Slashdot Mirror
TV Networks Discussing YouTube Rival
An anonymous reader writes "Reuters is carrying a story indicating that NBC, CBS, Fox, and Viacom are considering banding together to work on a competitive video-hosting site. The goal would be to provide an alternative to Google's YouTube, and presumably direct some revenue in their direction." From the article: "While a deal is still far off, the four media companies envision a jointly owned site that would be the primary Web source for videos from their television networks, the paper said in an online report on Wsj.com, citing people close to the situation. The companies aim to cash in on the fast-growing market of Web video advertising and have also discussed building a Web video player that could play clips, the Journal said. "
And they are going to use DRM. Wow...such a compelling service...NOT!
Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-RMS
I don't think the property of *exclusive content* applies to the internet. Digital information can be too easily copied for any exclusive content to stay exclusive for long.
games journalism blog
I'll give even odds that they use Google AdSense for their revenue stream. ;-)
Uh, so just about the entire US broadcast industry is banding together to distribute content through a joint venture. I think the word you want is "anti-competitive", not "competitive".
It's not possible for NBC, CBS, Fox, and Viacom to work together. The closest any one of them came to working with another major corporation is M$ and NBC forming MSNBC. Everything else has been a merger, buyout or ridiculously complex business partnerships. YouTube is the king until they figure out talent > management ego.
No Need For YouTube When OurTube Is Your Tube!
You get 100 million hits a day ( http://www.onlinereporter.com/article.php?article_ id=7234 ) and the ad revenue starts to add up.
"Even for Slashdot, that was a very obscure reference!" - Anonymous Coward
First, Cuban says Google is stupid for buying YouTube, now all the megamediagiants want to band together to try to beat Google at its own game? Google has some work cut out for it... maybe?
If you consider that **AA wants to pull the rug out from under Google et al, now MS is trying their hand at the online video thing... then along comes johnny mediagiant to try too.
Perhaps there is more to this free internet videos thing after all?
How can the MPAA continue to want to control content and then want to play in the same space as Google?
The only thing I'm certain of is that this could be very interesting...
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Wow.. compelling. As it stands now, I can 'TiVO' or download all the shows I want to watch, sans commercials and bullshit.. or I can subscribe to the networks' version of youtube for $11.99 a month, that has less content and comes complete with commercials and DRM. Yeah.. that's going to work out really well for them.
Are they really competing with YouTube? Rather, why are they competing with Apple? Apple is already selling (some of) their shows, and they're apparently pulling in mad bank for it.
building a Web video player that could play clips
The TV networks aren't stupid. They've got a really long-term vision for this. After they create this "video player," which I hear is going to be called something like "FastTemporalMovement," or "HurryUpNow," they're going to start making some of these clips available on a vast, distributed network they are calling, "The ConnectedLattice." Originally they were going to call it "DenseAdaptiveRegisteredPlaybackAssociationNET," but apparently that was too close to some other experimental project someone else is working on. After their new distributed network gets activated, they're going to pass their video through a series of interconnected tubes and into this distributed network, which will then allow individual users to connect via the "FastTemporalMovement" video player and watch programming on.. get this, here's where it really gets exciting... THEIR HOME COMPUTERS!!!"
Now tell me the TV networks aren't technology and business innovators! Once people start getting a taste of this "video on your computer" thing, customers will start lining up to pay the networks for quality programming like American Idol and Deal or No Deal. The only potential snag in the networks' plan is that some viewers may, and I think this is only a slim possibility, may start producing their own video content and attempting to place it on the vast distributed network the clever TV folks thought up. What a funny thought that is: consumers actually producing content. Heh heh. Too funny. It'll never happen. The networks are WAY ahead of the game, folks.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
What do they need a joint site for? If all they want to do is allow limited downloads of their own content, each network can do that right now.
Also, with a Democratic Congress, anti-trust questions will be asked. Competitors aren't supposed to have joint marketing arrangements. "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court." (15 USC 2). Antitrust enforcement has been out to lunch since Bush came in, and Congress hasn't questioned this. That's going to change.
have also discussed building a Web video player that could play clips
There *is* a player -- it's called Flash. Why do they need another player? DRM, perhaps? No thank you.
Software Wars
This is probably just posturing to get a better deal.
The TV networks probably aren't getting as sweet a deal as they'd like from Google/YouTube, so they're threatening to create a rival and use them exclusively. They just want Google to cave to their terms.
Chances are Google won't.
Chances are the TV networks won't be able to agree on exactly what they want for some time, will find out how hideously expensive creating a rival would be, and then realise they have to solve the problem as to how to get people to watch their rival as well. This will cost a hefty bucket of money, and there's no way they'll be able to agree how to split the cost fairly.
Then it'll be back to the negotiating table. Google will give them a token step towards their terms to protect their shattered egos, and the TV execs may or may not take it. Or, possibly, Google will give one TV network a sweet deal and refuse to budge on the others, and the others will effectively be forced to accept a crappy deal or face irrelevance.
The 'big media' conglomerates have always been geriatric/glacial in their movements into new technology.
I'm thinking this is worthy of note on just how fast they are um... talking about this. They probably see it as targeting a key demographic (the teenager - young adult crowd), which it does and would.
*deep breath* The reason, I'm guessing, for the seemingly slow movement would be the decision makers are older, fiscal conservatives who are fearful of new technology and systems/processes that transcend general media broadcast methods.
I had to chuckle over "a Web video player that could play clips". TFA doesn't go into enough detail, but it leads one to assume that it is a web client similar to what we have been using for YouTube. (May the Master Control Program derez it softly into oblivion.)
However, in the context, the hypothetical player could be either a physical web-appliance (doubtful) or a program that runs on a PC with web connectivity (similar to Media Player Classic).
I would imagine that they want complete control over the project and will want a proprietary codec/format that they can load with DRM. Given their feelings (and their lawyer's) on the subject, this is fairly obvious. If this were not the case, I'd imagine they would use Apple Quicktime.
It is also obvious that Walt Disney wouldn't want to join in on this just yet. They are berserk about their intellectual property rights.
Given their track record, I'm slightly impressed. I think they will mess it up by being over-protective of their rights by having some snake-oil salesman tell them what they want to hear, but I'm still (mildly) impressed.