] agreements, or—in the United States—the ]. | |||
Most streaming services feature a ] for viewing based on each user's view history in conjunction with all viewers' aggregated view histories. Rather than focusing on subjective categorization of content by content curators), there is an assumption that, with the immensity of data collected on viewing habits, the choices of those who are first to view content can be algorithmically extrapolated to the totality of the user base, with increasing probabilistic accuracy as to the likelihood of their choosing and enjoying the recommended content as more data is collected.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Buijsman |first=Stefan |title=Pluses and Minuses: How Math Solves Our Problems |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TYzzDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA13 |publisher=Penguin Books |year=2018 |isbn=978-0-14-313458-9 |edition=English |location=Amsterdam |pages=12–16 |language=Dutch}}</ref> | |||
== Applications and marketing == | |||
==References== | |||
Useful and typical applications of streaming are, for example, long ] performed online.<ref>A typical one-hour ] is the following live stream from an international conference on ]: {{cite web |url-status=live |url=http://videolectures.net/eccs08_stanley_aosptucs/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190528191529/http://videolectures.net/eccs08_stanley_aosptucs/ |archive-date=28 May 2019 |title=Applications of Statistical Physics to Understanding Complex Systems |date=2008 |first1=Eugene |last1=Stanley |website=Videolectures }}</ref> An advantage of this presentation is that these lectures can be very long, although they can always be interrupted or repeated at arbitrary places. Streaming enables new content marketing concepts. For example, the ] sells Internet live streams of whole concerts instead of several CDs or similar fixed media in their ]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.digitalconcerthall.com/|title=The Berliner Philharmoniker's Digital Concert Hall|website=digitalconcerthall.com |access-date=3 May 2012|archive-date=3 May 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120503212518/http://digitalconcerthall.com/|url-status=live}}</ref> using YouTube for ]. These online concerts are also spread over a lot of different places, including cinemas at various places on the globe. A similar concept is used by the ] in New York. There is also ] from the ].<ref>{{cite web|title=ISS High Definition Live Streaming Video of the Earth (HDEV) |website=Earth Science & Remote Sensing Unit |url=https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/ESRS/HDEV/|publisher=NASA|access-date=26 December 2016|archive-date=8 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161208002437/https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/ESRS/HDEV/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=ISS HD Earth Viewing Experiment|url=http://www.ustream.tv/channel/iss-hdev-payload |website=IBM Video Streaming |access-date=26 December 2016|archive-date=29 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161229042858/http://www.ustream.tv/channel/iss-hdev-payload|url-status=live}}</ref> In video entertainment, video streaming platforms like ], ], and ] are mainstream elements of the media industry.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Forrester|title=Q1 2020 Proves Streaming Is Essential To Consumers And To The Future Of Media Companies|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/forrester/2020/04/27/q1-2020-proves-streaming-is-essential-to-consumers-and-to-the-future-of-media-companies/ |date=Apr 27, 2020 |access-date=2 October 2020|website=Forbes|language=en|archive-date=1 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201101052439/https://www.forbes.com/sites/forrester/2020/04/27/q1-2020-proves-streaming-is-essential-to-consumers-and-to-the-future-of-media-companies/|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
* Schneier, Bruce (May 15, 2001). ''Crypto-Gram Newsletter''. | |||
* Schneier, Bruce (August 2000). ''Information Security Magazine ''. also at . | |||
* Schneier, Bruce (October 15, 2001). ''Crypto-Gram Newsletter''. | |||
Marketers have found many opportunities offered by streaming media and the platforms that offer them, especially in light of the significant increase in the use of streaming media during ] from 2020 onwards. While revenue and placement of ] continued to decrease, ] increased by 15% in 2021,<ref>{{Cite web|title=Deloitte study: digital marketing spending is expected to increase by almost 15% until the end of 2021, while traditional advertising will slightly decrease|url=https://www2.deloitte.com/ro/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/studiu-deloitte-bugetele-pentru-activitatile-de-marketing-digital-vor-creste-cu-aproape-15-pana-la-sfarsitul-anului-2021-iar-publicitatea-traditionala-va-scadea-usor.html |date=29 October 2021 |access-date=4 February 2022|website=Deloitte Romania|language=en|archive-date=4 February 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220204090152/https://www2.deloitte.com/ro/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/studiu-deloitte-bugetele-pentru-activitatile-de-marketing-digital-vor-creste-cu-aproape-15-pana-la-sfarsitul-anului-2021-iar-publicitatea-traditionala-va-scadea-usor.html|url-status=live}}</ref> with ] and ] representing 65% of the expenditures. | |||
==See also== | |||
* ] (audio) | |||
* ] (video) | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
A case study commissioned by the WIPO<ref>{{Cite web|first1= Leticia Ange |last1=Pozza |first2=Ana Paola |last2=Sifuentes|title=Case Study VI: Data in the Audiovisual business: Trends and Opportunities|url=https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ip-development/en/agenda/pdf/9_case_study_6_data_trends_and_opportunities.pdf|url-status=dead|access-date=4 February 2022|website=WIPO |archive-date=26 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211026235642/https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ip-development/en/agenda/pdf/9_case_study_6_data_trends_and_opportunities.pdf}}</ref> indicates that streaming services attract advertising budgets with the opportunities provided by interactivity and the use of data from users, resulting in personalization on a mass scale with ].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Revised Proposal for a Pilot Project on Copyright and the Distribution of Content in the Digital Environment Submitted by Brazil|url=https://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=421771 |date=November 23, 2018 |access-date=4 February 2022|website=WIPO |language=en|archive-date=4 February 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220204090156/https://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=421771|url-status=live}}</ref> Targeted marketing is expanding with the use of ], in particular programmatic advertisement, a tool that helps advertisers decide their campaign parameters and whether they are interested in buying advertising space online or not. One example of advertising space acquisition is Real-Time Bidding (RTB).<ref>{{Cite web|title=What is programmatic video advertising? (And why it's smart to use it)|url=https://biteable.com/blog/what-is-programmatic-video-advertising/|url-status=live|access-date=4 February 2022|website=Biteable|date=17 May 2018|archive-date=4 February 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220204090153/https://biteable.com/blog/what-is-programmatic-video-advertising/}}</ref> | |||
=== Streaming media systems === | |||
* ] | |||
* ] video streamer for Icecast | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] P2P Icecast protocol | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] P2P streaming | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] --<small> Open Source project to save streaming media to disk</small> | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] (Open-source alternative to Andromeda written in PHP) | |||
== |
==Challenges== | ||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] (WMA) | |||
* ] (WMV) | |||
=== |
=== Copyright issues === | ||
{{See also|Copyright aspects of downloading and streaming}} | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
