Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Google Movies Youtube News Technology

Google Strikes Deal With Paramount 105

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the you-have-bad-taste-in-film dept.
redletterdave writes about more movies being made available on Youtube's rental service. From the article: "Google announced a new deal with Paramount Pictures on Tuesday, which will make more than 500 movie titles available for rental on YouTube and the new Google Play platform. The deal was made even though Google is still embroiled in a four-year-old legal battle over copyrights with Paramount's parent company, Viacom. The latest deal means Google has rental deals with five of the six major Hollywood studios, including Paramount, Warner Bros., Disney, Universal Pictures, and Sony Pictures. The lone exception is 20th Century Fox, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. Google will only make these titles available for rent; the search giant has not yet made a decision to sell any movies it licenses, despite pressure from major Hollywood studios looking to compensate for poor DVD sales."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Strikes Deal With Paramount

Comments Filter:
  • by crazyjj (2598719) * on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @11:06AM (#39572549)

    I can watch *way* more movies and TV shows than that with no hassle on my Xbox and they don't expire or require some annoying separate login, weird PC-only DRM scheme, or any other annoyances. I just pay my $8 a month, click "Netflix" on my Xbox menu, and watch whatever I like.

    Keep it simple, make it easy--then we'll talk.

    • Except netflix keep loosing content, and getting farther behind.

      • by jedidiah (1196)

        Farther behind doesn't matter so much if you never bothered to pay attention to release dates to begin with. Netflix is great at fostering that kind of attitude and they have been doing well at it for over 10 years now.

        The only content they are "loosing" is perhaps the streaming stuff.

        The disk service is still going strong despite a number of factions that want to ignore it.

        Yields better features and quality while not subject to network bandwidth issues, caps, or throttling.

        • by mcgrew (92797) *

          Since Netflix streams require Microsoft, I won't even rent the damned disks -- just out of annoyance that I have to have MS to stream. If I want a DVD there's a Family Video half a mile away and movies are a buck or two, and there's no way I'd rent five in a month.

      • We all know the netflix model is definitely not what the movie industry wants, but so far it is the only viable alternative to piracy I've seen. People will pay because it's easier and legal. If there is one simple truth about humans it's that they are lazy above all other things, including "morality" if you want to call it that. So they can make it watching their movies in a way they disprove of as illegal as they want, but people are always going to chose the easier route. For most people netflix is easie
    • by firex726 (1188453) <firex726@yahRASPoo.com minus berry> on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @11:09AM (#39572607)

      Yea, I was looking at some online rentals and they were like $5 each.

      Fuck that, that price is more then Blockbuster ever was, and I would only be able to watch it once and had to do it within 24 hours.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Google Play rentals on new releases are typically $2-$4 dollars. Blockbuster rentals on new releases have been more than $5 for over a decade. I will fully agree with you that the 24 hour window can be kind of annoying and pointless. If you were going to somehow rip/pirate the rental, the restriction is meaningless since it won't take 24 hours to do so. If you pass out during a movie and are busy the next night, you're just fucked.

      • by jedidiah (1196)

        > Yea, I was looking at some online rentals and they were like $5 each.

        How much you wanna bet that you can already BUY some of those Paramount movies for $5? Never mind renting...

        Best Buy bargain BD bin anyone?

        • by mcgrew (92797) *

          Indeed you can. I just bought the first 6 STOS movies for $40, that's six and a half bucks each. Paramount Studios. WalMart has all kinds of movies (good ones, too) for five bucks, including Paramount releases.

          This must be for people with more dollars than sense, who are too lazy to go to the $1 Redbox kiosk.

          • by tepples (727027)

            This must be for people with more dollars than sense, who are too lazy to go to the $1 Redbox kiosk.

            That or the $1 Redbox kiosk is really $2 because the city buses don't run on Sundays.

    • I can watch *way* more movies and TV shows than that with no hassle on my Xbox and they don't expire

      I beg to differ. Netflix's contracts with particular studios have ended in the past, forcing Netflix to pull movies from availability.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by phantomfive (622387)
      More options is better.
    • by morari (1080535)

      Except that in this case your Xbox is the DRM. Furthermore, you're paying for Xbox Live on top of your standard Netflix fee for some reason. I wouldn't be so proud about letting Microsoft double-dip on me like that.

