Maybe if networks like MTV and Comedy Central put out more then 1 or 2
interesting shows instead of some of the crap they are trying to pass
off as TV more people would be interested in watching them on
television instead of posting and viewing their good clips online. If
the big network execs
That is always an accurate point to make. But its besides the point.
And You better believe EVERY content company will be entering the net with
VOD services.
Whether it be on Joost or one of the other upcoming VideoOnDemand services
that wil be unleashed this year.
TV is coming to the net.
I don't follow your logic. You say that if they put out more good shows,
we would watch them on TV instead of viewing their good clips online.
If we're already getting the good stuff online, by this logic, wouldn't
making a good show just mean it would end up being posted and viewed
online?
--
If the viewers are there, the networks will come. There are still very,
very large questions regarding how advertising is going to work. This will
require them to make huge changes in their ad sales staffs, etc. Until
then, litigation appears to be their answer - we all know that story, aka
the
I think the point of what he said was that if a channel was better than just
a few shows, you might care a bit less about wanting video on demand. but
since TV in general sucks and for the most part the traditional programming
model is still in full effect... people turn to where they CAN get
well the viewers are already here... on the net.
so the content would be coming to the viewers just as much or more so than
the viewers coming to the content...
i think channels on the net will eventually work like channels on TV.
the idea of one BIG site like a youtube to contain all content
Sports are helping keep big cable/sat companies afloat I think. If it
weren't for DirecTV's awesome sports packages like Sunday Ticket and the
NCAA College Hoops package, TV would be completely irrelevant for me. I'm
on Blockbuster's movie thing (great), and I can watch all the [adult swim] I
Well personaly I don't think all traditional TV sucks but I do
agree the model is changing. I got a DVR just over a month ago and I
has transformed how I watch TV. I rarely watch a show when it is
scheduled, I watch when I want, how I want and in glorious HDyes
there are some shows that
The sports packages are more of a problem than a help. IMO, they are
some of the prime reasons for the rate hikes that are going on, that
and all these exclusive contracts which limit YOUR choice and force
you to pay out the nose. I love sports as much as the next guy but
what is happening is
That and the fact that when you deploy citizen entertainment in your life,
you actually get to hang out with your celebrity heroes in person.
Why would I not want that kind of excitement in my life?
I don't want to hang out with those capable of attracting millions, either.
Those that attract a
The turn on, tune in, and put your feet on the ottoman model of
television marketing has been in decline since the invention of the first
remote control. Network loyalty has repeatedly been shown to be a
function largely of limiting viewer choice. The final nail in the coffin
of such a model
I wouldn't be so sure. As a lacrosse fan, the best way for me to see the
games I want is via the Internet.
--
Rhett.
http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
I don't see sports moving to the net anytime soon though, because of the
sheer amount of live production work it takes to make a successful
Well Viacom have said:
There is no question that YouTube and Google are continuing to take
the fruit of our efforts without permission and destroying enormous
value in the process.
This is value that rightfully belongs to the writers, directors and
talent who create it and companies like Viacom
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well Viacom have said:
There is no question that YouTube and Google are continuing to take
the fruit of our efforts without permission and destroying enormous
value in the process.
This is value that rightfully
That's not entirely true, YT itself is not uploading the clips, the
users are. Now I understand it's a fine line and I am not defending
the practice of copyrighted clips on YT. But they do remove clips once
they have been notified, that is a fact. Now does it stop people from
uploading
Well yes, using the comparison to video services that re-show vloggers
stuff without honouring the license, youtube would be comparable to a
site where the users submitted peoples rss feeds, as opposed to the
site themselves deliberately going out and selecting content to put on
their site without
First of all, remember the name.. YOUTUBE. remember the tagline...
BROADCAST YOURSELF.
Thats what their focus was supposed to be on. The User Generated Content.
But they realized, or maybe knew all along, that a more lucrative goal would
be to become TV for the net.
And as the inevitable
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First of all, remember the name.. YOUTUBE. remember the tagline...
BROADCAST YOURSELF.
Thats what their focus was supposed to be on. The User Generated
Content.
Absolutely.
But they realized, or maybe knew all along,
As far as I know no site, none can completly stop pirated content
from being uploaded
And again I am not defending the practice of allowing such content.
I personaly think a BILLION dollars is streching it a bit. And I
respectfuly disagree and think this could have an impact on all
This is only going to make a pack of lawyers very happy. Viacom has
the legal right to protect their property.
They have now chosen to do so. This can't be disputed or parsed into
anything but what it is - they own the content and want to harvest the
profits from said product.
I think it is a
I'm not sure how many times I can say this but I am not defending the
uploading of copyrighted worksThe way the current law reads, the
DMCA (and yes the law sucks but for right now it's still the law) the
way the law reads is if they take down the material once they are
notified they are
Just as an aside I was not trying to be flip or dismiss the legit
claim or frustration for YT making a ton of money off of people's
legit content, but they did just announce a program to start paying
content creaters did they not?
Heath
http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com
--- In
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure how many times I can say this but I am not defending the
uploading of copyrighted worksThe way the current law reads, the
DMCA (and yes the law sucks but for right now it's still the law) the
way the law
23 matches
Mail list logo
