Slashdot Log In
CBS Hosts Ad-Funded TV Series, Incl. Original Star Trek
Posted by
timothy
on Sun Feb 08, 2009 09:44 PM
from the whole-new-generation-can-obsess-or-ridicule dept.
from the whole-new-generation-can-obsess-or-ridicule dept.
eldavojohn writes "On Friday, CBS launched a TV Classics section to their ad based online service. Which means that Trekkies can now watch all three seasons of Star Trek: The Original Series online at the expense of a few commercials. Alongside this CBS is offering all of MacGyver, Twin Peaks and even three seasons of the original Twilight Zone. A side note, they seem to work perfectly fine in Linux. "
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
"On Friday"? (Score:5, Informative)
Um, it's been there for over a year now. I watched the first season last spring.
Re:"On Friday"? (Score:4, Funny)
Obviously, the TV Classics section did a slingshot around the sun.
Parent
Outside the US? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Outside the US? (Score:4, Insightful)
No thanks. I'll stick with BitTorrent, if only because I live outside the US, and it won't be available outside the US, for some reason.
That reason is copyright law...which, unless I'm mistaken, CBS doesn't control.
Parent
Re:Outside the US? (Score:5, Interesting)
I find it hard to believe that they don't have control over their own copyrights.
Parent
Re:Outside the US? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's quite possible they sold the foreign rights to Trek long before the Internet came along...
Parent
Re:Outside the US? (Score:5, Funny)
yah, but if the CBS execs went warp 10 around the sun, they could go back and, uh...
Parent
Re:Outside the US? (Score:5, Funny)
yah, but if the CBS execs went warp 10
They could "hyper-evolve" into salamanders and have gross salamander sex?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Outside the US? (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, but hasn't it already been proven that just because a site in one jurisdiction allows viewers from another jurisdiction they can't be charged because the other jurisdiction forbids the content thats legal in the first jurisdiction?
Theory predicts that that would cause a trans-jurisdictional warp anomaly, which could lead to a subpoena cascade. Very dangerous. But Data and I think that if we can reconfigure the deflector array to emit bogus affadavits in the "do-whatever-I-want"-band, the high-energy subpoenas will be completely neutralized. It would be like stuffing a mailbox with scrap paper!
Parent
Re:Outside the US? (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine you are an international TV station guy who just purchased airing rights of Star Trek and when you browse slashdot, you see this story, click and start watching the series you just purchased for $100K or even more. That is the issue.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do people keep bringing proxies into these discussions? Sure, there are lots of proxies available, but how many free (or cheap) high bandwidth ones are there? We are talking video here. Bouncing it through a bunch of low bandwidth connections doesn't leave you with a very good experience.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My guess is that there's absolutely no margin for CBS in trying to block proxy users. The only reason they block is due to the demands of advertisers and/or foreign licensees - if a user works around that block CBS wins an ad view.
Re:Outside the US? (Score:5, Insightful)
One problem is probably regional sublicensing, so it's more contractual than copyright, but there is copyright involved. CBS might have sublicenced the distribution rights series to other companies based on country or region, and they can't just violate those licenses. These contracts predate the popularity of using the internet for video, and they can't just go back on them without consequences.
They might have some problems selling ads for non-US viewers too, there's no sense in selling ads for viewers in the UK for products that are as yet only sold in the US.
Parent
Re:Outside the US? Like Canada (Score:4, Informative)
Browsing from Canada this is all I get when I try to watch videos...
"The video you requested is unavailable. Please visit www.cbs.com for current videos."
Is this just a coincidence or is anyone having the same issue?
Parent
Re:Outside the US? Hot Spot Shield (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's why proxies were invented, they don't know the difference...
Re:Outside the US? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, and that's exactly why Bittorrent is the mechanism of choice for many. What CBS is doing is the future, and it's a pretty good future, where Bittorent isn't needed -- once they figure out that they can solve so many problems by making shows available to the entire world.
Low ratings in the US? Not such a problem, if your show is available globally instantly. Plus, your ratings aren't based on a Neilsen sample, they are based on hard numbers from actual views. You can make more than 100 times the revenue from advertising to a global audience -- there's plenty of global companies (and I'm sure it's possible to have local ad partners providing local feeds by reading IP addresses). There is no reason whatsoever that CBS is not a Network that broadcasts to every English speaker in the World simultaneously.
Yes, there are rights and distribution issues with the current system that prevent that from happening. Which is why that system is outdated and must be changed. Just as the world no longer needs record companies, the world really no longer needs distributors.
Once the Networks eventually figure this -- very obvious -- fact out, then we will see not only real progress, but perhaps we might actually get to see complete seasons of the shows we love. Firefly, for example, would never have been canceled if it was distributed under this model.
Parent
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
This and Hulu make me very happy. It takes a bit longer to download than bittorrent, but I don't find the ads obtrusive (so short), the quality is good enough for me, and the option to stream live is handy.
