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.'"

Comments

Hmmm...

[elid]

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...).

Will it work?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Will it work?

[bitingduck]

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.

Re:Copyright

[garcia]

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.

Re:hmm

[JayBean]

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.

Too many products and betas?

[baadger]

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.

Re:Too many products and betas?

[Momoru]

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.

read the TOS agreement

[tech-hawger]

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

Re:read the TOS agreement

[Rude Turnip]

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.

So much for Do no Evil

[bentfork]

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...