Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sony Pictures in Talks With YouTube

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the slowly-coaxing-execs-into-the-future dept.

Media 84

CNet is reporting that Sony Pictures may be in talks with YouTube to license full length movies to the video sharing site. Set to post nearly a half a billion dollars in losses this year, YouTube could certainly use some juice to combat sites like NBC-owned Hulu which already has an array of movies for streaming. "Details about what a final agreement could look like are sparse, but any partnership between the two powerhouses would likely benefit both. Representatives from both companies declined to comment. Word of the negotiations comes a week after Disney announced it had licensed short-form content to YouTube. Those clips will come from a range of Disney brands, including ABC and ESPN. For YouTube, obtaining short-form clips from Disney is an important step but still doesn't provide what YouTube needs most."

cancel ×

84 comments

Doubtlessly, the pickings therein... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482269)

...will make the most mediocre offerings on Netflix instant viewing seem absolutely stellar by comparison.

YouTube nearly bankrupt? (4, Interesting)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482291)

>>>Set to post nearly a half a billion dollars in losses this year

Youtube is the most-popular video site. It should be making hand-over-fist in dollars. How can this be?

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (4, Insightful)

Karganeth (1017580) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482393)

Maybe it's because nobody purchases anything from YouTube.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1, Insightful)

Feminist-Mom (816033) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483405)

Yes, but what is the cost of running it that can cause it to lose a half a billion dollars in one year?

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (4, Informative)

Cassius Corodes (1084513) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483475)

Prolly the bandwidth. From the universal repository of knowledge that is wikipedia "n March 2008, YouTube's bandwidth costs were estimated at approximately US$1 million a day".

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (4, Interesting)

Feminist-Mom (816033) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483767)

That makes sense. Added to the cost of the zillion employees they have to comb the thing for video that need to be taken down, or at least to write the software. And the constant legal issues. Throw in just the machines, and now I see that is reasonable as a loss, esp. that they don't sell anything. On the other hand everyone I know generally uses it as a first choice. Maybe in a few years it will make money. Remember the (good?) old days when Amazon didn't show a profit for years?

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

ChangelingJane (1042436) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483839)

It wouldn't surprise me if they find a way to monetize it before it runs the risk of tanking. Although some of that might be dependent on how many companies are willing to work with them and adjust their business models.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

Mozk (844858) | more than 5 years ago | (#27492563)

Monetization doesn't mean what you think it means.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

ChangelingJane (1042436) | more than 5 years ago | (#27494033)

That depends on who you ask.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

eleuthero (812560) | more than 5 years ago | (#27496035)

or maybe it does...

Monetize 1. To convert into money. 2. To convert from securities into currency that can be used to purchase goods and services.
Investopedia Commentary
For example, you'll often hear Internet marketers talk about "monetizing website visitors." This is another way of saying that the marketers are trying to figure out a way of making money from website visitors, such as through advertising, e-commerce, etc.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

TheSambassador (1134253) | more than 5 years ago | (#27484903)

I could be wrong... but I don't think that Youtube pays people to look for copyrighted works. The people who do that are the big companies that make the works (like Sony). They send a takedown notice to Youtube, Youtube removes the video.

That's like saying that you should have to pay somebody to constantly watch your car so that when people write chapters of Harry Potter in the dirt on it they can wash it off. They don't control what users put up.

I know... awful car analogy.

I've purchased all kinds of things on YouTube. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27483467)

They have my IP address. I'm just waiting for the bill.

Round'n'Round.
Love will find a way just give it time.
  -Anonymous lurking attorney.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (4, Insightful)

Albanach (527650) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482397)

Youtube is the most-popular video site. It should be making hand-over-fist in dollars. How can this be?

It's because youtube typically has no adverts on user submitted videos. If google made money off of copyright material they'd be looking at big lawsuits. So they typically only have advertising on licensed content. They need more deals like the one suggested to deliver more advertising revenue.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (5, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482427)

Youtube is the most-popular video site. It should be making hand-over-fist in dollars. How can this be?

