YouTube Co-founder Calls For Global Access To TV Online 140
An anonymous reader writes "YouTube co-founder Chad Hurley says internet users should be able to legitimately watch content from anywhere in the world at any time. He says the days of national TV networks controlling the global online rights to shows has to end. 'I think the business models are breaking down and the companies that are going to win in this new world are the ones that make it as easy as possible for the consumers to consume the content wherever and whenever they want.' Hurley also says YouTube will be bidding for more online live sports."
I'm glad they will show live sports online. (Score:5, Insightful)
That is the only reason I pick up cable part of the year anymore.....American College Football.
Finally, I will be able to drop cable entirely.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like another good reason for Cable.
Fortunately for me I only need cable for Sept-mid January. Then I get to turn it off for the rest of the year.
Re: (Score:1)
Honestly the same could be said of most television broadcasts throughout the past 80 years. The general rule is that if you're worth something to society then you've got better things to do than watch television. Same applies to commenting on news stories. /worthless
Re: (Score:1)
not sure what you are meaning about tv broadcasts from the past 80 years? clarification.
commenting on news stories is worthless? how so?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Seems a rather broad brushstroke, but I guess everyone can have a comment and an opinion. Even someone commenting on a comment about a news tidbit.
Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Information wants to ENSLAVE - TV That Watches YOU (Score:3)
Samsung TV has Android in it http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/01/technology/security/tv-hack/index.html?iid=HP_River [cnn.com]
Combine the natural outcome of these stories... Look at the Xbox One debacle. It ain't pretty...
Information shouldn't be free (Score:2, Interesting)
Free information is the death of all culture. It leads to the homogenization of society. It is why people are complaining about the stagnation of the arts since about 1995, when the internet started to become widespread. You ever notice how people's sense of style now is the same as back in 1993? Compare this to the massive stylistic shifts between 1953 to 1963 to 1973 to 1983 to 1993. Each decade was vastly different from the decade before.
This cultural & artistic stagnation is because information
Re:Information shouldn't be free (Score:4, Interesting)
Why shouldn't someone in rural Nebraska or Korea have the same right to an obscure band as someone who lives in NYC with access to record shops stocking obscure content? "Giving privilege to none?" Gimme a break.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Information shouldn't be free (Score:4, Interesting)
So if you live in Hyder, Alaska you're only expected to listen to Twangy's Good Ol' Boys (specializing in CCR cover tunes?
well if you're a goo 'ol hipster then yes.
on the other hand internet allows you to listen to twangys even if you're a finnish dolt - or new c64 remixes. the variety is through the roof in reality.. there's more sub cultures than ever, but no "new" mainstream fads. this makes it of course harder to be against mainstream and that annoys the hell out of some assholes.
you know what pop music used to be in Finland in 60's? fucking translated pop songs - seriously, a way to make a finnish hit: just take the italian/american/british song, copy it and change lyrics to stupid finnish lyrics.
ever heard a version of bowie's space man that has lyrics like "why doesn't my girl-prince* come already?" *yes, prince, not princess. fucking confusing.
Re: (Score:2)
The Finnish version of "Starman" sounds like it's unintentionally hilarious. Could "girl-prince" be a reference to the old stereotype of girls being princesses that wait idly for a prince/knight whisk them away to a charmed life, while the boy/prince proves his worth via exciting adventures?
Re: (Score:2)
What's stagnating art is the notion that people need to always be around people, slowly losing their identity in favor of the group identity. Then again most of the great artist weren't exactly the kind you see being another individual in the crowd: they had their ideas, they explored them, they didn't exactly follow societies rules and ideas.
This video [ted.com] is quite interesting in presenting the point I'm trying to express. And I'm positive there is a field in psychology dealing exactly with how individuals be
Re: (Score:2)
I'm positive there is a field in psychology dealing exactly with how individuals behave in a crowd, how they follow the crowd, and how the take on the identify of the crowd.
There is -- it's part of the field of social psychology [wikipedia.org] and sometimes its sibling sociology.
