"...Right now, when viewers replay a show they've recorded on DVR (a service that typically costs $5 to $13 a month), the networks get nothing. In Poltrack's model, networks would negotiate to get their slice of the revenue pie from distributors ï¿½ cable and satellite TV operators, Internet service providers and perhaps even telephone companies ï¿½ which would pass those costs along to the audience."
So, this is the polar opposite of the supply-driven (advertiser subsidizes media consumption) model. As always, a synthesis will emerge somewhere between these two extremes - imho, elements of both models will be part of the Media 2.0 dominant design.
Something that hasn't been discussed so much is that the net effect will be that consumers (financially) pay more
for the same amount of media - the media market size gets larger - because the relevance (and thus value) of the media they consumer will increase massively.
Alternatively, that the subsidizing of media consumption by advertisers will decrease, which means that the (traditional) ad market size will decrease. That's a less revolutionary conclusion because it's already happening.
The effects further down the value chain of a demand-driven model are also fairly straightforward - a Long Tail effect for content producers, rather than a winner-take-all market dictated by media buyers' economies of scope.