I imagine they don't like you downloading it but sometimes I don't have tubes, and as the commercials aren't annoying I don't bother removing them.
Now if only they carried programming I liked more...and here we are:-)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
I have been using Chrome + Privoxy for weeks and havent seen a single Hulu add. Recently I don't even have the 30 second delay, just a 1 second jump where the advertisement should be.
Try it out if you want to avoid the adds.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Kaspersky's firewall automatically blocks the ads and instantly jumps back to the show as well. I haven't taken the time to investigate exactly how it does it, but I'm sure that any firewall could be configured to do the same.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want internet video to continue to provide you a service you have to actually accept having to view the ads.
Parent
Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
Honestly I'm kind of bummed that these work-arounds to sites like Hulu exist. Finally I have a means of watching TV where i don't feel like I am wasting too much of my life on commercials while those that make the shows that I enjoy are able to make some money. Now that we're seeing a move back towards a reasonable level of advertising for TV we've got people abusing the system to the ultimate determent of us all.
I like the fact that I can honestly watch these shows without watching 8 - 9 minutes of commercials for every 21 - 22 minutes of show. It's really disappointing to find out that there are those that are actively ruining this for the rest of us because they can't be bothered with 2 - 3 30 second advertisements so that those who make the TV we like can make a bit of money.
Parent
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Star Trek should be required in schools. (Score:5, Interesting)
And by that, I mean, classic Trek. See, the current vogue is that every character has to have faults and be greedy and weak somehow... I mean, in the new Galactica everyone has more issues than a Windows Beta, and its like, it sucks. Men are all crying, cheating, pathetic, and I'm supposed to draw some moral lesson from these people? What a joke.
On the other hand, there's Captain Kirk, decorated, confident, successful. Now, he goes and tells me that there is a better way, that, I don't have to be a big jackass and we can solve social problems, learn about the world around us, and not be sissies about it, that's all good.
Re:Star Trek should be required in schools. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Star Trek should be required in schools. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Old news... (Score:3, Informative)
Twilight Zone episodes [tv.com] have been online for the last year, at least...
STTNG, Voyager, Stargate, Atlantis are online via ShoutCast...
Why are you guys so out of the loop...?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
STTNG, Voyager, Stargate, Atlantis are online via ShoutCast...
ShoutCast [shoutcast.com] is the Nullsoft/AOL internet radio site. Do you mean Fancast [fancast.com]?
Assuming you meant the latter, I went to their site and found ST:TOS, but nothing about ST:TNG. I don't think that TNG is available on any of these ad-supported, media-company-supported sites.
Gotta love TV networks (Score:5, Interesting)
It won't let me watch from Puerto Rico: "The video you have requested is unavailable. Please visit www.cbs.com for current videos."
You really gotta love these TV networks. Here we have a global network -- the modern wonder that is the Internet -- and the TV networks can't think of anything better to do than to impose the same old territorial divisions through entirely artificial means. Reaching a global audience used to be a technical challenge, but with the Internet there is no longer any need for that. I can't wait for the day when these "old fart" networks are displaced by their modern counterparts.
Then there's ESPN, that wants to impose the cable TV model upon ISPs...
I say again... I can't wait for the day.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nope. Ads are very time and location specific. They can't advertise the same things everywhere at the same time. Sandals vs snowtires, & Miami vs Minnesota.
In traditional media (TV and print), it is easy. But retailers and advertisers are still trying to figure out how to manage that concept in the online world.
Re:Gotta love TV networks (Score:5, Insightful)
Or if that's not how it works, they could have a neutral start page and then have people select the country they're from and ta da, targeted advertising.
Parent
Re:Gotta love TV networks (Score:4, Insightful)
Google makes billions of dollars on advertising. The international nature of the Internet has not impeded this.
Parent
FYI: Can't have any adblocking (Score:4, Interesting)
I tried to fire up one of the episodes in Opera, only to be met with the message that the video was unavailable because I had ad-blocking software installed. Thinking it was some browser detect issue, I tried FireFox. No joy. Google Chrome, no luck. I sighed and fired up IE thinking this was one of those IE-only sites... no such luck.
Then I remembered that I have a pretty comprehensive ad-blocking HOSTS file.
If they want to get around ad blocking via a hosts file, they just need to deliver their ads through the CBS domain. Don't require me to open up to other sites' content to view yours.
I'm tired of TV networks like this. (Score:5, Interesting)
Boo! Put it on Hulu so Canadians can watch it too!
I don't understand these networks. They don't seem to understand that the internet is a global community. With TV there's no guarantees that you're hitting the correct audience, so the desire to filter the audience(so that it is "correct") is understandable when the opportunity arises - but what they seem to forget is they lose out on evangelical advertising because of that filtering.
