Slashdot Mirror
Broadcasters Put New Ad-Skipping Restrictions On YouTube TV (dslreports.com)
YouTube launched its new "YouTube TV" service last week for select markets. One of the biggest features for the service is its DVR functionality, which would in theory allow users to record shows and fast forward through all the commercials. Unfortunately, that is not the case, notes the Wall Street Journal. Karl Bode writes via DSLReports: If a show is available on-demand, viewers won't be able to skip ads, even if they recorded the episode on DVR. Google has confirmed with the Journal that the restriction is courtesy of the licensing agreements the broadcast industry forced Google to adhere to in order to offer the service. As a result, if YouTube TV has the on-demand version of a specific program you may be interested in, then the service won't let viewers watch a recorded version that allows for ad-skipping. Instead, viewers are forced to watch the on-demand episode and all of the ads, even if consumers thought they saved the show on their DVR for ad-skippable viewing.
Let's be clear here: Broadcasters didn't do this, YouTube (AKA Alphabet) did this. Broadcasters asked for this -- maybe even demanded this, or traded this for lower costs -- and YouTube decided that having their content, plus ads, was more important than sticking to their guns and offering their customers (the people who actually pay money for the service) an ads-free experience.
However will I use video downloadhelper now?
I've already paid enough for shitty DRM-content and I'll never do it again. And by that I mean I won't watch ads either. I will take what you produce without paying and do what I want with it. And no, I don't care if you starve.
As a purveyor of entertainment, you don't get to treat your customers like puppets. Or even like cattle or pigs, placidly "consuming" your entertainment slop.
Too bad even Tim "world wide web" Berners-Lee just doesn't get that.
..broadcast TV is dying.
Here comes the new media...
[Rent This Space]
I am willing to pay money to watch TV without ads...or if I don't want to pay I am willing to watch TV for free with ads. I will not pay money for TV and watch ads...
Really early in its existence wasn't youtube the most popular video sharing site for two years in a row ONLY BECAUSE it was the only video sharing site that didn't force you to watch an ad before the video you where trying to play?
oh how the mighty have fallen.
viewers are not "forced to watch" the ads. They might be forced to play them if they watch the program, but we old-timers remember that the ads are a great time to go get a beer or take a comfort break - you don't have to watch them.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Because I haven't seen a YT ad play on my own devices in years.
Commercials killed TV, advertisers need a new host to survive, now infecting YouTube. Look up the definition of parasitoid.
so google wants me to pay $35 a month to watch tv. add to that the internet cost. and i still am paying to watch ads?
at this rate, why not just keep cable tv?
I can think of 1/2 dozen ways right off the bat.
Not that it matters, there’s nothing on it worthwhile, and we’re not going to watch it in this household, and I don’t want it in our intellectual diet.
Well I probably wouldn't have watched anyway, but if I had been thinking about it, this would have pushed me into the "not" category. They sure showed me.
disgust you.
YouTube is a wasteland, a sewer. Fuck YouTube with a rusty pitchfork.
Loop of tvshow back into youtube elsewhere minus ads. Now that is a well filtered feedback loop.
Youtube is ripe of rips, it will only be a matter of time.
I had pretty much abandoned Hulu over its mandatory ads -- and then they offered an ad-free version for a few dollars (per month) more. Jumped on that right quick. And of course, no ads in Netflix. Or Amazon video.
Bad, bad move. ..bruce..
Bruce F. Webster (brucefwebster.com)
>"If a show is available on-demand, viewers won't be able to skip ads, even if they recorded the episode on DVR."
And this is why streaming usually fails, because it puts the user out of control. It doesn't matter the who or why- broadcasters, content providers, streaming service, if they are going to FORCE the customer to view ANYTHING- be it ads, previews, trailers, "infomercials", public service announcements, then we have moved backwards. Streaming gives them that power, and it is often irresistible- something they don't have over DVR's.
Technology has released me from being forced to watch commercials for 20 years and I am not about to start now (VCR then TiVo then added Netflix streaming). I am amazed that people will PAY for services that force them to watch what they don't want. Even if the content is "free", there is a large segment of the market who is like me, and if that contains forced anything, we reject it.