For ] (OTT) platforms, the original content captures additional subscribers.<ref>Katz, Raul (October 2021). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221105090545/https://www.wipo.int/ip-development/en/agenda/work_undertaken.html#pilot_project_cdcde|date=5 November 2022}} World Intellectual Property Organization</ref> This presents copyright issues and the potential for international exploitation through streaming,<ref>Moullier, B; Galvis, Alexandra (October 2021). World Intellectual Property Organization {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220521132841/https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ip-development/en/agenda/pdf/part_4_contractual_practices_latin_american_audiovisual_sector_digital_environment.pdf|date=21 May 2022}}</ref> widespread use of standards, and metadata in digital files.<ref>Schotz, Gustavo (October 2021). Study on the copyright legal framework and licensing practices of audiovisual content in the digital environment, Part 5: The Identification and Use of Metadata in Audiovisual Works https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ip-development/en/agenda/pdf/11_part_5_identification_and_metadata_av-en.pdf {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220407160626/https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ip-development/en/agenda/pdf/11_part_5_identification_and_metadata_av-en.pdf |date=7 April 2022 }}. World Intellectual Property Organization</ref> The WIPO has indicated several basic copyright issues arising for those pursuing work in the film<ref>WIPO, How to make a living in the Film Industry. Available at: How to Make a Living in the Film Industry https://www.wipo.int/copyright/en/creative_industries/film.html {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221105092823/https://www.wipo.int/copyright/en/creative_industries/film.html |date=5 November 2022 }} (wipo.int)</ref><ref>WIPO, How to make a living in the Film Industry. Rights, Camera, Action! https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/869/wipo_pub_869.pdf {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220626082928/https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/869/wipo_pub_869.pdf |date=26 June 2022 }} (wipo.int)</ref> and music industries<ref>WIPO, How to make a living in the Music Industry. Available at: How to Make a Living in the Music Industry https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/939/wipo_pub_939.pdf {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220307210332/http://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/939/wipo_pub_939.pdf |date=7 March 2022 }} (wipo.int)</ref> in the era of streaming. | |||
===File formats=== | |||
* ] -- WindowsMedia | |||
* ] | |||
* FLV -- Flash | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] ] audio | |||
* ] ] video | |||
* RM -- Real | |||
* ] | |||
* ] -- WindowsMedia | |||
* ] | |||
Streaming copyrighted content can involve making infringing copies of the works in question. The recording and distribution of streamed content is also an issue for many companies that rely on revenue based on views or attendance.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Maeda|first=Mari|title=Optical Fiber Communication Conference and International Conference on Quantum Information |chapter=OFC'01 Invited Talk the Internet of the Future |date=17 March 2001|chapter-url=https://www.osapublishing.org/abstract.cfm?uri=OFC-2001-TuK1|publisher=Optical Society of America|pages=TuK1|doi=10.1364/OFC.2001.TuK1|isbn=1-55752-654-0|doi-access=free|access-date=28 July 2019|archive-date=18 February 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200218115929/https://www.osapublishing.org/abstract.cfm?uri=OFC-2001-TuK1|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
===Description formats=== | |||
* ] - Session Description Protocol | |||
* ] - Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language | |||
== |
== See also == | ||
<!-- Please keep entries in alphabetical order & add a short description ] --> | |||
{{portal|Record production}} | |||
{{div col|colwidth=20em}} | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] playlists | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
{{div col end}} | |||
<!-- Please keep entries in alphabetical order & add a short description ] --> | |||
== References == | |||
===Streaming media tools online=== | |||
{{Reflist}} | |||
* ( Calculate streaming bandwidth and storage) | |||
* (Open source tool to Save streaming media) | |||
== Further reading == | |||
===Streaming media systems=== | |||
* Hagen, Anja Nylund (2020). Music in Streams: Communicating Music in the Streaming Paradigm, In Michael Filimowicz & Veronika Tzankova (ed.), ''Reimagining Communication: Mediation (1st Edition)''. Routledge. | |||
* (for ] or ]) | |||
* {{cite news|author=Preston, J. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/business/media/occupy-movement-shows-potential-of-live-online-video.html?_r=1&ref=technology|title= Occupy Video Showcases Live Streaming|work=The New York Times|date= 11 December 2011}} | |||
* | |||
* {{cite news|publisher=CNBC|author=Sherman, Alex|title=AT&T, Disney and Comcast have very different plans for the streaming wars – here's what they're doing and why|date= 27 October 2019|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/27/how-att-disney-and-comcast-are-handling-the-move-to-streaming.html}} | |||
* (Distributed streaming media server) | |||
* | |||
* (Open Source audio and video streaming technology with a player written in Java) | |||
* | |||
* | |||
== External links == | |||
===Companies=== | |||
* {{cite web|title=The Early History of the Streaming Media Industry and The Battle Between Microsoft & Real|url=http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2016/03/history-of-the-streaming-media-industry.html|access-date=25 March 2016|website=streamingmedia.com|date=March 2016|archive-date=21 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160321172010/http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2016/03/history-of-the-streaming-media-industry.html|url-status=dead}} | |||
* | |||
* {{cite web|title=What is Streaming? A high-level view of streaming media technology, history |url=http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=74052|website=streamingmedia.com|access-date=25 March 2016}} | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* (Dutch) | |||
{{Broadcasting}} | |||
] | |||
{{Web syndication}} | |||
] | |||
{{Authority control}} | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 23:08, 9 January 2025
Multimedia delivery method "Streaming" and "Streamed" redirect here. For other uses, see Stream (disambiguation)."Media streaming" redirects here. For the feature in Microsoft Windows, see DLNA.This article is about streaming media in general. For the music listening format specifically, see Music streaming service.
E-commerce |
---|
Digital content |
Retail goods and services |
Online shopping |
Mobile commerce |
Customer service |
E-procurement |
Purchase-to-pay |
Super-apps |
Streaming media refers to multimedia delivered through a network for playback using a media player. Media is transferred in a stream of packets from a server to a client and is rendered in real-time; this contrasts with file downloading, a process in which the end-user obtains an entire media file before consuming the content. Streaming is more commonly used for video-on-demand, streaming television, and music streaming services over the Internet.
While streaming is most commonly associated with multimedia from a remote server over the Internet, it also includes offline multimedia between devices on a local area network. For example using DLNA and a home server, or in a personal area network between two devices using Bluetooth (which uses radio waves rather than IP). Online streaming was initially popularized by RealNetworks and Microsoft in the 1990s and has since grown to become the globally most popular method for consuming music and videos, with numerous competing subscription services being offered since the 2010s. Audio streaming to wireless speakers, often using Bluetooth, is another use that has become prevalent during that decade. Live streaming is the real-time delivery of content during production, much as live television broadcasts content via television channels.
Distinguishing delivery methods from the media applies specifically to, as most of the traditional media delivery systems are either inherently streaming (e.g., radio, television) or inherently non-streaming (e.g., books, videotapes, audio CDs). The term "streaming media" can apply to media other than video and audio, such as live closed captioning, ticker tape, and real-time text, which are all considered "streaming text".
Etymology
The term "streaming" was first used for tape drives manufactured by Data Electronics Inc. that were meant to slowly ramp up and run for the entire track; slower ramp times lowered drive costs. "Streaming" was applied in the early 1990s as a better description for video on demand and later live video on IP networks. It was first done by Starlight Networks for video streaming and Real Networks for audio streaming. Such video had previously been referred to by the misnomer "store and forward video."
Precursors
Beginning in 1881, Théâtrophone enabled subscribers to listen to opera and theatre performances over telephone lines. This operated until 1932. The concept of media streaming eventually came to America.
In the early 1920s, George Owen Squier was granted patents for a system for the transmission and distribution of signals over electrical lines, which was the technical basis for what later became Muzak, a technology for streaming continuous music to commercial customers without the use of radio.
The Telephone Music Service, a live jukebox service, began in 1929 and continued until 1997. The clientele eventually included 120 bars and restaurants in the Pittsburgh area. A tavern customer would deposit money in the jukebox, use a telephone on top of the jukebox, and ask the operator to play a song. The operator would find the record in the studio library of more than 100,000 records, put it on a turntable, and the music would be piped over the telephone line to play in the tavern. The music media began as 78s, 33s and 45s, played on the six turntables they monitored. CDs and tapes were incorporated in later years.
The business had a succession of owners, notably Bill Purse, his daughter Helen Reutzel, and finally Dotti White. The revenue stream for each quarter was split between 60% for the music service and 40% for the tavern owner. This business model eventually became unsustainable due to city permits and the cost of setting up these telephone lines.
