The Center for American Progress reports:
It's official, TV is moving online. Fewer customers are buying cable packages and more are opting for lower-cost options that let them watch movies and television shows wherever they want--at an airport or in a coffee shop.
But there are more than 100 online services, from Netflix to Hulu, that allow customers to watch all their favorite episodes of The Simpsons at any time they want. Meanwhile, big broadcast and cable companies have struggled to compete with [the] mobile-ready entertainment market, clamoring for customers' attention.
[...]
[On November 10,] the Motion Picture Association of America joined the pack with a new site called WheretoWatch, a sort of online search engine where customers can type in the name of a movie or TV show and find out exactly where they can watch it legally. Users can search by title, genre, year it was produced or released, MPAA rating (PG or R), and whether it's online, on DVD or in theaters.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Arik on Saturday November 22 2014, @05:40PM
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Saturday November 22 2014, @09:58PM
10 years ago it would have been a static page with a couple of web sites and a couple hundred movies at best. And they would be played at 320x200 inside Flash, and they would cost more to rent than it would to go to a store and buy the DVD.
(Score: 4, Funny) by melikamp on Saturday November 22 2014, @05:48PM
Eh, correct me if I am wrong, but it's not really "any time", is it? It's only when you are connected to high-speed internet, and only when their servers are up, and only when you are using a platform they care to support, and only when they don't censor your favorite episode at their whim, and only when they are not unloading a commercial ad on you. Other than that, it's "any time" alright.
Or you could simply download this [thepiratebay.se].
(Score: 2) by naubol on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:23PM
I could not agree with you more in terms of how I feel about it.
However, I believe most people, even most people who work in tech, will not be overly concerned with these restrictions.
Maybe that will change over time as we realize digital libraries aren't legally inheritable, as platforms die and people want to move their stuff around, etc.
Still, I don't think people will care about it even if we explain to them that they'll probably care about it later.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Monday November 24 2014, @04:39AM
Uhhhhh.....
Maybe we should support the MPAA on this? I'm just saying, I've been trying to gut them and stick their dead limp bodies on sticks with my best Vlad the Impaler impression for some time, but when do we recognize them acting properly?
This is a very good thing to see happening, and is closely analogous to a sociopathic drug addict having a good day with sincerely good progress. WhereToWatch is a move towards information symmetry and greater transparency and options for the consumer.
Yes, some of the options are going to be completely ridiculous like the late Blockbuster's attempt at online streaming. Many will have DRM. At least they are trying though and actively showing you where it's legal.
It's entirely possible that this site will list EVERY SINGLE MOVIE licensed to DirectTV, Dish, Comcast, Time Warner, Cox, HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, STARZ, Netflix, Amazon, Apple, etc.
This is extremely useful. Nothing stops them from being the Google of intellectual property and informing customers where their own group members have licensed said intellectual property for lawful access.
Now, once it *says* the movie is only available on a Tuesday afternoon on Showtime, but only if you are on DirectTV, you can go to The Pirate Bay. Although, I would treat all public torrent trackers and encrypted connections as if they had the plague.
The great part about this is that they can see it. Search for your movie, find it's locked up in ways you don't want, and then pirate the living shit out of it. They will see all the searches, but not any associated consumption of content using the same ways marketers analyze ROI (to the ability they have). When the MPAA (or its members) do well and make it available in acceptable ways (no cable subscription--no drm, unless rental) people will respond and consume.
WhereToWatch can be a tool by which we teach the MPAA what we want as consumers. Granted, it's fucking retarded to have to do it this way, but you have to work with mentally challenged children in the ways that you can.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:25PM
Yeah, but that only works when you are connected to the internet and have the computer space and/or bandwidth to download it, so "anytime" doesn't work for you either.
(Score: 2) by melikamp on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:29PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:58PM
It's like buying 25 seasons on DVD, but simpler, cheaper, and faster.
Buying? I don't think that word means what you think it means.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @10:53PM
It's a product you cant buy the equal of for ANY MONEY.
That it's only available for free is just ironic. And sad.
