by Mike Masnick
Tue, Apr 29th 2008 6:42am
The NY Times has an article talking about how the various TV producers are finally embracing the idea of offering up TV shows online, noting that Warner Brothers is now opening the vault and adding a bunch of old shows that can be streamed directly online. This isn't all that surprising. However, what's odd is that the article includes a few complaints about the cost of doing this compared to the revenue, with NBC Universal boss Jeff Zucker complaining "there are streaming costs so you have to make sure you’re covering that." Of course, that brings me back to a discussion some folks had around here over four years ago -- when we started wondering why television companies didn't just use BitTorrent to distribute their shows. If you combined RSS and BitTorrent (which was briefly referred to as "Broadcatching" by Ernest Miller) television companies could make it very easy for people to watch their shows. With RSS, they would "subscribe" to the shows, so as soon as a new one came out, subscribers would definitely see it. It would increase loyalty and remind people to watch their favorite shows. And by using BitTorrent, it would take the bandwidth cost away from the television companies. Unfortunately, the entertainment industry is still too scared of BitTorrent to realize how it can be embraced. So they complain about bandwidth costs for absolutely no reason.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- 100 Million Pennies For Your Thoughts? DEA Hands MuckRock A $1.4 Million Estimate For Responsive Documents
- Yes, Major Record Labels Are Keeping Nearly All The Money They Get From Spotify, Rather Than Giving It To Artists
- YouTube's Offer To Musicians Isn't As Bad As Some Believe, But YouTube Should Still Change Its Policies
- Comcast Says Its Sudden Love Of The Poor Is Just Altruistic 'Serendipity,' In No Way Tied To Wanting Merger Approval
- Comcast, NBC Have Learned Little, Still Cling Tightly To Broken 'TV Everywhere' Mindset