If you're interested in the topic, I highly recommend taking a college course -- even if you're not in college, both are commonly taught at community colleges, often at night so adults & high school students can attend.
Re:Information shouldn't be free (Score:4, Interesting)
If you want everyone in the world to be the same and destroy all cultures, then, sure, go ahead and make information free.
you say that like that's a bad thing.
It won't make everybody the same but it might help bring home the realisation we are pretty similar in many respects. I don't think it'll be worldwide main stream tv which will achieve that, more the efforts of ordinary or maybe extraordinary people. talking across cultures.
I don't know what happened to slashdot polls but it would be interesting to see how many countries our friends are from. I suspect there will not be many people on this website who doesn't have friendships outside of their own nationality.
If we want to do away with some of the lousy things we do to our own species then we first must break through the barriers of our nations borders.
Re: (Score:3)
Fascinating. It's interesting to see how /. users are willing to preach the "competition is good, let the market sort it out" mantra when it comes to economy, but turn around and cry foul if the same rules are applied to their pet interests. Especially if they're not mass market material.
Re: (Score:2)
Life should be unfair. It is better that way.
Absolutely. And artists must starve, else where will they acquire the angst needed to create art?
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely. And artists must starve, else where will they acquire the angst needed to create art?
Reading Slashdot comments?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bla bla bla 'Like omaigaaaawd this is so FAAAAIR'
Re: (Score:2)
Free information is the death of all culture.
That's an interesting way to put it, but there's some truth in the statement. Essentially, many struggles we're involved in right now, from ISOC v ITU to Manning/Snowden v Secrecy, from Apple v Samsung to SOPA/PIPA v The World... all of these derive from the impact of sharing, a thing that many aspects of our respective cultures protect us against. The mere presence of the internet implies that, by giving them away, we do in fact lose our differences. And that is the very essence of subversion.
Re: (Score:3)
[strong Aussie accent] That's bullshit, mate. [/accent]
The corporate mindset is built around profiting from disparity, and that applies to information too. Copyright is pervasive and imposed upon us by default, and Art is mostly built on the efforts and influences of those who came before, and just as subject to hoarding, fencing and chilling effects as any other endeavour. Cultural and artistic stagnation? You'll find it where corpora
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So instead of having 3 or 4 American conglomerates controlling the media you have just 1. Google.
Or if you are britsh just the BBC anyway.
Remember when we all liked Apple and they were the good guys helping to stop DRM and MS with its predatory pricing? Man, those times have changed once Steve got some real power. Why do you think Google will be any different.
They may even be more evil as having crappy expensive oligopoly that we have today.
Re: (Score:1)
The bbc dosnt have aabsolute power over british tv we have commercial free to air ITV, channel 4, channel 5 and many other broadcasters if you buy a digital freeview box (free to view no subscription after the inital pruchase of the box which isnt tied to any broadcaster).
Oh and of coure the ubiquitious fox/sky channel commercial susbcription channel
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
at least in football, when local sports are blacked out it is because they didn't sell out the stadium and want you to drive there to watch the game. Of course they blackout everything in a 80 mile circle of the stadium.
other than that I agree completely. current TV coverage sucks, is generally useless and is far harder to find good bits.
though I won't be greedy and can start small. let me have ala carte cable channels. then you will quickly see just how fast things change.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember when we all liked Apple and they were the good guys helping to stop DRM and MS with its predatory pricing?
Umm, Apple has always been about premium pricing, and they've always been about proprietary computers. The Apple lovefest on Slashdot was a short-lived, hipster fad.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd prefer to have a ton of companies, competing for the market. But if they let Google get away (again) with being the first one and establishing a turf before they even bother noticing that it might be worthwhile to discuss the possibility of maybe entering the market, yes, what you fear will be the result.
Google is not "more evil" than other companies. Google just acts and creates facts where self-absorbed managers of other companies are still busy hiring consultants to cover their asses with "studies" t
If they want to do this (Score:1, Troll)
Copyright must be thrown into the dumpster. There is no other way around it. The right to distribute and share belongs to everybody.