I'm Canadian, but I spammed all my American friends about Hulu, and now they all watch TV there. If a show isn't available on Hulu, then we'll look for it elsewhere. If we have to jump through hoops to watch it(AOL, ABC, CBS, BBC, etc. etc.), then we won't; we'll just torrent it.
I think they'd be best off streaming it with or without ads to other countries, just to capitalize off word-of-mouth advertising. Stuff that can be watched by anyone on the internet spreads rapidly - See: Dr. Horrible [sitepoint.com], Monty Python [slashdot.org]
Networks like this will never get my endorsement - but not because of me; it's because they block me.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How do you get Hulu.com in Canada?
define "perfectly" (Score:3, Funny)
"A side note, they seem to work perfectly fine in Linux" (with the proprietary Flash plugin).
Re:indeed (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it would mean more to the viewer if they realized that the original series was written with both the Vietnam War and Summer of Love in plain view. Among all the firsts that the original series created they also created true science fiction; they created stories that told of the issues of mankind in a setting that is in the future and beyond our technology. It was a brilliant series that addressed issues of the day that were addressed in no other way that was as illuminating or cogent. They truly deserve the accolades they have received since.
The stories they told were bold and still apply to today, having stood the test of time even if the technology portrayed leaves a bit of questioning to a modern viewer. As an atheist I truly appreciate how they handled religions. Faced with racism every day I truly appreciate how they handled racism, and have continued to handle it in other series.
If we as a society follow what we are shown on television, I truly hope that we can follow the examples set by the Star Trek series.
side note: I don't wear red shirts anymore ... just can't do it.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect that Frankie Thomas and the other people who created Tom Corbet -- Space Cadet [wikipedia.org] would disagree with you, considering that they pre-dated Star Trek by almost 20 years. And, for that matter, Clark, Heinlein, Asimov, Smith and many others were writing it long before Tom Corbet was created.
Re:indeed (Score:5, Insightful)
well there wouldn't even be a startrek TNG without TOS and its "cheesy" effects.
Parent
Re:indeed (Score:5, Insightful)
The effects might look cheesy now, but they were much better than anything else on TV at the time. If you really want to see cheesy effects, watch the original Dr. Who sometime, or Blake's 7, for that matter.
Parent
Re:indeed (Score:5, Interesting)
TOS was campy and the special effects didn't quite match those of Enterprise, but it was the 60's! More importantly there was no Wesley or Riker!
Parent
Re:indeed (Score:5, Funny)
More importantly there was no Wesley or Riker!
What was wrong with Riker? It's not like he ever lost the Enterprise to the Ferengi [wikipedia.org], made out with a little boy [wikipedia.org], got kidnapped [wikipedia.org], accused of murder [wikipedia.org], or lost the Enterprise to an obsolete Klingon rust bucket [wikipedia.org]. Oh, never mind ;)
You'd think from increased insurance premiums alone Picard would have had ample reason to find a new Number One ;)
Parent
Re:indeed (Score:5, Funny)
You'd think from increased insurance premiums alone Picard would have had ample reason to find a new Number One
As opposed to Jean-Luc "I surrender" Picard? He may have had the British accent, but you could tell he was French by how quickly he was willing to surrender. To anyone.
To paraphrase the late Tasha Yar, "He surrenders at the drop of a hat. Any hat."
Off the top of my head, there was his surrender to Q.
He tried to surrender to the Ferengi in The Last Outpost.
In The Outragous Okona, he ordered the shields dropped "In case we decide to surrender to them."
and in A Matter of Honor, he surrendered to Riker (who had taken over a Klingon ship.)
Seen on Ebay : "2nd hand Phaser inscribed "JPL". Never fired. Only dropped once."
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Be your own boss. Problem solved.
Re:When did CBS get the rights? (Score:4, Informative)
The rights to ST:TOS originally belonged to Desilu Productions, which was bought by Paramount. Paramunt was later bought by Viacom, which also owned CBS. Viacom spun off CBS into "CBS Corporation", which maintained their TV library. They would later become "CBS Paramount Television".
Just because it was shown on NBC doesn't mean they have the rights to it...
Parent
Re:When did CBS get the rights? (Score:4, Informative)
It's an honest mistake for one so young...
You see, way back when, there were studios and there were broadcast networks. Broadcast networks weren't allowed to own studios. So they would buy the rights to air the program (and they would have some say over content and the like), but the studio owned the program. So when a network cancelled a program, the studio would make the money on syndication and, later, on DVD sales. The studios would make more money on syndication and DVD sales than they made from the networks for the original airings.
So, back then, all NBC did was show Star Trek on their network. Desilu (and later, Paramount) owned the actual rights to the show.
Of course, they got rid of that rule about networks owning studios (which is how the Fox network, etc. came about). Studios bought up networks (Disney bought ABC, NBC is part of Universal, and CBS is part of Viacom, which includes Paramount). This works nicely for the studios because they are no longer dependent on some outside source to make shows popular--they control everything.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)