Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Google Makes Peace With Media Companies 67

Posted by CowboyNeal from the olive-branches dept.
Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Google is bringing some of the biggest media companies into its camp and sharing revenue with them, after drawing their ire last year with moves to search video and books, the Wall Street Journal reports. From the article: 'Google's improved relationships with media and entertainment companies reflects the confidence those companies have gained in online distribution in the past year, amid rapid growth in Americans' consumption of Web video and other Internet content. But just as importantly, it illustrates a coming of age in Google's approach to the owners of content it wants to search.' Google has hired executives from the media world to conduct the negotiations. One of them, David Eun, formerly of Time Warner and NBC, said, 'The biggest challenge is explaining to them we're friend and not foe.'" Just don't use google as a verb. Pretty please?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Makes Peace With Media Companies More

Google Makes Peace With Media Companies

Comments Filter:

  • Here everybody (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14, 2006 @11:40PM (#15908094)
    I googled it for you:

    http://www.altavista.com/web/results?itag=ody&q=go ogle+used+as+verb+lawsuit&kgs=1&kls=0 [altavista.com]
  • ... providing the company with additional places to display lucrative ads, such as alongside video clips.
    Yeah, that's just what I always dreamed of, more ads. I hope they're interesting.
    • With any luck they'll be more ironically placed "Teen Sex Addict" ads that I see here every now and then. Those always give me a good chuckle, as they are on ./ ...

      • Re:yaay (Score:1)

        by ggy ( 773554 )
        Well, I still liked one ad I got at ./ on sysadmin appreciation day:
        "Racism - starting at $1 / day." from the friendly folks at ebay...
    • What ads? - kihjin, Adblock user 4572

  • Fun With Corporations! (Score:5, Funny)

    by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Monday August 14, 2006 @11:50PM (#15908121)

    Just don't use google as a verb. Pretty please?

    Okeedokey, smokey. (Seriously, "google" as a verb annoyed the bejezus out of me).

    BUT! I hereby nominate "Don't Do Evil" as the new way to mockingly refer to ANY corporate misdoings. Let's see how they like that!

  • The Real Napster (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 )
    When I Google (TM) for a song, why doesn't it show me links to MP3s of those songs on the Web? Or links to pages which link to MP3s of those songs? Google has always (or for a long time) censored its links to that content. I guess they're scared of the Napster caselaw. But that's a pretty big stick they've got to hit "media companies" with when they want to haggle.

    • Re:The Real Napster (Score:3, Informative)

      by hugzz ( 712021 )
      It's quite easy to find links to download mp3s of songs on Google. It's just that most of the higher ranked pages are lyric and information sites
    • Technically speaking, an MP3 cannot be spidere very well because filename is not as significant as content and a non-text content is near impossible to interpret.

      Try sticking filetype:mp3 on the end of your query.

      However, sometimes when searching for lyrics I get a picture of the album at the top of the results with more info about it; I suppose Google could strike up a deal to include links to where to buy the song.
  • 'The biggest challenge is explaining to them we're friend and not foe.'

    Considering how much content they have had that they charge for for some time on Google Video, I am suprised. Apple is paving the way, and everyone knows that whatever Google does works (whether it is true or not).

  • Great Move by Google (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MrCrassic ( 994046 ) <<li.ame> <ta> <detacerped>> on Tuesday August 15, 2006 @12:20AM (#15908200) Journal

    If Google can garner a solid relationship with those large media companies, the possibilities for Google to grow are nearly infinite. Many households today do not own a DVR, but imagine how convenient it would be for a typical Joe User to be able to find a clip from CNN he saw earlier and use it for a research project he's working on. Wouldn't it be great if his daughter could find a clip of her favorite program as easily as searching for web pages?

    If this relationship can build, this will all be possible. Furthermore, companies that benefit from AdSense will benefit greatly from those types of users. Everybody wins at the end, and Google keeps its "friendly giant" crown it's been holding for years.

    No sneaky corpse-beating RIAA lawyers required.

    • Wouldn't it be great if his daughter could find a clip of her favorite program as easily as searching for web pages? And furthermore, wouldn't it be great if I could then Google for his daughter?* We could even turn it into a new naughty word, a la: "Dude, I totally googled this chick last night..." Okay, maybe not. But if Google could help me on that front, then I probably wouldn't care whether or not they're doing any evil. We all have our price. And I might even be able to tolerate all the fanboys

    • ...imagine how convenient it would be for a typical Joe User to be able to find a clip from CNN he saw earlier and use it for a research project he's working on. Wouldn't it be great if his daughter could find a clip of her favorite program as easily as searching for web pages?

      "Imagine"? I don't have to imagine it. Napster (the original) was well on its way there. P2P networks are clearly doing this already. In fact, P2P networks distribute content in ways that efficiently spread out distribution cost

      • It is easily arguable that Google is trying to start up some kind of new method of filesharing, but the difference between what Google is trying to do here and what Napster and its contenders intended to do originally is very far apart. What I tried to imply was that if Google can obtain the kind of rights that the media companies are willing to give them, the companies will win tremendously from the services Google provides, especially in advertising. Therefore, Google have enough power to basically contro

    • Maybe the Goodness and Niceness of Google will infect Time-Warner so that they'll stop beating up widows and orphans through the RIAA lawyers. Naaa. I think if you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. Bye-bye Google.

