Suggested F1 Plan

Sony Pictures Technologies

• Not functionally organized, but people and current organization- centric (i.e.- SPE, SCE, SNEI, etc)– F1 structure must be very streamlined and functionally oriented to achieve desired result (Sony’s

usual WG formation not suited for effective or timely resolution of 4k issues)• Too many people, too little vision

– Unclear who would be providing vision/leadership, current structure more of a reach diagram rather than an organizational structure

• Multiple PMOs must always be avoided– Must have one clear Project Management Office with ONE clear Project manager for clear direction

across all functional teams (proposed structure relies on too many “dotted line reporting” type relationships to be effective)

• Technology differentiation/standardization cannot occur without SPE involvement– Makes no sense to have a “Technology WG” with no 4k content expertise represented– Any standardization of 4k will need to involve the entertainment industry’s full support and backing/

this activity CANNOT occur in a vacuum• Goals/Action Items/KPIs of proposed WGs not in line with our competition’s current timelines

– Proposed structure would put Sony approx two years behind our competition– Must begin with establishing an internal common understanding of the problems/issues we are

facing in the broader 4k marketplace (e.g. competition, HW industry view, content industry view, broadcast industry view, etc) in order to calculate the correct plan of attack

Comments on Originally Proposed F1 Org Structure

4k Ecosystem for Sony Products

Proposed Functional Organization

Strategy TeamStrategic Goal Action Items Comments

Sony 4k Vision for Consumer Products

1. Figure out which 4k market segments Sony wants to be in

2. Clarify consumer value proposition- How is 4k better than HD?

3. Create 4k Vision team to oversee all other teams

• 4k must be more than 4x resolution of HD

• 4k Vision team to ensure that all other 4k teams work towards the same set of goals

State of Market Development

1. Figure out which content suppliers are working on 4k and what each are doing

2. Figure out which device makers are working on 4k and what they are doing

• Get Sony products in the hands of content suppliers (F65 camera, 4k TVs, 4k broadcast cameras) for feedback

Content Availability 1. Assess where 4k content would be coming from

2. Ascertain whether market needs to be seeded with investment in content creation

• Studios? • Live and event broadcast?

First Generation Products

1. Create plan re how to deal with incomplete standards

2. How to deal with consumer expectations if 1st gen products cannot meet all 4k market requirements

• H.265 is not complete, IPR claims could take time to resolve

• If 1st gen Sony TVs do not support HDCP 2.x what does Sony tell early adopters?

Core Functions Teams (1)Core Function Action Items Comments

Encoding team 1. Identify broadcast operators testing 4k broadcast

2. Identify content providers testing 4k pre-packaged distribution

3. Review state of the art H.264 and H.265 encoding

• Broadcast = real time encoding• Pre-packaged = non-real time

encoding• Start with H.264 strategy with later

upgrade to H.265 (supply chain will migrate to H.265)

File Format 1. Participate in creation of 4k profile for Common File Format (CFF)

2. Participate in creation of 4k profile for MPEG-DASH

3. Participate in creation of 4k profile for HbbTV

• Work on CFF and MPEG-DASH 4k profiles starting in DECE

Picture Quality 1. Assess requirement across full range of content provider for extended gamut and high dynamic range

2. Identify standards body to develop new standard

• ITU-R 6C standard may not get acceptance outside of free-to-air broadcast

• Sony Crop is on record at ITU-R as opposing wide dynamic range

• Discussions are taking place on alternatives

Core Functions Teams (2)Core Function Action Items Comments

Scaling 1. HD to 4k up-scaling2. 4k to 2k/HD down-scaling

• Down-scaling will be required for HD TV

• Down-scaling will be required if TV does not support HDCP 2.x

Physical Media Data Delivery Team

1. Market assessment of consumer desire for stand alone physical media - playback on “never connected” devices

2. Assess studio position on consumer copies from stand alone physical media

• Existing formulation of CFF assumes consumers have on-line account

• Copying from stand alone physical media = 2 copies

Streaming & Download Data Delivery Team

1. Determine bandwidth requirements with respect to encoding efficiencies

2. Identify opportunities of early testing/demonstrations

• H.264 and H.265 encoding

Core Functions Teams (3)Interconnection Action Items Comments

Display Interface 1. Assess if HDMI is ready for 4k 24p/25p/48p/50p/60p frame rates