Being most-popular is not an advantage when no one has figured out how to profit from it. Most-popular means highest costs in bandwidth, servers, etc.

Ad spend is shrinking globally. How exactly is YouTube going to make money when everyone and their dog uses their servers and bandwidth for free?

Reminds me of the dotcom boom... sure, we're losing money on every transaction, but we'll make up for it in volume.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

ChangelingJane (1042436) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483859)

Here's hoping they're putting more thought into the problem than that.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

megaditto (982598) | more than 5 years ago | (#27484267)

How exactly is YouTube going to make money when everyone and their dog uses their servers and bandwidth for free?

Well, the users are already paying to their ISPs for their bandwidth. Couldn't Youtube demand a cut of that, or at least get "free" bandwidth for better quality service to the provider's customers?

If the ISPs don't cooperate, Youtube could always downgrade the videos or display adds like "Your XX ISP doesn't want to play ball which might mean more costs to you. May we recommend this YY provider in your area?"

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

TheP4st (1164315) | more than 5 years ago | (#27486347)

So, those of us who barely ever use Youtube should subsidize Rickrolling.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (2, Interesting)

skarphace (812333) | more than 5 years ago | (#27490693)

Well, the users are already paying to their ISPs for their bandwidth. Couldn't Youtube demand a cut of that, or at least get "free" bandwidth for better quality service to the provider's customers?

If the ISPs don't cooperate, Youtube could always downgrade the videos or display adds like "Your XX ISP doesn't want to play ball which might mean more costs to you. May we recommend this YY provider in your area?"

So it's cool if you break net neutrality rules if it's in Google's favor? Sheesh...

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

moniker127 (1290002) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482435)

Bandwidth, electricity, server maintenance- with their massive size I can be that being immense. They only have adds on a few different pages. I really hope google does not decide to drop them at some point.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482533)

Though, I wonder how Vimeo does then? They only allow 1 HD video / week nowadays and "just" 500 MB / week or something such, but anyway, has always had much higher quality than youtube.

Guess they may have much less people just browsing from video to video though.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

corsec67 (627446) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482857)

For Vimeo, if you pay you can upload more HD movies, so that is one possible source of revenue.

I do like Vimeo a lot more than YouTube.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482967)

Still the free things kicks youtubes butt, they even let people download the original video!

Vimeo is strict (2, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483455)

Vimeo's guidelines [vimeo.com] are even stricter than YouTube's. You can't upload public domain videos, and you can't upload videos on behalf of an author who is someone else. You can't upload videos to promote your business. You can't upload videos of video games at all because you aren't the game's author.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

skeeto (1138903) | more than 5 years ago | (#27491177)

they even let people download the original video

youtube-dl [bitbucket.org] - you can grab the HD videos too.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27494355)

Except, like, you know, any such solutions will only save the re-encoded flash video and not the original video.

Yeah, you can save the flash file.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

skeeto (1138903) | more than 5 years ago | (#27494941)

I guess you missed the HD part of my comment. What I have seen so far is that the HD version will be an MP4 containing a Quicktime stream. It's not flash video junk.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27495077)

I saw the HD part but assumed it was still flash.

Though flash video can still contain content of decent quality, such as H.264 + AAC or something such (use &fmt=18.)

May still have been re-encoded though, Vimeo let you download true original, not just a decent format.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482455)

YouTube makes virtually nothing in advertising and have extraordinarly high bandwidth cost. Short videos, like the majority of the ones on YouTube, are difficult to monetize. People won't wait through a 30 second video ad, so the best you can do is overlays and advertising outside the video.

For full length quality content, like that featured on Hulu people will have the patience to wait through 4-5 15 second ads over the length of a 45 minute TV show. Hulu is also able to snatch up traffic from people that used to pirate the same shows they watch on Hulu. Most people would much rather directly stream a fairly high quality video, than wait 3 hours for some pixelated piece of crap rared into 50 different password protected files.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (2, Informative)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482617)

Hulu's quality pales in comparison to that of a decent encode you could:

Make yourself
Download from the intertubes.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482669)

False.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482749)

why mod above AC flamebait? he/she/it is absolutely correct...

