Content creators waking up
- Brace Yourself for Massive Changes in the Online Video Industry
Ever wonder what was YouTube’s secret to success? Studies have shown that people are choosing the internet as they’re source of entertainment over dvd’s or going to the cinema. That would explain Viacom’s suit against Google.
However YouTube’s success has left many media companies questioning their age old method and some companies are now realizing the need to change. Two such companies are NBC and Fox who are now aiming to capitalize on digital audio and video content just like YouTube and iTunes.
The only difference is that these companies actually own most of the video and audio content that consumers demand so replacing them to a digital form should be a piece of cake for them.
I wonder how this will work. I realize there is a lot of user generated content, but I think a lot of the popular content is not produced by users. So if they take their content back it could mix things up a bit.
son of parnas
March 29th, 2007 1:27am
NBC is stupid. They want to create their own NBC oriented social networking site where you can leave comments & add your favorite shows as friends. While they will gain some traction this way, I don't see any reason to go to NBC for my social networking.
March 29th, 2007 1:36am
These guys always have their lawyers dream up the dumbest implementations. ABC got smart and had episodes of Lost available on their site the day after. I liked this since I could catch the intro if I missed it.
So last week they 'updated' their viewer to be a downloadable plugin for Java. It asked for FULL administrator privileges on my computer. So I switched to a virtual machine as a temp sandbox and did so, then watched its behavior with my debugging tools. Sure enough, it started a scan of what it thought was my hard drive for media files - presumably looking for files with hash signatures that match Disney IP properties. It downloaded and installed a rootkit that tried to hide itself. It's the Sony DRM crap all over again.
Trojan Hating Turk
March 29th, 2007 1:54am
I'm an old guy, so I don't really get Web 2.0, so can someone tell me: does "social networking" really matter?
Or, maybe that's the wrong question... is it social networking when I see an interesting video on YouTube (say an old black and white segment of Paul Desmond and Dave Brubeck playing Take 5) and copy and paste the link into an email and send it to my friends? I don't comment on it on YouTube, and neither do they. I don't know of any of them having a blog, so they don't embed it in their blogs.
The value of YouTube to me is that there's some videos on there that interest me. Some are stolen (e.g. Disney movies in 10minute sections), some are probably public domain, some are just people's home videos they've posted. I'd pay a bit to get access to some videos, but it'd have to be pretty cheap for "real shows" and very cheap for 30-second clips of people doing dumb things.
March 29th, 2007 1:54am
I don't think there is a financial model for this and I think YouTube is doomed and it will take Google down with it.
But I do think that YouTube is changing society right now. Videos of cops beating protesters or bystanders get uploaded before the cops get their victim back to the police station. There's tons of original content there if you look for it and a lot of it I like better than the crap they have on TV.
March 29th, 2007 1:58am
"I'm an old guy, so I don't really get Web 2.0, so can someone tell me: does "social networking" really matter?"
Social networking is forums for anyone who grew up in the post usenet/IRC era.
March 29th, 2007 3:20am
People seem to forget that YouTube isn't really very successful - their revenue for the last year was $15 mil and their bandwidth bills are probably 1-2 mil per month. Were it not for the fact that they were bought by Google, they would eventually just fizzle out and die.
March 29th, 2007 3:41am
The majors will need to win swingeing judgement in court to kill YouTube - AFAIK antitrust forbids the majors colluding to share a common rootkit (other than Vista) to hobble users. NBC and Fox better watch their cooperation is squeaky clean as well.
YouTube will continue with or without illegal content as long as Google chooses to keep it there and the State allows it to (despite being such a wonderful distributor of subversive content) because it was the first to work well enough and it hosts stuff people want to see - though the comments against the clips can be pretty lame.
March 29th, 2007 4:01am
if youtube goes, the others will take over.
If the US tries to ban them, they will reappear in Taiwan or India or somewhere.
The present IP laws for media content are just not sustainable, or even enforcable, really. The whole damn system is creaking at the seams, and I think that that is the weak spot that will give.
The days where artists or producers needed to sign away their IP to a publishing company of some sort to be able to reach the market are gone, gone, gone. Not coming back. So the publishing companies are fucked. Google knows this. That is why they will spend big money to challenge them.
March 29th, 2007 5:28am
>> So last week they 'updated' their viewer to be a downloadable plugin for Java. It asked for FULL administrator privileges on my computer. So I switched to a virtual machine as a temp sandbox and did so, then watched its behavior with my debugging tools. Sure enough, it started a scan of what it thought was my hard drive for media files - presumably looking for files with hash signatures that match Disney IP properties. It downloaded and installed a rootkit that tried to hide itself. It's the Sony DRM crap all over again. <<
This are pretty serious charges. Do you have any proof you can publish? If you were to write this up and get DF to blog about it, it would attract some high powered attention. But you need to be absolutely correct in what you saw. Unfounded accusations don't help the cause.
March 29th, 2007 8:47am
agree with xample. that's a great story if you can provide more details. screenshots, etc.
I didn't install the new abc viewer because given the choice between downloading a player and then dl'ing Lost or just watching Lost on the old viewer, I chose the faster option (plus they wanted my name and email which I thought was a tad intrusive).
BTW, the big buzz is that Lost has lost Nielsen marketshare this season from last. But so many people stream it or Tivo or it iPod it, the comparison seems weak.
March 29th, 2007 12:39pm
>if youtube goes, the others will take over.
March 29th, 2007 3:06pm
>YouTube will continue with or without illegal content as
>long as Google chooses to keep it there
Really, the question is whether Google will choose to keep it there. It could feasibly run the thing at a loss forever, but what would be the point?
Not to mention, there's nothing really to separate it from DailyMotion (actually DailyMotion is better), Veoh or all the other flash video playing websites. There's enough competition that even if it WERE possible to make the thing profitable (highly unlikely) it would never be that profitable.
March 29th, 2007 3:11pm
March 30th, 2007 8:49am
"Viacom's lawyers helped craft this law but apparently don't like it, after all. They want to shirk the responsibility Congress gave them."
Wow you are right. They are really kicking some ass. "Made your bed, now you sleep in it, nyah nyah nyah!"
Them and Apple, sheesh. I never thought Jobs would pull off that crazy iPhone trademark play but fuck if he didn't.
March 30th, 2007 11:46pm