Evidence plz (Score:2)
Jobs had to pull music industry into the Web (Score:3)
Steve Jobs 'single-handedly' created the digital music market [telegraph.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know who I think did? Shawn Fanning, John Fanning, and Sean Parker.
Re: (Score:1)
Thats cute ... you know I was sharing MP3s before Shawn made it out of grade school. You kids are cute, napster wasn't the start bud, it was the end of free music sharing.
Any true warez rat knows popularity is the antithesis of doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
He created the digital music market, as in, he was the first person who managed to persuade people to pay for music in significant numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
yes thats right 20 whole gb.
Hehe. And you actually think that was small.
Re: (Score:2)
I paid extra to get a 40Mb HDA put in my first Mac in 1990. The first computers I used had no HDAs and you used 400k floppy disks for most stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd give the credit to Napster. Everyone else was just figuring out how to monetize it. Without Napster the idea that people would want a huge digital-only collection of music wouldn't have existed.
When it suits them... (Score:1)
He says the days of national TV networks controlling the global online rights to shows has to end.
And YouTube aka Google would like to replace this model with their own multinational/global monopol/business model because their "new world" would benefit them the most as the current status quo is unsatisfactory for there shareholders. In fact Google, like most multinational business, would like to remove all regional regulations and redtape as it hurts there bottom line. Ultimately it would be better for Google if we would all just watch the same program on the same channel in the same language at the sam
Re: (Score:2)
IP multicast (Score:2)
You realise the Internet is not a broadcast medium, right?
Whose fault is it that IP multicast over the public Internet remains unimplemented?
Re: (Score:2)
Whose fault is it that IP multicast over the public Internet remains unimplemented?
Huh? Even my small UK ISP supports multicast, on all its services ( ADSL up through Ethernet and who-knows-what-else ).
I just have to set the mode to PIM-SM and enter the rendezous IPv4 address.
Just Business (Score:1)
This is purely about business, not about some noble stand to make the internet more free. Google benefits from having more video content available to everyone, and if they were able to license/play basically every sort of video content available on the internet then they could dominate video/monetize YouTube more effectively.
And Another Thing... (Score:2)
...what he is really calling for is for government to pass laws that enable him to achieve his goal. So... coerce others to work with him.
While it is a laudable goal, it will only come to fruition when he or someone else makes a convincing financial argument for it to the producers of the content.
Copyright is already coercion (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
No, its asking to replace the incumbent middleman with a new middleman, otherwise its the same.
Not all middlemen are equal (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright enables the creators of content to enjoy the fruits of their labor. Just because they labored long ago doesn't mean it isn't the result of their efforts.
If you built a house, do you think someone whould be able to move in 20 years later just because it was twenty years ago you built it?
If they are being assholes with their copyright, don't watch/listen/read and they will go broke.
Pretty fucking simple.
Then Muzak and its competitors are coercion (Score:2)
Copyright enables the creators of content to enjoy the fruits of their labor.
Then why does copyright continue for 70 years after "the creators of content" have ceased to exist?
If you built a house, do you think someone whould be able to move in 20 years later just because it was twenty years ago you built it?
Someone who moves in 20 years later wouldn't have to pay the original builders again and certainly wouldn't have to pay a recurring royalty to the original builders.
If they are being assholes with their copyright, don't watch/listen/read
That's difficult if all grocery stores in the area have licensed the a-holes' music to play over the speaker system.
Re: (Score:2)
How to get ESPN without HGTV? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sorry. (Score:4, Insightful)
Correction: It's not available on your platform. The Pirate Bay has everything.
Re: (Score:2)
If the NSA would just open up their computers, then information would finally be truly free.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, the wrong kind of information.
Re: (Score:2)
I get this all the time, but I can't complain. I believe in copyright. If a Taiwanese television station sells online rebroadcast rights to a website based in Shanghai with the restriction that only computers with IP addresses in the PRC can watch, that is its right. These same websites show "The Big Bang Theory" to the Chinese, but I can't watch it either.