History
Early development
See also: Timeline of online videoAttempts to display media on computers date back to the earliest days of computing in the mid-20th century. However, little progress was made for several decades, primarily due to the high cost and limited capabilities of computer hardware. From the late 1980s through the 1990s, consumer-grade personal computers became powerful enough to display various media. The primary technical issues related to streaming were having enough CPU and bus bandwidth to support the required data rates and achieving the real-time computing performance required to prevent buffer underruns and enable smooth streaming of the content. However, computer networks were still limited in the mid-1990s, and audio and video media were usually delivered over non-streaming channels, such as playback from a local hard disk drive or CD-ROMs on the end user's computer.
Terminology in the 1970's was at best confusing for applications such as telemetered aircraft or missile test data. By then PCM was the dominant transmission type. This PCM transmission was bit-serial and not packetized so the 'streaming' terminology was often a confusion factor. In 1969 Grumman acquired one of the first telemetry ground stations which had the capability for reconstructing serial telemetered data which had been recorded on digital computer peripheral tapes. Computer peripheral tapes were inherently recorded in blocks. Reconstruction was required for continuous display purposes without time-base distortion. The Navy implemented similar capability in DoD for the first time in 1973. These implementations are the only known examples of true 'streaming' in the sense of reconstructing distortion-free serial data from packetized or blocked recordings. 'Real-time' terminology has also been confusing in streaming context. The most accepted definition of 'real-time' requires that all associated processing or formatting of the data must take place prior to availability of the next sample of each measurement. In the 1970s the most powerful mainframe computers were not fast enough for this task at significant overall data rates in the range of 50,000 samples per second. For that reason both the Grumman ATS and the Navy Real-time Telemetry Processing System employed unique special purpose digital computers dedicated to real-time processing of raw data samples.
In 1990, the first commercial Ethernet switch was introduced by Kalpana, which enabled the more powerful computer networks that led to the first streaming video solutions used by schools and corporations.
Practical streaming media was only made possible with advances in data compression due to the impractically high bandwidth requirements of uncompressed media. Raw digital audio encoded with pulse-code modulation (PCM) requires a bandwidth of 1.4 Mbit/s for uncompressed CD audio, while raw digital video requires a bandwidth of 168 Mbit/s for SD video and over 1000 Mbit/s for FHD video.
Late 1990s to early 2000s
See also: Original net animationDuring the late 1990s and early 2000s, users had increased access to computer networks, especially the Internet. During the early 2000s, users had access to increased network bandwidth, especially in the last mile. These technological improvements facilitated the streaming of audio and video content to computer users in their homes and workplaces. There was also an increasing use of standard protocols and formats, such as TCP/IP, HTTP, and HTML, as the Internet became increasingly commercialized, which led to an infusion of investment into the sector.
The band Severe Tire Damage was the first group to perform live on the Internet. On 24 June 1993, the band was playing a gig at Xerox PARC, while elsewhere in the building, scientists were discussing new technology (the Mbone) for broadcasting on the Internet using multicasting. As proof of PARC's technology, the band's performance was broadcast and could be seen live in Australia and elsewhere. In a March 2017 interview, band member Russ Haines stated that the band had used approximately "half of the total bandwidth of the internet" to stream the performance, which was a 152 × 76 pixel video, updated eight to twelve times per second, with audio quality that was, "at best, a bad telephone connection." In October 1994, a school music festival was webcast from the Michael Fowler Centre in Wellington, New Zealand. The technician who arranged the webcast, local council employee Richard Naylor, later commented: "We had 16 viewers in 12 countries."
RealNetworks pioneered the broadcast of a baseball game between the New York Yankees and the Seattle Mariners over the Internet in 1995. The first symphonic concert on the Internet—a collaboration between the Seattle Symphony and guest musicians Slash, Matt Cameron, and Barrett Martin—took place at the Paramount Theater in Seattle, Washington, on 10 November 1995.
In 1996, Marc Scarpa produced the first large-scale, online, live broadcast, the Adam Yauch–led Tibetan Freedom Concert, an event that would define the format of social change broadcasts. Scarpa continued to pioneer in the streaming media world with projects such as Woodstock '99, Townhall with President Clinton, and more recently Covered CA's campaign "Tell a Friend Get Covered", which was livestreamed on YouTube.
Business developments
Xing Technology was founded in 1989 and developed a JPEG streaming product called "StreamWorks". Another streaming product appeared in late 1992 and was named StarWorks. StarWorks enabled on-demand MPEG-1 full-motion videos to be randomly accessed on corporate Ethernet networks. Starworks was from Starlight Networks, which also pioneered live video streaming on Ethernet and via Internet Protocol over satellites with Hughes Network Systems. Other early companies that created streaming media technology include Progressive Networks and Protocomm prior to widespread World Wide Web usage. After the Netscape IPO in 1995 (and the release of Windows 95 with built-in TCP/IP support), usage of the Internet expanded, and many companies "went public", including Progressive Networks (which was renamed "RealNetworks", and listed on Nasdaq as "RNWK"). As the web became even more popular in the late 90s, streaming video on the internet blossomed from startups such as Vivo Software (later acquired by RealNetworks), VDOnet (acquired by RealNetworks), Precept (acquired by Cisco), and Xing (acquired by RealNetworks).
Microsoft developed a media player known as ActiveMovie in 1995 that supported streaming media and included a proprietary streaming format, which was the precursor to the streaming feature later in Windows Media Player 6.4 in 1999. In June 1999, Apple also introduced a streaming media format in its QuickTime 4 application. It was later also widely adopted on websites, along with RealPlayer and Windows Media streaming formats. The competing formats on websites required each user to download the respective applications for streaming, which resulted in many users having to have all three applications on their computer for general compatibility.
In 2000, Industryview.com launched its "world's largest streaming video archive" website to help businesses promote themselves. Webcasting became an emerging tool for business marketing and advertising that combined the immersive nature of television with the interactivity of the Web. The ability to collect data and feedback from potential customers caused this technology to gain momentum quickly.
Around 2002, the interest in a single, unified, streaming format and the widespread adoption of Adobe Flash prompted the development of a video streaming format through Flash, which was the format used in Flash-based players on video hosting sites. The first popular video streaming site, YouTube, was founded by Steve Chen, Chad Hurley, and Jawed Karim in 2005. It initially used a Flash-based player, which played MPEG-4 AVC video and AAC audio, but now defaults to HTML video. Increasing consumer demand for live streaming prompted YouTube to implement a new live streaming service for users. The company currently also offers a (secure) link that returns the available connection speed of the user.
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) revealed through its 2015, earnings report that streaming services were responsible for 34.3 percent of the year's total music industry's revenue, growing 29 percent from the previous year and becoming the largest source of income, pulling in around $2.4 billion. US streaming revenue grew 57 percent to $1.6 billion in the first half of 2016 and accounted for almost half of industry sales.
Streaming wars
See also: List of streaming media services "Streaming wars" redirects here. For the South Park film, see South Park The Streaming Wars.For competition between music streaming platforms, see § Music streaming platforms.History of television in the United States |
---|
Eras |
|
Histories |
The term streaming wars was coined to describe the new era (starting in the late 2010s) of competition between video streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Hulu, Max, Disney+, Paramount+, Apple TV+, Peacock, and many more.
The competition among online platforms has driven them to find ways to differentiate themselves from the rest. A key differentiator is offering exclusive content, often self-produced and created for a specific market segment. When Netflix first launched in 2007 it became one of the more dominant streaming platforms. This changed when Disney+ came out offering exclusive content that wasn't available on any other platforms. Disney+ took advantage of owning popular movies and shows like Frozen and Moana drawing in more subscribers and making it a big competitor for Netflix. Research suggests that this approach to streaming competition can be disadvantageous for consumers by increasing spending across platforms, and for the industry as a whole by dilution of subscriber base. Once specific content is made available on a streaming service, piracy searches for the same content decrease; competition or legal availability across multiple platforms appears to deter online piracy. Exclusive content produced for subscription services such as Netflix tends to have a higher production budget than content produced exclusively for pay-per-view services, such as Amazon Prime Video.