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (2, Informative)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#27487439)

Most people would much rather directly stream a fairly high quality video, than wait 3 hours for some pixelated piece of crap rared into 50 different password protected files.

I don't know where you've been pirating, but the worst case is 50 different non-protected rar files. Quality is generally very good, much better than Hulu. Additionally, I can play it wherever I want, without an Internet connection, without waiting through 15-30 seconds of ad at every seek, on any video player that can handle it -- which means my own keybindings, not Hulu's -- oh, and Flash sucks for video, compared to just about any standalone video player.

I stopped watching Naruto when it got picked up by Hulu -- and thus, Dattebayo stopped subbing it -- and thus, quality, both of the subs and of the encode, dropped massively. Additionally, in order to display the Hulu and Viz Network logos, the entire video was encoded at a 4:3 resolution with black bars. Thanks to being played through Flash, I couldn't do the usual mplayer trick to crop those out. That means there are ginormous black bars inside of ginormous black bars, making the video look tiny on my full HD monitor (widescreen, of course).

You've provided a good summary of Hulu's business model, but the simple truth is, piracy continues to provide better quality in just about every respect. The only advantage Hulu provides is that it streams out of the box on most systems -- no need to install a BitTorrent client, then PeerGuardian, then wait a half hour or so for whatever it is to download.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482591)

YouTube doesn't have to make money. Google puts ads on it (gratis) and collects advertising revenue directly. If YouTube collected advertising revenue and had to post (pay) it to its parent company, accounting would become complex and taxes may take effect twice (though this is an expense and shouldn't be taxed, usually). YouTube, as a separate company, does have to post a profit once in a while to be considered a business (legally) and enjoy the legal benefits of being a business (like cutting all expenses off your income, including depreciation).

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (2, Insightful)

CyberSlammer (1459173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482609)

Wow, let's see...considering just about every music artist has had their music video removed over the past year might have something to do with it. Not to mention TV show clips have disappeared, it's pretty much turned into who is the next numa numa or Star Wars kid.....lame.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (1)

FrankieBaby1986 (1035596) | more than 5 years ago | (#27484415)

Well, it IS name YOUtube. It's supposed to be user-created content.

Re:YouTube nearly bankrupt? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27485277)

>>>Set to post nearly a half a billion dollars in losses this year

Youtube is the most-popular video site. It should be making hand-over-fist in dollars. How can this be?

Same way 4chan is losing money.

See no evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482293)

Who said Sony was evil?

Re:See no evil (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482347)

They said it themselves with their repeated attempts to screw their customers

Re:See no evil (0)

feepness (543479) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482491)

Hating the entire company is like hating Obama because Bush was president for the last eight years.

Re:See no evil (3, Insightful)

MicktheMech (697533) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482597)

It would be more like hating the government in general. I believe they call themselves libertarians.

Re:See no evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27485073)

I don't need 8 years of Bush to hate Obama. He's given me enough in just 75 days to hate him for life.

Re:See no evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27485147)

sample size? do you hate bush the same way?

Re:See no evil (2, Insightful)

ScotlynHatt (764928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27487757)

Actually, it would be similar to hating Sony because they have repeatedly controlled media formats to death, installed malicious software secretly, and ignored the modern standards for many of their products. I mean c'mon, Bush, Obama, and Libertarian references!? Really?

Re:See no evil (1)

Bourbonium (454366) | more than 5 years ago | (#27490171)

If I had any mod points available, I'd flag you as off topic. You don't have to be a Libertarian to hate the government, but it helps.

Re:See no evil (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482601)

Right. Remember, caucasians are too damn tall.

liek stage 6 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482299)

stage6 all over again?
I welcome it!

Also rumored to be in talks with... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482389)

Also rumored to be in talks with Mr. Goatse [goatse.fr] , they are interested in a new series of his famous content, to fill youtube with.

Re:Also rumored to be in talks with... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482745)

I think he needs to be filled with the content more than they do

Like...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482401)

... but still doesn't provide what YouTube needs most.

Revenue? A business model?

