Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Television

Hulu "Kicking Back Into Action" Says CEO, Adding New Content 169

Posted by samzenpus
from the back-to-life dept.
cagraham writes "While rival Netflix dominated the news this summer with original programming and content deals, the only news from Hulu was a July announcement that they might be sold off. Parent companies Disney, 21st Century Fox, and Comcast seem to have decided against that now, and acting CEO Andy Forssell says they're 'kicking back into action.' The main take is that they've signed an agreement with the BBC to add show like Sherlock, MI-5, and Doctor Who, although the deal isn't exclusive, and the shows are already on other streaming services."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hulu "Kicking Back Into Action" Says CEO, Adding New Content

Comments Filter:
  • As a US-only service (Score:5, Interesting)

    by msobkow (48369) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:01PM (#44889391) Homepage Journal

    Hulu can rot in hell.

    I am so tired of seeing "not supported in your region" messages from US companies.

    • by cheater512 (783349) <nick@nickstallman.net> on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:21PM (#44889501) Homepage

      Tip: thepiratebay.sx is one service which doesn't have those messages.
      Works well for me in Australia.

      • by sharklasers (3047537) on Thursday September 19, 2013 @02:25AM (#44891109)

        It's weird. I used to pirate a lot because of a lack of income - I was a kid but still wanted the movies/games. Later on I started things as I got older and had more disposable income - I wanted to support the creators and "do the right thing", morally as well as legally. But now I'm back to pirating things again not because it's free, but because of all the additional benefits it provides:

        (1) I can obtain movies/TV shows in a DRM-free, open(ish) cross-platform format that doesn't require a special, Windows-only player which requires authorization per viewing and lacks functionality compared to other video players of choice.
        (2) I can obtain an actual file, period. Something I can store on my own devices and not rely on streaming and Internet access to watch.
        (3) In terms of games, I don't have to deal with dodgy DRM schemes, or DRM at all. I can also pick and choose which patches to install once they're released by a scene (so I can use, for example, an older RAGE patch that doesn't lock out most console commands, whereas on Steam you can't downgrade updates once they occur).

        At this point in my life it's really, really hard to justify subscribing to these services and buying (or renting as the case generally is) content, because the actual product is generally worse in terms of user control and freedom than what you'd get from TPB.

        The only reason I'd stop now would be if there was a real, legitimate way to prove and punish with accuracy everyone who pirated, and it was all but guaranteed that if you pirated you'd get caught. If that were to eventuate, I'd definitely stop... but I wouldn't start buying things either, because there's no motivation to give people what they want apparently.

    • by oodaloop (1229816) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:37PM (#44889641)
      That's what you get for living in the outer rim territories.
      • Anyone who modded you troll should leave this site immediately!

        FFS, if you don't get that reference, hand in your geek/nerd badge!

    • by DNS-and-BIND (461968) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @09:04PM (#44889787) Homepage
      Shouldn't you be thankful that your pristine country is protected from Yankee cultural rot and contamination?
    • by Rude Turnip (49495) <valuation@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @09:06PM (#44889797)

      It's worse than you think. Even if you're in the US, you can't watch certain shows on certain devices, such as XBox 360 or Roku. Their management lives in this 20 year old fantasy land where I'm going to go sit at my desk and watch something in my web browser. It's an incredibly backwards-thinking company.

      • by symbolset (646467) *
        Look who owns it. That explains everything.
      • by geekoid (135745)

        Are you high or stupid? or maybe a troll?
        Hulu is supported on Roku:
        http://www.hulu.com/support/article/332610 [hulu.com]
        and Xbox:
        http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/partners/hulu-plus [xbox.com]

        or do you mean you don't like them becasue they cost money to bring entertainment to you?

        • by Tr3vin (1220548) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @11:02PM (#44890331)
          No, he means exactly what he says. While there are Hulu apps for Roku and the Xbox 360, not all of the content is available to stream to those devices. It comes down to licensing but it is still very annoying. http://www.hulu.com/support/article/20116158 [hulu.com]
          • They claim it is a licensing issue, but it is curious that a show will air 5 episodes streamable via any hulu supported device, then become "Web Only" when the have their audience. Another aspect is the fact that Hulu is owned by the licensors. Given their past claims about tethering Hulu to cable, it seems more likely that they are trying to prop up their aging business model by driving viewers to their "channels".

