It seems that BitTorrent, the peer-to-peer file-sharing service, is trying to go legitimate.

On Wednesday, BitTorrent announced that it had signed deals to distribute movies and TV shows from Fox, Paramount, Lionsgate, Palm Pictures and MTV Networks. It already has similar deals with Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Egami Media, Hart Sharp, Koch Entertainment and The Orchard. They’re not all top tier studios, but it’s a start.

It’s getting harder and harder for Hollywood to ignore file sharing and digital distribution. There’s MySpace, iTunes and YouTube already but online video doesn’t sell as well as online music.

Currently, no pricing has been released yet, but it should prove interesting to see how pay file-sharing does compared to free illegal file-sharing. Will users pay for content that’s easy to find and better quality? Or will they prefer to hunt around a long time and search for TV shows and movies of dubious quality? And more importantly, will Hollywood release premium, first run content or just crappy content that no one will pay for?

One way to encourage pay for play BitTorrent is providing exclusive content. Palm Pictures, for example, said that it will even distribute full-length movies on BitTorrent before their theatrical and DVD release dates. Not a bad deal.

In other BitTorrent news, it just finished its second round of financing for $25 million from Accel Partners and Doll Capital Management. Bram Cohen, CEO and creator of BitTorrent, is also stepping down.

Update: Bram said in a recent interview that rumors of his departure were false. So far, it seems to be the case, since he hasn’t left the company. Stay tuned.

Popularity: 8% [?]

Hollywood and traditional media have never really understood online video. They were scared off by what was happening in online music. And they watched the explosion and self-destruction of content providers like DEN and Pop.com.

But with the popularity of YouTube, it’s obvious that the times are changing. User generated content is popular (again) thanks to the ubiquity of broadband and the ease of creating and distributing content. Every teenager in America understands this. Hollywood, however, still doesn’t get it.

Case in point. In early November 2006, NBC Universal announced that it was “airing” webisodes of a brand new Internet-only show called A Big Life With Sissy Biggers exclusively on MSN. The webisode I watched was on (excuse me while I yawn) table etiquette.

The show is created by NBC Universal Digital Studios, which is making “original and unique programming for a wide range of digital platforms” according to the press release. But this show has all the earmarks of big, bloated TV, and nothing fun or compelling.

Here’s why I think “A Big Life with Sissy Biggers” is a “Big Failure”:

• Sissy Is Not Memorable or Charming. Although the press release says that Biggers has been on TV (Food Network and PBS) she is not very well known and needs to have a bigger personality to survive the Internet. It seems as if someone at NBC Universal owed Biggers a favor and decided to give her an Internet show. Or perhaps the project started out for TV, but had to be bumped to the Internet. Either way, this is not the kind of content that screams “big hit”.
• The Content Is Not Unique or Compelling. Sissy Biggers is lean back viewing, not lean forward. What audience is MSN/NBC Universal going for? How many people do they think will watch this? Is there really a need for this? Does it have to be a “webisode”? Contrary to the press release, there’s nothing original or unique about this show.
• The Webisodes Are Too Long. The episode I watched was 4 minutes and 45 seconds long. Internet users want to see short viral videos, not long-ish videos that aren’t very funny or compelling. Sitting through the entire first show was grueling. My attention shifted after about 30 seconds.
• The Commercials Are Re-Purposed. Before watching Sissy Biggers, I had to sit through a 15-second commercial for Triscuit starring the ever-perky Rachel Ray. This sounds like great targeted advertising, but it’s just plain lazy. Those commercials are currently airing on broadcast TV and there’s nothing cool about them. Why not some original Web commercials?

In sum, Sissy Biggers is not what the Internet wants or needs. It’s not “must-see TV”, it’s must-avoid TV. Hopefully NBC Universal and others can come up with something better than this. This is an embarassment for them.

Popularity: 9% [?]