Forced ads are a dinosaur that needs to become and stay extinct.
Honestly, how is this any different from any other legitimate streaming service offering current content?
All of the networks that off "on demand" "streaming" of "recent episodes" has commercials in them and, no, you can't skip them either.
Netflix doesn't have ads, they also don't have current content that they didn't create.
I'm not familiar with Hulu, or Amazon. Do any of them offer current content that isn't their own without advertising, or with advertising that can be skipped?
Finally, on my Apple TV at least, "skipping" is mostly an awful, laggy experience anyway. It's not like the DVRs with a 30s "fast forward" button.
So, how is YouTube any more special than anything else?
If a show is available on-demand, viewers won't be able to skip ads, even if they recorded the episode on DVR
Stuff like this is what drives people to use bittorrent - why pay for content if you have to sit through the ads anyway?
Obligatory TheOatmeal:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/g...
It's not like other YouTube "shows" aren't already available for download.
I won't be getting.
the right to choose.
People are going to be motivated to figure out ways to bypass this, and figuring out ways to bypass this will probably tangentially lead to the ability to extract offline copies as well. Chances are breaking DRM will be required for people to skip ads, so that's what people are going to do.
There is a certain subset of people out there who were previously only interested in subscribing to the service who have now been motivated by YouTube and the broadcasters to become anti-DRM hackers. Way to shoot yourself in the foot.
Maybe YouTube will be smart like they have been in the past and just not bother with anti-ad-skipping countermeasures. If there's a superficial way for an extension like AdBlock to bypass this problem without circumventing DRM, then they will reduce the incentive for people to start popping the hood, hacking the DRM, and kicking over the broadcasting industry's sandcastle in the process.
Although maybe that outcome is inevitable, but I still think they shouldn't encourage it.
If we DVR the DVR, then we can skip ads. Of course they'll probably find some way to prevent the DVRR from skipping ads. We'll respond with a DVRRR, pronounced "diver". What's it diving for? Turtles, all the way down.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
This is why I torrent my TV shows.
I would pay for ad free, but the networks are ran by gigantic assholes and refuse to let me. So I have only one choice. Torrent the TV shows and get them 100% ad free.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwuy4hHO3YQ
Sit and spin, alphabet
I just cancelled my trial of Vue for the same reason. I basically got it for sports (I know, right?), and had to jump through hoops of "starting the playback from the DVR list and not the TV list", had to be very careful to not catch up to the present (which disables DVR functions), and then when the game ran over its "official" time slot (as every game does, ever) it dropped me into whatever after game program, and I couldn't rewind to see the 30 minutes I'd missed. Pass. I'd love to save the $50/mo from my satellite subscription, but if the service doesn't actually work, then I'm just wasting the entire $85.
Why all you mother fuckers watch TV, None of you mother fuckers own a god damn fishing pole.
You know there is a place down the street you can play pool and drink a beer dont you?
I'll just mute the sound, look away, and gaze out the window for 30 seconds or so if I'm ever unfortunate enough to be subjected to one of their ads.
But frankly, with Adblock I never see the ads anyway, so I doubt it'll be a problem.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I pay for services to AVOID ads.
On the whole, getting into a private tracker is based on your standing on other private trackers. There used to be trackers that offered invites through an interview process, mostly covering the tracker's rules and quality guidelines, until What shut down. Nowadays it appears to have become a Catch-22 for someone new to private trackers.
Sorry. If this is a service I pay for in any way, shape or form, I refuse to be burdened by ads.
If I'm paying for said service and you're forcing ads on me as well, I simply do not need the service and will do without.
Fuck this sick "ads on everything" culture.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
They can't force us to watch commercials
... because someone will likely program a tool that can extract the "dont-skip" parts as a playlist we can feed into comskip...
Any interest I might have had in the service had come and gone in the span of the summary. I've no time or interest in watching ads for things I neither want to buy and on principal I'll try not to buy products that are obnoxiously advertised. Everything Google touches tends to start off so well and slowly but surely degrades into crap. Youtube will be with us for a while but it's not going to get better, ever.
Netflix had it right with their service and despite the price creep it's still good bang for your buck, for now.
That I have with advertising is that it misses the mark entirely. I don't want to see feminine hygiene ads, car ads, etc. Don't care.