    • by krept (697623)
      I have to login to Netflix on my PS3, IPhone, Wii... Also I'm not sure when Silverlight or whatever was first introduced on Netflix streaming it wasn't a PC only service.
      • by crazyjj (2598719) *

        I have to login to Netflix on my PS3, IPhone, Wii

        I don't on the Xbox. I just click the Netflix button, it takes a few seconds to connect, and there is my queue (I supposed it's logging in transparently in the background, but I never see it). I think when I first set it up, I had to get a number and login to my account to tell Netflix that my Xbox was an allowed streaming device. But now it's a one-click operation. Can't get any simpler than that. I've even taken it with me on trips and used it in hotels and at friends houses, with no hassle.

    • by Pax681 (1002592)
      just pay $8 a month.. on top of your xbox live subscription you mean?
      • by crazyjj (2598719) *

        I was already paying for that anyway. But substitute "PS3" for "Xbox" if it makes you feel superior. The point is that it's reasonably-priced, simple, and easy.

        • by Pax681 (1002592)

          I was already paying for that anyway. But substitute "PS3" for "Xbox" if it makes you feel superior. The point is that it's reasonably-priced, simple, and easy.

          you presume much.. i don't do consoles

          • by tepples (727027)

            you presume much.. i don't do consoles

            Again, substitute "home theater PC" for "Xbox" if it makes you feel superior.

            • by Pax681 (1002592)

              you presume much.. i don't do consoles

              Again, substitute "home theater PC" for "Xbox" if it makes you feel superior.

              again, presumption.
              i don't own any console.... i do not have a nerflix subscription, or a hulu subscription, i dont watch movies my pc.
              i watch movies on an actual home theater system regardless of my means of acquiring the movie in question. .. i know.. shocking.. does that make me old fashioned.....??

  • by Anonymous Coward

    From the announcement:

    to people in the U.S. and Canada

    I know this is par for the course with this sort of agreement, but really? Are they under the impression nobody else might want this service?

    Yeah I know the usual arguments, not actually interested in consumers, issues of control, etc. It still irritates me though.

    • Google and Paramount are both headquartered in the United States. If you live in (for example) France and want to watch French film, look for a French streaming provider that licenses from French studios.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @11:23AM (#39572745)

        Google and Paramount are both headquartered in the United States. If you live in (for example) France and want to watch French film, look for a French streaming provider that licenses from French studios.

        Supporting local industry is a nice point, but having reflected on my earlier whinge I guess that's not really what I was getting at. It irritates me that these are the international companies who complain incessantly that people are illegally downloading their products without giving a large chunk of the alleged culprits the legitimate alternative. They spend huge amounts of money advertising it and building hype and then won't give us all of the available options for watching it. They've pushed European nations into enacting pretty tough anti-piracy laws and then made deals that won't allow us to use the legitimate supply lines. Your point would be great if Paramount didn't advertise in France, but they do.

        • by afidel (530433)
          The biggest problem is that Paramount US might not own the distribution rights to every Paramount film in France (or Germany, or the UK, etc), those rights might be held by a third party that is not a party to the negotiation. It's a pretty messy industry from a legal perspective so I can understand why they might not get deals done in other markets quite as quickly as for the US.
    • by Yvan256 (722131)

      Par for the course? Absolutely not. I'm actually shocked to see that, for once, someone out there included Canada in the deals.

      I still haven't read anything about the OS/hardware requirements, however.