This competition increased during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic as more people stayed home and watched TV. "The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a seismic shift in the film & TV industry in terms of how films are made, distributed, and screened. Many industries have been hit by the economic effects of the pandemic" (Totaro Donato). In August 2022, a CNN headline declared that "The streaming wars are over" as pandemic-era restrictions had largely ended and audience growth had stalled. This led services to focus on profit over market share by cutting production budgets, cracking down on password sharing, and introducing ad-supported tiers. A December 2022 article in The Verge echoed this, declaring an end to the "golden age of the streaming wars".
In September 2023, several streaming services formed a trade association named the Streaming Innovation Alliance (SIA), spearheaded by Charles Rivkin of the Motion Picture Association (MPA). Former U.S. representative Fred Upton and former Federal Communications Commission (FCC) acting chair Mignon Clyburn serve as senior advisors. Founding members include AfroLandTV, America Nu Network, BET+, Discovery+, Disney+, Disney+ Hotstar, ESPN+, For Us By Us Network, Hulu, Max, the MPA, MotorTrend+, Netflix, Paramount+, Peacock, Pluto TV, Star+, Telemundo, TelevisaUnivision, Vault TV, and Vix. Notably absent were Apple, Amazon, Roku, and Tubi.
Use by the general public
Advances in computer networking, combined with powerful home computers and operating systems, have made streaming media affordable and easy for the public. Stand-alone Internet radio devices emerged to offer listeners a non-technical option for listening to audio streams. These audio-streaming services became increasingly popular; music streaming reached 4 trillion streams globally in 2023 -- a significant increase from 2022 -- jumping 34% over the year.
In general, multimedia content is data-intensive, so media storage and transmission costs are still significant. Media is generally compressed for transport and storage. Increasing consumer demand for streaming high-definition (HD) content has led the industry to develop technologies such as WirelessHD and G.hn, which are optimized for streaming HD content. Many developers have introduced HD streaming apps that work on smaller devices, such as tablets and smartphones, for everyday purposes.
—Robert Christgau, 2018"Streaming creates the illusion—greatly magnified by headphone use, which is another matter—that music is a utility you can turn on and off; the water metaphor is intrinsic to how it works. It dematerializes music, denies it a crucial measure of autonomy, reality, and power. It makes music seem disposable, impermanent. Hence it intensifies the ebb and flow of pop fashion, the way musical 'memes' rise up for a week or a month and are then forgotten. And it renders our experience of individual artists/groups shallower."
A media stream can be streamed either live or on demand. Live streams are generally provided by a method called true streaming. True streaming sends the information straight to the computer or device without saving it to a local file. On-demand streaming is provided by a method called progressive download. Progressive download saves the received information to a local file and then plays it from that location. On-demand streams are often saved to files for extended period of time, while live streams are only available at one time only (e.g., during a football game).
Streaming media is increasingly being coupled with the use of social media. For example, sites such as YouTube encourage social interaction in webcasts through features such as live chat, online surveys, user posting of comments online, and more. Furthermore, streaming media is increasingly being used for social business and e-learning.
The Horowitz Research State of Pay TV, OTT, and SVOD 2017 report said that 70 percent of those viewing content did so through a streaming service and that 40 percent of TV viewing was done this way, twice the number from five years earlier. Millennials, the report said, streamed 60 percent of the content.
Transition from DVD
One of the movie streaming industry's largest impacts was on the DVD industry, which drastically dropped in popularity and profitability with the mass popularization of online content. The rise of media streaming caused the downfall of many DVD rental companies, such as Blockbuster. In July 2015, The New York Times published an article about Netflix's DVD services. It stated that Netflix was continuing their DVD services with 5.3 million subscribers, which was a significant drop from the previous year. On the other hand, their streaming service had 65 million members. The shift to streaming platforms also led to the decline of DVD rental services. In July 2024, NBC News reported that RedBox, a DVD rental service that had operated for 22 years, would shut down due to the rapid incline of streaming platforms. As the rental services has been rapidly declining since 2010, the business had to file for bankruptcy, with 99% of households now subscribing to streaming services. Further reflecting the shift away from physical media, BestBuy has ceased selling DVDs.
Napster
Music streaming is one of the most popular ways in which consumers interact with streaming media. In the age of digitization, the private consumption of music has transformed into a public good, largely due to one player in the market: Napster.
Napster, a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing network where users could upload and download MP3 files freely, broke all music industry conventions when it launched in early 1999 in Hull, Massachusetts. The platform was developed by Shawn and John Fanning as well as Sean Parker. In an interview from 2009, Shawn Fanning explained that Napster "was something that came to me as a result of seeing a sort of unmet need and the passion people had for being able to find all this music, particularly a lot of the obscure stuff, which wouldn't be something you go to a record store and purchase, so it felt like a problem worth solving."
Not only did this development disrupt the music industry by making songs that previously required payment to be freely accessible to any Napster user, but it also demonstrated the power of P2P networks in turning any digital file into a public, shareable good. For the brief period of time that Napster existed, mp3 files fundamentally changed as a type of good. Songs were no longer financially excludable, barring access to a computer with internet access, and they were not rivals, meaning if one person downloaded a song, it did not diminish another user from doing the same. Napster, like most other providers of public goods, faced the free-rider problem. Every user benefits when an individual uploads an mp3 file, but there is no requirement or mechanism that forces all users to share their music. Generally, the platform encouraged sharing; users who downloaded files from others often had their own files available for upload as well. However, not everyone chose to share their files. There was no a built-in incentive specifically discouraging users from sharing their own files.
This structure revolutionized the consumer's perception of ownership over digital goods; it made music freely replicable. Napster quickly garnered millions of users, growing faster than any other business in history. At the peak of its existence, Napster boasted about 80 million users globally. The site gained so much traffic that many college campuses had to block access to Napster because it created network congestion from so many students sharing music files.
The advent of Napster sparked the creation of numerous other P2P sites, including LimeWire (2000), BitTorrent (2001), and the Pirate Bay (2003). The reign of P2P networks was short-lived. The first to fall was Napster in 2001. Numerous lawsuits were filed against Napster by various record labels, all of which were subsidiaries of Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, or EMI. In addition to this, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) also filed a lawsuit against Napster on the grounds of unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material, which ultimately led Napster to shut down in 2001. In an interview with the New York Times, Gary Stiffelman, who represents Eminem, Aerosmith, and TLC, explained, "I'm not an opponent of artists' music being included in these services, I'm just an opponent of their revenue not being shared."
The fight for intellectual property rights: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.
The lawsuit A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. fundamentally changed the way consumers interact with music streaming. It was argued on 2 October 2000, and was decided on 12 February 2001. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a P2P file-sharing service could be held liable for contributory and vicarious infringement of copyright, serving as a landmark decision for Intellectual property law.
The first issue that the Court addressed was fair use, which says that otherwise infringing activities are permissible so long as they are for purposes "such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching scholarship, or research." Judge Beezer, the judge for this case, noted that Napster claimed that its services fit "three specific alleged fair uses: sampling, where users make temporary copies of a work before purchasing; space-shifting, where users access a sound recording through the Napster system that they already own in audio CD format; and permissive distribution of recordings by both new and established artists." Judge Beezer found that Napster did not fit these criteria, instead enabling their users to repeatedly copy music, which would affect the market value of the copyrighted good.
The second claim by the plaintiffs was that Napster was actively contributing to copyright infringement since it had knowledge of widespread file sharing on its platform. Since Napster took no action to reduce infringement and financially benefited from repeated use, the court ruled against the P2P site. The court found that "as much as eighty-seven percent of the files available on Napster may be copyrighted and more than seventy percent may be owned or administered by plaintiffs."