(Score: 2) by halcyon1234 on Sunday November 23 2014, @04:21PM
and only if the cousin of the grandchild of the sound engineer who gave advice to the session drummer who was off sick that day (but totally would have been on the track anyways) for the beat sampled for the background track used in that one episode of that show decides that they signed the correct paperwork and are receiving a fat enough check for "THEIR" hardwork-- because otherwise they'll demand that TV series be pulled to "respect the artist".
Original Submission [thedailywtf.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @05:50PM
Is gewg_ affiliated with the Center for American Progress? This is the second submission from him that I've seen lately that refers to them.
gewg_, please disclose your affiliation with them, if one exists. We need to know if you benefit in some way from the publicity that you're helping to bring to them.
SN moderators, please think twice before posting submissions from gewg_ that refer to the Center for American Progress. There are lots of other good submissions in the queue. gewg_'s can be ignored without negatively impacting the quality of the content here, and in fact ignoring them may improve the quality of this site.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @05:59PM
Maybe he just visits the site on a regular basis, and figures it's a decent source of news that isn't one of the Top 30 go-to sites for Slashdot and SN.
Don't go for the conspiracy theory until you've applied Occam's Razor.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:22PM
Why haven't you proclaimed that you are anti-terrorist yet?
While I do not have any evidence to support this claim, you have not gone on record that you don't sleep with sheep. What is taking so long?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @07:04PM
How can you so casually lump the sheep-sleepers in with the undeclared anti-terrorists? You haven't publicly come out as pro-pony, have you? Does that mean you like the crust on your bread too?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @07:16PM
The GP does have good evidence. It's on the front page of SoylentNews at this very minute, for crying out loud!
gewg_ submitted MPAA Launches Search Engine that Tells You Where You Can Watch Almost Anything Online--Legally [soylentnews.org], which starts with "The Center for American Progress reports:".
Then if you scroll down, there's Energy Drinks Pose a Deadly Threat to Children [soylentnews.org], again submitted by gewg_, which about half way down has "The Center for American Progress notes".
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Saturday November 22 2014, @08:42PM
So, Anonymous Coward is a watchdog for ethics in journalism.
So noted.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @08:04PM
Fuck you. If you don't like progress, why don't you disclose your affiliation with whatever retarded morons...
gewg_ is submitting a lot of good stuff, this piece included.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Sunday November 23 2014, @09:58PM
gewg_ is submitting a lot of good stuff, this piece included.
Seconded. gewg_ is a good fellow/lady/sentient being to have around.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Common Joe on Sunday November 23 2014, @07:57AM
Take a deep breath. There could be other factors at play. Like he simply prefers this source.
As a reader, I like to see where things come from so I can judge the quality of the content. If I ever submit something to Soylent News from Fox or MSNBC, I'll probably mention where my information is coming from in the summary so others know what kind of quality of information is to be expected. (I can't imagine ever using those sources, but it's possible.) I would actually encourage gewg_ and others to continue mentioning their sources. I find it's a nice gesture.
Personally, I think he did the right thing. I know nothing else about the website, but the article he linked to seems fair. Why not advertise the site a little? It's done unobtrusively, not in your face, and is a good summary (even with copy and paste).
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Saturday November 22 2014, @05:53PM
What's this? A good idea from the heart of incurable evil? Never mind that they're joining the parade after everyone's already gone home, at least they finally got this vague awareness that there was a parade!
Or not.
Web site refuses service unless I give them control of my browser. Of course, they just couldn't resist, right? The control instinct is just too ingrained to let go. (I'm talking about Javascript, for those of you who don't recognize malware without it's familiar label.)
And the movie I remember from when I was younger still isn't available. They're not "making available" even if I'm willing to pay! So how do they expect me to pay?
Once a product is no longer commercially available, the "intellectual property owner" should lose the exclusive distribution right. It should be legal for those who know how to share interesting bits to step in and take over.
(Score: 2) by melikamp on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:09PM
That would be a saner world, ha? But IMHO you are not going far enough with your outrage. Why give out exclusive distribution rights in the first place? They are monopolies on ideas, their only detectable effect is distortion of otherwise free market of ideas. Even if there is a strong desire to see craptastic Hollywood drivel get made, the copyright term should be cut to 1 year top, and non-commercial sharing must be made completely exempt, as it is a basic human right. All the best and most recent research suggests that even a weak and humane 1 year copyright would be quite enough to recoup all costs of producing a heavily marketed blockbuster.
