Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Get Played. Get Paid.

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the the-return-of-the-bob dept.

vile8 writes "Bob Young, co-founder of Red Hat Software, is in the NY Times this morning covering a new co-operative business plan for viral video makers. Just like his Self-publishing site Lulu, the new plan provides 80% of the revenues back to the creators. It is based on something quite common, Co-ops. In this plan, if there were 5000 users at 14.95 each there would be 59,800 that would get divvied up among those that brought traffic to the site. The 'pro' users also get larger upload space, and longer cam captures. Other unique features of the site are the podcast generation per author, author vlog pages, and open-source-specific OGM video format conversions."

13 of 78 comments (clear)

  1. nothing to do with games by WinEveryGame · · Score: 3, Informative
    lulu.tv is simply a video sharing service.

    But on the other it would be cool to have a co-operative for video game developers. Is there one already? Or is the business model too hard for that?

    1. Re:nothing to do with games by vile8 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is a video sharing service with a seeded co-op actually. One of the reasons we liked the co-op idea is that it fits open source and creative commons so very well.

  2. Or... by nmb3000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...you could just upload and watch movies for free on Google, You-Tube, etc.

    If there's one thing the Internet has shown, it's that people do *not* want to pay for content. This is what Google knows and it's why they base nearly all their revenue on contextual ads instead of trying to sell access to Gmail or Maps.

    This sounds like just another 'make easy money on teh interweb!' scheme that's going to disappear pretty quick.

    --
    "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
    /)
    1. Re:Or... by just_another_sean · · Score: 3, Informative

      Experts exchange bugs me too in a couple of ways, but you *do not* need to pay to see answers. Just scroll to the bottom of the page, past the ads, past the "Subscribe now!" junk and there's the thread. And although the "Accepted Answer" does not always appear to be what you need I find that Experts Exchange has a slightly higher average of useful replies then most forums. Of course, YMMV.

      There's plenty to hate about the way the site is designed, no need to make things up about it...

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    2. Re:Or... by EL_mal0 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      If there's one thing the Internet has shown, it's that people do *not* want to pay for content.

      The people at Apple might disagree with you (here).

  3. Current.tv by Sir+Holo · · Score: 2, Informative


    The video site http://www.current.tv/ has a similar setup, but they are connected to a TV network as well. Users submit videos, users watch them for free, and if other users mod them up enough, they get greenlit for airplay on the real TV channel. Then the makers get paid. $500 for your first greenlight.

    Lots of great video content there already.

  4. Did anyone else read.... by zarthrag · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Get Laid, Get Paid"???

    Really had my attention for a sec...

    --
    Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
    1. Re:Did anyone else read.... by nacturation · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is an article about Lulu... you're thinking of the Bubba service.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  5. Google, Youtube don't do cam captures... by b0r1s · · Score: 4, Informative

    But other free services like Vobbo do.

    Yet another competitor in an already very full market. Not seeing the purpose, but throw more money into the ring.

    --
    Mooniacs for iOS and Android
  6. Deceitful by kevin_conaway · · Score: 4, Informative

    Disregarding the actual content of the story, I the think submitter is being a bit deceptive. He is affiliated with the LuLu site (as seen by his link and comments)

    He should at least have the good nature and objectivity to note that he is affiliated with story he is publicising

  7. I'd pay for a good search engine... by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...by the year, some reasonable fee, IF, there was a toggle to filter out commercial ads/spam sites.

  8. Bob Young wasn't co-founder of Red Hat by McPierce · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mark Ewing founded Red Hat in 1993. Bob Young's company, ACC Bookstores, bought out Mark in 1995 and Young became CEO until 1999.

    --
    Darryl L. Pierce "What do you care what people think, Mr. Feynman?"
    1. Re:Bob Young wasn't co-founder of Red Hat by lulucircus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well except to "found" a company means to incorporate it. You are right, Marc (note spelling) began writing a Linux distribution he called Red Hat at about the same time I incorporated a company (ACC Corp. Inc.) to sell Linux related stuff in early 1993. In early 1995 we merged our two small businesses by having ACC pay Marc for the assets of his efforts (he had not incorporated a company at that time) in exchange for shares in ACC Corp. Inc. So technically I incorporated the company that became Red Hat, Inc. But Marc started the Linux distribution project that became the basis for Red Hat, Inc. We agreed very early on to refer to each other as "co-founders" simply because it was too confusing to figure out which of us actually founded Red Hat since neither of us had a law degree. ;-) Cheers, Bob.