The injunction ordered against Napster ended the brief period in which music streaming was a public good – non-rival and non-excludable in nature. Other P2P networks had some success at sharing MP3s, though they all met a similar fate in court. The ruling set the precedent that copyrighted digital content cannot be freely replicated and shared unless given consent by the owner, thereby strengthening the property rights of artists and record labels alike.
Music streaming platforms
Main article: Music streaming serviceAlthough music streaming is no longer a freely replicable public good, streaming platforms such as Spotify, Deezer, Apple Music, SoundCloud, YouTube Music, and Amazon Music have shifted music streaming to a club-type good. While some platforms, most notably Spotify, give customers access to a freemium service that enables the use of limited features for exposure to advertisements, most companies operate under a premium subscription model. Under such circumstances, music streaming is financially excludable, requiring that customers pay a monthly fee for access to a music library, but non-rival, since one customer's use does not impair another's.
An article written by the New York Times in 2021 states that "streaming saved music." This is because it provided monthly revenue. Especially Spotify offers its free platform, but you can pay for their premium to get music ad-free. This allows access for people to stream music anywhere from their devices not having to rely on CDs anymore.
There is competition between services similar but lesser to the streaming wars for video media. As of 2019, Spotify has over 207 million users in 78 countries, As of 2018, Apple Music has about 60 million, and SoundCloud has 175 million. All platforms provide varying degrees of accessibility. Apple Music and Prime Music only offer their services for paid subscribers, whereas Spotify and SoundCloud offer freemium and premium services. Napster, owned by Rhapsody since 2011, has resurfaced as a music streaming platform offering subscription-based services to over 4.5 million users as of January 2017.
The music industry's response to music streaming was initially negative. Along with music piracy, streaming services disrupted the market and contributed to the fall in US revenue from $14.6 billion in 1999 to $6.3 billion in 2009. CDs and single-track downloads were not selling because content was freely available on the Internet. By 2018, however, music streaming revenue exceeded that of traditional revenue streams (e.g. record sales, album sales, downloads). Streaming revenue is now one of the largest driving forces behind the growth in the music industry.
COVID-19 pandemic
By August 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic had streaming services busier than ever. The pandemic contributed to a surge in subscriptions, in the UK alone, 12 million people joined a new streaming service that they had not previously had. Global subscriptions skyrocketed passing 1 billion. Within the first 3 months, back in 2020, nearly 15.7 million people signed up for Netflix. With people stuck at home and facing lock-downs Netflix provided a much needed distraction.
An impact analysis of 2020 data by the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) indicated that remuneration from digital streaming of music increased with a strong rise in digital royalty collection (up 16.6% to EUR 2.4 billion), but it would not compensate the overall loss of income of authors from concerts, public performance and broadcast. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) recompiled the music industry initiatives around the world related to the COVID-19. In its State of the Industry report, it recorded that the global recorded music market grew by 7.4% in 2022, the 6th consecutive year of growth. This growth was driven by streaming, mostly from paid subscription streaming revenues which increased by 18.5%, fueled by 443 million users of subscription accounts by the end of 2020.
The COVID-19 pandemic has also driven an increase in misinformation and disinformation, particularly on streaming platforms like YouTube and podcasts.
Local/home streaming
Streaming also refers to the offline streaming of multimedia at home. This is made possible by technologies such as DLNA, which allow devices on the same local network to connect to each other and share media. Such capabilities are heightened using network-attached storage (NAS) devices at home, or using specialized software like Plex Media Server, Jellyfin or TwonkyMedia.
Technologies
Bandwidth
A broadband speed of 2 Mbit/s or more is recommended for streaming standard-definition video, for example to a Roku, Apple TV, Google TV or a Sony TV Blu-ray Disc Player. 5 Mbit/s is recommended for high-definition content and 9 Mbit/s for ultra-high-definition content. Streaming media storage size is calculated from the streaming bandwidth and length of the media using the following formula (for a single user and file): storage size in megabytes is equal to length (in seconds) × bit rate (in bit/s) / (8 × 1024 × 1024). For example, one hour of digital video encoded at 300 kbit/s (this was a typical broadband video in 2005 and it was usually encoded in 320 × 240 resolution) will be: (3,600 s × 300,000 bit/s) / (8 × 1024 × 1024) requires around 128 MB of storage.
If the file is stored on a server for on-demand streaming and this stream is viewed by 1,000 people at the same time using a Unicast protocol, the requirement is 300 kbit/s × 1,000 = 300,000 kbit/s = 300 Mbit/s of bandwidth. This is equivalent to around 135 GB per hour. Using a multicast protocol the server sends out only a single stream that is common to all users. Therefore, such a stream would only use 300 kbit/s of server bandwidth.
In 2018 video was more than 60% of data traffic worldwide and accounted for 80% of growth in data usage.
Protocols
Video and audio streams are compressed to make the file size smaller. Audio coding formats include MP3, Vorbis, AAC and Opus. Video coding formats include H.264, HEVC, VP8 and VP9. Encoded audio and video streams are assembled in a container bitstream such as MP4, FLV, WebM, ASF or ISMA. The bitstream is delivered from a streaming server to a streaming client (e.g., the computer user with their Internet-connected laptop) using a transport protocol, such as Adobe's RTMP or RTP.
In the 2010s, technologies such as Apple's HLS, Microsoft's Smooth Streaming, Adobe's HDS and non-proprietary formats such as MPEG-DASH emerged to enable adaptive bitrate streaming over HTTP as an alternative to using proprietary transport protocols. Often, a streaming transport protocol is used to send video from an event venue to a cloud transcoding service and content delivery network, which then uses HTTP-based transport protocols to distribute the video to individual homes and users. The streaming client (the end user) may interact with the streaming server using a control protocol, such as MMS or RTSP.
The quality of the interaction between servers and users is based on the workload of the streaming service; as more users attempt to access a service the quality may be affected by resource constraints in the service. Deploying clusters of streaming servers is one such method where there are regional servers spread across the network, managed by a singular, central server containing copies of all the media files as well as the IP addresses of the regional servers. This central server then uses load balancing and scheduling algorithms to redirect users to nearby regional servers capable of accommodating them. This approach also allows the central server to provide streaming data to both users as well as regional servers using FFmpeg libraries if required, thus demanding the central server to have powerful data processing and immense storage capabilities. In return, workloads on the streaming backbone network are balanced and alleviated, allowing for optimal streaming quality.
Designing a network protocol to support streaming media raises many problems. Datagram protocols, such as the User Datagram Protocol (UDP), send the media stream as a series of small packets. This is simple and efficient; however, there is no mechanism within the protocol to guarantee delivery. It is up to the receiving application to detect loss or corruption and recover data using error correction techniques. If data is lost, the stream may suffer a dropout. The Real-Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP), Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) and the Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP) were specifically designed to stream media over networks. RTSP runs over a variety of transport protocols, while the latter two are built on top of UDP.
HTTP adaptive bitrate streaming is based on HTTP progressive download, but contrary to the previous approach, here the files are very small, so that they can be compared to the streaming of packets, much like the case of using RTSP and RTP. Reliable protocols, such as the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), guarantee correct delivery of each bit in the media stream. It means, however, that when there is data loss on the network, the media stream stalls while the protocol handlers detect the loss and retransmit the missing data. Clients can minimize this effect by buffering data for display. While delay due to buffering is acceptable in video-on-demand scenarios, users of interactive applications such as video conferencing will experience a loss of fidelity if the delay caused by buffering exceeds 200 ms.