  • Poor DVD sales? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by sureshot007 (1406703) on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @11:15AM (#39572673)
    "...despite pressure from major Hollywood studios looking to compensate for poor DVD sales"

    How about making movies that are actually worth buying? Instead of just remaking, or worse, re-releasing movies for a blatant money grab.
    • hollywood remake a movie? never http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWMhADqlPYg [youtube.com]
      • You picked a bad example. That will probably be a good remake and given that it's aim appears to be to follow the book closer then arguably it's not a straight remake either.
    • Re:Poor DVD sales? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TheRaven64 (641858) on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @11:38AM (#39572935) Journal
      How about making the DVDs available in a timely fashion? I don't buy many DVDs anymore, but I rent a lot. I often have to wait 6-12 months between a film being in the cinemas or a TV show airing in the USA and it being available to rent. On the other hand, if I wanted to pirate, films are usually available within a few days of cinema release and TV shows within a few hours. If you say 'you can get our product illegally now, or legally in 6-12 months' then you shouldn't be surprised when a lot of people opt for now. Especially when you spend a huge advertising budget on telling them that they want to see it right now...
      • by RyoShin (610051)

        Releasing DVDs soon after the theatrical release would also be a small boon to theaters. If the DVD were released two-three weeks after the theatrical release, the theaters would likely be still showing it and could put out displays for the DVD copies; if someone liked a movie, they're (probably) far more likely to purchase it immediately after seeing it than after having days/weeks to digest and perhaps lose interest. Supposedly theaters are hurting for cash, necessitating the $5 20oz drink, so even a sm

        • I proposed something similar a few years ago: Offer a small discount (say, 50% of the ticket price) on the DVD in exchange for your cinema ticket on the way out. I wouldn't be surprised if at least 10% of cinema goers would impulse purchase the DVD. Ideally, you wouldn't delay the DVD launch at all: as soon as the first person walked out of the cinema after the first showing, they'd be able to buy the DVD. I'd have thought that the people who go to the first showing of a movie are the most likely set to
      • by Rolgar (556636)

        Lets say there are 3 types of movie watchers

        People who love the theater, and will go even if the DVD is available on the day of the premier.
        People who hate the theater or theater prices, and will not go to the theater even if they have to wait six months.
        People who would watch at home if available, but will go to the theater instead of waiting.

        About this third group of people, some of them will go to the theater, and then buy the DVD. If the DVD is available on release day, or the following Tuesday, more of

        • by Nethead (1563)

          Type 4: Those that don't watch TV and ad-block the Internet and don't have a clue about what new movies there are. Maybe once every two months re-watch a classic (Space Balls!)

    • Even then I wouldn't touch a DVD/Blue-Ray.

      I remember VHS, I adopted DVD for videos. I grew up with my parents' records and 8-Tracks, I'm a child a cassettes, and I remember my first CD. I drove my grandparents insane wanting to use my CD player in their corvette. It involved a CD-player to cassette adapter, placed in an cassette to 8-track adapter. I can't remember if I ever got it to work or not, but I remember repeatedly attempting it.

      I'm better off just getting digital copies in my opinion. At least

  • by Microlith (54737) on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @11:30AM (#39572845)

    Quickly, everyone! Let us adopt the latest in DRM'd technology so that we may more quickly route our money to overpriced, overcompressed rentals of movies from companies who will then turn that money around and lobby Congress for even more oppressive laws!

  • redletterdave writes about more movies being made available on
    Youtube's rental service. [youtube.com]

    Am I the only one who read that as,

    redletterdave writes about more movies being made available on
    Youtube's rectal service. [youtube.com]

  • i know the kiddies who work at google love the geeky spend life around your computer/smart phone crowd but for most of us we watch this stuff on this huge screen called a TV with other people of blood relation to us.

    amazon just released instant video on the PS3 and the x-box will probably be here by the end of the year. why should i even think about google for this?

    • by hal2814 (725639)
      Look for the jack on the back of your TV labelled VGA. If your TV was made within the last decade or so, it probably has one. That plus a computer made some time in the 21st century is usually enough to get video on a big screen pretty painlessly. My uncle is pretty much a luddite but he managed to set such a system up by himself once Glen Beck left FoxNews and was only available online.
      • by alen (225700)

        yes, i have nothing better to do than hook up a computer to the TV and let my wife suffer even more with an overkill tool for the job. and why would i want to buy a separate computer to hook up to the TV? why would i move my laptop all the time?

        blu ray players, apple tv/roku and game consoles are much better suited for this because for most people their life does not revolve around the computer

        • by jedidiah (1196)

          This all comes down to whether or not you're willing to eat dirt or not. If you are then by all means stick with an inferior canned solution. Just don't try to pretend it is superior when it is not.

