There’s a little more explanation at http://www.oracep.com

Thanks for your thoughts. Have a great Christmas.

1. “Ownership or control of Intellectual Property by the corporation.” Hm, the richer the media, the harder it has been for traditional media to secure full IP control. (Remember Art Buchwald?) The notion of ‘conversation vs dictation’ works fine with text data but as we get further into rich media I think all sorts of rights holders will crawl out of the woodworks, potentially chilling certain forms of interaction.

2. “Ownership or control of expensive distribution networks.” MSO types have tended to think of these things as distribution windows; i.e., make it once, distribute it over as many distribution windows (cinema, HBO, DVD, etc.) as possible. John Malone never tried to own/control every distribution network. He focused on only one distribution network and leveraged the holy bejeezus out of it. I know that the concept of walled gardens is a bit out of favor in the current environment but I think it’s only a matter of time before the pendulum starts to swing the other way, if only because not every network is created equal. If you’re JibJab you think of YouTube for one purpose; Yahoo for another; and home video distributor Razor & Tie for yet another.

3. “Established business models based on highly evolved approaches to advertising and subscription models.” I do think people still underestimate the value of versioning. Some of these comments remind me of Netscape. In a meeting back in 1995 they claimed they could get something along the order of 25+ iterations of Mozilla done in the time that it took Microsoft to release the next version of Word. They slowed down real fast after Netscape 3.0 came out, if I recall correctly.

I suspect versioning will have the same role in development that promotional calendars do in marketing: they act as a roadmap that help keep complex enterprises coordinated. With more moving pieces in the Internet space and in enterprises, I expect versioning to be of greater value.

You make the analogy between blogs and talk radio, and it’s a good one.

But you, and Mikey TechCrunch, and Longtail Anderson, and Tim “Web 2.0″ O’Reilly and the rest of the “big-thinkers” frequently go to far with the “Us” (smart Bay Area-based Web people) vs. “Them” (New York and LA-based old media) mentality.

It’s not really that black and white, and you guys know it. I sometimes think you do it to sell books, or look smart.

Much like every other movement of the media to democratized platforms, those who currently think they are in control will continue to attempt to maintain what they think is control.

They will never see users and consumers as resources but always as walking talking wallets good only for their lifetime consumer value.

Even with the NewsCorp purchase of MySpace. They are using the platform to push the goals of PGM into the space rather than focusing on new ways to extract the maximum value of the content and resources of the users within MySpace.

The MySpace users are seen as an audience, not as the largest group of energized, dynamic, interesting and diverse content generators ever to populate the same domain.

Equip and incent this group with the ability to more easily share of them selves, invent of them selves and project themselves into this medium and who knows what they can do.

With dramatically reduced costs of digital goods, iteration, imperfection, and betas become economically feasible.