P.S. In fact, I can't watch TBBT on CBS.com here in the US since my internet provider is Time Warner. 8=)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
[Content in this reply belongs to Universal Inc, Disney, and Dice Holdings Inc, one or more of whom have blocked it on copyright grounds.]
Cultural Imperialism and Nativist Reaction (Score:3)
He says the days of national TV networks controlling the global online rights to shows has to end.
Historically. this gives the big budget Hollywood production dominance in all markets. It is why New Zealand becomes a standing stage set and nothing more. It is why governments impose domestic content requirements on theaters, broadcasters, and so on.
---- and why Disney is intent on calming the waters by green-lighting a multi-cultural Pacific Rim anime Big Hero 6 [cartoonbrew.com]
Offline viewing (Score:4, Insightful)
users should be able to legitimately watch content from anywhere in the world at any time
Does "anywhere" include on a city bus? What I'd like to be officially able to do is queue up some 1- to 10-minute videos to watch, download them (possibly using encryption) while connected to the Internet, disconnect, and watch them. Even if offline viewing were restricted to 360p, that'd still be better than having to pay hundreds of USD per year for cellular Internet for my Nexus 7 tablet.
Re:Offline living (Score:2)
is queue up some 1- to 10-minute videos to watch
Or you could use the time constructively. Maybe consider some of your higher goals, what you *really* want to do, take the time to observe the world around you, maybe even dream a little. It's not necessary to fill every waking moment with entertainment.
Or you could even read a book
End of netbooks (Score:2)
Or you could use the time constructively.
That's what I currently do. But my Dell Inspiron mini 1012 laptop will eventually break. With affordable 10" laptops having reached end of manufacturing at the end of last year [slashdot.org], doing constructive work on a device that fits on a crowded bus has become far more expensive.
Re: (Score:3)
The ignorant slashdot troll telling someone else how to use their time constructively, cute.
Perhaps that commute is the one time of day he fills with entertainment, and the rest of the time he is doing great things?
What if the commute is his only time to unwind and he's trying to fill it in with 10 minutes of something he couldn't otherwise fit into his schedule?
Your comment is insanely short sighted. You're in such a hurry to knock him, you completely ignore the possibility that he may do exactly what you
Re: (Score:2)
Paid offline viewing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Android YouTube app somewhat supports that. It can download videos it thinks you might be interested in (watch later list, recommendations, subscriptions etc.) while on wifi and then play them back later. You still need to be online for the first second to start playback, but it doesn't eat up your data allowance.
Most buses in the UK seem to have free wifi anyway now.
Carrier charges $2 for the first second (Score:2)
You still need to be online for the first second
I see how that would help people who already subscribe to cellular Internet for some other reason, but it doesn't appear to help the use case I described. In the United States, where YouTube and Slashdot are headquartered, some pay-as-you-go cellular Internet providers work on a "pay only on the days you use it" basis: $2 for the first second and $0 for the rest of the day.
Most buses in the UK seem to have free wifi anyway now.
It would cost even more to move to the UK than to get Internet on the bus in the US.
Two reasons why this hasn't happened yet (Score:4, Informative)
And both of them are horseshit.
1) The entrenched interests have invested too much in existing legacy infrastructure to let this happen. Sure, they've already seen the returns hundreds or thousands of times over, but if they can wring it out longer, they will. It will take the majority of consumers demanding IP-based TV for this to change.
2) Internet connectivity is mostly shit in North America. Either it's high bandwidth with a deprecating cap, or shitty bandwidth with no cap. Until telcos are reined in by regulation, forcing them to build out the fiber infrastructure for which billions in tax dollars were earmarked and quit this rent-seeking business model, we aren't going to have the sort of connectivity we need for universal IPTV. And let's not forget how a number of ISPs muddy the waters by running their own streaming services; again, due to piss-poor regulation.
high quality content v. Youtube (Score:3)
What Chad means is that he envisions a world where people only watch shitty Youtube videos all day, and Google gets a cut from showing an obligatory advert at the start.
