What is Digg?96 Comments
- canewediggit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+237while this sounds like a great idea, doesn't this mean that all these users uploading copyrighted content will now be sued? if they're going to be paid, they have to identify themselves, so now they can be easily tracked. and if they're making $$$ using someone else's material, well.......
lip syncing to a 50 cent track? lawsuit. mash-up of colbert and o'reily? lawsuit. use the oc theme song in the background of your lonelygirl15 rip-off? lawsuit.
content creators should get paid, but how much of youtube's content is actually 100% original? - sundancekid503, on 10/12/2007, -1/+83Great... now every jackass with a webcam will be spamming their youtube videos all over digg and every other social network.
- plamoni, on 10/12/2007, -2/+64The only downside is that YouTube has been a giant money pit since it launched... Last I heard they were dropping about a million bucks a month on bandwidth...
So when they say "revenue sharing," does that mean they're going to start charging you? :-) - kursefour20, on 10/12/2007, -1/+37We'll I think it's going to be like Metacafe.com "Producer Rewards" where you can enroll certain video's to get revenue. The rest of the video's are just to view like Youtube.com is doing now. Now if they still decide to put a video with copyright infringement acts after reading the Terms and Conditions, then that's when they are in trouble.
- dpvu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27Time to break out the webcams!
Let's all make videos about how sad and depressing life is and reap the profits. - seaotter02, on 10/12/2007, -0/+26@4NDr01D
So let me recap for you. Revver has:
1) Better terms of use than Youtube
2) been paying for creating content for over a year
3) been paying for sharing content for over a year
4) an open API orders of magnitude more advanced than Youtube's (http://developer.revver.com/api)
5) better quality videos
6) QuickTime downloads on all videos
7) customizable branding on their flash player
8) an advanced JS widget (http://developer.revver.com/widget)
9) pays creators any time their content is used (paying users for the Verizon service that Youtube does not pay users for)
Yeah, Revver should suck it. They sound horrible. - swOhio, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25I'm sick to my stomach thinking about two ***** kids making thousands of dollars acting like jackasses lip syncing the pokemon theme song. I still don't understand why people watch some of the "most popular" users/vidoes.
- BlackSheep720, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18i guess this means a lot more videos will be being submitted to digg
- halbe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17What happened to the complete copyrights you give up when you upload your videos. I thought that they basically own it when you post it.
- JavertHolmes, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16YouTube before: people would spam the ***** out of other people's video comments and sites such as Digg to boost their view count.
YouTube after: same as YouTube before, but now people have a financial incentive to spam. This makes YouTube or the web in general better how? - locojones, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Doesn't a company actually have to have revenue in order to share it?
- stalinvlad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10No pron allowed on you prude
- Rapishorrid, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12@canewediggit
that's probably half the reason they are doing this - djphatjive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Youtube is nothing without copyright infringement.
- JackDanger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@plamoni
YouTube *was* spending $1mil/month on bandwidth until they were bought by Google. Google owns the most beastly fiber-optic network in the world and it's cost them far less to run YouTube. - smroge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Has YouTube become profitable itself yet?
- TheCount, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Well there goes Youtube. As soon as you involve money into the system, all the lame bastards will show up to try and game the system.
- swOhio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8wtf, why did my post end up here?
can't we just add a delete option for the same 2 minute window as the edit option? - toast1226, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I'm pretty sure it was Alex who predicted this. If I remember correctly in a diggnation podcast, Kevin didn't think it'd work out.
- JonAce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Can't wait for my $0.001 USD!
- jobeats, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It was Alex in Episode 67 at 4:50 min in. He was talking about ad revenue submitted content.
http://revision3.com/diggnation/2006-10-12 - Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"while this sounds like a great idea, doesn't this mean that all these users uploading copyrighted content will now be sued?"
Not really as directors who abide by the money making rules will be the only ones who can receive money, that would make it simple and ensure original creativity. - darkcaps, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yeah the more copyrighted videos you post the more money you get.
- ariza, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5REVVER.com has been sharing advertising with users for a few years now. This is nothing new.
My guess is that YouTube users will need to create a GoogleCheckout account to manage payments from YouTube. That way Google will continue their assault on PayPal. - Skysurfer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Youtube's position on user submissions already states they can pretty much do anything they want with the video until you remove it, so I'll be watching to see what changes are made on this policy. One way to look at it is that it's great they are going to compensate users, but I wonder how granular that will be. For instance, let's say I upload a video of my new five month old son doing something amazing (of which he does every day of course), and some ad agency wants to use that. So Youtube sells them a license for $50K - what do I see from that? A flat fee or a percentage of the total licensing revenue? Then what happens if I take the video off the site once it's been sold? The horse is pretty much out of the barn at that point.