I just had a look at Hulu (4, Insightful)

Mystery00 (1100379) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482415)

I just had a look at Hulu and got this:

We're sorry, currently our video library can only be streamed within the United States.

Google combating who? The only competition is torrent.

Re:I just had a look at Hulu (4, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482461)

Google combating who? The only competition is torrent.

Google combating the licensors of the content, who wish their distribution channels in non-US markets to remain free of easy, legal online competition. Pandora has the same issue with streaming audio.

Hulu competes with bt for content delivery, but is also competes with DVDs, VHS, movie theaters, etc. That last one is pretty important -- many movies are just hitting theaters overseas when DVDs or online distribution is released to the US market.

Re:I just had a look at Hulu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482555)

Hulu competes with bt for content delivery, but is also competes with DVDs, VHS, movie theaters, etc. That last one is pretty important -- many movies are just hitting theaters overseas when DVDs or online distribution is released to the US market.

Well there's your (their) problem.

People don't have any standards anymore ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482495)

Gee, why doesn't Sony Pictures create their own site and offer their movies for download ... preferably in h264+vorbis?
Am I the only one who hates watching stamp-sized movies in flash? Or even if it's like 720p, flash needs 100% CPU and doesn't even have vsync!
I can't for the life of me understand how people could watch movies on youtube.

Re:People don't have any standards anymore ... (2, Informative)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482667)

Yeah right.

It'd be in a .DLM wrapper (DownLoadMax) with the Super Downloaded Video codec for video and SDDS and ATRAC for the audio tracks.

Also, you'd need an SDVF (Super Downloaded Video File) player to play it. The logo would look neat but you'd never see it on any consumer device from anyone but Sony.

BluRay titles from Sony will feature a digital copy of the film in SDV format, but you will still have to download them to a super memory stick super. All you get is an authorization code. Some collector's editions may include the copy on a separate useless mini frisbee (umf) disc.

(Hint: I am referencing betamax, sdds, super audio cd, minidisc, umd, memory stick pro, and other sony abortions).

Re:People don't have any standards anymore ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27484215)

(Hint, Next time don't include hints to the punchline to a joke at the bottom of the page, if you want mod points from me. Unless the joke is over the top obvious. (Ex: Bush is a moronisaurus rex. (hint I mean bush is not so smart) that will get you mod points this one was just flat))

Re:People don't have any standards anymore ... (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#27490325)

Hint: This is slashdot.

Re:People don't have any standards anymore ... (2, Insightful)

feepness (543479) | more than 5 years ago | (#27484477)

I am referencing betamax, sdds, super audio cd, minidisc, umd, memory stick pro, and other sony abortions).

Yes, that'll definitely get you some mod points around these parts.

(Hint: I am referencing the fact that you are making hyperbolic statements to get attention.)

Re:People don't have any standards anymore ... (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#27487553)

I really can't imagine a more useless combination than h264/vorbis.

If you don't care about patents, h264 and aac+ should be fine. If you do, you'd probably want theora/vorbis, or dirac/vorbis.

And you're right, I hate Flash. Unfortunately, the alternative (if Sony did it) is much, much, worse.

YouTube isn't a Company (5, Insightful)

MrNonchalant (767683) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482511)

Let's be clear. YouTube isn't set to post anything, let alone a loss. Google as a whole will post huge profits again, albeit below last year, and that will be that.

Re:YouTube isn't a Company (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482899)

Whether or not Google publically posts P&L by division, analysts have pegged Youtube for a half a billion in losses in the current year.

And Youtube will post a profit or loss -- whether that is disclosed to the public is another matter (and most likely will not be disclosed), but you can bet your bottom dollar that Youtube will post a loss (or gain :) ) to Google's books.

don't do it, google (1)

alxkit (941262) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482565)

"would likely benefit both"

would it benefit the users though? or will this turn youtube into a paid service and EVERYONE will lose?

