Slashdot Mirror
TiVo to Sell Your Fast-Forward Button
Thomas Hawk writes "PVRblog is reporting today that TiVo will begin to place banner advertisements on your screen when you are fast forwarding. As one of the whole points for people getting a TiVo is to remove obtrusive advertising, it seems like a really bad move to force advertising on people at the exact moment that they are using your technology to avoid advertising. This act points to the desperation of TiVo and their management team and although it might help them in the short run it will most certainly backfire in the long run." This is ironic for a company whose slogan used to be "TV Your Way," but not surprising, since its CEO says he wants to move to a largely advertiser-supported revenue stream. I've bought three TiVos in the past four years, but my next PVR will run MythTV -- unless HR2391 passes and makes me a criminal for skipping commercials.
.... I mean, its not like you are looking at anything useful while you are fastforwarding, and "free tv" needs some sort of revenue.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
Then hammer them with advertising. Its the american way :)
Pete Carr Owner Chatmag.com
is to stop watching the television. I moved to my new app. and decided not to buy a TV and in about 1.5 years I haven't watched a single TV commercial.
You can't handle the truth.
Tivo should be careful. As I imagine more people will become interested in messing with the software in TIVO as it does run Linux. Example, on the major Tivo boards, they don't talk about subscription stealing because Tivo threatened legal litigation over such discussion - fair enough. But if Tivo Corp goes too far than there will be a backlash and people will go just as far. People would (and some do) install a larger drive, hack the advertisement feature, re-add 30 second skip and while messing with it mid as well get a free subscription to boot.
I don't really want to see Tivo go down the tubes but I can imagine that the development community would pick up the charred remnants and actually produce a better product.
I'd think most peoples' motivation is to save the time of viewing commercials, not because of some aversion to advertising.
I'd think as long as the banners don't make the ffwd through commercial slower (by assuring they're on the screen for some specific time) people won't mind.
Better for the marketing folks to pay tivos electric bills then us.
It looks like we've finally found the advantage to being stuck with Series 1 hardware and 2.5.5 software. Almost makes up for not getting Home Media Option and all the other additional features...
I don't know why anyone bothered with Tivo in the first place - the promise was of "TV Your Way", but TV my way has always been best served by Bit Torrent. It's quasi-legal to be sure, but I can get a 400 meg HDTV broadcast of one of the very few shows I do watch over TV, the commercials are nicely stripped (so I don't even have to fast forward them) and the service is fast and reliable, especially on third generation high-speed internet technology.
If you're getting a TIVO, I'm assuming the moral issue of skipping the stations precious advertisements don't matter to you that much anyway, right?
"However, it's the implementation that is the concern. If the law is *interpreted* to mean that even things like fast forwarding through commercials are inappropriate, well, then we have a problem. But that is NOT the intent nor the purpose."
In an age when we have so many thousands (millions?) of lawyers in the nation, I do not think you can separate intent or purpose from what is written and how it is interpreted. We can't afford to be writing laws that are vague, and we have the resources to ensure it does not happen, should we choose to use them.
"Sure, your cable/satellite bill can, but only to a point. There are billions of dollars that come from advertising. Is there not that side to this story as well?"
I'd pay more per channel for cable if it had no advertising, no problem. Note I say per channel -- as in a la carte. Since I watch 2 or 3 channels via my TiVo I would probably end up paying less overall, but the channels whose services I use would be getting more.
"How and when is it acceptable for products to be advertised?"
It's acceptable exactly up to the point that the consumers allow it to be. If the consumers revolt, spend extra money on a product and service that allows them to skip them, it's no longer acceptable to them.
Listen, TiVo needs to make money. They're a company selling a product. Everyone seems to forget that and whine when they don't give you everything for free. I applaud them for coming up with a way to sell ad space without interfering with normal use of the product.
Nobody's asking to get anything for free. TiVo already charges for the unit and you have to pay a monthly charge to just use the damn thing. If they want to add banner ads and give me the service free, that's great, but it's not what they're doing.
TV is a waste of time. The shows are glorified advertisements and the commercials are overwhelming. The best solution is to just skip the whole thing. Spend more time with your family.
Boy, you must really hate Firefox's Adblock and Flashblock features.
As much as I'd like to preserve the old business model of being forced to look at ads for minutes at a time, it's time to rethink this strategy now that we have 21st century technology... simply giving them billions of dollars in revenue because the're accustomed to getting billions of dollars of revenue doesn't cut it anymore.