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Saturday November 22 2014, @07:05PM
I see your point, but what I'm saying is the *AA should have no complaints about my proposal. They're not making a penny off that movie they won't sell me, so why should they care if someone else does? Or if we share it for free?
It almost feels like "We can't let you watch the old stuff you fondly remember because we're afraid if you do, you won't swallow the crap we're shoveling out today."
(Score: 3, Informative) by Foobar Bazbot on Saturday November 22 2014, @08:49PM
I see your point, but what I'm saying is the *AA should have no complaints about my proposal.
Ooooh, yes they would have complaints.
Two words (and a link): Disney Vault [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Saturday November 22 2014, @09:01PM
Yeah, AKA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_scarcity [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @07:11PM
From theirprivacy opt-out page [wheretowatch.com]:
If you previously consented to allow us to disclose personal information about you (such as movie and television titles you add to your universal queue or for which you otherwise set alerts) to certain third parties, you may withdraw your consent at any time by checking the box below.
Their privacy page [wheretowatch.com] (and I do use that term loosely):
The types of personal information we may obtain through the Site include:
• contact information (such as name, email address and zip code);
• gender;
• date of birth; and
• information about movies and television shows that may interest you (such as titles of trailers you search for or watch).
In addition, when you visit our Site, we may collect certain information by automated means, such as cookies, web server logs, web beacons and JavaScript.
I guess "checking the box below" doesn't cover the "automated means".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:02PM
They should provide links to the trailers on YouTube or elsewhere, though. Also consider linking the IMDB and rottentomatoes pages.
For my test search, I tried "Game Change" and was happy to see that the trailer is back! It's a great trailer, with excellent use of "American Woman" the '70s song from the Guess Who, but I suspect that seeing the entire film might be overkill.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:24PM
I was all in in the earliest days of Napster. I downloaded tracks I would never have listened to if it had not been for the cornucopia that was the original Napster. I became a fan of the Plastic People of the Universe and Vladimir Vysotsky. I never would have heard of them before that, and would not have risked my dollars to hear them after buying $20 CDs at Tower. During Napster I downloaded everything I wanted that has sustained me these past 20 years. In the past 10, I had subscribed to Netflix to get more recent content, and had listened quit a bit to Pandora. But after a half-decade of dancing around the content companies' trying to game the future, I have lost patience. I won't pay them for anything anymore, though I would have had they gotten with the program. Now, I'm simply going to pirate everything.
Why pay to stream anything when you can pirate and have it on any device you want, any time, without restriction? I can now load up X hours of entertainment to quiet my kids on long car rides. No negotiating endless bullshit license, OS, and device restrictions. No anything. Do I have enough storage? No? Pick up another commodity flash mem device at Micro Center, and away we go.
Streaming services like Netflix and Hulu had a chance with us, for the last 4 years, but they have so failed to understand how consumers want to consume media, that they have practically driven users to circumvent them. Netflix has done the best, but honestly, given the intermittency of connectivity in the world why would you suffer your entertainment to stutter and stop just because your data plan and coverage doesn't suffice? Let me tell you from experience, it is when you are in the wilds of Pennsylvania, furthest from the reaches of connectivity and civilization, that you least like to have your entertainment experience to stop. Should I feel guilty? Should I quiet my kids with the in-car BS games my parents gave us? Perhaps. But even 10 minutes into a bout of blood-curdling screaming you'll reach for anything, especially when it's as painless as pirating something.
Is it right? Is it moral? Is it economically optimized? I couldn't tell you. I haven't taken the time to sit down and map it all out. But as a beleaguered parent and sometime content consumer, I can tell you that I unequivocally don't care. The tech and market moved on, and the content providers didn't. So sad. Let them die. Who cares.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:49PM
I think you know the answers to those.