Unicast protocols send a separate copy of the media stream from the server to each recipient. Unicast is the norm for most Internet connections but does not scale well when many users want to view the same television program concurrently. Multicast protocols were developed to reduce server and network loads resulting from duplicate data streams that occur when many recipients receive unicast content streams independently. These protocols send a single stream from the source to a group of recipients. Depending on the network infrastructure and type, multicast transmission may or may not be feasible. One potential disadvantage of multicasting is the loss of video on demand functionality. Continuous streaming of radio or television material usually precludes the recipient's ability to control playback. However, this problem can be mitigated by elements such as caching servers, digital set-top boxes, and buffered media players.
IP multicast provides a means to send a single media stream to a group of recipients on a computer network. A connection management protocol, usually Internet Group Management Protocol, is used to manage the delivery of multicast streams to the groups of recipients on a LAN. One of the challenges in deploying IP multicast is that routers and firewalls between LANs must allow the passage of packets destined to multicast groups. If the organization that is serving the content has control over the network between server and recipients (i.e., educational, government, and corporate intranets), then routing protocols such as Protocol Independent Multicast can be used to deliver stream content to multiple local area network segments.
Peer-to-peer (P2P) protocols arrange for prerecorded streams to be sent between computers. This prevents the server and its network connections from becoming a bottleneck. However, it raises technical, performance, security, quality, and business issues.
Content delivery networks (CDNs) use intermediate servers to distribute the load. Internet-compatible unicast delivery is used between CDN nodes and streaming destinations.
Recording
Media that is livestreamed can be recorded through certain media players, such as VLC player, or through the use of a screen recorder. Live-streaming platforms such as Twitch may also incorporate a video on demand system that allows automatic recording of live broadcasts so that they can be watched later. YouTube also has recordings of live broadcasts, including television shows aired on major networks. These streams have the potential to be recorded by anyone who has access to them, whether legally or otherwise.
Recordings can happen through any device that allows people to watch movies they don’t have access to or be at a music festival they couldn’t get tickets to. These live streaming platforms have revolutionized entertainment, creating new ways for people to interact with content. Many celebrities started live streaming during COVID-19 through platforms like Instagram, Youtube, and TikTok offering an alternate form of entertainment when concerts were postponed. For example, Miley Cyrus hosted a series where she live streamed and sang songs during the pandemic. She even had other celebrity guests like Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez, Demi Lovato, and more! Who were able to join in from their home through their device. Many other people joined in on this like Phoebe Bridgers who sang songs for over 10,000 people while live streaming. Live Streaming and recording allow for fans to communicate with these artists through chats and likes.
View recommendation
Most streaming services feature a recommender system for viewing based on each user's view history in conjunction with all viewers' aggregated view histories. Rather than focusing on subjective categorization of content by content curators), there is an assumption that, with the immensity of data collected on viewing habits, the choices of those who are first to view content can be algorithmically extrapolated to the totality of the user base, with increasing probabilistic accuracy as to the likelihood of their choosing and enjoying the recommended content as more data is collected.
Applications and marketing
Useful and typical applications of streaming are, for example, long video lectures performed online. An advantage of this presentation is that these lectures can be very long, although they can always be interrupted or repeated at arbitrary places. Streaming enables new content marketing concepts. For example, the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra sells Internet live streams of whole concerts instead of several CDs or similar fixed media in their Digital Concert Hall using YouTube for trailers. These online concerts are also spread over a lot of different places, including cinemas at various places on the globe. A similar concept is used by the Metropolitan Opera in New York. There is also a livestream from the International Space Station. In video entertainment, video streaming platforms like Netflix, Hulu, and Disney+ are mainstream elements of the media industry.
Marketers have found many opportunities offered by streaming media and the platforms that offer them, especially in light of the significant increase in the use of streaming media during COVID lockdowns from 2020 onwards. While revenue and placement of traditional advertising continued to decrease, digital marketing increased by 15% in 2021, with digital media and search representing 65% of the expenditures.
A case study commissioned by the WIPO indicates that streaming services attract advertising budgets with the opportunities provided by interactivity and the use of data from users, resulting in personalization on a mass scale with content marketing. Targeted marketing is expanding with the use of artificial intelligence, in particular programmatic advertisement, a tool that helps advertisers decide their campaign parameters and whether they are interested in buying advertising space online or not. One example of advertising space acquisition is Real-Time Bidding (RTB).
Challenges
Copyright issues
See also: Copyright aspects of downloading and streamingFor over-the-top media service (OTT) platforms, the original content captures additional subscribers. This presents copyright issues and the potential for international exploitation through streaming, widespread use of standards, and metadata in digital files. The WIPO has indicated several basic copyright issues arising for those pursuing work in the film and music industries in the era of streaming.
Streaming copyrighted content can involve making infringing copies of the works in question. The recording and distribution of streamed content is also an issue for many companies that rely on revenue based on views or attendance.
See also
- Comparison of music streaming services
- Comparison of streaming media software
- Comparison of video hosting services
- Content delivery platform
- Digital television
- Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market
- Internet Protocol television
- List of streaming media services
- List of streaming media systems
- M3U playlists
- National Streaming Day
- Over-the-top media service
- P2PTV
- Protection of Broadcasts and Broadcasting Organizations Treaty
- Smart TV
- Stream ripping
- Video over cellular
References
- Patrikakis, Charalampos; Papaoulakis, Nikos; Stefanoudaki, Chryssanthi; Nunes, Mário (2010), Daras, Petros; Ibarra, Oscar Mayora (eds.), "Streaming Content Wars: Download and Play Strikes Back", User Centric Media, vol. 40, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 218–226, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-12630-7_26, ISBN 978-3-642-12629-1, retrieved 5 May 2024
- "DLNA Network Guide" (PDF). Retrieved 21 August 2024.
- Fayyoumi, Ebaa; Idwan, Sahar; Muhared, Hiba; Matar, Izzeddin; Rawashdeh, Obaidah (November 2014). "L2CAP-based prototype media streaming via Bluetooth technology". International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organisations. 14 (3): 221. doi:10.1504/IJNVO.2014.065785.
- The history of streaming media - PC Plus (PDF). 2012.
- "Music consumption at all time high powered by streaming and video apps | Complete Music Update". Retrieved 5 May 2024.
- ^ "Streaming Wars". The Verge. Archived from the original on 6 December 2019. Retrieved 1 December 2019.
- Bonnington, Christina (12 April 2018). "Even Ikea Has a Connected Speaker Now". Slate. ISSN 1091-2339. Retrieved 5 May 2024.
- "What is live streaming?". Cloudflare.
- ^ Gelman, A.D.; Halfin, S.; Willinger, W. (1991). "On buffer requirements for store-and-forward video on demand service circuits". IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference GLOBECOM '91: Countdown to the New Millennium. Conference Record. IEEE. pp. 976–980. doi:10.1109/GLOCOM.1991.188525. ISBN 0-87942-697-7. S2CID 61767197.
- Reason, Samuel (6 November 2020). "Music Streaming Actually Existed Back In 1890". blitzlift.com. Archived from the original on 1 December 2020. Retrieved 27 December 2020.
- US 1,641,608, "Electrical signaling"
- Greene, Bob (8 February 1987). "GETTING PERSONAL WITH THE JUKEBOX". Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on 8 November 2020. Retrieved 27 December 2020.
- ^ Furness, Zack (17 October 2019). "Did You Know Music Streaming Has Roots in Pittsburgh?". pittsburghmagazine.com. Archived from the original on 4 February 2021. Retrieved 27 December 2020.
- Bradley-Steck, Tara (4 September 1988). "Complex Link-Up of Phone Lines, Old Phonograph Records : 'Human Jukebox' Spins Sounds for the Heart". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 25 January 2021. Retrieved 27 December 2020.
