Youtube will no longer allow video overlays of sponsor logos and product branding, unless Google is paid by the sponsor

[deviant88]

Thats my youtube magic actions extension's volume overlay doesnt work anymore since 2 days ago,makes sense.

[Guest]

I really hope that this helps drive development of viable alternatives to Youtube.

I hope it's not too late to make that happen.

[Dredgy]

I really hope that this helps drive development of viable alternatives to Youtube.

I hope it's not too late to make that happen.

It's never too late, but this won't be a step that triggers it. Video sharing site that makes people more money isn't going to attract viewers (Vimeo!), but a site that makes it better to WATCH videos for the general population. And Youtube is still the best platform to watch. So it will reign for a while.

[Camul]

Never got a reply the first time, so I'll ask again. What is wrong with this exactly? Aren't they just adapting the old policies to cover ads inserted into videos? Why should those ads be treated any differently to normal ads? The reason that ads like the ones Linus has in his videos is because it's a counter to ad block. This really only fixed that issue for the content creators, but the service host is still getting shafted by adblock. This just makes things like they used to be if I understand it correctly?

[bry.yyyy]

Google Start Digging!!!!!

[Dredgy]

Never got a reply the first time, so I'll ask again. What is wrong with this exactly? Aren't they just adapting the old policies to cover ads inserted into videos? Why should those ads be treated any differently to normal ads? The reason that ads like the ones Linus has in his videos is because it's a counter to ad block. This really only fixed that issue for the content creators, but the service host is still getting shafted by adblock. This just makes things like they used to be if I understand it correctly?

Never got a reply the first time, so I'll ask again. What is wrong with this exactly? Aren't they just adapting the old policies to cover ads inserted into videos? Why should those ads be treated any differently to normal ads? The reason that ads like the ones Linus has in his videos is because it's a counter to ad block. This really only fixed that issue for the content creators, but the service host is still getting shafted by adblock. This just makes things like they used to be if I understand it correctly?

Because those ads in the video are negotiated for on their own contract completely independent of YouTube. They aren't a counter to ad block, they are a separate source of income than preroll ads (which Youtube takes a huge cut of). The sponsor may not have or want any relationship with Youtube, they want a relationship with the people they are sponsoring.

As youtube had nothing to with the production or insertion of the ads, and nothing to do with the number of viewers, so they don't really have any entitlement to revenue for them except that they are the on that are displaying them.

[LlamaDom]

@LinusTech and @Slick : Easy solution (if it's allowed, at least) : Print the sponsor logos on paper and hang that on the wall.  Or similar (plotted logos on plastic would look more pofessional)

 

Or T-Shirts...

[Guest]

This just makes things like they used to be if I understand it correctly?

From the perspective of how the revenue was split, maybe.

But this gives Youtube more control over the content than they used to have. Creators were able to negotiate with sponsors directly  and decide how much ads were too much ads. Now Youtube has to be involved.

[airdeano]

i know, lets talk about the Google thing and let all the other BS roll off our backs.

enough of the crapola and discuss the ramifications of logo/product placement.

 

how does it affect you/your channel or viewing YouTube in general, not how

political/religious this can turn into, because that is not what the topic is..

[Camul]

Because those ads in the video are negotiated for on their own contract completely independent of YouTube. They aren't a counter to ad block, they are a separate source of income than preroll ads (which Youtube takes a huge cut of). The sponsor may not have or want any relationship with Youtube, they want a relationship with the people they are sponsoring.

As youtube had nothing to with the production or insertion of the ads, and nothing to do with the number of viewers, so they don't really have any entitlement to revenue for them except that they are the on that are displaying them.

 

I would argue that YouTube has every right to claim some of the add revenue from the video considering the ads are still hosted on their service. It costs them money to support this content and if they don't make money off the video then they actually loose money on it. Not very much at all, but that's how it works.

[Puddleuk]

Time to grab some popcorn. This will get interesting

 

[Lewellyn]

i know, lets talk about the Google thing and let all the other BS roll off our backs.

enough of the crapola and discuss the ramifications of logo/product placement.

 

how does it affect you/your channel or viewing YouTube in general, not how

political/religious this can turn into, because that is not what the topic is..

 

Just another day.

[Lewellyn]

Surely this counts as double dipping on the part of Google? They already have their advertisements presented on their site, now they're monetizing the content in videos as well? (edit: I know this is a double post but I'm separating it from the off topic BS)

[othertomperson]

i know, lets talk about the Google thing and let all the other BS roll off our backs.

enough of the crapola and discuss the ramifications of logo/product placement.

