Slashdot Mirror
ESPN's Play To Make ISPs Pay
lochii sends us to Wired for reporting on ESPN's game plan to extract royalties from all ISPs, for a "license" for their users to view ESPN video. Currently, according to ESPN, 40% of US Internet users connect through ISPs who are paying the (undisclosed) fees; others are unable to view the content. Quoting: "This is a reversal of the model pushed by some major broadband companies that would like to charge content companies for the right to use their pipes. If other full-length video providers like Hulu and HBO get in on the act, the time could be approaching when you'll choose your Internet service based on what selection of content it offers. Eventually, popular non-video websites might follow suit. Imagine a future water cooler conversation over broadband choice: 'I went with Comcast 'cause they get Yahoo.'"
so let me get this right, because I dont give a F#%K about ESPN, never gone there in my life and never plan too, I have to pay because they want to shake down my ISP for money?
So what if my ISP is my cable provider (effing Comcast)? Am I effectively paying twice for this content?
I was going to moderate you as insightful but... After thinking about it, NO ONE'S content, not even Google's, is worth it.
Well the ISPs could band together and simply block ESPN, or simply charge ESPN for bandwidth corresponding to the dollar amount ESPN wants from the ISPs.
Actually that is something that is very different with the internet, with regards to Cable/Satellite. In the former if its connected you have access, whereas in the latter your provider has to get explicit permission. I would rather switch news source than have to put up with having to pay ESPN.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
You know, my instinctive reaction was horror, anger, and disgust, but after thinking about it for few minutes, I realize this isn't that terrible. There are plenty of sites on the internet that only offer their content to paid subscribers. This one just happens to be subscribing large groups by having their ISP pay.
It does still suck, because ultimately any ISP that pays for this license is going to pass the cost on to their customers, including those that don't care about ESPN. While many are trying to force cable TV to go to ala carte pricing, here's a company trying to move the internet to a "package deal" system.
Ultimately, I think I would be okay with this if individual users could still subscribe to the site if their ISP hasn't, and if everyone had more than 2 choices of ISP. The first condition could probably be met, but the second is a tough one.
So yeah, I'm against this. But I'm downgrading my outrage from horror/anger/disgust to trepidation/irritation/distaste.
If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
Many I know are fleeing cable so they DO NOT have to pay for things like this.
And why not? You can watch many if not most popular shows on the web, DVD sales are where the real money is so they release as soon as they can and you can get them from netflix or sometimes even stream them from them, and on the shady side you can get pretty much anything via torrent. Of course, cable internet customers are having problems there these days... But the point remains, there is little reason for anyone who can get cable to actually get television over it, if they can get internet access - unless they actually watch sports or something.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It's happening everywhere. Nobody is paying money to subscribe to a website. ESPN tried this and failed to get support because there are so many free things out there (you know, like the internet used to be). The problem for them is they also make money off of advertising and need eyeballs. They are trying to figure out ways to play both sides to maximize their profits, and individual users have already told them to go screw themselves.
When I first saw the 360 message, I thought it might have been that Verizon was essentially partnering with ESPN to minimize the bandwidth (a cacheing scheme to minimize the traffic). Guess it's just another money play.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
TV is a dead business model, and they need to get on the bandwagon. Ever since I got Hulu on my Xbox, I've discovered how much I just don't care, and don't need, cable/satelite tv.
Does Hulu offer 5.1 Dolby Digital and 720p or better resolution with ZERO commercials and live sports? Once I can get that quickly and easily on the net without having to wait for someone to upload a torrent and then wait again for it to download AND live sports, I will be done with cable/satellite. But until that day I will bite the bullet and over pay because of the quality and convenience. I hate my cable company, but as a sports fan and an A/V nut, I'm stuck with them for now.
The internet has been successful, because people just route around damage. I would consider this artificial damage by ESPN and it will fail.
Its only voluntary when you have broadband options. Most of the country- if they're lucky enough to get broadband can get it from only one provider. Broadband providers have colluded to avoid encroaching on each others territory- if each one is the sole provider they both win.
The closest thing to this situation was/is when local phone companies control your telephone line, but they were/are heavily regulated, whereas cable companies do whatever the hell they want.
Not everyone who uses the internet is out to watch television.
If you don't like this, call them at 888-549-3776, and go on their web site and write a complaint and ask for a refund if you ISP is paying them, and charging you, and you don't want their "service." If you really want to make a difference, pick a random day of the week and time and schedule a reminder to call them once a week on this topic. It does cost them, and they will take notice, if enough people call them enough times on a regular basis. A short-lived complaint blast that goes away after a day, or week, will either not be noticed, or ignored because it was a one-time event. You can also contact your congress critter and tell them you would like them to investigate such practices and put a stop to it. But again, it would be better if you regularly brought this to their attention rather than a one-time event.
Our new video player is only available for: Windows 2000/XP/Vista - Internet Explorer, Firefox Mac - Firefox, Safari To watch our Live High Quality videos, please download and use one of browsers above.
My ISP supports it and I still cant use it. They don't support linux (I am using firefox on linux). I can't use it so I don't want to pay for it but I have no choice in the matter.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention... I am on a college campus, so "ESPN360.com is also available to fans that access the internet from U.S. college campuses and U.S. military bases." is not factual.
ESPN is owned by Disney. If this works out for ESPN, you can bet your sweet ass Disney will be following suit in a big way (hello, ABC, etc).
Here's to hoping Steve Jobs recovers quickly and uses his 8% of Disney stock to put a massive foot up somebody's ass to quickly end this.
No, it'd probably convince them to buy companies that can do shit like ESPN is doing and screw over their competition.
Who says Hulu has to make an offer? If Verizon offers them millions of dollars to only work exclusively with Verizon, who's to say Hulu wouldn't take it?
s/Hulu/$ANY_MAJOR_CONTENT_PROVIDER
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
I know people are outraged by this but what ESPN is doing is different than how your viewing it.
The ISPs are having to pay for this because ESPN sets up a server at their location and they have their own network they deliver this thru.
If ESPN didn't have this all set up separately then these videos would be slow to load. Your ISP is paying because they get a direct connection to ESPN's videos which brings it just a couple of hops to your house.
If you've ever watched sports on ESPN360 it is a very fast efficient service. The only exception to this was when UGA played and it was only carried on PPV or 360. It was terribly bogged down in the Atlanta area. May not have been for the rest of the country.