How does this make it less wrong?
The point is that if I want to attach a device to my television that translates every third word into Algonquin once the signal comes into my device it's none of their business. If I write a module for MythTV that allows me to change all the commercials in my LiveTV programming into mpegs of dancing midgets throwing pickles at a naked woman it's none of their business.
Their revenue stream and rights to artistic integrity end when they reach the consumer. At that point it's my signal in my device and as long as I don't rebroadcast it they need to leave me the hell alone.
Never confuse volume with power.
-phixxr
ungggghhhh
This is the same business tactic as the RIAA is using: if you refuse to evolve, legislate! Rather than adapt to a changing world, make new business models illegal. Sure, it may cripple you in the long run, but as long as we avoid that invisible hand and keep the stockholders happy, all is well. Right?
Another one bites the dust
"What about newspapers? Sure, you can argue that newspaper ads aren't "intrusive", in a time-dependent way, but would a newspaper or its advertisers welcome a service that made it free or easy to eliminate all ads, and keep the other content, while still keeping the newspaper cost at 50 cents?"
The difference is that tv, especially broadcast television, is a much more limited resource than a newspaper. Anyone can start up a newspaper and start distributing it, it is not regulated in the least. Which is a very good thing, but also appropriate for the medium which allows for naturally unlimited competition. If you don't like the content or presentation of one newspaper, another could take its place without much trouble.
Television, especially broadcast television is considered a public resource. So, we as individuals have every right to demand that the use of the airwaves meets our best interests and not solely those of the licensees. We can argue about the rightness of that approach, but until broadcasters stop using public airwaves and the public rights of way (cable) then I demand that I be able to view the content anyway I damn well choose.
What would you do if you went to the cinema and every 30 minutes they showed you adverts? you'd be a bit miffed.
Being able to skip the commercials is to me about not having my viewing pleasure interrupted by commercials for products I'm not going to buy. I don't need advertising to make an informed choice about buying a product.
Good for TiVo for using their technology for profit. Isn't that the point of going into business?
Ideally (this is how I think it should work, I don't know exactly how it works...):
Think of how many commercials are on the air. If advertisers are concerned about commercial skipping, they pay TiVo for the software needed to encode a billboard into their ad, similar to the "press thumbs up to record" or "press thumbs up for more info" that you see often on NBC.
When TiVo is fast forwarding through the ad and sees the bill board encoded in the video stream, it displays the bill board.
So:
- TV stations are happy because advertisers want to buy longer ad slots in order to increase the time their bill board is on the screen during a TiVo fast forward.
- Advertisers are happy because they have a captive audience for their ads. (you actually have to attentively watch the screen or you'll fast forward into your show)
- TiVo is happy because they have another revenue source.
- TiVo owners are still happy because they are still getting through commercials at the same rate as they did before TiVo added this feature.
Who exactly is loosing?
I'm going to go back in my box and will think within the limits of my box: MS Sucks Linux Good I read too much Slashdot.
Well, economist Joseph Schumpeter came up with the theory of "creative destruction". In short, every now and then, a new innovation destroys the old economic model (think TiVo or, in the retail field, think Wal-Mart). The capitalist society comes up with a new way to respond to that innovation. In the case of TiVo, it appears that they will now have pop-up ads. In the case of Wal-Mart, you now see Sears and KMart merging. However, TiVo started the revolution, and now they are trying to take a step backwards. Unfortunately for them, there is a good chance the revolution is about to pass TiVo right by.
What does that do for the Advertisers? Well, they better figure something out, otherwise, their economic model completely falls apart. In a capitalist society (which the US claims to be), it is up to the advertisers to figure their way out of this mess. If the advertisers don't figure it out, you'll see less money flowing to the TV networks and, a potential reduction in TV show budgets. Now, wouldn't THAT be a disaster! Those overpaid actors and network executives would start losing money. Oh well. If Hollywood isn't providing me with dumb entertainment, my entertainment dollar will go elsewhere.
Creative Destruction. It's time that advertisers re-read their college economics textbooks. In short, I don't care about the advertisers, nor do I care about how the networks make money. In our economy, their problems are not my problems.
