Slashdot Mirror
Google and YouTube Continue To Struggle With Details
An SFGate article looks at the still rocky road that Google and YouTube are traveling as they try to iron out after-merger details. Hanging in the air are things like the Viacom takedown request, competition from Joost, and deal-making with organizations like the NBA and BBC. They're also concerned about little things like, you know, making money. From the article: "Tensions [with IP holders] haven't reached lawsuit status -- yet. Such a fight could be long and costly, but with Google's backing, YouTube could afford it. And that may be why media companies have held back so far, [IP lawyer Lee] Bromberg and others said. Google and YouTube have something to gain from deal-making, too. For the company to make money from advertising -- and the potential is huge, with an estimated $70 billion to $80 billion spent in television advertising -- Google and YouTube need the premium videos. Because viewers are more likely to watch these clips than myriad user-generated ones, advertisers are willing to pay more for them. "
Competition from Joost? There is no such thing, nobody knew (or knows) what Joost it, while YouTube already hit the mainstream media.
The deal between Viacom and Joost is like when that beautiful cheerleader, after breaking up with the handsome quarterback, chases him and says "I'd rather to sleep with the first idiot that passes by me that going back to you". And picks up the first idiot that passes by her. And gives him a big sloppy kiss.
That "first idiot" is Joost. Everybody knows that Viacom end up ironing a deal with Google, and that they will be back in bed soon, so, no need to give him false hope.
google/youtube just simply needs to get more tv networks and whatnot onboard. But the deal maker is to get ALL music videos online, not just current "hip" ones that the kids are watching today but as many as possible.
Replays of old tv shows would be great, even current tv shows could make a deal that youtube could have their shows a week or two later, kind of the same setup sendmail has, actual tv viewers get the latest, but computer tv viewers have to wait. So tv networks don't lose their audience if they decide to go online because the stuff online wouldn't be the latest episodes.
Since joost got so hyped up early .. when it actually comes out it'll be a downer. I don't think it's going to be a success because they're delaying launching the service.
.. they can always keep it separated and labelled on a separate channel.
Of course when it fails everyone will say online TV is dead. And then Apple will do it right.
Also, I dont see why Joost is so vehemently against user generated content
Will they allow linking to channels/tv show scenes from the web like youtube style?
No shit - you're saying that professionals in the TV and movie industries generally crank out better stuff that amateurs? And you're wondering why the companies that bankrolled the professionals so they could sell advertising inserted into the professionals' final product are getting annoyed that a competing company is copying the content and putting its own advertising on it? If that last bit's a mystery to you, I'm not sure I can help.
Generally, I think of YouTube as the next generation of "America's Funniest Home Videos". Entertaining? A little. $X billion entertaining? Dunno. Going to replace my viewing of DVDs and a handful of TV shows on cable? No.
This is where I get worried about where Google is headed. At its core, it's not really a tech company; it's a media and advertising company. Its "consumer product" is a search engine and now YouTube, but it doesn't really have any "premium content" or service that serves a unique need or performs it in a unique manner.