- IEEE Aero & AES Magazine, May 2022 ISSN 0885-8985, Vol 37, No.5 pp. 40
- Lee, Jack (2005). Scalable Continuous Media Streaming Systems: Architecture, Design, Analysis and Implementation. John Wiley & Sons. p. 25. ISBN 9780470857649.
- "History of the Internet Pt. 1 – The First Live Stream" Archived 29 January 2019 at the Wayback Machine. Via YouTube. Internet Archive – Stream Division. 5 April 2017. Retrieved 13 January 2018.
- Newman, Keith (2008). Connecting the Clouds: The Internet in New Zealand. Auckland: Activity Press. p. 90. ISBN 978-0-9582634-4-3.
- "RealNetworks Inc". Funding Universe. Archived from the original on 11 July 2011. Retrieved 23 July 2011.
- "Cyberian Rhapsody". Billboard. United States: Lynne Segall. 17 February 1996.
- Tobagi, F.A.; Pang, J. (1993). "StarWorks-a video applications server". Digest of Papers. Compcon Spring. pp. 4–11. doi:10.1109/CMPCON.1993.289623. ISBN 0-8186-3400-6. S2CID 61039780.
- "Starlight Networks and Hughes Network Systems". Archived from the original on 2 April 2019. Retrieved 10 May 2017.
- Sullivan, Jennifer. "Revived RealNetworks Buys Xing". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 5 October 2022.
- Hebert, Steve (November 2000). "Streaming Video Opens New Doors". Videography. p. 164.
- Reinstein, Bill (25 June 2001). "Webcasts Mature as Marketing Tool". DM News. p. 24.
- "YouTube now defaults to HTML5 <video>". YouTube Engineering and Developers Blog. Archived from the original on 10 September 2018. Retrieved 20 February 2018.
- Josh Lowensohn (2008). "YouTube to Offer Live Streaming This Year". Archived from the original on 10 August 2011. Retrieved 23 July 2011.
- "YouTube Video Speed History". Archived from the original on 26 April 2012. Retrieved 30 April 2012 – via YouTube.
- "News and Notes on 2015 RIAA Shipment and Revenue Statistics" (PDF). Recording Industry Association of America. Archived (PDF) from the original on 6 June 2019. Retrieved 5 January 2017.
- "Streaming made more revenue for music industry in 2015 than digital downloads, physical sales". The Washington Times. Archived from the original on 5 January 2017. Retrieved 5 January 2017.
- Shaw, Lucas (20 September 2016). "The Music Industry Is Finally Making Money on Streaming". Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg L.P. Archived from the original on 22 May 2019. Retrieved 5 January 2017.
- Chalaby, Jean K (2024). "The streaming industry and the platform economy: An analysis". Media, Culture & Society. 46 (3): 552–571. doi:10.1177/01634437231210439.
- "Why the Streaming Wars Will Change the TV Industry Forever | Paramount". www.paramount.com. Retrieved 9 December 2024.
- "Streaming wars (Creative Economy Notes Series)". wipo.int. Retrieved 29 December 2021.
- Frank Pallotta (11 August 2022). "The streaming wars are over". CNN. Archived from the original on 19 August 2022. Retrieved 19 August 2022.
- Cranz, Alex (14 December 2022). "The golden age of the streaming wars has ended". The Verge. Archived from the original on 29 December 2022. Retrieved 29 December 2022.
- Huston, Caitlin (26 September 2023). "Netflix, Max, Disney and More Form Streaming Industry Trade Alliance". The Hollywood Reporter. Archived from the original on 26 September 2023. Retrieved 26 September 2023.
- Davis, Wes (26 September 2023). "Streaming giants have banded together for lobbying power". The Verge. Archived from the original on 26 September 2023. Retrieved 26 September 2023.
- Sherman, Maria (10 January 2024). "Music streams hit 4 trillion in 2023. Country and global acts — and Taylor Swift — fueled the growth". AP News. Retrieved 21 November 2024.
- Christgau, Robert (20 November 2018). "Xgau Sez". robertchristgau.com. Archived from the original on 26 July 2018. Retrieved 21 November 2018.
- Grant and Meadows. (2009). Communication Technology Update and Fundamentals 11th Edition. pp.114
- Kellner, Scott (28 February 2013). "The Future of Webcasting". INXPO. Archived from the original on 3 July 2013. Retrieved 15 May 2013.
- Umstead, R. Thomas (5 June 2017). "Horowitz: Streaming Is the New Normal". Broadcasting & Cable: 4.
- Durrani, Ana (27 March 2023). "Top Streaming Statistics In 2024". Forbes Home. Retrieved 28 September 2024.
- Steel, Emily (26 July 2015). "Netflix Refines Its DVD Business, Even as Streaming Unit Booms". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 21 June 2017. Retrieved 4 November 2019.
- "Redbox set to close as DVD market withers in streaming's shadow". NBC News. 11 July 2024. Retrieved 9 December 2024.
- "Ashes to ashes, peer to peer: An oral history of Napster". Fortune. Archived from the original on 9 March 2019. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- Evangelista, Benny (31 May 2009). "An interview with Napster's Shawn Fanning". The Technology Chronicles. Archived from the original on 21 May 2021. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- "The Ethics of Anonymous Computing: Napster". cs.stanford.edu. Retrieved 21 September 2023.
- ^ Harris, Mark. "The History of Napster: Yes, It's Still Around". Lifewire. Archived from the original on 15 March 2019. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- Strauss, Neil (18 February 2002). "Record Labels' Answer to Napster Still Has Artists Feeling Bypassed". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 23 March 2019. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- ^ "Case Study: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. – Blog | @WashULaw". onlinelaw.wustl.edu. 1 August 2013. Archived from the original on 31 May 2020. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- ^ "A&M RECORDS, INC. v. NAPSTER, INC., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001)". law.cornell.edu. Archived from the original on 12 April 2019. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- "Digital Media Association Annual Report" (PDF). March 2018. Archived (PDF) from the original on 10 December 2018. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- "Battle of the Streaming Services: Which Is the Best Premium Video Service?". NDTV Gadgets 360. Archived from the original on 17 June 2022. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
- "Streaming Saved Music. Artists Hate It. (Published 2021)". 22 March 2021. Retrieved 9 December 2024.
- "Decoding Artist Compensation: Streaming 2024". 7 February 2024.
- McIntyre, Hugh. "The Top 10 Streaming Music Services By Number Of Users". Forbes. Archived from the original on 8 November 2019. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- "Napster Proves That Streaming Music Can Be Profitable". Digital Music News. 22 August 2018. Archived from the original on 1 March 2020. Retrieved 11 March 2019.
- "Global Music Report 2018: Annual State of the Industry" (PDF). GMR. 2017. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 July 2020. Retrieved 12 March 2019.
- Rajan, Amol (5 August 2020). "TV watching and online streaming surge during lockdown". BBC News. Archived from the original on 24 November 2021. Retrieved 24 November 2021.
- X; Instagram; Email; Facebook (18 March 2021). "Streaming milestone: Global subscriptions passed 1 billion last year". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 9 December 2024.
{{cite web}}
:|last2=
has generic name (help) - Lee, Edmund (21 April 2020). "Everyone You Know Just Signed Up for Netflix". New York Times.
- CISAC (27 October 2021). "CISAC Global Collections Report 2021 (for 2020 Data)". CISAC. Archived from the original on 30 December 2021. Retrieved 30 December 2021.
- "IFPI issues Global Music Report 2021: Global recorded music revenues grow 7.4%". IFPI.org. 23 March 2021. Archived from the original on 25 March 2021. Retrieved 30 December 2021.
- Hsu, Tiffany; Tracy, Marc (12 November 2021). "On Podcasts and Radio, Misleading Covid-19 Talk Goes Unchecked". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 28 December 2021. Retrieved 24 November 2021.