And it goes for brick and mortar types too, BJ's Club - I scan the card every time I shop there but the emails I get are for people who live in suburbia. I live in a city and have no use for most of what they try to hawk. But you'd think, they know my purchasing history right? How hard could it be to target ads based on that?
Killed off before it even got started.
But this will be what keeps me from subscribing.
I don't get it. In the USA, time-shifting has been found to be legal. Just record it, remove the ads, and watch later.
What's the problem?
Been doing that for years - fast forward through the VHS tapes or skip 30 seconds using your HDMI capture device if you can't be bothered to remove the commercials using comskip.
It isn't my fault if people choose to give up their rights and bought a networked TV or networked DRV or networked bluray player. Don't blame others for your stupidity.
OTOH, I don't have youtube-tv and never plan to get it. Google already has too many services and is prone to killing them off just after they become good. At least with youtube-tv, we know it isn't be good already - no reason to bother trying it.
I have been watching hacker TV for about 15 years now. No more Ads, No More Wasted Money, or lining the pockets of Lefty Lunatics, and no more material support for the destruction of America! HOLLYWOOD/YOUTUBE CAN STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE!
...you are an absolute idiot. Google is EVIL! My solution? BT, YTD Video Downloader, Adblock Plus, Privacy Badger and new Adblocker and Do Not track from my VPN. I paid the last one, the rest as free (as in beer).
You monkeys will be forcefully brainwashed with your eyes peeled ! Whatever it takes.
I tried YouTube TV on the free trial when they started offering it in Los Angeles area recently, and promptly canceled it.
When I canceled, they ask why. But you get a small list that doesn't have any of those as an option, and no place to put a specific other reason. Oh well, back to torrents for me. I tried giving them money.
The minute they inserted ads and monetized everything it all went to to trash(a good while back now). It went from youtube to theirtube. In other words, what was once original and personal content became over-produced garbage that is only produced in order to garner a few shekels and not to spread a personal viewpoint.
I always mute through commercials...use that time to go to the bathroom, check my computer, grab a snack etc. When I come back, if the show has already started, I just back it up to end of the last computer.
I get it: producers need to pay for content. So, reasonable income streams seem fair.
Key word is REASONABLE.
Here, advertisers are likely paying more than reasonable since the service provider (Google) is forcing viewers to be subjected to bullshit, mind-numbing ads.
Herein lies a major issue: We, the people, reserve the right to protection from the offensive, insulting, mind-twisting ads intended to brainwash (as much as possible) viewers into buying (or even buying in to) the ads product (or thinking).
It is WRONG to be forced to endure an ad that subliminally suggests things like buying that car will catapult me into a class where I can get hot dates and a luxurious lifestyle!
I reserve the RIGHT to skip any ad that I want to.
So, a different model needs to be developed for paying, FAIRLY, for content.
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
Would you prefer that it be $150 per month?
That number seems totally made up.
My assumption was that Discovery, Scripps, Disney, NBCUniversal, Turner, Fox, Viacom, and other companies providing channels to cable TV operators would price the ad-free surcharge higher than the current going rate for the equivalent ad time, on grounds that people willing to pay more for ad-free service tend to be richer and more worthy to be the victims of price discrimination. The estimate was based on one HBO price for NBCUniversal channels, one HBO price for ESPN, Freeform, and other Disney channels, one HBO price for TNT, TCM, CNN, and other Turner channels, etc. They'd highball the price of ad-free retransmission consent to build a claim that only a commercially insignificant fraction of the viewer base is willing to pay that much.
I'm on a monthly trial. I will simply cancel and pay nothing. Why should I have to be forced into watching advertising when I am paying to have the service. Cable and Satellite is so wrong. I'll stock with cable cutting..
nm
If we were actually interested in the ad's pitch, we probably wouldn't skip it. Do they think that forcing me to watch the ad is going to make me want the product more?
This move will do nothing to avert piracy. Nothing will prevent the capture and edit of a program, with it being distributed ("ad free"). They'll bitch and complain, but only have themselves to blame for their poor business decisions. Just don't subscribe to the service, if they don't get good revenue they'll rethink their approach.