In order to use my PC as a PVR I need to be able to bypass my cable box; right now I can't do that, the internal tuner has to stay on channel 3. Does anyone know of software for the Radeon that will descramble the signal? I suppose it would be illegal here in the States?
www.mythtv.org is slashdotted, if that's what it does.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
First of all, RTFA... This is not about putting banner ads during fast forward. It is about putting up interaction during ads. This has already been tested and is shown to work. (IE people respond to it).
It is also an article showing that TiVo can provide advertisements that have better response rates than interstitial advertising provides.
But this slashdot posting is editorializing from beginning to end. I can understand that *you* don't wnat to see any advertising ever... Good for you. (but look at the banners at the top and right of the the slashdot page you nit.) But you know nothing about why I or many people have TiVo! And for the most part all this editorializing is WRONG. The interstital is being replaced by the more attractive click-ins. The ads are better produced, more entertaining, more informative. And they are not being replaced by more intrusive advertising. It is being replaced by *less* intrusive and more interactive advertising. And you can still opt out of the data collection! Get a friggin grip.
tivo can do this right by offering service credit to those willing to watch the ads while fast-forwarding. if they really mean "tv your way" then that's the right way. (the wrong way, like the caller-id crap, is to charge the customers to not watch ads during fast-forward.) if you respect the customers, tivo, then give them the choice.
I don't understand why they need advertising revenue anyway. I've just paid about £120 (roughly $200) annual fee for my TV Licence which pays for about five and half channels of excellent BBC television, about eight channels of radio (plus the world service and numbwerous local stations) and one of the world's finest web sites and information services. And the establishment of a creative commons-based archive. All of it without a single advertisement or commercial. I think that's excellent value for money and it proves that revenue from commercials isn't necessary. Pity it'll never happen in the U.S. - Andrew
Big difference here. You paid for your magazine expecting ads. It's part of the package. Now if your magazine offered you a more expensive subscription that would give you a special edition without ads, how would you feel if they suddenly decided to place "a few" ads in your magazine?
I know I'd be hopping mad.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
I have a problem with it anyway. It's a law that says I can do a thing but I cannot have a machine that does that thing for me. WTF? It's as though they passed a law that says you cannot use an electric can opener because forcing people to open cans manually will keep the market for food contained in glass bottles competitive with cans.
And make no mistake, the intent is to keep people watching commercials, whatever the mechanics of the process. If the law as written doesn't have that end result, it will be reinterpreted or a new law will be written to further restrict our options.
How and when is it acceptable for products to be advertised?
How about letting the market decide that? If the payback from advertising drops to the point where it can no longer support creation and delivery of programming, what then? Will the demand for programming go away? I sincerely doubt it. Other revenue models will emerge, including direct payment (subscription and pay-per-view). What's wrong with that?
Advertising will continue to get more and more invasive until people finally have enough and actually revolt against it.
With the rise of SSRIs, people won't get enough. They'll just go on with life and 'not worry' about their rights being taken away.
These are scary times.
The advent of TiVo undermined this quite a bit, of course, which is why there's a bit of backlash now. Again, I think more people are in it to save time (although there is that "skip annoying commercials" aspect to it...), but circumventing advertisements that pay for the shows you enjoy is a bit of a grey area.
Also interesting is that TFA doesn't make it clear whether the banner ads will be equivalent to the commercial being skipped over, which would raise some issues if advertisers making payments to TiVo overruled those who had paid for a certain time slot. Even if the ads=the commercials, there is some question of who will end up profiting from the exposure-Should Tivo share its money with NBC because one of its banner ads was triggered by a commercial broadcast during one of NBC's programs?
Thank Christ I'm not in advertising!
switch of your television set and go do something less boring instead?
I mean seriously folks.
Advertising is here for good. It's a mainstay of our entire socio-economic model.
Of course, as television changes, so will the way advertising works.
For all of you that are 'shocked, shocked' that Tivo intends to get into the ad business, wake up and smell the coffee. Business is about money and ads are where the money lives.
nuclear iraq bioweapon encryption cocaine korea terrorist
Nice to think, but it isn't true. In fact, there are volumes of evidence that shows "people" never get immune to advertising. I know, you're smart. You make all purchasing decisions based on facts filtered through your giant brain. Marketing has no effect on you, especially when you are in one of these wonderful, ad-free countries. But advertisers spend money because it's effective. Marketing, brand management, and advertising are not voodoo.
Yes, I use TiVo to skip over commercials. I also use FF for shows I can watch without sound and faster than real time. Will the service know if I'm FF over a commercial or for some other purpose?