          Building an HTPC may be a bother WHEN YOU FIRST SET IT UP. Beyond that, it is superior in every respect to every appliance you've mentioned. While "bothersome", you are in total control of it. That includes enforcing a level of consistency you won't find with a hodgepodge of consumer devices.

          Once built, an HTPC i

        • by hal2814 (725639)
          BluRay player, Apple TV, Roku, game consoles? I hate to break it to you but those are computers. My interface is a little clunkier but in exchange for that I get a little more flexibility in what I can run.

          Besides, if your wife is suffering "even more" with a PC then that means she's suffering to watch shows to begin with. If your family is suffering just to watch TV then it sounds like you're the one whose lives revolve around the computer. If I ever feel "suffering" while just trying to watch a show
        • blu ray players, apple tv/roku and game consoles are much better suited for this because for most people their life does not revolve around the computer

          BluRay players, settop boxes, and game consoles are computers. Don't lose sight of that. They are computers that you don't have much control over, though. The acceptability of that trade-off is up to you.

          I have a BluRay player with Netflix built in that I watch some stuff on, but I also watch a lot of stuff on my old laptop hooked to my TV via a cheap VGA

  • Only available to people in the U.S. and Canada.
    Nuff said.

  • Too late for me (Score:5, Insightful)

    by future assassin (639396) on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @11:43AM (#39572997) Homepage

    I just pirate all I can. Yes I don't fucking care anymore especially with the media companies trying hard to turn Canada into some lock down DRM utopia. I have aprox 500 dvd's of which half were bought new and rest at pawn shops. I have no intention of giving the studios any money until they stop trying to take away my ownership right off an item and stop trying to get politicians to pass insane laws.

    Also HOW MANY FUCKING MOVIES must be remade from 20 year ago?

    Support your local Pawn Shop and Pirate!

    • Re:Too late for me (Score:4, Interesting)

      by RyoShin (610051) <tukaro.gmail@com> on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @02:43PM (#39575849) Homepage Journal

      I just pirate all I can. [...] I have no intention of giving the studios any money until they stop trying to take away my ownership right

      So how about just not watching the movie? I can completely side with you on not supporting the media companies. They're an unscrupulous and greedy lot. But then you go and download the movie anyway. True, you're not depriving anyone of anything, and I'm not chastising you for pirating; but, when you do that, you completely lose any credence in what appears to be a boycott/protest. Plus, someone out there tracks torrent hits, and that goes to show some sort of interest/consumption on some manager's desk, even if it's not monetary.

      It's like saying you are going to protest/boycott the Mars company and then steal a Snickers bar or ask a friend to buy a Snicker's bar for you. Again, it's not about the method of obtaining something, it's about the hypocrisy at hand. You may want to ask yourself just why you do these things, and just how useful your position vs. actions are.

      To me, it seems like a weird reverse of the NIMBY crowd--they want cheap, local, 'safe' energy, but not when it takes up their roof or makes noise when it spins or has an extremely low risk of radiation spilling out.

      • Well its not that easy. First there really isn't any good entertainment content on YouTube unless you're 13 years old and get a laugh out of retards.Gimme some good Sci Fi like http://www.pioneerone.tv/ [pioneerone.tv] (Which I donated twice to) and I'll watch I started my boycott by not going to the movie's and I haven't been to one movie since before Iron Man 2. I just couldn't spend $40-50 between me an my son to watch some shitty movie which I might as well buy a big screen tv and just buy the DVD's at pawnshops.

        I did

        • Why not just boycott movies and spend your money at the local (live) theater? It's 3-D, interactive, surround-sound, and you can often talk to the actors after the show (and sometimes watch a repeat performance with a different take on the characters being played).

