Google To Make Video Services More Annoying After Buying DRM Company?

from the seriously? dept

Wed, Dec 8th 2010 2:16am — Mike Masnick

You would think that the folks over at Google would know by now what a joke DRM is -- especially after the company's disastrous foray into server-based DRM on its original Google Video platform that required users to "check in" before they could watch videos they thought they had "purchased." However, Google made some news this week by buying DRM vendor Widevine. It's no secret why the company did so: it wants to appease the big entertainment companies, promising that it's "protecting" their works and trying to sign big dollar deals to distribute their content via YouTube or the as-yet-unannounced Google Music offering. But, still, it's unfortunate that (even if it's demanded by these companies) Google would legitimize technology that purposely is designed to destroy value for consumers.

Filed Under: drm, video
Companies: google

14 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Best Website Designer, 8 Dec 2010 @ 2:33am

I think Google will always come up with good services or options for its users. Only thing annoying to me is the maximum duration of You-tube up-loadable video is 15 mins. If Google does something to increase it, it will be better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mr. Oizo, 8 Dec 2010 @ 2:45am
  
  Not sure
  Something that has been bothering me about youtube for a while now is clicking on a video then to get the message that this video 'can't be played in your country due to whatever'. Well, it would have been much more interesting not to list that video in the first place.
  
  So I'm not sure google is always coming up with good services.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 8 Dec 2010 @ 6:34am
  
  Re:
  I don't know exactly how it's done, but I watched a 22 min video yesterday. Someone... somehow... can get longer videos. You may want to check into it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Dec 2010 @ 5:17am

DRM is Evil
Congratulations, Google.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Dec 2010 @ 5:18am

If Google want content they will need to produce it themselves or finance a production house, because those "people" over there are not nice people and they don't want business, they want to be called captain and like Ahab they will try to find a dick mob oops a mob dick :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Dec 2010 @ 6:36am

Your article is pure speculation. You have no basis for your argument. You have no idea why Google bought anything unless you were part of the decision process. Pure speculation but something to watch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jay (profile), 8 Dec 2010 @ 6:41am
  
  Re:
  If Widevinepurchase = True
  Then Google = Fail
  
  Else Widevinepurchase = False
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ts, 8 Dec 2010 @ 7:07am

I hate DRM just as much as everyone else, but I hate not being able to watch content even more. I can see the need for DRM (sorta) for streaming media, but it should be kept out of media that is purchased. For example, I can totally understand why Netflix should be made so it's impossible (very hard) to copy movies that you stream. However, if I purchase music or movies online, I should be able to copy to any device I own without jumping through hoops.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pixelation, 8 Dec 2010 @ 7:43am

"Google would legitimize technology that purposely is designed to destroy value for consumers."

I hate DRM too, but that statement is a stretch. I think it wasn't designed to destroy value even if it does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- kosmonautbruce (profile), 8 Dec 2010 @ 11:36am
  
  Re:
  Of course DRM is designed to destroy value. It hampers flexibility, convenience and prevents sharing and/or re-sale (at least in theory if not practice). That's the point of DRM.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spaceman Spiff (profile), 8 Dec 2010 @ 7:46am

Producers (read MPAA/RIAA labels & studios) demand it
In order for Google to get a lot of video streaming sites (Netflix for example) to put their applications on the Android market, they need "robust" (aka mainstream) DRM for the devices. This is one way for them to be able to entice those providers to hookup with the Android AppStore. You don't have to like DRM (I hate it and won't do business with anyone who requires it), but it is a fact of life right now... :-(
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 8 Dec 2010 @ 10:11am
  
  Re: Producers (read MPAA/RIAA labels & studios) demand it
  In order for Google to get a lot of video streaming sites (Netflix for example) to put their applications on the Android market, they need "robust" (aka mainstream) DRM for the devices.
  How can they do that on an open source system? Open source is incompatible with DRM.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hephaestus (profile), 8 Dec 2010 @ 10:50am

"or the as-yet-unannounced Google Music offering"

Just wait a little while longer for the news ... "Google to buy EMI catalog from CitiCorp"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
drupal web development, 21 Mar 2011 @ 5:33am

Google Rocks
Google Rocks- Google always providing a good services, all are user friendly services. I thing coming up this services with good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]