wow. This could be huge!
Why would anyone now upload there video anywhere else? Talk about trying to corner the market.
also on BBC News [news.bbc.co.uk]
Nice idea in theory, but it's likely to open a Pandora's box the way AdSense did, with people uploading video clips they don't own and cheating advertisers with phony impressions and clicks. But who knows--maybe I'm wrong, and the Web isn't a spawning ground for petty crooks or a land of opportunity for organized crime.
The revenue from adSense will now be shared with the people uploading the videos. This is an invitation for the teenage crowd to click their own ads! I guess G will not ban youtube? ;-)
There does seem to be a MAJOR conflict of interest here.
So they are dividing up $0 revenue among 10,000,000+ users? I can't wait to get my part! ;}
Just kidding around.
Does anyone know when this will be initiated? fx. third quarter of this year.
This isn't just going to be based on clicks, they're talking about adding a 3 second ad at the beginning of the movie that advertisers will pay for. In fact it may not even be based on click advertising at all...
Also they said it will only apply to movies where the uploader owns the copyright entirely and they are working on some kind of digital audio fingerprinting technology to work out what is original and what isn't.
|This is an invitation for the teenage crowd to click their own ads |
Just like AdSense! and it has to be said that although click fraud is a problem, AdSense still works.
what I want to know is why this thread is on the front page and mine didnotmake it even though I was faster :(
> what I want to know
Because it is an unreferenced quote pulled from the ether?
well it actually was an AP story not an msnbc one ..
but I did make a mistake there, that's true
www.metacafe.com has been revenue sharing for maybe a month now (as far as i know). Their top 'producer' made $50,000 by generating 5,000,000 views. Its a good idea for YouTube too imo because they buy exclusive rights to video material that they can then license to T.V. media like CNN, Real T.V. and the dozen or so of other 'video clip' shows that have sprung up very recently on T.V. Also Dillon said YouTube will be putting 3 second commercial bits with every video. Personally, as a viewer I don't like this, but for YouTube its obviously a good move. To me it seems like the maturity of the online video content market is happening now and it will be/is commericalized by mainly ad revenue. So YouTube is basically making a good faith gesture to it loyal viewers who are used to ad-free videos and might jump ship to another 'video site' where the videos are-a-plenty and the ads-are-a-few. So YouTube is preempting the, 'shame on you YouTube' thoughts that these users are going to have upon watching their first 3 second bit. But then they'll see that YouTube pays every day joes like them for their own unique uploaded videos and the relationship between user and YouTube will be once again cozy.
Sorry if I ranted, it was fun.
I think it's a great idea in theory, but it will require a lot of monitoring in practice to avoid putting an AD in copyright protected videos or in offensive, adult or just inappropriate content for the advertiser. If they try doing it automatically, it'll create loads of problems. As far as I know Metacafe is a less algo based video site than Youtube.
We deliver thousands of real videos inside html frames that also contain adsense.
Revenues from that had been much lower than on urls with regular content.
From the BBC:
|YouTube founder Chad Hurley confirmed to the BBC that his team was working on a revenue-sharing mechanism that would "reward creativity". |
The system would be rolled out in a couple of months, he said, and use a mixture of adverts, including short clips shown ahead of the actual film.
YouTube just need to be careful not to annoy users with ads or they will go elsewhere for their fix of videos.