Your comment is quite insightful. They _are_ moving into the content business.
Just one example: I work in the music industry. YouTube has a fingerprinting service is used to pay out royalties on music. The tech is similar to Shazam.. whereby if the girl next door uses "Island In The Sun" by Weezer in her vlog, YouTube detects that song and pays Weezer a small royalty.
The alternative option for Weezer is to block this content (meaning her video would be taken down) but obviously it's in their best interest to monetize.
This is just one way YouTube gets in bed with content producers like record labels.
This same thing is now being implemented in Facebook videos, so clearly that's something they're going to push.. having their users host longer-form video than what is normally seen on facebook. And I'm sure there's other parallel efforts on Facebook's side to get more premium video and gaming content onto their platform.
Facebook recently acquired exclusive rights to broadcast ESL Dota 2 and the reaction has been mostly negative [1]. Players and fans are accustomed to watching professional games on Twitch or using the game client, both of which provide a better experience. Twitch has a very good streaming interface, chat with Dota 2 related emotes, and easy clipping of highlights. The game client lets you view via broadcaster's perspective, any player's perspective (great for learning from the pros) or free cam.
It has turned into a PR nightmare for ESL. They shot themselves in the foot by throwing fits on Twitter and DMCA'ing (in bad faith) other prominent Twitch streamers who broadcast the matches directly from the game client, which is explicitly allowed by Valve.
The whole ordeal seems like a land grab by Facebook. Why would anyone want their friends / family to know they're watching people play video games for hours? Why put up with a terrible streaming interface when Twitch and Youtube are well-known and proven? No one wanted this except Facebook; buying up users to track and monetize them is just what they do best.
> recently acquired exclusive rights to broadcast ESL Dota 2
Yup I heard this as well.
I was just saying that it's not a question of if/when Facebook is making said land-grab into the content space. They're already on the move.
Where does that royalty payment come from out of curiosity? Like does it come out of the money that might go to the person who created and posted the video that used it?
Yes. In the case of the "girl next door" example, she's probably not over the threshold she needs to be to make money from youtube. So the ad revenue is split between youtube and the content owner of the music.
I don't have a ton of insight but I'm sure it gets more complicated when you have creators that get a cut of the money, as well as potentially multiple advertisers in the case of longer videos. But it all comes out of that ad revenue.
I don't use facebook but I was under the impression facebook video has been unpopular so far. I certainly have never heard anyone I know mention that they saw a video on facebook, but maybe that's because they say it's "From CNN" and actually it's from their facebook page?
Just one example: I work in the music industry. YouTube has a fingerprinting service is used to pay out royalties on music. The tech is similar to Shazam.. whereby if the girl next door uses "Island In The Sun" by Weezer in her vlog, YouTube detects that song and pays Weezer a small royalty.
The alternative option for Weezer is to block this content (meaning her video would be taken down) but obviously it's in their best interest to monetize.
This is just one way YouTube gets in bed with content producers like record labels.
This same thing is now being implemented in Facebook videos, so clearly that's something they're going to push.. having their users host longer-form video than what is normally seen on facebook. And I'm sure there's other parallel efforts on Facebook's side to get more premium video and gaming content onto their platform.