 

how does it affect you/your channel or viewing YouTube in general, not how

political/religious this can turn into, because that is not what the topic is..

 

Sure that's how to deal with racism, just pretend it never happened. Cool moderation, bro.

[Mystic Mistro]

This just seems really like money grabbing...

[Bsmith]

this is very bad, since it's actually able to kill channels like LTT and techquicky, damn linus wont be happy with this

[Dredgy]

I would argue that YouTube has every right to claim some of the add revenue from the video considering the ads are still hosted on their service. It costs them money to support this content and if they don't make money off the video then they actually loose money on it. Not very much at all, but that's how it works.

They already make money off the video being played. They now can make more. Because it's their service hosting it, they can get away with it, but it's an enormous phallic move.

They should have NOTHING to do with content in the video (hard encoded data that is in the video whether or not that video is on YouTube), which is the creator's work.

[Camul]

From the perspective of how the revenue was split, maybe.

But this gives Youtube more control over the content than they used to have. Creators were able to negotiate with sponsors directly  and decide how much ads were too much ads. Now Youtube has to be involved.

 

Yeah, that does suck. YouTube should be interfering with the content, as long as it doesn't break any laws, or unless it doing something bad (as if it were to target a person to bully them).

[SpaceCore]

A real alternative to YouTube just escalated from "needed" to "crisis".

Google right now:

[Guest]

this is very bad, since it's actually able to kill channels like LTT and techquicky, damn linus wont be happy with this

 

'Kill' is a bit of a stretch. Maybe make them downsize the team and do fewer trips to expos.

I can't imagine anything being able to outright kill LTT now that they've gotten so far.

Maybe if that whole room watercooling loop spawns some kind of an algae slime monster...

[Camul]

They already make money off the video being played. They now can make more. Because it's their service hosting it, they can get away with it, but it's an enormous phallic move.

They should have NOTHING to do with content in the video (hard encoded data that is in the video whether or not that video is on YouTube), which is the creator's work.

 

Okay, I can agree. I think a better solution would be to only take a cut from any view that had ad-block enabled. It's not like they couldn't monitor that.

[N3rot0xin]

I think maybe we're overthinking this. We as normal viewers probably don't see the "behind the scenes" of this. I'm willing to bet that LMG as well as many other channels with partnerships to Youtube etc, have known about this for a bit longer then we have and as such have already begun formulating a plan of action to still maintain content quality and consistency. Also, we're not looking at the sponsor side of things. If I understand correctly, overlays are fine just as long as the sponsor is paying google to  be there. For all we know, most if not all of the LMG sponsors are already doing this so as far as LMG is concerned things could just stay the same. But that's speaking strictly to LMG and not to other channels/sponsors. I imagine the ramifications of this are going to be felt pretty hard across other parts of youtube.

[WereCat]

'Kill' is a bit of a stretch. Maybe make them downsize the team and do fewer trips to expos.

I can't imagine anything being able to outright kill LTT now that they've gotten so far.

Maybe if that whole room watercooling loop spawns some kind of an algae slime monster...

But it will hurt smaller channels that don't get as many views and rely on sponsors.

[Yoinkerman]

I think maybe we're overthinking this. We as normal viewers probably don't see the "behind the scenes" of this. I'm willing to bet that LMG as well as many other channels with partnerships to Youtube etc, have known about this for a bit longer then we have and as such have already begun formulating a plan of action to still maintain content quality and consistency. Also, we're not looking at the sponsor side of things. If I understand correctly, overlays are fine just as long as the sponsor is paying google to be there. For all we know, most if not all of the LMG sponsors are already doing this so as far as LMG is concerned things could just stay the same. But that's speaking strictly to LMG and not to other channels/sponsors. I imagine the ramifications of this are going to be felt pretty hard across other parts of youtube.

That's not how Google has worked in the past. They make changes and blindside people.

And screw you Google, I'll put whatever I want in my YouTube video.

[Bsmith]

'Kill' is a bit of a stretch. Maybe make them downsize the team and do fewer trips to expos.

I can't imagine anything being able to outright kill LTT now that they've gotten so far.

Maybe if that whole room watercooling loop spawns some kind of an algae slime monster...

 

well if im not mistaken, with the part of "video overlays of sponsor logo's and product branding" it could mean the end of the ad's at the beginning of most LTT video's and/or the sponsoring way of techquicky, where product branding is used or an overlay, that would reduce the income to just the people who have ad block turned off, knowing the income rate for each advertorial form youtube($0,01-$0,20) i doubt it will be alot.