TV2- The next leg up (5c-10c), page-1951

I only say this as I am aware that Divan are alleged to be still in the market getting DRM quotes for an OTT service.

That makes me wonder as I would envisage that DRM component as being in-scope with a TV2U type of deal when I scan their architectural diagrams of what a good service offering they bring to the market. If they are only offering the software app and Divan are responsible for sourcing the hardware and licences then that would mean all is fine but its all just taking longer(which is my optimistic position).

My broader concern stems from my time in the tech industry where I have seen smart business operators engage tech companies to do a proposal where in many cases a detailed blueprint gets tabled. The company then slowly disengages and uses the solicited information to create their own solution.

Governments are famous for this in tenders. They get multiple proposals and keep each and even put in tender documents that they reserve the right to keep tabled info and rights to it. I have been party to collated tender documents that actually shaped the tendering entity's final solution, and where that led to no awarding of a contract as it was an information fishing expedition.

I am well aware of Eastern Bloc hard business strategies having dealt with a few. Culturally they take no prisoners and a binding contract is binding from TV2U who are ethical but look through the court lists in the Supreme courts of any country to find how companies use lawyers and tactics to break binding contracts. In some jurisdictions there is little court relief such as in Russia and China can not always go the way of the injured party. Look at Apples recent IP court loss in China.

In my risk assessment of TV2U as a Project Manager/Architect I hold this sort of risk as one that I see as likely and the impact significant only because TV2U have such a great innovative model. Innovators attract imitators and predators and startups are more vulnerable than mature companies to be commercially done over.

Also look at Vector who now have their own OTT solution after having disengaged with TV2U. So where did they get the smarts to work out how to create such an outcome as OTT smarts are not a commodity.

I am not being reckless or down ramping but I contribute in good faith as I am employed to identify and mitigate risk in part of what I do at work.

If in the hypothetical worst case TV2U get burnt by Divan then thats part of business life and not necessarily a bad reflection on TV2U. As a general comment IP theft is common worldwide for companies with valuable IP such as that TV2U hold.

I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with my logic and opinion. Its based on whatever information over a timeline I can uncover and it involves some speculation and assumptions, but this forum is healthy when we can venture an opinion that challenges the norm, even when hopefully it turns out wrong.