        • by Belial6 (794905)
          Try watching The Simpsons on Hulu's Xbox or Roku app.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by formfeed (703859)

        Even if you're in the US, you can't watch certain shows on certain devices, such as XBox 360 or Roku. Their management lives in this 20 year old fantasy land where I'm going to go sit at my desk and watch something in my web browser.

        No. It's exactly the other way around:
        They know that most people wouldn't want to watch it sitting at their desk on their PC. They know that most people would prefer to watch hulu on their streaming device / android stick / whatever while sitting on the couch.

        And that's exactly why the PC is free and anything that hooks up to a TV or media center costs money

        • I don't begrudge anyone for charging money, but since I was a paying customer, I insist on being able to watch everything in their library on a streaming device.

      • by Monoman (8745)

        I agree but I'm not sure it is Hulu that decides what you can watch content on, how long it will be available, etc. It is in Hulu's best interest to let you watch as much content as you what, when you want, and where you want. My guess is the "owners" of the content come up with wacky DRM scenarios for Hulu, Netflix, Amazon, and others to program around. These "owners" are just being greedy and looking for ways to charge more and/or stall while they try to figure out how to do streaming themselves.

        The on

        • i doubt any of them are licensed in a pay-per-viewing manner. netflix or hulu could fudge that numbers, if that were the case. the content creators could also spam-watch the stuff.
    • It's probably rooted in the fact that American commercials shown overseas won't produce any revenue. I despise Hulu because I pay monthly for service and still get commercials...and the interface sucks compared to NetFlix.
      • by egamma (572162) <egamma AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @09:58PM (#44890043)

        It's probably rooted in the fact that American commercials shown overseas won't produce any revenue. I despise Hulu because I pay monthly for service and still get commercials...and the interface sucks compared to NetFlix.

        Then do what I do--vote with my wallet, and stop paying for Hulu Plus, and stick with Netflix. So I'm a year or two behind--so what? I can watch years and years of a single show, and then do the same with another show. I never run out of stuff to watch and never see a commercial. Why bother with Hulu?

        • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

          I know nerds are not supposed to have friends, but I do and they watch stuff as soon as it is released and then want to chat about it at work. Aside from spoilers I couldn't join in if I was only watching stuff from a couple of years ago.

          • by SpzToid (869795)

            Yes, but we're talkin' about an $8 dollar a month (estimated international average cost) for a legal all-you-can-eat streaming entertainment service of quality with a pleasant GUI. What exactly is your complaint? You can't keep up with your friends, with regards to the popular culture? Have you tried paying more, as one would assume your friends have been doing?

    • If you're a Firefox user, give the Hola plugin a whirl ;-) Works for me.

    • I agree that they're evil. But have you tried using a proxy?
  • Shill service (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hguorbray (967940) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:06PM (#44889417)
    They were probably hoping that they could diminish netflix (esp comcast) since they would all prefer pay per (every) view or non ala-carte bundles rather than a 'watch whatever you want for a low flat fee'

    Netflix is one of the things that is helping keep the Media cartels at bay at this point and I am happy to have been a subscriber for the past 10 years or so and hope that Comcast/ATT get their comeuppance some day (but doubt it due to regulatory capture)

    -I'm just sayin'
    • by MrEricSir (398214)

      A pay per view/rental model could be a huge improvement. Just look at Amazon Instant -- they get content fast, there's a huge selection and you only pay for what you want to see. Makes a lot more sense than "unlimited" streaming of shows you don't care about.

      • Re:Shill service (Score:5, Interesting)

        by notanalien_justgreen (2596219) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @09:35PM (#44889921)

        At $2 an episode, tv watching adds up quickly. I (and almost everyone I know) vastly prefer netflix's model. Just look at the lack of success of historic pay-per-view channels. Yeah, people will occasionally pay for it, but generally it's something people do very rarely (like once every few years).

        Just last week I was sick with the flu for several days - so I loaded up the most recent seasons of Mad Men and Breaking Bad - binged on them while I was sick and couldn't really do anything else. There's no way in hell I would have done this with the pay-per-view model as I would have blown ~$20/day on it.

        • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

          $2/episode is a joke. Clearly they don't make that much from it being shown on TV or streamed via NetFlix, yet when you go to them directly and offer to pay money right into their pockets they suddenly think you will pay 20x as much.

