Poll: How much would you pay for Hulu on your TV?
By Ben Drawbaugh 
posted June 3rd 2009 10:06AM
posted June 3rd 2009 10:06AM
posted June 3rd 2009 10:06AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Because Fox, NBC, etc have exclusivity agreements with franchise TV stations across the country. It goes like this:
- The studios make the content to sell to the networks.
- The networks arrange for the content to be aired
- The actual TV stations air the content.
If the studios bypass the networks, the networks sue (if the network and studio are part of the same company, the network still gets very pissed.)
If the networks bypass the TV stations, then the TV stations sue.
They can just about get Hulu going by making the point it's for streaming individual programs to personal computers.
In the long term, I suspect the studios want to be able to stream to actual TVs, but in the short term, they can't, and they can't give Hulu those rights.
I think that any and all algorithmic modifications of media that you obtained legally should be allowed, as long as it doesn't include redistribution to another person.
Transcoding, Ripping, Recording. All that should be considered "fair use".
1. Needs a massively expanded selection
2. Needs the whole "Not on a TV" thing removed.
3. Needs to continue to be cross platform (I use Ubuntu.) Flash is fine though would prefer something more open.
In exchange for all of these and no increase in advertising, yes, I'd pay $10 a month.
I will only pay for full screen HD content that plays on any TV in my house. It must allow for remote control with pause/ff/rw and be available on or before the date it originally airs. I don't know what these "Lets bring TV to the PC" people are smoking! Honestly, I can't think of a single time where I wanted to watch TV and had access to a computer but not a TV. The only thing that came close is the gym where I opted to use my n95 + slingbox + tivo while I worked out on the treadmill. If you have both a PC and a TV, who in their right mind picks the PC?
I already have Hulu on my TV: PCTVCables.com
@Schwinn Sorry but it is not wrong. Just because your house has limitations doesn't mean that your municipality has less than three competitors in the market. You made the choice to live there; you have to accept the consequences of your decision. You feel entitled to have other choices; you did have other choices but made decisions that precluded those other choices. Your entitlement is inherent in your failure to take responsibility for how your decision affected your choices.
And I'm not saying that you should choose a house based on television. I'm saying that when you choose a house, you are limiting your own choices, and you are therefore fully responsible for the impact of those limitations.
By law.
Wow Brian, what a narrow-minded view that you have of the choices that people have. What about low income families who must live in an apartment building where Comcast is the only provider? They can't get U-verse or FIOS or DirecTV or DISH because the Comcast has an exclusivity contract with their building. So their only choice is Comcast or possibly OTA stations, if they can get them. And suggesting that low income families choose their home based on their TV choice (which regardless of your denials is EXACTLY what you are saying) is completely unrealistic and elitist.
As with people's attitudes about the RIAA, no one cares about who they get their music from, they just want the music. In the same way, no one cares about who they get their TV shows from, just that they get them. However, many, if not most people, especially those in the lower income brackets, have no choice whatsoever in who they buy their TV access from and must buy into whoever the monopoly holder is in the home that they must live in.
Learn something about the way of the world before you make ridiculous statements. And take your foot out of your mouth before your mouth gets athlete's foot.
I voted that I would not pay anything for Hulu, however that is only based on the current status of Hulu.
I currently do not pay for Cable or Satellite, and I actually watch Hulu quite a bit. I have a nice MacMini hooked up to my TV and the new Hulu frontend that was released is great because it works with the Mac Remote. The 480p does not bother me a whole lot as, sure it is not nearly as nice as the 720p over the air broadcasts that I get with my antenna, but for free on demand viewing I have no complaints.
If I were to start paying for Hulu it would have to be a bit more like cable or satellite. Not only more shows from the current providers but other content like current shows from HBO, Food Network, Comedy Central, etc. It would also have to provide more live coverage or at least allow you to watch a show starting at the same time as its first airing on regular TV. Currently you usually have to wait up to about 24 hours after a show airs on TV before it shows up on Hulu.
Hulu wants my brains, so I should be paid to use it. Like Hell I'm paying for it.
This poll doesn't go low enough. I'd be will to pay $5 or less for Hulu's current content. There are only about 3 good shows and the rest is crap. I certainly would not pay $10 or more considering Netflix costs me $15 for 10x the content, plus I get 2 DVDs at a time from the rest of their catalog.