Re:don't do it, google (1)

psychodelicacy (1170611) | more than 5 years ago | (#27484803)

Only for certain values of "EVERYONE", surely? After all, the guys making the money aren't going to lose. More ads might start to help the situation, without really hampering the user experience. And an upgradable paid service (e.g. you can upload up to n videos with a free account; upgrade to a paid account for more) would bring in some revenue without completely shutting out any users. A lot of what's on YouTube is duplicated content - setting a limit on free uploads would surely streamline the service for users, too.

And the players line up.... (4, Interesting)

GPLDAN (732269) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482579)

Sony Playstation 3 firmware upgrade added the link-in to Youtube during the last upgrade. Anyone who DIDN'T see this coming was blind.

Sony and it's empire vs. Microsoft and Disney and ABC on the other. Paramount is on the Hulu/Xbox side, owning NBC which really started moving so much of its stuff to Hulu, all the SNL episodes and lots of its archive stuff.

This fight will expand to be a USA vs. the world thing. If I am over at Google/Youtube my strategy is to take licensing outside the states. Get international content exclusive to Youtube with the Playstation tie in. Get broadband deals done with the major providers in Europe. Isolate the Hulu guys to providing US content only.

Content is king, and it's like suddenly everyone realized the general public couldn't do it. There are only so many videos of your guild's Epic WoW raid or cats flushing toilets that will hold an ad revenue stream in place.

Sony can really break the Hulu grip if they eschew any embedded commercials in the video streams. Grab Fox Studios and maybe Lionsgate, get New Line Cinema and it's game over.

Should be interesting...

Re:And the players line up.... (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482611)

What? I didn't get any upgrade while i was playing Playstation 2...

Re:And the players line up.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482887)

Yeah, grab Fox Studios. Considering Hulu is a joint effort by NBC and Fox Entertainment Group (yes, they own Fox Studios) I doubt it will happen.

But I'm sure Lionsgate and New Line will both love your international focus instead of US. New Line Cinema especially considering it's parent, Time Warner, has no stake in the US market at all.

Your plan, has no holes whatsoever. Pure money making genius.

Re:And the players line up.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27483245)

Isolate the Hulu guys to providing US content only.

That's the whole thing, Hulu (and Google) doesn't own the content. They can only play it where they are licensed to.

Because Hulu is owned by NBC/Universal it may actually be easier for them to get international permission (at least for the NBC/U content).

ROOTKIT [sony.com] has its own site anyway: crackle.com
Not sure what they'd get out of a youtube partnership.

Anyway, anything having to do with distribution of content across national borders is a huge cluster-fuck thanks to decades of media cartel rule.
So it will be a royal pain for Youtube/Google to pry content from the MAFIAA's cold dead hands.

[flame-retardant-suit]Besides, outside the US/UK, how much good content is there?[/flame-retardant-suit]

Grab Fox Studios and maybe Lionsgate, get New Line Cinema and it's game over.

Fox already has TV [hulu.com] , TV Movies [hulu.com] and regular Movies [hulu.com] on Hulu.
As does Lionsgate [hulu.com] .
Plus plenty [hulu.com] others [hulu.com] .

Game over indeed.

Re:And the players line up.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27484483)

Hulu is owned by NBC/Universal and Fox. It is not NBC alone. Again, Hulu is a joint venture of NBC and Fox.

Re:And the players line up.... (1)

sootman (158191) | more than 5 years ago | (#27490059)

This fight will expand to be a USA vs. the world thing.

Cool. Maybe in 5 years those involved will make a videogame out of it. You can be a Sony exec with a briefcase full of rootkits, a Google exec with a "Don't Be Evil" shield, a YouTube coder who can disappear in the San Bruno fog and respawn safely at Tanforan... [wikipedia.org]

Vote of No Confidence (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482655)

Getting pretty sick of hearing these types of stories...Maybe the internet needs a bailout? I mean afterall, if a company posts losses, that must mean they're in trouble right? It can't possibly mean anything else like a shifting interest or more competition or declining quality offerings...it's always too big to fail.

I really hope youtube tanks but only after Sony buys it. Then I hope Radioshack buys Sony, then tanks and closes. Then Ruphert Murdoch will buy everyones trash, then he'll tank, then we'll be back to the way it was...when lemonade stands dominated the great plains and there were bowls of hard candy at every crosswalk.....zzzzZZ.