        • by MrEricSir (398214)

          At $2 an episode, tv watching adds up quickly. I (and almost everyone I know) vastly prefer netflix's model.

          Try watching the last few episodes of Breaking Bad with the Netflix model. Oh right, you can't.

          Also the $2/episode thing is somewhat of a red herring here, with Amazon's model you can usually buy the entire season for a steep discount.

  • Fuck streaming (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:06PM (#44889419)

    Seriously.

    Why has nobody made a service that even comes close to piracy? 3 clicks. type one word. wait 10 minutes and i have a full movie i can watch on any device anytime i want. using any player i want. no connection needed after dl.

    Nobody has even tried to compete with that level of convenience. I'd pay a couple bucks an episode or $5 a movie for that fast and that easy to use.

    but nope. there is no legal way to do that.

    that's just fucking stupid. you'd rake in BILLIONS.

    • by Urza9814 (883915)

      Also integration with other devices and services. I have a custom built media center system. I stuff a magnet link into it and it downloads the movie, then it looks it up on IMDB and grabs all the details, then it dumps all of that into my library. Then I can select it from the library and it will turn on the projector and stereo and such before playing the movie, and turn them off when it's done.

      There is literally no paid service that I could do even half of that with. I'd pay for the media if I could use

    • Re:Fuck streaming (Score:4, Insightful)

      by camperdave (969942) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:24PM (#44889537) Journal

      Seriously.

      Why has nobody made a service that even comes close to piracy? 3 clicks. type one word. wait 10 minutes and i have a full movie i can watch on any device anytime i want.

      That only works for popular movies. I've had download times in days for some.

      • So you build a collection of things you might have an interest in. Start downloading them as you find them, so that they're ready once you have an opportunity and excuse to watch them. Heck you don't need terabytes of storage like some of those crazy media hoarders - just enough to keep you occupied during a sick day or when the wife is away for a few days.

        • by Zordak (123132)
          Your wife leaves for a few days, and the best thing you can think to do with that time is spend it all watching television? Dude, don't you have hobbies? You know that cool stuff you never get to do enough of because your wife thinks you should be paying attention to her? A few days ought to be enough to at least build a prototype of a cool robot.
          • Your wife leaves for a few days, and the best thing you can think to do with that time is spend it all watching television? Dude, don't you have hobbies? You know that cool stuff you never get to do enough of because your wife thinks you should be paying attention to her? A few days ought to be enough to at least build a prototype of a cool robot.

            Ooh, like that one on Robot Wars episode 20. Here, I think I have it on one of my hard drives somewhere. Let me cue it up on the big screen.

    • Amazon Instant Video, the iTunes Store, Vudu, and I'm sure others have allowed downloading of some or all of their titles in addition to streaming them for a number of years. None of them have always-on requirements for their downloaded titles, all of them are relatively easy to search, and between those three you have good coverage over a wide range of media and platforms (Android is the only notable platform that doesn't have download support from those three). Not to mention that some of them even offer

    • Why has nobody made a service that even comes close to piracy?

      Fucking stupid question IMO.

      The media cartels are all scared shitless. They can't see the forest for the trees because the upper management is still wondering "How do we get people to go to cinemas again?". Why? Because they're all frightened, ageing, greedy, foolish, incontenent, semi-literate control freaks.

      No point in shouting at the wind. Just keep pirating.

      • The media cartels are all scared shitless. They can't see the forest for the trees because the upper management is still wondering "How do we get people to go to cinemas again?". Why? Because they're all frightened, ageing, greedy, foolish, incontenent, semi-literate control freaks.

        They just haven't learned the lesson of "You can't be afraid to cannibalize your own products and services, because if you don't, somebody else will."

    • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

      You might pay a few $, but many would not and that is the biggest issue. A lot of P2P users are young and don't have a lot of disposable income, and even the older ones are used to getting most stuff for free quite legally via their TV. Okay, there are ads on TV, but you don't have to watch them, and most importantly no money leaves your wallet.

      A more realistic pricing model, say $0.10/episode, would make a lot of people honest. I really doubt that an episode shown on TV generates more money for the produce

  • by globaljustin (574257) <justinglobal@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:08PM (#44889423) Homepage Journal

    Hulu.com is doomed in its current incarnation.