Questions, questions...
The Youtube policy I reference is here (section 5, paragraph B): http://www.youtube.com/t/terms - m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5They facilitate the entire interaction. The value is in the interaction.
And this facilitation costs money (servers, bandwidth, developers).
So you, being a user of the service, should help keep this value by clicking ads to support them in paying all the bills.
If they make more than what goes out, that's good because it means more growth in all the areas I mentioned. More servers, bandwidth, developers thus features. And thus more value.
If it means someone like Kevin gets to buy a new BMW, well, good for him. =) - n3il89, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Here is the actual YouTube link of Hurley saying this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlYtu63_uDE - gamesector, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3One thing is for sure. If this happens, I'm buggered. My account is basically just tv shows...
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@m3mn0n - That's all well and good, but the value of Digg is in the submissions. If we all stopped submitting stories tomorrow, Digg would be out of business in a month.
- Stewage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Idiocracy here we come!
- Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If it's worth watching I'll watch it, otherwise you can go stuff it you stupid ugly retard!!!!
Just joking.. I always thought to comment on Youtube videos you must want the director to die a hopeless death.
(half the comments on Youtube are actually 'this' ugly) - jbklego, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3what revenue?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'll stick with MetaCafe... MetaCafe + YouTube = $$$ if I post all the same videos to both. Yeah baby!
- xister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2From the UA: "C. In connection with User Submissions, you further agree that you will not: (edit) post advertisements or solicitations of business: "
So no more "Will it Blend?"
(ducks and runs for cover) - TheNik, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You mentioned that and I looked. Every ad on this page was for Diggnation (when I was looking at it). :P
- JeremyL, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Show me the money
- surfpark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Profiting from your videos will most likely be conducted in the manner of Adsense. For example, Adsense doesn't care where your content is as long as you're directing traffic to their advertisers. I suspect that videos made for profit will have advertisements in their stream. It won't be about if YouTube makes a profit as a whole, but rather if advertisers are willing to pay to be seen on these most-watched videos.
I do think this is forward thinking, but there will be legal issues involved. There is a big difference to simply taking down a video verses revoking cash profits from a user. I have a feeling the profits will be held in escrow (ala PayPal) for a while before anyone sees a real cent. - orientis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'd like to see anyone lip-synching to 50 cent put in jail.
Every time I go looking for video clips - say Weird Al clips - the search results are full of ***** like "Weird Al - Bohemian Polka - ME AND MY SISTER MADE THIS TRIBUTE TO WEIRD AL LOLZ". News Flash: Only your mother thinks you are funny. Fan-made video clips for things that are already inherently silly is beyond stupid. It's metastupid. - Mikecol, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Since when does Google not have revenue?
- catullus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1you're forgetting the fact that Chad Hurley now OWNS 1992.. yes... the year
- sparkmonkeyz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1yay!!!
- xister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Shoot it (no pun intended) in an interesting way and call it art if they question it... ;)
- t0ny, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wish they did this sooner when this video http://youtube.com/watch?v=tR21apqxxHo of mine got 33k views... It rules have a stupid video that is related to a video on the home page :).
Like I was saying I dont expect to get paid anything but it would be nice. - danc4498, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Users profiting from posting Daily Show clips. Something tells me this'll cause media companies to think twice before allowing Youtube to post videos.
- scottytoodope, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1*patiently awaiting my check for 1.65 billion
- digitalsmash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Could it be...that they want to entice more people (esp. teens) into doing things like the "lonelygirl15" thing to gain more popularity for themselves, as well as gain a regular flow of traffic from those who come by everyday to watch the new "episodes? I really hope not! I'd rather see the good, copyrighted stuff! While it seems like a good business strategy, it's quite likely that it could one day lead to the demise of You Tube....espcially if the copyrighted content is elminiated in the process of screening and monitoring submissions for paying people. If You Tube does it without eliminating the copyrighted content...they would probably do alright.
- devzer0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1... and since we have negative revenue, you OWE us money!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHA !!! - stalinvlad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It would have to be really crazy amazing to get $50K
Would your wife earn that doing a video? - parthanant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It is an old idea. Covered back in 2006
http://mediavidea.blogspot.com/2006/10/google-youtube-deal-ultimate-roundup.html
It si to be seen when they actually start payinh out. - DMUX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1man that sucks, too bad they deleted my account for no reason a while back, I guess they didn't like all my really popular lockpicking videos so they up and deleted everything with no reason why
-
Show 51 - 96 of 96 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is