Sony Pictures + YouTube (1)

acb (2797) | more than 5 years ago | (#27482833)

So soon it will be possible to watch blocky, smeary versions of all the Spider-Man films in a web browser. Awesome!

What it REALLY needs (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27482891)

For YouTube, obtaining short-form clips from Disney is an important step but still doesn't provide what YouTube needs most.

Porn.

Re:What it REALLY needs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27483863)

there are other sites [4tube.com] already providing that service.

Signs (3, Funny)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483149)

Isn't Sony being consumer friendly one of the signs of the coming apocalypse? I don't know about you guys, but I'm going to start hoarding food and weapons.

Re:Signs (1)

petra13 (785564) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483983)

Perhaps they're not being consumer friendly... Since their CD rootkit scheme a couple years ago backfired they're branching out to find new and compelling ways to pwn consumers computers.
/conspiracy theory

Re:Signs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27484533)

Isn't Sony being consumer friendly one of the signs of the coming apocalypse? I don't know about you guys, but I'm going to start hoarding food and weapons.

I for one will be playing a lot more Fallout 3 as it is in my opinion the best post apocalyptic simulator out there in the market right now.

feature length YouTube movie? (1)

amiga500 (935789) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483283)

When I read the title, I thought Sony was approaching YouTube to create a full length movie. Putting Sony's content on YouTube makes a bit more sense than YouTube's content on Sony.

Re:feature length YouTube movie? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27484773)

When I read the title, I thought Sony was approaching YouTube to create a full length movie.
Putting Sony's content on YouTube makes a bit more sense than YouTube's content on Sony.

Seeing as how Disaster Movie [wikipedia.org] managed to turn a profit, putting YouTube's content on Sony would be a perfectly feasible business choice that would produce funnier results.

Re:feature length YouTube movie? (1)

psychodelicacy (1170611) | more than 5 years ago | (#27484843)

I dunno - I could watch the dramatic chipmunk [youtube.com] for hours without getting bored, which is more than can be said for Stuart Little...

Rootkit joke in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1... (1)

gapagos (1264716) | more than 5 years ago | (#27483657)

*sigh*

Life with Goo Ray (1)

heroine (1220) | more than 5 years ago | (#27484349)

It's going to be a 320x240 version of HD, with the word HD in a small button in the lower right. When you click it, it expands to 400x300, wow!

All the movies transferred to Goo Ray are going to be defocused, underexposed, shaken, & the audio muffled for the Goo Tube look you've come to expect.

Same rumor on the hulu side... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27484831)

... except that SPE is _already_ distributing stuff via Hulu. (i.e. crackle.com content)

More of this in the next two weeks (2, Interesting)

PhillC (84728) | more than 5 years ago | (#27486083)

I think we'll see a lot more announcements like this in the next 2 weeks - other Studios and TV Broadcasters putting long form content on YouTube, laden with advertising to generate revenue. The adverts will be pre-roll, mid-roll and possibly post-roll as well.

I also prophesise that YouTube/Google will not understand broadcast timecodes and will require everything in simple seconds, to two decimal places. Why do they need timecodes? To know where to insert the advertising of course. Will users be able to skip the advertising mid-roll? Not a chance. And what problems will timecodes in seconds, with two decimal places, create? I believe we'll see adverts inserted at the incorrect places as different frame rates between PAL, NTSC and film content are not taken into account, or ad breaks that are placed in content at obvious points like fades/transitions/mixes (whatever you'd like to call them) will be a few frames incorrect, so the transition will happen slightly before or after the ad break.

I also predict that YouTube won't really understand about TV resolution and will request everything at 640x480 frame size, rather than say 720x576 for PAL. I predict they may also have problems dealing with Full Height Anamorphic content, but of course that's just a hunch.

Don't ask me how I know, just looking into my crystal ball you understand.......

and crackle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27496703)

This has got to be a real kick in the nads for crackle.com (formerly grouper.com).

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...