    Exclusivity was the game 5 years ago, before Netflix sort of cornered the market w/ userbase & began its successful 'original programming' venture.

    Getting BBC 'content' that is already available on competitors, fee or not, is kind of sad, really.

    Maybe Dr. Who is a big 'get' (look IMHO its shit scifi, but i don't know what people like)...maybe it'll boost 'clicks' by 20%...that's just polishing the brass on the titanic

    the 'profit model' iceberg sunk Hulu.com a long time ago...we're just watching it play out now...

    **if** the copyright holders decided to just dump their content onto hulu exclusively for free...that would change things, but that's virtually impossible

    my prediction: hulu.com dies a slow sad death and gets bought by some Mark Cuban type for $1.2 Million in 5 years who uses it for MMA fights or something

    • >

      Maybe Dr. Who is a big 'get' (look IMHO its shit scifi, but i don't know what people like)...maybe it'll boost 'clicks' by 20%...that's just polishing the brass on the titanic

      Doctor who is great once you look at it as a fantasy series instead of as a scifi series, everything else you said I agree with.

      • by geekoid (135745)

        There is on difference between sci-and fantasy except setting. Yes, Dr. Who is Science Fiction.

        yeah yeah I know, you have some view of sci-fi yu are emotionally attached to and thus stopped any actually thinking about it a decade ago.

      • word yeah it's all IMHO...

        scifi has something for everyone

    • by frinsore (153020)

      I have hope for Hulu simply because it can fill a niche that is very under-served. Netflix provides a back catalog but rarely has current content. iTunes provides current content but at a premium. Amazon seems to be attempting to copy both Netflix and iTunes. If I want to watch current content without paying a few dollars my only options are Hulu, torrent sites, and broadcast TV/cable.

      • Netflix provides a back catalog but rarely has current content.

        yeah I do occasionally hit up hulu.com when Daily Show and Colbert new episodes don't update on Comedy Central fast enough...usually they post the new episodes just after 12pm Pacific but sometimes it doesn't cycle through till later

        Also, I'll choose hulu.com over some network's free airing (like when I watch New Girl) b/c Hulu.com's players is actually pretty smooth

        so I have *used* hulu.com but only as a sort of 'hack' to get better quality of

    • by whoever57 (658626)
      I have to wonder at the thinking of Hulu execs: there are programs available on Hulu if you are using a Desktop computer, but not if you use a Roku box. Why?
  • Service is meh... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pspahn (1175617) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:12PM (#44889447)

    For $6/mo you still have to watch ads, and the only real benefit you get is that you can watch a new episode of certain shows a couple days before the non-paying members.

    On top of that, when we watch using the Wii, the interface is quite clunky. I'm not sure if they're doing a similar thing as Netflix where they have all these dozens of wrappers for different devices, but I can only assume they are to some extent. I'm sure Hulu on other devices is equally painful (though, on a computer it's actually quite well-done).

    Netflix is just a way better value and it works better. I'm all for Hulu "stepping it up", but I'll believe it when I see it.

    • by fermion (181285)
      I dunno, does one have cable? Now if one watches sports then it is a good value. Every subscriber subsidizes the habit, but if we are just watching the stuff you get on Hulu, then we are being ripped off, totally.

      What is keeping Hulu back is the realization that such services are going to kill television, which has become dependent on the cable fees at least as much as the advertising. If things are going as they are, it is going to be very expensive to keep high profit ventures such as sports and fox n

    • by 0racle (667029)
      I don't see ads on hulu.

      HuluPlus on the PS3 is fine, on the TV I bought a few months ago it didn't work at all.

      Honestly, it works well enough for me and I don't have to wait for a torrent to download to see many popular things. Saves disk space that way too.
  • by seebs (15766) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:20PM (#44889489) Homepage

    Hulu's options:
    1. I watch shows which have ads.
    2. I pay them money, and they still show me ads.

    I am really not seeing the attraction of option #2.

    • by camperdave (969942) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:27PM (#44889565) Journal

      Hulu's options:
      1. I watch shows which have ads.
      2. I pay them money, and they still show me ads.

      I am really not seeing the attraction of option #2.

      They're better quality ads?

    • by geekoid (135745)

      Newer content.

