|Aress - 2016-01-05 |
I think it's a legitimate complaint.
Looking at you LadBible.
Now that there are plenty of people making meager livings from Youtube ad revenue, it's definitely a legitimate complaint.
What makes them think that these "stolen views" are literally "stolen", and not simply generated independently? That is, the 15 million viewers-on-Facebook who clicked through your video in five seconds, had they not done this, would they have otherwise gone to your Youtube channel and watched the whole thing? If you were GOING to get 15 million views, but only received 1 million views, because Poaching, then that is one thing. But if you were only ever going to get 1 million views in the first place, and those 15 million additional views were generated ex nihilo, then it seems to me that instead of whining, the optimal strategy here would be to accept that your Youtube strategy isn't working as well as you'd like, and start sharing your videos on Facebook.
Also, around two minutes in, the narrator states that the free and natural sharing of information does not increase exposure for independent content creators. That's a rather bold claim; do they provide any sources for this?
I agree with this but I don't see a problem with promoting your music or art form with a video of a cat or something.. band flyers do this all the time: sometimes it's a really creative local artist's work but more often than not it's just some tired internet meme on a sheet of paper that will probably be stapled over the next day, but in either case it's supposed to be eye catching instead of a regular sheet of paper with the band's name in Helvetica.
I should probably defriend him because it's getting annoying, but Gucci Mane's FB is like this, and all he posts is clickbait or viral videos, and that's got nothing to do with his work as a musician. In turn, other aspiring musicians post links to their soundcloud or whatever in the comments. Who knows if anyone clicks on them but it's got nothing to do with the video of the cat at that point.
Or, promoting from prison if you're Gucci Mane that is..
Rodents of Unusual Size
I actually do have a problem with a large scale moneymaking operation if it's a musician only getting attention for their music by showcasing other artists, if there are no views accumulating on that artists Youtube channel and there is no benefit to them.
Yeah I'm on the fences; in my example Mr. Gucci Mane's music isn't being promoted at all, since there hasn't been any since his incarceration, just clickbait links to something like Kim Kardashian's Butt pics, or cute kittens, but they get 1+ million views and thousands of comments, some of which are links to artists' own soundclouds. But I wouldn't like it much if I promoted my own band and someone else posted a link to their soundsloud directly underneath and it got more views via linkback, simply because I had more followers.
But, a lot of bands got started this way, way before the internet. Metallica were famous for trading out their bootlegs at shows, and The Pretenders famously recruited the Violent Femmes, who were busking outside of the Oriental Theatre to open for them after the opening band's van broke down. Who was that opening band? I dunno. All of a sudden Violent Femmes are famous and everybody forgot. And people give out free CDRs of their own material at popular band concerts all the time.
|Gmork - 2016-01-05 |
Or someone could just firebomb facebook HQ.
|Cube - 2016-01-05 |
Well hot damn, that's why I haven't had that many views!
Might also be because I uploaded my last video to Youtube about 8 years ago. Also, I have since lost the control of my account, because I didn't want to change it into a Google account.
That does beg the question though; poetv's small but an embedded video means that the original gets no views from here, correct? The views are in the hundreds on here vs. the millions on Facebook, but if poeTV suddenly exploded in popularity would we want to stop embedding videos ourselves?
|Oscar Wildcat - 2016-01-05 |
We didn't kill all the Brian Harrod whilst we had the chance: now he has metastasized.
Harrod was different though; I've posted videos I've seen on here on facebook and I don't give credit to poeTV or the submitter name, and I've never really thought twice about it. I'm assuming most poesters that use FB have. But Harrod took our comments themselves, not just the videos. So a grumpy cat video with the description "this is how I feel on mondays" is pretty universal, but not so much for plagiarism down to a single typo of mine.
|Hooker - 2016-01-05 |
I have a better solution: never, ever, ever use Facebook. Ever. You already don't need it, so just stop using it.
|StanleyPain - 2016-01-05 |
This is the kind of bullshit mentality that has led to the sorry, draconian state of our copyright law...this belief that as an art creator, you are literally entitled to own every single view, observation, discussion, or even the merest brushing up against your work no matter where or why or what the context.
