Linked by David Adams on Sun 11th Jul 2010 18:54 UTC
Internet & Networking There's an article today at abc.com that looks at recent trends around net-based pay-for services and the smattering of paywalls from News Corp to the NYT that are up or threatening to be put up, and speculating that this could be the beginning of a trend. Of course, a YouTube video rental site and a few large publishers putting up paywalls will make zero difference to the "free internet" on their own. But if they're successful, it could spark emulation. But could this be a trend that could snowball enough to change the nature of the net?
Permalink for comment 433151
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
still not going to happen
by JrezIN on Sun 11th Jul 2010 20:17 UTC
JrezIN
Member since:
2005-06-29

The biggest problem to a pay-for internet content, is real micro-payment. right now, micro-payment (from a few cents to a couple of dollars/euros) is discouraged by payment middlemen... I can see several people payment small amounts to some good article, but I find hard to see people paying $10 a month to a website they read... maybe because they can read from, maybe, 5 to 100 different websites daily, and paying for several of them would quite a sum...


...another problem is concurrency. For me, $10 dollars is not money I would spend without thinking too much... but I see north americans arguing the opposite, that it's basically worth nothing... You can see where those $10 DLC for games are more popular...

But ads... well, ads are a concurrency of their own. It is much easier to sell ads to anyone, anywhere, with floating value, than deal of concurrencies that will limit our user base.


...and in the end... everyone knows that the biggest heads pushing for-pay content are the big "monopolies" of content (usually distributors/middlemen, the ones that are closer to been just legacy with the internet content distribution), the ones that basically try to control the system,

Reply Score: 4