      • by skiflyer (716312)

        The problem is the newer content is hit or miss. I paid for Hulu for a few months until I got sick of "this show isn't available yet unless your a member of a participating cable company", and "web only", and the straw that broke the camel's back for me "this episode expires in X days".

        I thought I got all new content, quickly, and the entire season.... but that's not true, it's highly qualified. Everything in hulu is content dependent and it's just not fun to keep track of it, so I stopped and replaced it w

    • It's worked for cable companies for years. What they haven't realized is that it's not working so well any longer, since Hulu was basically an attempt to bring that model to the Internet, without regard for the fact that people were turning to the Internet to get away from that model.

  • It's crazy to fault Hulu for having a free service. They're getting money from those 1 million Plus subscribers, AND the ads they're forced to watch. They're also getting money from ad viewing of many millions of others who are not paying, which Netflix/Amazon can't claim.

    IMHO, Hulu Plus is too expensive for what you get... the same price as Netflix, for less value. They could increase their subscriber count by just lowering the price to something reasonable. Or they could just do a better job monetizin

    • I have no interest in Hulu with ads, ever. I hate ads, i hate being programmed like that. Those days are gone for me. I dont even like having to fast forward through them on the DVR anymore. Just sick of the volume of ads in my life.
  • by dcollins (135727) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:22PM (#44889515) Homepage

    Hulu has been on a downward slide for a few years, no doubt. But I'll say that their two original series this summer, The Awesomes and Quick Draw, have been absolutely spectacular. The Awesomes is a lot of SNL people (Seth Meyers, etc.) with a love-letter spoof to animated superheroes. Quick Draw is improv Western-crime-procedure-comedy, and is the best TV show I've seen in years; I've been laughing at it after the fact all week. Try them out if you can. (I'm crossing my fingers for another season of Quick Draw, it's a real gem.)

  • by dmomo (256005) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @08:41PM (#44889673) Homepage

    When they first came out, I was impressed. They were streaming programs and trying honestly to generate revenue. Instead of cramming ads down my throat, they tried to show them in innovative ways, as a sort of compromise to the ad-weary consumer. They would show two cars and let me pick an ad to watch. They would ask if I wanted to view all commercials first so I could watch the show uninterrupted.

    And the commercials were short. I was optimistic about the way things were headed. I understand the need to make money. Hulu seemed to be sensitive to their audience.

    Then, Hulu Plus came along. They basically said.. "Some of that free content is no longer free. You have to pay for it now. But, you still have to watch commercials". With that, I ceased all interaction with Hulu. About a year later, I decided that paying for some streaming content would be worthwhile, if I could watch it on my terms. I now gladly give Netflix my money for that. So long as they don't charge me twice by also showing ads, I will stick with them.

    • I was actually shocked when I went to go watch Top Gear on Netflix last week and was not greeted with the musical intro I was expecting, but was instead met with a trailer for one of their original shows (Hemlock Grove). One I had already marked as Not Interested and which even their own recommendation engine thought I would only give two stars.

      I think it's happened only once before to me, so they're doing it sparingly, but they need to stop doing it, since it actually really annoyed me that a service that

      • by dmomo (256005)

        I've never seen that happen. Wow. If that's the case, they are probably testing certain people to see how it pans out. That doesn't bode well. Be vocal with them, if you can.

  • Doesn't get it (Score:4, Insightful)

    by EmperorOfCanada (1332175) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @09:06PM (#44889799)
    The bar has been set by piracy. If you want to be successful you must beat piracy. The key attributes of piracy are: Worldwide release, no commercials, no FBI WARNING screens, doesn't promote crap that people don't want to watch but you want them to see, doesn't charge too much, simple interfaces, doesn't upsell upsell upsell, doesn't try to extract continuous marketing information, doesn't use your product to try and support your 20th century business model, make it as easy for me to use your product (basically make it available on every conceivable device).