You want to be circulated on the internet then you have no fucking choice but to have limits on what exactly you control. If you don't want people looking at/listening to your art outside of a venue you control, then don't put it on the internet and place it only somewhere where you have realistic control of it.
There is piracy and flat out theft and then there is litigating the actual marketing and publicity of your work as if it is the same thing. In other words, shut the fuck up all you retarded YT video creators and shit who think that you should be paid even MORE for your "OMG 5 FACTS YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT ARIEL THE MERMAID" videos than you already get you entitled babies.
I'm with you there, SP! And yeah, Boomer, it's funny you use the Dogs analogy, because that's the same analogy I've been using to explain Youtube post-monetization. Ad-sense money really is just scraps, and it has been causing the dogs to fight each other.
|Rodents of Unusual Size - 2016-01-06 |
I've been wondering about this lately. Youtube should make an algorithm that prevents Facebook from being able to link on Facebook. Just a "go to Youtube" function. There are so many fucking remoras, it's astounding that assholes wanting to sell their own music do so by stealing other people's. Or selling anything else.
Motherfucking Facebook Brian Herroding.
Nothing to do with linking videos, as that still gives the creator views so isn't "stolen". The problem is people who rip raw video from youtube and then upload it into fb's system.
Holy shit. I think the last time I thought about avi converters for youtube was before facebook existed so I hadn't even thought about that.
|Ocyrus - 2016-01-06 |
Facebook is faggotry. So many levels.
|Monkey Napoleon - 2016-01-06 |
I find whining of this nature by content creators to be kind of ironic.
Youtube's popularity is BUILT on exactly this type infringement, and when they finally got around to doing something about it... the same people cry constantly about how strict and uncompromising it is. They can't even stop this type of activity from happening on youtube, much less external sites.
Also, anyone who does this for a living will tell you that google partner money is terrible. Sponsorships and direct audience engagement (appearances, patreon, etc) are where it's at.
Wear your adblock add-on proud, and encourage content creators to pursue external revenue that is more fair for everyone.
|tesla_weapon - 2016-01-06 |
I raised the "They make scraps off advertising" point with a friend, and a quick google search (fucking google) shows that many Youtubers can make 00 a week. Some youtubers make a million dollars a month. Ellen is the second most viewed youtuber, which is just clips from her show mostly, and her videos don't have any ads. I hate this myth that it's an advertising model, when really it is selling meta data for market research. That is obviously big fucking money even if Youtube is running at a loss. Facebook also has a vast array of data mining going on, even if Mark Truckerbird trends his own status updates.
My friend who works in IT cannot sanely fathom the problem he sees with youtube, which is disk space. I hypothesise that some advanced alien or futuristic technology must be involved.
As of right now, million would buy you 33.3 PB of storage at consumer prices assuming you're using 4TB HDD's. Assume they get a huge discount for volume.
33.3 PB is roughly 33.3 million hours of encoded video in 1080p. A rough estimation of how much video youtube is storing as of this time last year is 550 million hours. So, the actual HDD's themselves would cost under million.
The storage space is the cheap part. The server hardware to host and manage it plus the manpower to maintain it is where you get bogged down. They don't own several stadium sized server farms for nothing.
"many Youtubers can make 00 a week"
How many is "many"? I would be shocked if the number of people making lower middle class incomes off of Youtube is even in the 6 digits, out of what, 5.2 billion or so active users as of last year? Maybe that's changed recently but historically the idea that lots of people are making good livings from Youtube is very wrong (but widely encouraged by Google of course).
|cognitivedissonance - 2016-01-06 |
Not my views! I need those to liiiiiiiiiiiiive!
| Register or login To Post a Comment|