Slashdot Mirror


Google Readies Platform for Video Distribution

Eric writes "According to BetaNews, 'Google is preparing a video distribution platform that provides a complete ecosystem of services for content producers, publishers and end-users.' The first phase of its video upload program rolled out today, and 'content owners will be able to control distribution rights themselves, even setting a price for their video clips. Eventually, users will be able to search, preview, purchase and play videos directly from within Google.'"

18 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm... by elid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A few questions:
    1) Will TV networks sign on to this? Will we able to download last night's episode of 24 for a small fee? How much will they charge?
    2) Why aren't these files DRM-less (see the article)? But Google is an innovator, and maybe they can come up with something fair (though fair and DRM seem to be mutually exclusive nowadays...).

  2. Will it work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It looks like Google may have a solution to the problem of indexing video media on the internet; host the content yourself and request the meta-data from the uploader themselves. Then you can easily index the meta-data to make it searchable. It sure beats trying to index any available content scattered across the web with no easy way to extract useful meta-data, but it certainly has the downside that you need to use Google to distribute your video. What if other search engines jump on the bandwagon; we'll have to search all of them to find the media we're looking for, because they won't share their indexes (Which are the valuable part, after all). It could get rather non-customer friendly if we're not careful.

    1. Re:Will it work? by bitingduck · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But if all the meta-data is self reported, you run a huge risk of people spamming you with things that they report as britney videos but are really sales pitches for viagra or something.

  3. Re:Copyright by garcia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But to me, this new service will be largely deluged with people looking to trade bootleg videos, pr0n, etc, as again almost all the other similar services are.

    Well of course porn will be a part of it as that industry is typically the first to adopt new technology as part of their operations. Of course people will absue the system as you said but hopefully some industries will embrace it as well which could lift the validity of it.

    This could be a very good thing but I really have to say that if people do cloud the waters with copyrighted material the networks, RIAA, MPAA, etc, will do everything in their power to discredit it and bring it down.

    This is a gutsy move by Google.

  4. Re:hmm by JayBean · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've been wishing that I could purchase TV programming by the show or channel instead of getting a large package of 50 channels when I don't watch 40 of them anyway. This has the potential to allow someone like me to purchase individual shows (channels in the future?) without any extra costs. But I don't know if that is the direction they want to take.

  5. Too many products and betas? by baadger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's alarming how accurately the Google Grid seems to be forming.

    This sounds great, but I wouldn't mind Google Image search results that didn't keep returning 404's.

    In a recent recruitment video that featured on GoogleBlog the nice lady says Google is all about "ambitious ideas, fast responses, big acheivements" but it seems to me they want to pump out new services as testaments to what the Googlers are capable of and show off their cool attitude..without actually producing a well polished and maintained product.

    Who hasn't noticed degradation of Google search results or lots and lots 404's on image search?

    I just hope the grid doesn't crumble and burn.

    1. Re:Too many products and betas? by Momoru · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed, they are all over the place...trying to do everything. I still don't think their search is as good as it could be (See Clusty for a useful new type of search). They seem to be more like a bunch of intellectual kids who won the lottery and want to spend all their time coming up with neat ideas instead of actually worrying about giving returns to the shareholders who bankrolled them. I'm sure that's what alot of you all like about them so much, but if it fails it will ruin future companies that want to be ran like this.

    2. Re:Too many products and betas? by alecks · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can't belive this.... For every other company, people bitch how the company is no longer inovative and only worries about ROI to its investors... And here's some wank who's essentially complaning that Google isn't worrying enough about it's shareholders' ROI... fuck man...

    3. Re:Too many products and betas? by deuist · · Score: 2, Interesting
      They seem to be more like a bunch of intellectual kids who won the lottery and want to spend all their time coming up with neat ideas instead of actually worrying about giving returns to the shareholders who bankrolled them.

      Coming up with lots of neat ideas is what's driving their stock price up and giving returns to the shareholders.

  6. read the TOS agreement by tech-hawger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If your video is too poular, they can charge you for the bandwidth it uses...i wonder if they would warn you first...

    1. Re:read the TOS agreement by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If a video really becomes that popular, Google should automatically implement a revenue sharing model on that video, where Google gets reimbursed for the bandwidth and the publisher would get his fair cut.