2. Evaluate wireless versions of HDMI3. Assess 4k 24p/25p/48p/50p/60p

frame rates using HDBaseT4. Assess 4k 24p/25p/48p/50p/60p

frame rates using DisplayPort

• Open standards offer maximum consumer satisfaction

• Open standards avoid consumer lock-in with other brands (i.e. Sony device will not work with devices consumers already purchased from other manufacturers)

In-home Streaming 1. 4k H.264/H.265 DLNA profile2. Alternative standards

• Open standards offer maximum consumer satisfaction

• Open standards avoid consumer lock-in with other brands (i.e. Sony device will not work with devices consumers already purchased from other manufacturers)

Multi-view 1. Define strategy2. Identify partners

• Standards based

Content Protection Teams - DeliveryMarket Action Items Comments

Streaming and EST 1. Propose solution based on understanding of studios’ enhanced content protection requirements

2. Engage in follow up to refine solution

3. Assess new content protection scheme vs. established security solution provider

• Work on enhanced content protection underway in DECE

• Any new content protection system (CPS) will take minimum 2 years to complete license agreements

• Little desire on part of stakeholders to create new CPS

Broadcast (Satellite, Cable and IPTV)

1. Identify action items for 4k CI-Plus profile

2. Work with all major CAS vendors3. Identify solutions for HbbTV

• Japan, US and Europe

Physical Media 1. Assess modifications to content protection for stand-alone physical media

• Ripping software available for AACS and BD+

• At present CPS for streaming and EST requires an on-line account

Content Protection Teams – In HomeLink Action Items Comments

Display Interface 1. Propose HDCP 2.1 adaption layer for HDMI

2. Identify/Develop HDCP 2.1 capable chips

3. Assess alternatives to HDMI

• Likely non-negotiable requirement for studio content

• HDCP 2.0 or 2.1 for sink devices (TVs)• HDCP 2.1 (or higher) for source

devices (players, Orbis)• DisplayPort adaptation for HDCP is

already definedIn-home Streaming 1. Assess whether an enhanced

DTCP-IP could meet enhanced content protection requirements

2. Assess whether EST content protection system be used for link protection

• Improvement of security for DTCP-IP may not be possible

• New compliance and robustness rules for DTCP-IP lengthy process

Sony 4k Product Readiness Teams (1)Product Category Action Items Comments

TVs 1. Assess product specifications vs. segment requirements

• 4k 24p/25p/48p/50p/60p frame rates• HDCP 2.0 or 2.1

Player Devices 1. Assess product specifications vs. segment requirements (streaming, EST and stand-alone physical media)

2. Assess whether interim H.264 solution could be upgraded to H.265 over time

• 4k 24p/25p/48p/50p/60p frame rates• HDCP 2.1

Orbis 1. Assess product specifications vs. segment requirements (streaming, EST and stand-alone physical media)

2. Assess whether interim H.264 solution could be upgraded to H.265 over time

• 4k 24p/25p/48p/50p/60p frame rates• HDCP 2.1• 4k H.264?

Receivers 1. Assess product specifications vs. segment requirements

• 4k 50p/60p HDMI • HDCP 2.1

Sony 4k Product Readiness Teams (2)Product Category Action Items Comments

Tablets & Phones 1. Assess product specifications vs. segment requirements (streaming, EST and stand-alone physical media)

2. Assess whether interim H.264 solution could be upgraded to H.265 over time

• 4k 50p/60p HDMI • HDCP 2.1 or disable outputs• 4k H.264?

VAIO 1. Assess product specifications vs. segment requirements (streaming, EST and stand-alone physical media)

2. Assess whether interim H.264 solution could be upgraded to H.265 over time

• 4k 50p/60p HDMI • HDCP 2.1 or disable outputs• 4k H.264?

Other TeamsMarket Action Items Comments

UGC 1. Product requirements2. 4k Camcorders3. Home video drag and drop editing

applications4. Home image processing tools

• System requirements for 4k processing

UX 1. Tie-in to existing UX team

Photo Book 1. Consumer requirements2. Direct integration with still

cameras

• Simple tools with excellent consumer interface

• Direct wireless upload from camera