Feb 24 Come on Hulu, get over it already!
Here's the latest in the saga of strange hacks, tweaks and contortions you need to go through to get Hulu on your TV. I just finished reading an article at Multichannel News called 'Cablevision To Test PC-To-TV Service.' According to the article, Cablevision is going to make an application available to it's subscribers that they can run on their home computers. This application will transfer video images and audio from their computer to their Cable set-top box, allowing them to watch online content such as YouTube and Hulu in the comfort of their living room.
Sounds great, right? ...Wait, what do I have to do?
It's just downright silly. So let me get this straight, I can't watch Hulu on a box that's in my home theater, something like the Boxee Box, but I can watch it relayed from my computer to a box in my home theater? Come again? Why can't we just have one box that does it all? That would be too obvious. All of this because Hulu doesn't want you to watch their content on your TV. C'mon, get over it already.
Here's the quote:
"Cablevision's position is expected to be that the PC to TV Media Relay service simply shifts content that's accessible on a PC to the TV screen and would be covered under fair-use provisions of the copyright code."
You can't fault Cablevision; they see the trends and are trying to find a solution. As a content owner of sorts, I'm at a loss to explain the phenomenon. I'd love for our podcast to be available on as many distribution platforms and methods as possible. After all, we just want to get more people listening. The more listeners we have, the more we could get for advertisements.
Of course Hulu is in a unique spot. They're afraid that the Hulu version of the show will steal audience away from the standard broadcast version. Netflix doesn't have that problem. YouTube doesn't have that problem. And to be honest, that could happen. But if you pick up some new viewers along the way, won't it even out? Hulu has ads; broadcast has ads. You'd think they could do the math and find a solution that makes it work.
Instead we get the same head in the sand reaction that record companies had to MP3 music a decade ago. Using that as our example, eventually they will come around. I guess these things just take time.
Reader Comments (4)
There is nothing Hulu can really do. It all comes down to individual contracts that the Networks sign with their affiliate stations. For instance, KING5 in Seattle has a contract with NBC to show broadcast episodes of Chuck in a certain geographical region. Part of that contract says that no one else can show Chuck except for KING5 in the area. The affiliates were all ready to sue NBC and the other Networks for breach of contract when the shows started streaming online. However, the Networks argued that the affiliate contracts only specified the rights to show the content on the TV; it did not specify anything about rights to show it on a computer screen. As soon as Hulu shows up on a computer screen, the individual affiliates can sue over breach of contract. We are going to be stuck like this until all of the contracts run out and are renegotiated.
Here is a post I made over on the AV After Dark podcast, dealing with this point generally.
On the issue of Hulu, Ben Drawbaugh of Engadget HD had the most insightful comments. What happens is that a network signs contracts with each local affiliate, giving them the exclusive rights to broadcast the content on television in their area. Those same networks can get away with allowing Hulu to show the same content as long as it is on the computer (and the networks can show it on their own websites) since it is technically not a violation of the contract with the affiliates. But, if Hulu is readily available on a television, and the network knows this, then allowing Hulu to show their content would be a violation of the contract. So, the only solution is to pull the content from Hulu, or require that Hulu not be on televisions. Hulu understands this and must make good faith efforts to stay off of TV screens so that they can keep the content flowing.
Now, the solution would be to enter into different types of contracts with the affiliates (obviously for less money) that is not as exclusive and would allow other ways of viewing the content on televisions, like Hulu. They would then hope to make of the loss with the ads on Hulu. But, for now, the contracts are the hindrance.
Great points, Vance and Andrew. Maybe I was too hard on Hulu. They may not really be the bad guy in the situation, but they are the easiest one to blame. You've got to give it to Cablevision. They're finding a creative way around the problem. It's just frustrating when we get stuck in the ancient business models and can't seem to find a way out.
Like you said, we just have to wait until the contracts run out. Hopefully those controlling the content don't renew the same kinds of deals and perpetuate the nonsense.
The interesting time will be when the contracts DO run out, we will see which way they jump. Do they realize the way the market is going and take the chance that what they lose on the local contracts they make up in advertising (or subscription sharing) on the Hulu,etc route? Right now, the networks and Hulu can say "our hands are tied", but what will they do when they are not tied?
I agree that some creative workarounds like Comcast are great, mainly because they might force the networks to realize that they MUST adjust their approach. They might give a "wink and nod", but the local affiliates are going to eventually insist that the product they are getting (exclusive local TV rights) has been watered down and they won't pay as much. At that point, the networks might as well just do a "hybrid" type deal and we can all get things the way we want them.