Morals and ethics are interesting topics, and people devote their careers to studying and discussing them. However, as they apply to places like this site and Slashdot, and for the most vocal people at least, it is pretty clear that the lines are drawn right along selfish boundaries. "I should be able to do whatever I want and whenever I want, and you have no business in my business, but if you have something that I want, I should be able to take it." Many people like to describe themselves as libertarians, which goes to the first part, but libertarianism, as far as I am aware, does not condone nor justify theft.
A lot of it is a risk/reward analysis. Are you likely for getting caught pirating? Probably not. It is like the looting that goes on when there is a widespread power outage in a city. Do you think the people smashing shop windows and taking things are doing it to make some sort of profound socio-political statement, or are they just stealing shit because given the current atmosphere they want that wide-screen TV and they don't think it too likely that they'll get arrested (and dont' forget "those guys are doing it, so I'm going to do it too")? Is looting right? Is it moral? I think you know the answers to those as well.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 23 2014, @10:07AM
It's my fucking harddrive. I pay for the elecricity. Who the fuck are you to tell me which way I am allowed to flip the bits on my platters?
(Score: 1) by anti-NAT on Saturday November 22 2014, @10:53PM
Why pay to stream anything when you can pirate and have it on any device you want, any time, without restriction?
Because at some point, if you and the majority of people stop paying for it, they'll stop producing it because they've got no incentive to do it - and then you'll have nothing to watch.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Dunbal on Saturday November 22 2014, @11:45PM
Dude just because I pirated the episode that I missed from a series does not mean I stopped paying my fucking cable bill. If those greedy fucks want to move to a pay per view model then they owe me a lot of money for all the shows they make that I don't watch. Well since I won't be getting a refund I have no trouble downloading stuff I wanted to see but can't. They are greedy fucks who want to keep their greedy and highly profitable business model, and that is that.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday November 23 2014, @01:01AM
It's funny you should put it that way, because more and more I find myself watching YouTube videos produced by John Q. Public. Those people have no direct incentive to produce such content. They do it because they want to. Do humans only do things and undertake productive activity if someone is actively paying them money to do it? We have written records from the Fertile Crescent that detail economic exchange (I have seen them myself at the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago), so we know for certain that people have been doing things for "money" for a very long time, but people also did useful things long before money and trade were invented. Should we wave our hands and let the Invisible Hand erase that evidence, or can we suppose that humans do useful things whether someone else is giving them sheep/gold/dollars to do it or not?
Of all the modern economic philosphers I suspect Karl Marx was closer to the real reason why people do things, and the importance of how people do things, than others. But as much as others decry Marx for his naivete, I believe others are just as naive when it comes to economic activity as he was, except they have been more successful in marketing their world view.
I believe that if you drop a man in the middle of a fertile wilderness, he will immediately begin working to harness it without ever having dreamt of the possibility of a Wall Street bank to fund it.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:46PM
a sort of online search engine
Would you access that with a sort of world wide web browsing program?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:57PM
Sort of, however the site sort of looks like an anti-piracy site which is absolutely solving the wrong problem. It also fails to work without javascript enabled.
Perhaps they could sort of make a useful service rather than some crappy drupal site that doesn't work as well as TPB? Perhaps they could sort of make a site without the austere, authoritarian styling that makes users feel like they're being coerced / mugged?
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday November 22 2014, @06:59PM
In some future time, the descendents of those you won the lottery of the content games will count themselves lucky that their genetic line mattered to anyone at all, ever. That will be payment enough. But by that time, 90% of humanity will have had the chance to have the outpourings of their souls heard by the rest of the world. It will be come to be viewed as a fundamental human right, not as a yet another profit opportunity by the stupid and greedy (READ: MBAs and bankers).
That's the world I want to live in, and for my kids to inherit. This? Not at all.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by SuperCharlie on Saturday November 22 2014, @08:19PM
No, this isn't what we want or need, its a link farm to places to buy or be licensed... Which isn't surprising seeing who they are. And that brings up the why. They never really had a leg to stand on when someone said they couldn't legally get some content. Here is an index of how to get that legally and likely, when its not listed, not legally obtainable.
I'm not saying right or wrong, its just an overdue necessity they have failed in the past to provide.