  7. So much for Do no Evil by bentfork · · Score: 3, Interesting

    3. Use of Content. By accepting this Agreement and uploading Your Authorized Content to Google, you are directing and authorizing Google to, and granting Google a royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive right and license to, host, cache, route, transmit, store, copy, distribute, perform, display, reformat, excerpt, analyze, and create algorithms based on the Authorized Content in order to (i) host the Authorized Content on Google's servers, (ii) index the Authorized Content; and (iii) display the Authorized Content, in whole or in part in the territory(ies) designated in the Uploading Instructions, in connection with Google products and services now existing or hereafter developed, including without limitation in products developed for syndication. This license gives Google the right to copy, excerpt, distribute and display Your Authorized Content via both streaming and progressive downloading technologies, and to display limited excerpts of Your Authorized Content for no fee to the end user. Google reserves the right to display advertisements in connection with any display of Your Authorized Content. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Google is not required to host, index, or display any Authorized Content uploaded, and may remove or refuse to host, index or display any Authorized Content. Google is not responsible for any loss, theft or damage of any kind to the Authorized Content. Sounds a bit evil to me...

    1. Re:So much for Do no Evil by EricTheGreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, it could certainly be used for evil.

      It could also be used to protect themselves from a variety of possible legal concerns that might arise from their normal operations.

      I work with content and content management systems and see similar clauses in most of our contracts with subject matter experts, authors and provisioning contractors. I'm not a lawyer myself, but have asked our legal staff about why these are included, and the consensus answer I get from them is that they save considerable legal effort dealing with the spiderweb of regulations, laws and statutes encountered when trying to distribute content to users in multiple countries. To paraphrase them, it's essentially a "get out of jail free" card for most common issues of redistribution problems our company might encounter.

      Comments from actual lawyers (if any are lurking) would be helpful.

      It certainly could be abused, but that's not the first purpose I'd think of.

  8. Focus on search? No. Agility. by otisg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Anyone remembers the days when Google said how they want to focus on search and search only?
    They are certainly not focusing on it so much any more, and are adapting to the market forces. Nice and agile.

    --
    Simpy
  9. If you build it.... by WareW01f · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Markets these days (read post dot-com) are very conservative. The main issue with video distribution is noone is A) sure it will work, and B) there are business models out there *based* on the fact that you can't get the content any where else. (Think Supper Bowl commercial time slots) So you've got the one side that doesn't what to invest in something that has no (we'll say commercialy) proven market and the other end that just has no intrest.

    Enter Google

    Google starts playing with searching video. Fine. Issue is that all video on TV is copyrighted and 'Fair Use' is not what it used to be. Fine. So someone says, "Hey, lets get people to upload they're own video and we can test with that." Great. The blogger group shifts from photo blogs to video blogs. Google has content. User satisfied the strange need to document the life and times of their gerbil. Everyone is happy. You have eyes. It's a small stretch once you have content to play with management. (And management in a manor that you control, not some big company demands) It's brilliant! They are going to end up with a content base (Dude, now my rock band can distribute mp3's and our killer concert footage) and audience. It's built, the market's there. All the big companies have to do is sign up.

    Google is getting big, and I would argue that they are starting to approch the SpiderMan-great-power-great-responsibility dilemma (some may argue we're past that) Our last remaining hope is that the key mentality in leadership that is leading to Google's success is linked the good side of the force. i.e. if evil forces take over the innovation dies. (Still, anyone want to bet on if Google-AOL-TimeWarner exists a few years from now.)

  10. Re:hmm by hunterx11 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, except that I imagine /. nerds make up a large portion of people watching aforementioned unpopular channels.

    --
    English is easier said than done.
  11. Re:Copyright by Punboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, it is a gutsy move. But that's really what Google specializes in. I mean look at GMail. Everyone thought it was a hoax cause it was so far out there (and the fact that it was released on April Fool's). But now most of the major email providers have followed suit, and Google recently bumped the storage up to 2GB (and climbing by the second). If anyone could really pull this off it'd be Google. or Apple. Perhaps the two should collaborate.

    --
    If you like what I've said here, and want to read more, go to http://www.krillrblog.com
  12. Content-based video searching/indexing by FleaPlus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It looks like indexing will initially be manual, but it'll be interesting to see what sorts of content-based searching and indexing methods Google will end up implementing. For those unfamiliar with it, content-based methods allow for information extraction based on the actual video data, rather than manually-added metadata. Searching google scholar and google web for "content-based video" methods comes up with some interesting results. The current state-of-the-art can do some impressive things, but there's clearly still lots of room for improvement.

    Now that I think about it, having uploaders manually index the videos the submit is a fantastic way for Google to bootstrap an automated video indexing system.

    One neat project is Sivic & Zisserman's Video Google (no relation to the Google company, I think). They have a demo available where you can search for automatically-extracted objects in a movie. They also show the results of doing things like detecting Bill Murray's tie throughout the movie Groundhog Day.