  • Googling no more.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by McFortner ( 881162 ) on Tuesday August 15, 2006 @12:22AM (#15908212)
    [Quote]"Just don't use google as a verb. Pretty please?"[/quote]

    Yep, it gives them a major headache having their name used as a generic term. Then they have to take several Asprin for it. It is the kind of hurt a kiss and a Band-Aid from Mom can't fix. We just have to stop being so Mickey Mouse about it....

  • More like (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hsmith ( 818216 ) on Tuesday August 15, 2006 @12:26AM (#15908224)
    They realized they are a dying medium and google could possibly be a way to drive viewers to their online content.
    • To expand on this, consider that:
      • People are spending (in average) less and time watching television and more and more time surfing the Net
      • Amateur produced content distributed via the Internet is proving itself unexpectedly popular *cough*YouTube*cough*

      Basically people are moving away from the traditional distribution channels for media into newer channels and in the process discovering there's more to motion pictures entertainment than the fare produced by the big media companies.

      More in general they're mov

    • They don't have to be a dying medium - they just need to change they way they do things.

      I have started to read online newspapers regularly, when I have never had a subscription for a paper newspaper. If there is one thing that bloggs prove, it is that there is a huge market for good content, and media companies can provide that, if they do it well.

      This is where the partnership with google comes in well. I think initially they were scared that sites like google news provide links to their competitors as well

  • I think (Score:2, Insightful)

    by NexFlamma ( 919608 )
    I think Google's improved relationship with the media companies has more to do with the viability of Google as a company as opposed to the viability of the internet as a distribution platform.

    It's hard to ignore the kind of success they've had.

  • Trademark Evilness -- not Google. (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Part of maintaining the rights to a trademark (Google(tm) for instance...) is that you actively prove that you are defending your mark. For instance, if a competitor created a new search service called um...what's a good name...uh GOOGLER.COM, and they could prove that Google(tm) was not protecting their trademark, then they could attempt to make a legal stake for the name. Google is probably ecstatic that their name has become a verb, however the guys in legal gotta do this, or else people will take adva

  • Trademark (Score:5, Funny)

    by fabu10u$ ( 839423 ) on Tuesday August 15, 2006 @12:40AM (#15908262)
    Just don't use google as a verb. Pretty please?
    Ah, but you forgot... it's Google(tm) with a capital G and a silent (tm).

  • Query results skewed more? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ScrappyLaptop ( 733753 ) on Tuesday August 15, 2006 @12:46AM (#15908278)
    So do you think this will mean that the only results will be the ones that any particular big media Google partner wants to push that week? To test this hypothesis, I predict that during sweeps week media searches will magically bring back results of each network partner's biggest shows...with little regard to your actual media search term.

    I swear, Google is starting down the road of becoming less and less relevant. It started with search results placement...What I want is a search engine that can filter out all commercial results and just give me pure, clean information when that's what I am looking for.

    • No (Score:3, Informative)

      by Gorimek ( 61128 )
      So do you think this will mean that the only results will be the ones that any particular big media Google partner wants to push that week?

      That's the road Alta Vista, Excite and many other now forgotten search engines went down to make a quick buck back in the day. Google stubbornly stuck to providing relevant links for their users.

      That's why Google is now raking in the billions, and they are very aware of that. There is no way they are going to throw away their biggest competitive advantage for a few lousy

  • bah (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Heikell ( 887104 ) on Tuesday August 15, 2006 @01:09AM (#15908327)
    Google:"Let's pay the content owners off so they don't sue us" That's not a partnership at all. That just means their paying them to keep their mouth shut.

    • Re:bah (Score:3, Funny)

      by Lord Aurora ( 969557 )
      No, no...you're obviously a n00b to the world of corporate America.

      See, that is what we call a partnership.

      =D

  • Good luck controlling English (Score:4, Funny)

    by svunt ( 916464 ) on Tuesday August 15, 2006 @01:58AM (#15908432) Homepage Journal
    I'm still upset that people get confused when I refer to a googol - they think I'm talking about a search engine, rather than a quantity! For serious, Google are kidding themselves thinking that some strongly worded letters will stop the genericization of google...it's already generic. I know that isn't the thrust of TFA, but dammit, I missed the original thread.
    • I'm still upset that people get confused when I refer to a googol - they think I'm talking about a search engine, rather than a quantity!

      And why exactly do you need to refer to a googol in front of people ? ... Unless by "people", you're referring to your imaginary math-freak friends :)

  • I get a nasty feeling that if I use Google(TM) to look for TV clips all I will get is 20 pages of TV ads.

  • Anybody notice the submitter? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Old Man Kensey ( 5209 ) on Tuesday August 15, 2006 @08:25AM (#15909373) Homepage
    Is this the first time the submitter has been a media flack who doesn't even go through the formality of registering a Slashdot account to submit? (Check out where the link from the submitter's name goes.)
  • Enough with the google as a verb thing.

    Reserve the harsh criticism until they actually sue someone.

    Google has to make an effort to protect their trademark(even if it means just sending a C&D letter) or they lose it. Period. It wasn't evil, it was responsibility.
  • What the heck, is Google paying taxes to the media mafia? If Google wants to keep their asses in my "good guys" list, they better side with my rights, and do what they can to hurt and piss off obnoxious media corporations.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Close