Google Video is rolling out some new features, including “instant gratification” uploading, and the ability to add comments, tags and ratings. Buried quietly in the “terms and conditions” (which you default accept if you don’t opt out in 5 days) is some language that suggests Google Video is preparing to give amateurs the ability to profit from ad revenue and sales of videos. See “more” below for an e-mail that was sent to uploaders last night. To read the new “terms and conditions” click here.
Highlights:
- Selling Videos for 70% Gross: If user-generated video is eventually sold or rented via Google video, Google keeps 30%.
- Ad Sharing Hints: If Google Video does share advertising revenue, you need to accrue $100 before they pay you, and it’s paid monthly.
- You’re Fired: They can terminate your account if you set up more than one – unless you get written permission. If you provide a link from your video and don’t update it, they can terminate you.
- Boilerplate Content Language: You grant a royalty-free, non-exclusive right. You allow Google Video to display “limited excerpts” of your content for “no fee to the end user.” You have to indemnify Google and only submit content that you create.
- You’re Giving it to Google and Any of Google’s Friends: You give Google Video the right to display the video content “in connection with Google products and services now existing or hereafter developed, including without limitation for syndication on third party sites.” You are giving grant Google a non-exclusive, world-wide, royalty-free license to use your name and logo in connection with your video.
- Click Fraud Clause: Google wouldn’t pay you for clicks “co-mingled” with invalid clicks. Suppose that means if they find Clickfraud, they don’t want to have to weed out the real from the fake.
- Hush Clause: You can’t disclose your click thru rates. That’s Google confidential.
Bottom line? This represents Google Video moving slightly into YouTube’s “community” space for consumer-generated content, and potentially into Revver and Eefoof‘s advertising-sharing model. However I wouldn’t see it initially as a high-profit source for amateurs. Google Video appears to prioritize major content providers, and I’d predict the bulk of revenue to come from low-margin contextual ads. Although Google has high traffic, it needs to get into display/impression advertising to make decent money in the online video arena. Hello Uploader,
It’s the Google Video Team again, back with an exciting update. We’ve been working
hard to make Google Video the best way to find and play video on the web, and we hope
some of our recent features are useful to you:
– Instant gratification: A web-based video uploader
(http://video.google.com/videouploadform) for immediate upload and playback
– Share your video with the world, or maybe just your friends: Single-click video posting
to popular blog services, including MySpace and Blogger
– Get involved!: Now add ratings, tags, and comments for all videos
– Zeit-what? Now you can see a “Top 100” list (http://video.google.com/videoranking),
updated daily, that shows what people are watching
– It’s “Football”, not “Soccer”: Google Video now exists in the UK, France, Germany,
Italy, Spain, Canada, Poland, and the Netherlands
And there’s a lot more to come — you may have noticed that we’re also been
experimenting with making “for sale” content free by sponsoring videos with ads. By
doing this we’ve been able to expose a lot of great video to our users, like content from
Charlie Rose (http://video.google.com/freetoday.html).
Because this test has been successful, we’re continuing to experiment with using ads to
extend content distribution. To do this, we’ve made some minor modifications to our
Terms of Service (TOS) so you can participate in ad programs we may roll out in the
future. Please take a moment to review the changes by logging into your account at
mb“,”<a onclick\u003d\”return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)\” href\u003d\”https://upload.video.google.com\” target\u003d_blank>https://upload.video.google<wbr />.com</a> and accepting the new terms and conditions. If you<br />don\’t agree to the new TOS, we will assume you acknowledge and accept these changes,<br />and will include your content in Google Video, as it is today.<br /><br />Keep the video rolling… and, as they say, the best is yet to come!<br /><br />Anticipating even more fun,<br />The Google Video Team<br /><br /></div>”,0] ); D([“ce“]); //–>https://upload.video.google.com and accepting the new terms and conditions. If you
don’t agree to the new TOS, we will assume you acknowledge and accept these changes,
and will include your content in Google Video, as it is today.
Keep the video rolling… and, as they say, the best is yet to come!
Anticipating even more fun,
The Google Video Team
This is a very good post, Nalts, and I enjoy this blog a lot.
These changes *sound* promising, but Google’s been making noise about letting small-timers sell videos & split the proceeds for a pretty long time now.
I do not understand why Google has been so hesitant to embrace the online video “long tail” of individual videographers. It seems inconsistent with their broader revenue strategy.
Excellent point and thanks for the feedback. Here are my theories:
1) This video thing isn’t a core competency for Google… it’s a “line extension.”
2) Google has always made money through tiny clicks based on major value. So it’s easier for them to go after big content providers to get traffic that will draw big crowds… versus going after the average Joe.
3) It’s a heck of a lot easier to sell ads around legitimate content (Mr. Magoo) than mysterious videos with which advertisers may or may not want themselves affiliated.
Yes, I suppose if you are going to sue somebody for aiding and abetting copyright infringement, Google is a more attractive target than Revver!
I’m just waiting for a Revver-style revenue share on the Flash platform instead of Quicktime.