For example I can watch a 3-hour football match in about half the time. I don't need the analyst's inane chatter, and I can always go back to regular speed to catch a big play.
In addition, this 'feature' contradicts TiVo's own marketing. There's no sound while a show is in FF, but one of TiVo's tips is to turn on the closed captions and read the dialogue while watching the show faster.
If the banner ad is anywhere on the screen where I can see it, then it is intrusive.
"Listen, TiVo needs to make money. They're a company selling a product. Everyone seems to forget that and whine when they don't give you everything for free. I applaud them for coming up with a way to sell ad space without interfering with normal use of the product."
That's just wrong. TiVo gives NOTHING for free. I've already paid for the hardware and paid for the service, and I didn't whine about it. This is TiVo unilaterally changing the terms of the deal after they have my money. Would you applaud nVidia if they decided to display banner ads on every computer with their graphics cards? Listen, nVidia needs to make money, right?
"What would you rather have, no fast-forward, forcing you to watch commercials, or a fast-forward with a small screen overlay that you only have to look at for as long as you are fast-forwarding?"
I'd rather have the service I paid for. But you're missing the real question, would you rather have FF with a small screen overlay, or a boat anchor that's useless if TiVo goes out of business and no other company picks up the service?
I have a mythTV with 500GB of attached storage and it just rocks... I originally owned a tivo (added 80GB to it), loved it, but didn't want yet-another-monthly-bill after that tivo died and wanted something where I can dump my DVD collection with either a DVD jukebox or massive storage. its absolutely brilliant, no monthly fees, I get CVS builds once every few weeks, I have a nice quiet Antec Sonata case hidden away, and I have over 200 DVDs I ripped using mythTV so I can watch them whenever I want, however I want. LOL i use mythTV more for the ripped DVDs than TV, I probably only watch 3-4 hours of recorded TV per week (daily show, 24, amazing race, will & grace). The only improvement to mythTV I hope to see is picture quality... imo the PVR-250/350s that most people use for recording isn't the highest quality, I think my Tivo had slightly better TV quality and much, much faster channel changing while watching live. Hopefully a next generation of HDTV PC cards will come out without silly cap'ing problems and we will all be happy :)
These days, companies are finding it harder and harder to stay in business. It's a bad economy. In a better economy, there would be more TiVo customers, and they would be able to make enough revenue, but unfortunately, every company, and TiVo is no exception, is finding it hard to make ends meet.
We're used to hearing about how greedy companies are. And there are plenty of them, with Microsoft being their poster-boy. But when you're a company with real competition, then you're walking a fine line between making enough income and selling at a competitive price. It's hard to balance. Apple is one of the few companies that seems to be able to charge a premium with impunity.
I'm not saying I know for SURE that TiVo is struggling financially, but given the statistics, they probably are. Making that assumption, they are faced with a choice between increasing what they charge customers or finding some OTHER way of increasing revenue. Selling banner ad space is just such an alternative.
Frankly, I suspect that most people would prefer to see an unintrusive banner appear when fast-forwarding than to have to pay a higher monthly fee.
Will I get cheaper monthly service fees for my Tivo because their costs will be offset by *shudder* these banner ads?
Granted, if TiVo needs the ad revenue to stay solvent, I guess it's necessary (the TiVo is doorstop without the service, well sorta =))
But they might be shrinking their market to tap these new ad based revenue streams, which will make the ad placements be worth less...
Apparently it won't be cable companies clumsy DVR's, or even us diy PVR'ers (shameless plug), or dillution of "brand/identity" that kills TiVo... it will be TiVo killing TiVo with practices and commitments that aren't in their CONSUMERS best interest.
Why would someone who buys a special box and pays a monthly (or lifetime) service fee to skip commercials put up with replacement commercials during the commercial skipping process?!?! Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!
Furthermore what advertiser in their right mind would want to reach people that ADD and disposition makes them actively adverse to ads? And if tivo's DVR/PVR share decreases what will those banner ads be worth to the advertisers then?
Will DirecTivo's be effected by this change? (and will this hasten DirecTV's dance away from TiVo specific DVRs?)
*Shrug*
Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
Skipping the commercials in broadcast television is no more theft than eating from the sample tray at your grocery store. The broadcast company is gambling that as you watch their content you will be convinced to make a purchasing decision based on its the advertising portion. Just like your local grocer is gambling that you will may like the products that he has on his sample tray enough to buy them.