    Netflix basically matches or beats nearly every one of these attributes. Hulu does not.
  • by jnmontario (865369) on Wednesday September 18, 2013 @09:07PM (#44889801)
    When they first came out I wanted to support them, but I'm in Canada - geoblocked. Strike 1. A year or two later I finally got a VPN, stopped my satellite subscription, modded my ATV2 and started watching. Shortly thereafter most of the content creators pulled their content from Hulu to try and create their own empires. Most of the shows I WOULD watch got pulled and placed onto their crappy services. Strike 2. In this digital age I want to watch what I want, when I want, and I don't want the limitation of having to try to remember to squeeze in that episode of X before the show expires on Hulu. I missed the season finale of Grimm by 3-4 days because of this expiration model for the show. Strike 3. Netflix, you get my money. Hulu/NBC etc... you don't, and I still watch the stuff that could have been on your site making you revenue, but I do it through other sources.
    • Ok, I'm no CEO super villian who's only purpose is to make more money, but hear me out. If you obviously have the technology to determine which region someone is in, can't you... wait for it, serve them region local advertisements? Why tell people,"Sorry sorry, you can't help make us money."
      • by tepples (727027)

        If you obviously have the technology to determine which region someone is in, can't you... wait for it, serve them region local advertisements?

        For one thing, if not enough advertisers in a particular region have placed region-local advertisements, I don't see how a video provider can show region-local advertisers. For another, a lot of these video producers have decade-long exclusive contracts with regional distributors in other countries that predate Hulu.

  • Competition in this space is good... but since I already have a Netflix account and Amazon Prime, I really don't want to see anything decent signed exclusively to Hulu. I especially don't want to see the owners of Hulu (content producers) make it their exclusive provider. That's using one monopoly (copyright, a government granted monopoly) in one market to try to move into another market, and should be illegal.

    Plus, and I know this is hearsay, but just a few days ago someone on slashdot was complaining th

  • can I have my money back for that time?

  • I want to see them resurrect Hulu Desktop and update it on all platforms. Hulu supported Linux, so I think maybe some of the folks on here might want to cut them some slack. Unfortunately, the most recent builds crash when going into full screen on recent releases of Ubuntu.

  • I have to laugh at complaining about devices...

    "The Wii UI is clunky"
    "It doesn't work with the Roku"
    "It doesn't work with the XBox"

    Has it occurred to you that it's your choice of device that's wrong? You buy a device for the content it can display; you don't subscribe to a content service because of the devices which decide whether or not to support it. It's be trivial to fix the 3 above listed issues, BUT the people who should be fixing them are the device vendors, not the content sites. Aren't you the

  • Netflix is awesome but it doesn't carry current network content. Hulu does for the most part (with CBS being a big exception).

    I know most (all?) of this content is available online but I can't bring myself to go back to being tied to a schedule. The online content is often here today and gone tomorrow. Also, I really like all my content delivered by a box that's hooked directly to my TV.

    As for the BBC stuff... (yawn). I can see all of it on Netflix without the commercials. If this cost Hulu any $$ I thi
  • by Chas (5144) on Thursday September 19, 2013 @01:03AM (#44890915) Homepage Journal

    Sorry. But until Hulu can offer a subscription service WITHOUT ads, and that allows place-marking, I won't be supporting them.

    Netflix remembers where I am in a flick. So if I stop watching and come back to it later, it picks right up where I left off.

    Amazon Prime does the same thing.

    Hulu? I have to drag to the approximate spot. Then suffer through all the interstitial commercials. Even if I'm paying them money.

    People pay for convenience. And Hulu just isn't convenient.

    • by Red_Chaos1 (95148)

      This is my stance on it, and has been. I've heard the argument that paying allows them to show less commercials, but I don't buy it. I'm certain they make a profit before ad partnerships.

  • by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) on Thursday September 19, 2013 @08:06AM (#44892345)
    Hulu may work fine in Canada for all I know, but basically I wanted to respond to the bitching about it being a US only service. There is an actual reason for this and it has nothing to do with "America hates your country" or "America is stupid". Foreign rights to American TV shows bring in a lot of money and basically Hulu only works for US viewers because somebody may have bought the rights to the TV show in your country and the deal prevents Hulu from letting you watch it because doing so makes you less inclined to watch on TV, where the rights were paid for. Since the foreign rights buyers might argue next time they need to pay less because Hulu is cutting into their viewers, the only way to protect the revenue streams is to do a "US only" policy for Hulu. Additionally there is some chance that actors, writers, etc. might have to get cut in for additional money if too many new distribution methods are found, so it's just makes it easier on everybody in the US side to have those restrictions.

The flow chart is a most thoroughly oversold piece of program documentation. -- Frederick Brooks, "The Mythical Man Month"

Working...