News Corp Deputy Chairman Chase Carey told press that the service won’t be free anymore starting as soon as 2010. (That’s in two months, people!)

Carey told reporters that Hulu was likely to become a subscription service, although it’s not clear how the video-streaming site plans to lure users who have been using it for free all along. Over on Twitter, many irritated fans say they would consider paying for the service if ads were cut, but I’d think such a significant change would have been worth a mention by Carey when he broke the news to reporters. Carey merely said:

“I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value.”

Of course, as Hulu has been a “free model” all along, it seems like a tough row to hoe trying to charge for it now. If the only additional access in this scenario is between Hulu and your wallet, customers are likely to just get their content through other means. However, going by other companies who’ve decided to charge for content suddenly with no added benefit (such as Newsday hallucinating that people will pay $20 a month to read about pumpkin picking and car wrecks on Long Island), it’s not that much of a stretch to believe that Hulu is suffering from the same delusions of grandeur. Which is a shame, because everyone I know who uses Hulu regularly adores it.

Related posts:

1. Another who cares Hulu post – this time get your wallet ready
2. I’m surprised it took so long: Hulu blocks Hotspot Shield users
3. Disney CEO on crack for suggesting Hulu charge for access

The service isn’t limitless, though: You’ll be able to listen to 25 full-length tracks a month. After that, you’ll be prompted to pay for a Rhapsody streaming subscription. If you turn it down, you’ll only be able to listen to 30-second samples until the start of the next month.

On the whole, the service works surprisingly well. Searching for an available artist brings up a box at the top of the results with play buttons for four popular songs and the option to see more songs. Once you click play, a second player box opens at the bottom of the search results. You can still navigate around the page with the box open and the song playing — it’ll stay at the bottom of the window — but once you click to any other page, the box and the song both go away.

I’m reluctant to say it, but this actually isn’t a horrible idea. It may be one of Yahoo’s first moves that does something to add value into its search product — a novel concept. Will it get people to switch over from Google? Likely not. But it might get them to use Yahoo a handful of times a month for music-specific searching, and that’s at least something.

In any event, it reeks far less of desperation than Microsoft’s “we’ll pay you to use our search engine” idea.

Related posts:

1. TechCrunch Yahoo search deal: TechCrunch now offered as default on Yahoo Search
2. Yahoo Rolls Out Open Search, In-Game Ads
3. Yahoo! Music tops most visited music site in Japan