- "Enabling and configuring DLNA media server". docs.qnap.com. Retrieved 27 October 2023.
- "Connected Digital Home". manifest-tech.com. Retrieved 27 October 2023.
- Brookes, Tim (30 March 2023). "No Plex App, No Problem: Using Plex as a DLNA/UPnP Server". How-To Geek. Retrieved 5 May 2024.
- Staples, Kim (20 May 2016). "How to watch live TV online: The complete guide". broadbandchoices. Archived from the original on 16 May 2016. Retrieved 1 October 2016.
- Minimum requirements for Sony TV Blu-ray Disc Player, on advertisement attached to a NetFlix DVD
- Rizk, Shirley (21 June 2019). "The myth of the green cloud". European Investment Bank. Archived from the original on 14 April 2021. Retrieved 17 September 2020.
- "Cisco Annual Internet Report (2018–2023) White Paper". Cisco. Archived from the original on 7 February 2014. Retrieved 17 September 2020.
- "Streaming the London Olympic Games with the 'Go Live Package' from iStreamPlanet and Haivision". iStreamPlanet. Archived from the original on 1 January 2016. Retrieved 11 November 2015.
- Sripanidkulchai, Kunwadee; Maggs, Bruce; Zhang, Hui (2004). "An analysis of live streaming workloads on the internet". Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement. IMC '04. New York, NY, US: ACM. pp. 41–54. doi:10.1145/1028788.1028795. ISBN 9781581138214. S2CID 1742312.
- Zhao, Hong; Chun-long, Zhou; Bao-zhao, Jin (3 February 2015). "Design and Implementation of Streaming Media Server Cluster Based on FFMpeg". The Scientific World Journal. 2015: 963083. doi:10.1155/2015/963083. PMC 4334929. PMID 25734187.
- "RTSP: The Real-Time Streaming Protocol. What is RTSP and How Does It Work?". antmedia.io. 8 July 2021. Retrieved 6 January 2025.
- Ch. Z. Patrikakis, N. Papaoulakis, Ch. Stefanoudaki, M. S. Nunes, "Streaming content wars: Download and play strikes back" presented at the Personalization in Media Delivery Platforms Workshop, , Venice, Italy, 2009.
- Krasic, C. and Li, K. and Walpole, J., The case for streaming multimedia with TCP, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 213–218, Springer, 2001
- "Videos On Demand". Archived from the original on 15 December 2018. Retrieved 8 May 2017.
- Burroughs, Benjamin; Rugg, Adam (3 July 2014). "Extending the Broadcast: Streaming Culture and the Problems of Digital Geographies". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 58 (3): 365–380. doi:10.1080/08838151.2014.935854. ISSN 0883-8151. S2CID 144577408.
- Peisner, David (21 July 2020). "Concerts Aren't Back. Livestreams Are Ubiquitous. Can They Do the Job?". New York Times.
- Buijsman, Stefan (2018). Pluses and Minuses: How Math Solves Our Problems (in Dutch) (English ed.). Amsterdam: Penguin Books. pp. 12–16. ISBN 978-0-14-313458-9.
- A typical one-hour video lecture is the following live stream from an international conference on financial crises: Stanley, Eugene (2008). "Applications of Statistical Physics to Understanding Complex Systems". Videolectures. Archived from the original on 28 May 2019.
- "The Berliner Philharmoniker's Digital Concert Hall". digitalconcerthall.com. Archived from the original on 3 May 2012. Retrieved 3 May 2012.
- "ISS High Definition Live Streaming Video of the Earth (HDEV)". Earth Science & Remote Sensing Unit. NASA. Archived from the original on 8 December 2016. Retrieved 26 December 2016.
- "ISS HD Earth Viewing Experiment". IBM Video Streaming. Archived from the original on 29 December 2016. Retrieved 26 December 2016.
- Forrester (27 April 2020). "Q1 2020 Proves Streaming Is Essential To Consumers And To The Future Of Media Companies". Forbes. Archived from the original on 1 November 2020. Retrieved 2 October 2020.
- "Deloitte study: digital marketing spending is expected to increase by almost 15% until the end of 2021, while traditional advertising will slightly decrease". Deloitte Romania. 29 October 2021. Archived from the original on 4 February 2022. Retrieved 4 February 2022.
- Pozza, Leticia Ange; Sifuentes, Ana Paola. "Case Study VI: Data in the Audiovisual business: Trends and Opportunities" (PDF). WIPO. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 October 2021. Retrieved 4 February 2022.
- "Revised Proposal for a Pilot Project on Copyright and the Distribution of Content in the Digital Environment Submitted by Brazil". WIPO. 23 November 2018. Archived from the original on 4 February 2022. Retrieved 4 February 2022.
- "What is programmatic video advertising? (And why it's smart to use it)". Biteable. 17 May 2018. Archived from the original on 4 February 2022. Retrieved 4 February 2022.
- Katz, Raul (October 2021). Study on the copyright legal framework and licensing practices of audiovisual content in the digital environment, Part 1: Audiovisual OTT business models in Latin America: Recent trends and future evolution. Archived 5 November 2022 at the Wayback Machine World Intellectual Property Organization
- Moullier, B; Galvis, Alexandra (October 2021). Study on the copyright legal framework and licensing practices of audiovisual content in the digital environment, Part 4: contractual practices in the Latin American audiovisual sector in the digital environment. World Intellectual Property Organization Archived 21 May 2022 at the Wayback Machine
- Schotz, Gustavo (October 2021). Study on the copyright legal framework and licensing practices of audiovisual content in the digital environment, Part 5: The Identification and Use of Metadata in Audiovisual Works https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ip-development/en/agenda/pdf/11_part_5_identification_and_metadata_av-en.pdf Archived 7 April 2022 at the Wayback Machine. World Intellectual Property Organization
- WIPO, How to make a living in the Film Industry. Available at: How to Make a Living in the Film Industry https://www.wipo.int/copyright/en/creative_industries/film.html Archived 5 November 2022 at the Wayback Machine (wipo.int)
- WIPO, How to make a living in the Film Industry. Rights, Camera, Action! https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/869/wipo_pub_869.pdf Archived 26 June 2022 at the Wayback Machine (wipo.int)
- WIPO, How to make a living in the Music Industry. Available at: How to Make a Living in the Music Industry https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/939/wipo_pub_939.pdf Archived 7 March 2022 at the Wayback Machine (wipo.int)
- Maeda, Mari (17 March 2001). "OFC'01 Invited Talk the Internet of the Future". Optical Fiber Communication Conference and International Conference on Quantum Information. Optical Society of America. pp. TuK1. doi:10.1364/OFC.2001.TuK1. ISBN 1-55752-654-0. Archived from the original on 18 February 2020. Retrieved 28 July 2019.
Further reading
- Hagen, Anja Nylund (2020). Music in Streams: Communicating Music in the Streaming Paradigm, In Michael Filimowicz & Veronika Tzankova (ed.), Reimagining Communication: Mediation (1st Edition). Routledge.
- Preston, J. (11 December 2011). "Occupy Video Showcases Live Streaming". The New York Times.
- Sherman, Alex (27 October 2019). "AT&T, Disney and Comcast have very different plans for the streaming wars – here's what they're doing and why". CNBC.
External links
- "The Early History of the Streaming Media Industry and The Battle Between Microsoft & Real". streamingmedia.com. March 2016. Archived from the original on 21 March 2016. Retrieved 25 March 2016.
- "What is Streaming? A high-level view of streaming media technology, history". streamingmedia.com. Retrieved 25 March 2016.
Broadcasting | |
---|---|
Medium | |
Broadcasting niche | |
Specialty channels | |
Production and funding |
Web syndication | |||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Types | |||||||||||||||
Technology |
| ||||||||||||||
Form | |||||||||||||||
Media |
|