The problem here is that this gamble hasn't been paying off lately and the advertising industry has been looking outward for someone to blame rather than looking inward and seeing how they are a large part of the problem. Our world is so filled with advertising now that it's impossible for any one spot stick out. The result is that none of the advertising is persuasive and the industry is losing its gamble wholesale. The broadcast industry is at risk that their clients will decide that this type of advertising doesn't work.
If we are very very lucky this entire industry will collapse or explode and everyone will get up off of the couch and go running or read a book like you say.
-- Ecks
My other Beowulf cluster is... er...
Been following them for the past year. They are facing a problem of becoming a commodity. Each independent cable/satellite company is rolling out their own home grown DVR box. DirectTV dropped them last March and divested from them quite a bit.
the last big news was that Microsoft just signed a deal with Comcast to provide DVR service, which directly competes with TIVO.
This ad-skipping commercial is good news for us shareholders. They need to prove that they have alternative revenues than just subscription.
Now to put on my consumer/techy hat. Why would anyone have a problem of seeing a banner ad rather than a blank screen when they fast forward? It's not hurting you in any way. I understand that since you pay 12.95 a month you should get it ad-free. But why not make the same request to cable television? I'm paying $33/month for cable TV, should I have the same expectation that Comedy Central is ad-free?
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
Been using mythTV for over a year now and commercials ARE that bad. My broadcast channels show commercials that are far worse than any commercials on my dishnetwork channels.
Once you are used to watching commercial free and something happens (computer crash etc...) and you watch TV you feel assaulted after watching the commercials. I don't want to know (nor my kids to know) about the newest (fe)male enhancement drug.
I don't care about the next episode of some stupid sitcom with low ratings.
People say tv makes you dumber. I would have to say that commercials just add to that. Why waste 15 minutes watching an hour show when you can watch it later and in shorter time
The only dissadvantage to not having commercials is trying to make time for a pee break(oh I guess that is what the pause button is for)
Can you ping me now?... Good!
More commercials, Yahoo clunky, Netscape slow... more commercials, Fox, recording ever more commercials, Media Center competition - DEATH!!!
I guess I'm simply going to watch "buffered TV" from the day before, as I simply don't want to spend 50% of my time watching commercials.
Google seem to be the only company that hasn't continuesly tightened the "commercial screw"
TiVos by default do not have any "quick jump" feature. You have to literally fast-forward through commercials. However, there's a widely-known code you type into the remote to turn on a 30-second instant skip feature. So when I skip commercials, I'm never fast-forwarding; I press the jump button 6 or 8 times and that's it. The whole thing takes like 3 seconds. As long as they don't remove that feature, super-anti-commercial people like me will still be happy.
I understand that since you pay 12.95 a month you should get it ad-free. But why not make the same request to cable television? I'm paying $33/month for cable TV, should I have the same expectation that Comedy Central is ad-free?
No, you don't understand. It's completely different.
If you were a new customer to cable, you would expect commercials on most channels. It would have been no surprise if you had done just a cursory amount of research on the service you were signing up for.
If you saw TiVO at a friend's house and signed up for it, you would not have the expectation of any banner ads whatsoever, no matter how much research you did on the service (rumors aside). All of the sudden, you will now be getting ads.
Bait and switch.
Expecting something for nothing is not a new concept but doesn't scale well. Skipping commercials is a technological response to an economic problem, and won't legitimately work. If we want commercial-free programming, the money's gotta come from someone other than advertisers. While I'd like being able to skip the commercials, and could set up a MythTV box to do so, the economic model can't support everyone doing so.
Until we adopt pay-tv like Great Britain, in the American model of TV economics it's those pesky commercials that pay for the non-premium programming.
Slashdot's name? When my compiler sees
It may surprise you to consider that producers of television entertainment are not in the business of delivering entertainment to consumers.
They are in the business of delivering consumers to advertisers.
Delivering entertainment to consumers is simply a side-effect of their reason for being in business -- it's just one means to achieve their purpose. As soon as it doesn't work, there's no reason for them to keep producing the side-effect (your shows) instead of looking for a better way to deliver your attention to advertisers.
$0.02,
ptd
I'm an animal lover -- they're delicious!
