All your video is belong to us…

This is not a paid commercial. For gawd sakes, I’m actually reviewing a toothbrush…

Ever since DVguru compared ten video sharing services, more services have cropped up.

According to Reuters, YouTube serves up 100 million videos a day. In June, 2.5 billion videos were watched on YouTube; contrast that with the company’s size which is just over 30 employees. More than 65,000 videos are now uploaded daily to YouTube, up from around 50,000 in May. YouTube also boasts nearly 20 million unique users per month, according to Nielsen//NetRatings, another Internet audience measurement firm. I’ve been using YouTube for a while now, putting out heavy-hitters once in a while (see my profile).

However, after hearing about YouTube’s major boo-boo with their new “all your video is belong to us” terms and agreement, I’ve been looking at other options. I know it costs YouTube about $1 million per month in bandwidth charges, but that doesn’t justify a popular company to push anyone around. No free lunchie.

While YouTube’s marketing manager clarified by saying that they don’t intend to sell your content, the realization of someone taking ownership of my free content makes me one unhappy camper. Perhaps this was the tipping point, since I’ve always been peeved by YouTube’s upload limitation of 15 minutes or 100MB.

What else have I considered then?
I’m trying Veoh now which lets me upload videos with no bloody file size limit, and lets users download the original video file I uploaded. I would also consider Revver and Google Video since they provide users in revenue-sharing / syndication opportunities.

Aside: The Oral-B Pulsar uses a pager-motor as seen here…

10 thoughts on “All your video is belong to us…

  1. How is this a review when you do tell us how well it works? How will we know what to buy, what to eat, what to read, what to believe, etc… if you don’t tell us? Oh wait, I forgot, that is Oprah’s job.

  2. Wasn’t there some controversy regarding Boing Boing’s coverage of YouTube’s TAC? For instance, they conveniently obmitted the first and last lines of the passage they quoted, i.e. “For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions.” and “The foregoing license granted by you terminates once you remove or delete a User Submission from the YouTube Website.”

    The Boing Boing link you posted has a reply from a YouTube marketing manager explaining the TAC.

  3. Biao: Yup, I mentioned that YouTube was pushing it a little, then it was blown out of proportion by bloggers, but either way it reminded me to consider other options.

    Sacrelicious: The uploading speed was ridiculously fast too, but it took about 30mins to process the video before it was ready for viewing. I love the fact that users can also download the original video, not just the streaming flash one.

  4. If YouTube did that, I bet more users will start switching. I believe Revver lets you put an ad at the end of your video and split the revenue 50/50 for clickthroughs.

  5. HI Kevin,

    Yes, Veoh will allow users to download a full video, after viewing a short clip on the site.. if they sign up.

    There are other sites I think are better. I use which allows you to upload whatever you want, converts it to flash, providing an embedded player for those that want that while also providing the files in their original formats for those that want that.

    The videos can be aggregated or posted on blogs. You can crosspost when you upload to have your videos sent right to your blog, complete with text. They’re free. They offer advertising but only for those that want it and they split the profits with the videographer.

    When you’re checking out sites, give them a try too.

    (disclaimer: I have issues with Veoh due to some early “business decisions” they made involving ripping off content from other hosting sites)

  6. Well, consider they are providing FREE BANDWIDTH, you have to understand that part of the business model here .. is that we own all your base. It only makes sense that they own all content (not pirated, or not fair use, mind you) uploaded to the site. Can you only imagine wtf it must cost to keep UP with that kind of volume!?

    Secondly, question … does Flikr work in the same way? If they do, well I consider photos to be a little less touchable than video, but I imagine that someone would disagree with me on that. It’s like saying that just because a painting is fresco style vs. cubeism, it’s not covered under the same legal rights.. sure some people would agree with that (based on crap value of cube-ism) hehe…. either way, I have no problem with YouTube. They can own all my base with respect to the lip-sync I may do.

Comments are closed.