Perhaps CBS is wanting to find a way to make more $ without profit sharing with iTunes on this 24-hour expiration.

Personally, I think that this is a crap article. BetaNews is usually VERY good at clearly explaining news. This article leads to a lot of confusion.

Wow. People actually still watch CBS?

Yeah, somebody must be watching, since it is often the #1 rated network.

A dubious "honor' these days considering the cr@ppy state of network tv. The only network shows I watch are Lost and Scrubs -- and even then I use the Replay to skip the commercials. Not being a fan of reality shows and the endless CSI spinoffs has its advantages: there are so many more hours to waste doing other things.

$1.99 on CBS.com with a 24 hour time limit vs. (presumably) $1.99 on iTunes.com with no time limit... I wonder which option people will choose.

Ah-ha! I gotcha now. I thought the article was saying iTunes was going to start putting a time limit on the episodes that you can download.
My mistake.

So they've got us down to "renting re-runs"? Am I understanding this right? Only 24 hours, if I'm paying for it, I should be able to keep a copy. I've spent ALOT of cash on iTunes. I think artist should be paid for their work.
If we only get the episode for 24 hours, then that's it for me. I'll stop using iTunes. Never watch another CBS show again. That's a complete rip-off. Some people are actually out there paying for the crap, and now you want to "rent" it to us for 24 hours?
Way to go iTunes and CBS. You just gave a bunch of people even more reason to use the P2P networks you hate.

DJOmegaRush you misunderstood... itunes isn't changing the way they do things... the point about 24 hour limits on viewing is that this IS NOT how itunes works, but IS the model used by the systems that CBS has so far used to sell video....

What I find amazing about what Apple has done with video is..... that it's brilliant in its simplicity--- totally predictable... and yet it's moving very quickly and so far no one else seems to be offering any competitive alternative!

What do I mean? Well, 1. the video on itunes is simple- and it works (I've tried the video services through yahoo, google, and aol, --- google didn't look that gret and I had a hard time even getting a picture to show up in aol and yahoo).... 2. the drm is enough to get the content providers to keep hopping on board at an amazingly fast rate (if/when cbs/fox hop on board then it's game over/apple wins-imho opinion.... kind of like with the music, they have 80% market share right now but if they manage to get the big hold-outs like the beatles and metallica then it's simply game over--- apple WINS
--- but the drm, while not perfect (would be great if we could burn dvd's, etc...) is reasonable enough to make the purchases worthwile (transfer to set # of pcs, unlimited # of ipods, and own the file for life)

--- and both audio and video podcasting is a huge boon to anyone with a portable device capable of playing these files (psp, ipod, any mp3 player for audio podcasts and most players supporting video for video podcasts)

---there have been portable devices capable of supporting video for at least a few years now.... the 2 key differences with apple are ipod size (yes, you can play damn near anything on a portable dvd player, but you can't fit it in your pocket, can you?--- on the other extreme-- don't you think the cell phone is just a little TOO small to be watching video on for very long?) and itunes...-- the first convenient way to distribute/receive content (intelligently starting with music videos and slowly moving towards longer and longer content... movies maybe later this year--- but honestly, the smaller and more portable the device, the more likely the consuer is to want shorter content (tv, podcasts, etc) and not full length feature films

anyway,
that's my 2 cents

i agree with you on this eddietg.

No way will I ever use anything that puts limit on what I can do with movie/music i pay for... Open up your minds! GPL3 is the way!