| | |

Still Waiting for That Call from YouTube

ByNalts

My favorite roving reporter, Alex Delyle (TheDailyReel), reports that Variety reports that YouTube may share ad revenue… some… day…. soon.

Says Variety:

Content creators who upload their videos to the site will be offered the option of having short ads shown at the beginning or end, with the resulting revenues split 50-50, according to Howard Lindzon, founder of Wallstrip, a finance-oriented site that distributes videos through.

Alex wouldn’t have ended that sentence with a preposition. Neither would have Felicia- who is starting to OutMicki Micki. Just kidding, Mickipedia.

If you haven’t subscribed to Felicia’s TDR podcast, I’d recommend it. Here’s the RSS address.

Similar Posts

I Killed a Grape for Valentine’s Day

ByNalts

Back in October 2010 I made my debut on Daneboe’s Annoying Orange channel as “KNIFE.” Daneboe just got engaged according to his Facebook account… so congratulate him! Today I’m back in the adorable fruit’s Valentine’s Day special. iJustine plays Passion Fruit, and I play the grape-murdering knife. I feel like a wine maker. Advance to…

Smoking May Be Hazardous to Your Viral Video Appeal

ByNalts

Don’t smoke in your next video. Never mind the health implications. It could impact your move from viral videos to mainstream television! Even Tom and Jerry had to quit smoking recently, and insiders are saying they haven’t gotten along well ever since. BBC News reports that Children’s TV channel Boomerang is going to edit scenes…

12 Comments

  1. OK, having just been introduced to this creative commons free music thing, here’s a question: what happens to all those youtube videos where creative commons music is used and the artist says “hey, you can use this for free as long as it’s not for commercial purposes”? Doesn’t the use become commercial once you start earning ad revenue?

  2. Hi Nalts,The article from the daily reel says youtube will split the ad revenue with”holders of copyrighted content”.Does this mean everyone will be required to actually get a copyright for each video before being paid? Or do you think they mean The average joes video can earn money as long as no copyright is being infringed? thanks for your time,steve

  3. its probably going to be the latter…..This was in the variety article”Key to the new venture will be making sure that those who upload video actually own the rights to it “

  4. This is from youtube,press,all the basics:” At the end of the day, it’s all about the community and we will continue to do what we can to make the user experience a prosperous one.”……..and we dont have to do our own advertising!

  5. Youtube’s upcoming ‘Claim Your Content’ is supposed to handle copyright issues. Of my 513 videos on Youtube, there are only two, maybe three of my videos that are borderline enough for me to pull down. Other than that, I’m all tingly about making money on Youtube, even if it is only AdCents. They’ll HAVE to come up with an adclick Revver-killer model, though.

  6. I guess YouTube’s looked at Revver’s business model and decided ads inserted into the beginning or end of a video is the most effective way to go.

    There goes my hopes of YouTube introducing some kind of revolutionary revenue model that might turn the industry on it’s head (Though, whilst they’re not commenting there’s still a chance). At this rate the money I’m making writing for Helium.com is likely to remain more lucrative.

    Such is life for niche market, content creators like me.

  7. I’ve been watching msnbc online and they have ads you can’t get past unless you time your viewing just right, IOW multitasking while they play in the background. If you miss the beginning of what you really went there for, you have to slide the bar, back track.It’s hard to get away from the sound though, unless you cut that as well.

    TIVO for the internet?

  8. arrow— just another million $ idea!

    I realize these guys have to make money and maybe most people just don’t look at ads the way I do, which means if I like what I see I will click the ad, or buy the book though that site via amazon or google. Not because I want to buy the product, but because I want to support the artist. Then again maybe that’s just rare and I’m living in a fantasy world. arrow— very strong possibility.

    I like the idea of an affordable strong subscription base entity, something along the lines of cube break, only people pay a small fee with unintrusives ads to gain access. This is where I see Joost heading.

    btw firefox 2.0 is out and very nice.
    OMG right click spell checker!
    Eat my dust IE7.

  9. I click on ads only if they are of interest to me. Which is where Google Adsense got it right. I have Adsense ads all over my site that I’m just itching to click but can’t because I’m not supposed to click on my own ads. (I swear they miss out on a lot of legitimate revenue because of that policy).

    I don’t like any kind of ‘pay for content model’ especially when I know there are better options whilst keeping content free.

    I just hope YouTube implement ‘Adsense for Video’ and really make use of a videos description and tags when choosing which ads to serve.

  10. What bothers me is that YouTube is currently having no problems finding ways to share revenue with big corporations like the BBC. Of course, dealing with a few big companies and dealing with individual users is kinda comparing apples and oranges, but honestly, who keeps more people coming back to YouTube: the BBC or somebody like Barats and Beretta (or yourself)?

  11. Wow- I hadn’t considered that some of my “royalty free” stuff is not for commercial use. Clearly getting ad revenue on the piece is commercial use. Well I’ll send ’em a check.

Comments are closed.