(Score: 1) by albert on Sunday November 23 2014, @04:23AM
They do have a lovely description of it. (well, "African-American handyman" could be an anachronism)
They are missing a picture or any links for places to get it. How are you supposed to study film history when it is denied?
(Score: 1) by lentilla on Saturday November 22 2014, @09:31PM
On the upside, it's nice our friends have provided us with a nicely curated list. Now all that needs to be done is index the site and helpfully provide "another way" of obtaining the content. Magnet links, for example.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22 2014, @11:02PM
I am now a corporate person. My only mandate is profit above all else.
Legal? Moral? Ethical? These things do not come into play in my search for personal profit.
And piracy gives me the best return on my investment.
The best result at an unbeatable price.
When caught i'll say 'sorry' and go back to doing it anyway.
It's the corporate way.
Greed is good.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 23 2014, @03:07PM
Well said. This is how they play, we should we be any different...
(Score: 2) by Appalbarry on Saturday November 22 2014, @11:31PM
US only, as expected. Someone tell these people that it's a connected world now - content doesn't respect borders.
Honestly, almost all of my Pirate Bay use is to get my hands on stuff that American companies refuse to let me buy in my country.
(Score: 1) by Happy.Heyoka on Saturday November 22 2014, @11:47PM
Only four genres for TV shows "Action, Comedy, Drama, Horror"
Picked a couple of shows of interest : "This season is not available."
Picked something I've already seen (eg: Fargo - been on free to air here for a while); about six places I can get season 1 but nowhere for season 2 (which I'm guessing is already "in the can")
Nothing irks me more than having some of my favourite shows axed *before* I ever got the chance to vote with my wallet.
Wake me when I can put down some money weekly for online delivery of media files (say, like buying songs from iTunes - watermarked but no other DRM stupidity)
(Score: 2) by tibman on Sunday November 23 2014, @06:31AM
Just used their site and found that Back to the Future 2 is finally available at amazon, lol. Most people here sound like 100% pirates so they probably don't care about this new site. I find it is actually easier to buy my shows/movies these days than pirate. I can sit down at the TV + Roku and watch almost anything. Roku has a super search similar to wheretowatch.com only it's a lot more useful. You can actually watch the show, lol. If something isn't for sale then i can always go to eztv or equivalent.
I have friends that make nearly double my paycheck and they pirate everything. I keep telling them that if they love a show and never pay for it then it's their fault when the show is cancelled early : ) But i totally understand why people without money would pirate. They don't constitute a lost sale anyways. Better to get them watching free episodes and spread to word to other people.
TLDR - Wheretowatch.com is late to the party. It's a basic feature that Roku has had for years.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 1) by Wrong Turn Ahead on Sunday November 23 2014, @08:05AM
These guys invest gobs of money into fucking shit up for everyone. They've filed John/Jane Doe lawsuits against tens of thousands, including children, the elderly, and a few people who were found to not even own computers or have Internet. They lobby for bad laws that strip away fair-use rights. They treat DHS and ICE as their own tax payer funded police force. They want the power to seize domains and prosecute people without representation. They want your ISP to police your connection because, to them, everyone is a thief. They use their money and influence to get restrictive laws passed in foreign countries so it will be easier to pass similar legislation in the US (just aligning laws for trade). They push for endless copyright and actively work to diminish the public domain. They forced the infamous Content ID system on Youtube that has caused endless headaches and losses for legitimate independent producers. They are complete assholes who will never change.
Now that cord cutting is prevalent enough to be felt on their balance sheet they suddenly want to embrace us? Don't be fooled, once they stop bleeding money it won't be long before they're up to their old tricks again. The MPAA needs to bleed out fully until it is completely bankrupt. Fuck 'em...
(Score: 1) by Pino P on Sunday November 23 2014, @07:37PM
I put it through the same 3-sample test suite that I've used for CanIStream.it and other services that claim to list options for lawfully viewing movies and TV shows from MPAA-affiliated studios. It's unscientific, I admit, but it should give you an idea of how much effort the MPAA is putting into providing lawful alternatives to mass copyright infringement.
Verdict: Still not much.