          I started my movie theater boycott over a decade ago, and haven't missed THAT experience at all. I'll admit I do watch the odd netflix movie to keep myself culturally relevant, but live acting/performance is where it's really at. Gets you out o

      • by Mikachu (972457)
        I'm not sure this is a fair statement to make. By pirating media you are boycotting the media companies; by not partaking in that media at all, you are boycotting both the media companies and the artists who perform the work. This is not to suggest that you are not hurting the artists by doing either; in both cases, lower revenue will hurt artists as much as the production companies (both directly and indirectly). But a boycott is a concept, and in that sense, the act of pirating media (for the media pirate
      • by humanrev (2606607)

        So how about just not watching the movie?

        I used to try that approach. I didn't want to support the bastards by buying any of their stuff, but at the same time I didn't want pirate as this would give them further ammunition to be even more draconian and relentless. So I just invested in alternative media - legitimately free stuff and purchased stuff direct from the artist(s). Keep in mind I actually LIKE a lot of the stuff that exists from the big studios. Sure they make a lot of crap but they also are respo

  • Paramount legal department: There is infringing content on youtube and they even have the gall to charge for it! Pirates! Shut them down NOW! They should just know what is infringing and what isn't!
  • by Anonymous Coward

    The agent of a Hollywood scriptwriter calls his client. "Morty" he says, "I've got good news and bad news. Which do you want to hear first?"

    "Gimme the good news" replies Morty.

    "Well the good news is Paramount loves your script, absolutely ate it up!" says the agent.

    "That's exciting" says Morty, "so what's the bad news?"

    To which the agent replies "Paramount is my dog."

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I can watch NetFlix on my rooted Android Phone and tablet but not Google video. I would gladly pay to rent movies but the idiots don't want my money. This is stupid in that it drives me to less legitimate sources for my content.

  • Too expensive (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hawguy (1600213) on Wednesday April 04, 2012 @01:07PM (#39574255)

    I'm not going to pay $4 - $5 to rent a movie from Google for 48 hours when for $12/month I can have 2 DVD's at a time from Netflix. Their turnaround time is so fast that I can easily get 8 movies in a month. And if I wanted to be less ethical, I could rip them to a hard drive to watch at my leisure. Netflix thought they could coerce me to move entirely to streaming, but their streaming catalog seems to keep getting smaller, so I stlil rely on DVDs.

    If movie rentals were $1 - $2 then I might consider it, but why can Redbox rent me a physical disk for less than the studios want for a digital download?

    • by hemo_jr (1122113)
      As a MAFIAA member, it is is pretty much a given that Paramount is a short-sighted all-the-market-will-bear robber baron type of company. They have their unregulated monopolies and will stick it to the consumer until the customer dies from loss of blood.

      The Hollywood tradition is to screw both the artist and the consumer and the MAFIAA has had a century to perfect their craft.
    • by Hillgiant (916436)

      why can Redbox rent me a physical disk for less than the studios want for a digital download?

      THIS

    • why can Redbox rent me a physical disk for less than the studios want for a digital download?

      because they've got it in their head that they can't possibly trust a third party not to screw with the numbers so they charge a large upfront licensing fee. if all the studios were smart, they'd create a unified rental interface that lets them control their own content directly. of course they'd lose before they began, as they would still try to charge $5/rental or $20+ for ownership, i mean unlimited viewing license, which you could never resell/lend/etc. i'm not sure why they are so stupid, but this if t

  • Let's just hope that Google has not sold their souls to the great MAFIAA Satan, and that they haven't compromised their stand on Internet freedom to make this deal. I, for one, will be keeping my eyes open for the tell tale (or more obvious, in your face) signs that they are compromised.
  • hilarious to see them complain "despite pressure from major Hollywood studios looking to compensate for poor DVD sales.", but still refuse to adapt their business model to a reasonable online distribution. $5 for a streaming movie? That is just bad business.
  • ...Paramount retaliates by enforcing a lockout.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    The reason I'm not subscribed to Netflix is that they want me tu use a backdored OS known as Windows so they can control it and enforce completelly redundant DRM (hint, pirates have no problem aquiring sources). If this doesn't require DRM and is usable form Linux I'm ready for it.

  • if the prices aren't going to be anywhere near the old video days ($1.99-2.99/1-2days for new releases and $0.99/5days for old stuff), why bother? only a retard would rent a movie for $5, unless perhaps, it was within a month of theatrical release.

HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!

Working...