Quality programming is difficult to make, and distributing it efficiently (as opposed to the "fuck you and build a bigger pipe!" unicast method of distribution Youtube uses) is also a challenge. Showing crap worldwide when all you have to do is to build a streaming server, adorn it with sponsorship, and take advantage of having been early to the party... well, that's a job for the geniuses at Google to have their brainpower wasted on.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, it works for XM radio, and they just broadcast the sound!
Thing is.... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Sadly ... (Score:2)
Would love local Pittsburgh coverage (Score:3)
All I want is to watch Steelers games, but the only legal recourse is to buy DirecTV THEN buy Sunday Ticket which will run you $1200/year. All that for teh 10 or so games that won't be nationally televised.
Re: (Score:2)
I hear you. The only way I can watch Columbus Blue Jackets hockey legally would be to buy cable and get Fox Sports Ohio. There is a way to watch out-of-market NHL games on various devices, but no way to watch in-market games short of routing it all through a VPN or breaking down and getting cable.
I guess the difference with you is that you don't live in the Pittsburgh metro area. It's still a problem for sports/teams that are not usually nationally broadcast. Be happy that your Steelers are good enough
In person (Score:2)
Hurley should create his own content (Score:1)
Hurley is free today, without hindrance, to create content that is wildly popular and distribute it worldwide without regards to the typical regional licensing model employed by Hollywood. Go for it, Chad. Be the change you want to see in others.
Already Done (Score:2)
that's a surprise (Score:2)
A guy whose business model is based on streaming unlimited access to free content declares that his competitors are dead. Shocking.
YouTube's credibility is thin (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
For the same reason you are paying taxes in general I guess, a form of altruism that keeps things civilized.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok then, would you be so kind sir as to altruistically pay a small stipend on the proceeds generated from the luxury item tea, so that our good king to be can have a new jacuzzi and polo field?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you can always go ahead and toss your TV into the Mersey.
Re: (Score:1)
In the hope that the US people might accidentally watch it instead of Fox News.
Re: (Score:1)
So why should UK citizens pay £145/year just so other people around the world can watch the BBC for free?
All BBC has to do is stick some ads in its stream to help pay for the rest of us. Brits could watch the streams ad-free. I know ads will drive some Slashdotters absolutely apoplecticly apeshit bananas, but I'd watch some ads if it meant I could watch BBC content.
BBC Worldwide (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Argentina's Canal Encuentro (Ministry of Education) is (or at least it was, when I watched it a couple years ago) just EXCELLENT. It even completely replaced Discovery for me. No silly explosions and car tuning on Encuentro. Just some very decent documentaries on a lot of subjects. Then I realized over half of their programming is BBC. I envy the british, who get that kind of programming over the air.
If the brits leave the country for a bit, and watch what's available everywhere else, I assure you they'd gl
Re: (Score:1)
I'd consider paying for it but, sadly, it's not an option for those outside the U.K.
Re: (Score:2)
Why shouldn't people elsewhere in the world be able to pay the same £145/year to watch the BBC? I'm sure many people would pay, and it would bring more money into the country.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck on finding some of those sports covered fully live on the BBC. Only half the F1 races in a season are shown live on the BBC any more (the half they don't show, they have highlights of qualifying and the race hours later). "Soccer" matches (aka Premier League) aren't shown live at all on the BBC - they have highlights shown in the evening (MOTD/MOTD 2 shows). There's only limited rugby on the BBC as well.
The BBC are weak on most sports, though they do cover world championships for swimming, athleti
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You classmate's half-sister is blowing sailors in the alley and you probably are too.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree about normal entertainment, but not the "you can't watch this Olympics stream in your country" stuff.
One of the reasons I stopped with Hulu was because they went from one 15s commercial every 10 minutes to 6 30 second commercial blocks all the time, just as if it were broadcast TV.
Well, I can go watch it on my tivo thanks, and skip all that crap.
If YouTube goes past one skippable 30s commercial, or one 15s non-skippable, I'm outta there, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't sell yourself short, merca, you make some good tv that we like too.
But yeah, if some of you were to take turns punching the Kardashians in the face, then we probably would be greatly amused.