Google Video Store Shutting Down 155
babbling writes "Google is going to close the Google Video Store, leaving users who bought videos that used Digital Restrictions Management without their purchases. The users of Google Video Store will be compensated with Google Checkout credit, but it seems they will be out of luck if they don't happen to be Google Checkout users."
Once again... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Another great slashdot edit... (Score:5, Informative)
All paid programming had to be watched through a viewer on Google's site.
To compensate customers who will no longer be able to see the videos that they purchased, Google is providing refunds in the form of credits that can be used on its online payment service, Checkout.
How is that not DRM? And does that clarify the matter?
Re:Once again... (Score:5, Informative)
IANAL, but I believe the only way to pull of something like this in Europe, and get away with not providing support for several years, would be to spin off a subsidiary as a wholly independent company, and then when the subsidiary declares bankruptcy, there's no new owner of that part of the business.
Re:Another great slashdot edit... (Score:4, Informative)
It was a rental service. When you rent a movie, you clearly have no right to make a copy or whatever, and neither do you have any right to keep the tape if the store chooses to close. Not a DRM issue in my book.
What Google sold was clearly a service. If from what Google sold people thought they would be able to watch it "indefinitely" then they deserve what happened. It was a stupid move in the first place.
The content wasn't sold and locked out. What was sold was clearly an access right. You were never supposed to have any possibility of accessing it otherwise (which is what most people think they can do with DRM'd files, up to the point where it explodes in their face).
I agree, the business model was shitty from a customer point of view. And I agree that you could tie that into the whole DRM stuff somehow as far as educating the customer and so on. I was just pointing out that it's different from companies selling you files and THEN trying to lock the content out of your reach and sue you when you use it as intended.
It would not bother me if Google was to reimburse its customers in a proper way, because people in that case got what they actually bought, which is not a DRM'd file.
On this board it is enough to say DRM to see people going up in arms, without even bothering to read TFA to see what really happened.
Re:Another great slashdot edit... (Score:3, Informative)
Instead people get some credit that they can't turn into cash. The shows they bought, they no longer have - maybe they can find it elsewhere for more.
Re:Never trust someone else to keep giving you acc (Score:4, Informative)
Unless I can burn it to a standard DVD, I will never buy DRM'd video from anyone!.
I do buy music from iTunes since they openly allow you to burn it to disc, therefore making it usable even if I run out of "authorized computers" or Apple decides to deprecate their DRM.
I'm in the process of looking at eMusic too, but they won't show you their whole catalog unless you sign up (ie. give them a credit card number) for their free trial. I'm guessing their catalog is, uh, limited since they don't want you to see it before you sign up.
Re:Another great slashdot edit... (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, you can video tape pay-per-view (afaik). You can do the equivalent to a stream coming in to your computer using a variety of software and methods. So, why the insistence on calling everything DRM? The word is losing its meaning. It's getting watered down and eventually will mean "anything I don't like about an entertainment product".
Re:Never trust someone else to keep giving you acc (Score:3, Informative)
I could be wrong here, but I think that may have more to do with crappy website design than actively preventing you from looking at their selection. Try using Google searches with site:emusic.com to turn up the normal pages instead of the "SIGN UP NOW LOLZ" pages. Although, they may have changed that more recently. I'm a happily paying customer of eMusic now, so I haven't tried it lately...
That said, their selection largely amounts to 1) Classical 2) Assorted ethnic and non-English stuff 3) Non-RIAA indie labels. I'm currently listening to some Pixies and White Stripes music I got from eMusic. Anyhow, if any of those three types appeal to you, I encourage you to sign up; it's certainly worth it. If you want popular music, stick with more mainstream online music stores, like, er, BitTorrent. ;)
Re:Google should've followed Microsoft's example (Score:4, Informative)