Ok, before you all go & cancel your subscriptions, you might want to READ THE DAMN ARTICLE. "TiVo viewers will see "billboards," or small logos, popping up over TV commercials as they fast-forward through them, offering contest entries, giveaways or links to other ads." Not quite the overwhelming barrage of advertising that some of you seem to be implying. Would I rather the ads weren't there? Sure. But I don't really care that they are.
Contrary to what the post implies, people don't buy a Tivo to "avoid advertising". They buy it so they can watch shows how & when they want, and so that they can fast-forward through advertising. You can still fast-forward through the ads, you'll just be shown a logo on the screen during the ad you're fast-forwarding through. This will likely be no more intrusive then the "Record this program" logo that shows up one ads for certain TV programs already. Not the end of the world, really.
Finally, I want to know, why is there such an overwhelming anti-Tivo sentiment on Slashdot? I understand the anti-Microsoft sentiment. But Microsoft is a company that makes frequently bad products, charges outrageous prices (that you really have no choice but to pay), offers lousy customer service, routinely violates anti-trust laws, Etc.. NONE of these really apply to Tivo. Some people object to their monthly fees, but if you don't like it you can feel free to build your MythTV box. But you'll probably end up spending considerably more in the long run, and be prepared for lot's more hassles, Oh, and your TV litings, though free, won't go as far in advance (last I checked xmltv only gave you one week of listings), and be prepared to upgrade xmltv at least every couple of months, sometimes twice a week (usually with no advance notice-- your listings just stop working).
Tivo makes a solid, VERY well designed product. They sell it cheap, but charge a reasonable monthly fee to use the service. They're even reasonably supportive of the hacking community. Yes, they hope to make a profit in the process. What's really wrong with that?
Their revenue stream and rights to artistic integrity end when they reach the consumer. At that point it's my signal in my device and as long as I don't rebroadcast it they need to leave me the hell alone.
While IANAL, I suspect that if you engage in activity that breaks their business model, they are well within their rights to exclude you from their business.
Movie theatres usually lose money on movie tickets and recover the money from the concession stand. Theatres can (and do) legally restrict patrons from bringing in their own food.
Some websites (slashdot?) give away the web service and make money from advertising. Some websites can (and do) legally restrict bots from their site.
The list goes on and on...
Contrary to what the post implies, people don't buy a Tivo to "avoid advertising"
I hate to break it to you, but some people do buy a Tivo for this express purpose. If you don't believe it, then you are out of touch.
Finally, I want to know, why is there such an overwhelming anti-Tivo sentiment on Slashdot?
Maybe it is because we bought our tivo's to avoid ads, which you don't seem to realize, and what is Tivo repeatedly trying to do? Put ads in front of us. Take away or limit features that help us to avoid ads.
Of course, being out of touch with the first point, would explain your puzzlement on the second point.
"TiVo viewers will see "billboards," or small logos, popping up over TV commercials as they fast-forward through them, offering contest entries, giveaways or links to other ads." Not quite the overwhelming barrage of advertising that some of you seem to be implying.
You may not see a problem with this, as you explained. And that is fine for you. But I don't want ads, or small logos, or offerings of contest entries, or giveaways or links to other crap crap crap. That's what I am trying to get away from.
As I said, you probably don't understand the anti-Tivo sentiment because you do not share the loathing of the ads.
This will likely be no more intrusive then the "Record this program" logo that shows up one ads for certain TV programs already. Not the end of the world, really.
Spam will likely be no more intrusive than an e-mail logo that shows up as one more subject line in your inbox. Not the end of the world, really.
(Of course, I may be making a false assumption. Maybe you think spam is not so bad?)
Tivo makes a solid, VERY well designed product. They sell it cheap, but charge a reasonable monthly fee to use the service. They're even reasonably supportive of the hacking community. Yes, they hope to make a profit in the process. What's really wrong with that?
Yes, yes, and also yes. Finally, nothing is wrong with that.
If part of their effort to make profit is to put craptacular logos and giveaways and contests in front of my face, then they are undermining the very profit they seek. Isn't it obvious that people don't want this? (Maybe not, see my first response above.)
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
The classic Slashdot argument. Just because somebody charges (either money or time) for something that you happen to want for free, you think you have the right to take it anyway and blame it on their "business model".
Bull. Broadcasters are not charging me anything. They are *hoping* that I actually will watch the commercials, but their desire imposes no legal or moral obligation on me. Just like my credit card company hopes that I won't pay off my balance every month; I suppose I'm stealing from them when I do?
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.