VeriChip VeriEasy To Clone, Researchers Say

Kazaa And Skype Not Enough: Founders Now Looking At Online TV Distribution

from the so-they-say dept

Mon, Jul 24th 2006 4:07am — Mike Masnick

Apparently the billions of dollars Niklas Zennstrom and Janus Friis picked up when eBay overpaid for Skype isn't enough. Business Week reports that the two are working on a new project that has to do with video sharing for television programming. The two are supposedly still working at Skype. Zennstrom is just contributing money and advice, with Friis spending 20% of his time on the new effort -- which is supposedly trying to partner with just about every TV network they can talk to. Of course, it's worth remembering that the music industry would still like to put the two of these guys in jail for Kazaa -- which has kept them out of the US, despite the eBay buyout. They also face charges from rival Streamcast that Skype actually uses Kazaa code, which Zennstrom (so the lawsuit charges) promised Streamcast it could buy. In other words, despite the success of Skype, there may be some legal baggage associated with any new company they're involved in -- especially for those in the entertainment industry. Also, of course, the video streaming and distribution market is already incredibly crowded -- with players from YouTube to BitTorrent already having plenty of users and name recognition. While it's true that neither Kazaa nor Skype were first to market in their spaces, neither market was nearly as crowded as the online video market is already today.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

18 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Chris, 24 Jul 2006 @ 5:34am

WTF?
"with players from YouTube to BitTorrent already having plenty of users and name recognition."

WTF? Since when was BbitTorrent an online media player?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Az, 24 Jul 2006 @ 6:10am
  
  Re: WTF?
  Bittorrent is a media distribution network, and likely the largest way to get TV and Movie digitally as they come out.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Chris, 24 Jul 2006 @ 6:40am
    
    Re: Re: WTF?
    I wouldn't put it in the same leage as YouTube etc as isnt it slightly illegal?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Ben, 24 Jul 2006 @ 7:13am
      
      Re: Re: Re: WTF?
      Its only illegal if you use it to share copywriten files. There are plenty of files that are legal to share and much more efficent than a straight download from a website.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 6:45am
  
  Re: WTF?
  "WTF? Since when was BbitTorrent an online media player?"
  
  I'm pretty sure that he means "players" as in contenders, not actualy media players
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lay Person, 24 Jul 2006 @ 7:25am
  
  Re: WTF?
  You know...players like in a match or ball game...not literal players as in media players...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 6:12am

Where does it call BT an online media player, foo? It's important and very well known in tv distribution, like the man said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rajesh, 24 Jul 2006 @ 6:51am

No FW
BitTorrent is illegal? Hmm, no. Its a way to distribute large files and there's nothing illegal about that. And the company has deals with studios to distribute files (that are large) so the studios seemingly have no problem with BitTorrent technology. The only difference is probably that YouTube is centralized and BitTorrent is decentralized and the final destination of any media is a desktop rather than a Flash app on the web. Other than that, both are onliny media distribution mechanisms so the comparison is apt. As an aside, there's probably as much copyright violation happening with YouTube as on BitTorrent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lay Person, 24 Jul 2006 @ 7:38am

Studios are retards
I'm sick and tired of people blaming technology for companies losing money.

Clearly, the studios are losing money due to their dated business models and are attempting to stifle technology by means of lawsuits and the threats thereof.

It's like the police trying to stop the use and production of screwdrivers because they can be used to break open locks!

Wake up people! It's not the screwdrivers. The secret is that there are actual people out there designing, implementing, and maintaining illegal operations by means of the technology.

All that is needed is to arrest and punish these criminals by some sort of international consortium of law enforcement officials to actually get these criminals and start sending messages of accountability. Right now it's easier for the criminals to hide than to face the piper. Hence the problem.

Can you imagine a world without screwdrivers just because it was banned by lock manufacturers! It's insanity!

The studios cannot come up with a working model to embrace the technology so they fight it tooth-and-nail to overcome their own shortcomings. It's a losing, rediculous battle where everyone loses but the criminals.

Tell me...what's wrong with this picture?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wire Cramped, 24 Jul 2006 @ 7:51am

Lay Person
Your on the money bro! I agree I would hate to have to go underground to get the side of my computer case open with my illeagal screwdriver...

I think that the transport program attack is retarded in the fact that I can transport files with FTP and other programs including setting a VPN tunnel up and then doing a freaking windows copy. ANYWAY....

One solution make every file sharing app illeagal EXCEPT and unless they are registered programs like paypal. Make all users have to use a credit card for tracking not payments. So no payments and you can use it totally free forever but we have your registration info. Thus no underage players and overage players will have to have a credit card(thieves not withstanding) At least there would be some accountability. Oh and while I am at it force each program to record and report each file transfered to each IP.

This would detere many allthough I am sure if you make the better lock it isnt anything but the next fun thing to break for hackers. But hey at least this would be one try???

~ pitching in my 2 downloads.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael Locker MD, 24 Jul 2006 @ 7:55am

Skype
Interesting development.

Michael Locker MD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zachary Spencer, 24 Jul 2006 @ 7:56am

illegalizing P2p
Yes, because all we need is MORE legislation/monitoring of the internet. How bout someone comes out with a P2P application that does all that, and they pitch it to distribution centers as a "Cheap and effective media distribution platform" Sorta like iTunes, but on a P2P basis. Then when they provide a service that is superior from a users standpoint(Hey! We can get all movies, tv shows, songs, podcasts from this provider legally and cheaply!) THEN it will achieve market dominance
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jsnbase, 24 Jul 2006 @ 8:46am

Maybe contemplation of my own mortality....
...has softened me, but I can't seem to muster even the slightest bit of indignation over any of this. Who exactly am I supposed to be upset with or worried about? What are we getting at here? I see two guys who have some experience in media/communications software working on a new project in that vein.

So?

Maybe I'm supposed to focus on the idea that any company that does business with these guys is taking on risks that one wouldn't normally expect.

So?

What am I missing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lay Person, 24 Jul 2006 @ 8:58am
  
  Re: Maybe contemplation of my own mortality....
  This is just one of many attempts at the established status quo trying to avoid growing pains, competition, and growth.
  
  They won't even make an attempt at trying to make the technology work for them but rather stifle anything that may jeopardize the status quo of their own technical ignorance.
  
  These large corporation's motto:
  
  "If you don't understand it, fight it; if it wins, keep fighting it so it cannot progress further."
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - jsnbase, 24 Jul 2006 @ 10:14am
    
    Re: Re: Maybe contemplation of my own mortality...
    Um....what?
    
    Were you originally responding to Mike's post or someone's comment? I ask because your response to me had nothing at all to do with what I was asking.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Lay Person, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:09am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Maybe contemplation of my own mortalit
      I think he's upset over the article or types of articles present. He thinks there is no accuracy worth reading.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
PaulM, 24 Jul 2006 @ 9:10am

bit torrent NOT more efficient protocol than strai
Re: Re: Re: WTF? by Ben on Jul 24th, 2006 @ 7:13am
Its only illegal if you use it to share copywriten files. There are plenty of files that are legal to share and much more efficent than a straight download from a website.

no, bit torrent is NOT more efficient - there is quite a big overhead of slicing & dicing files into little chunks.

ISPs particularly hate it as it uses the back-channel, and cable companies have largely built their networks mainly for customers to download

however, it DOES save bandwidth but only for the original seeder, allowing someone on a DSL or cable connection to serve 100's of downloaders but only have to actually perform a small number of parallel uploads.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeez MIKE, 24 Jul 2006 @ 10:05am

YOU'RE LAME.
OK, enough's enough.

Your "corporate intelligence" is weak and fluffed.

Mike,

YOU NEED TO FIND A NEW HOBBY.

I'm dropping you from my RSS feeds.

I'll have to tell everyone that I originally recommended your site to that YOU JUMPED THE SHARK.

Anyone else have any other _WORTHWHILE_ independent tech news sites they'd like to recommend?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]