Yesterday I wondered whether YouTube was going to permit publishers using its API to monetize the video themselves, or whether YouTube would control that inventory. TechCrunch wondered the same thing.
YouTube exec Hunter Walk offered a sorta answer in a comment to my post. But product manager Jim Paterson offered TechCrunch the direct answer: No.
Here is what he said:
We are not introducing any fundamentally new way to monetize. Any video that is uploaded through our API is treated exactly as on YouTube.com. In general if a video is uploaded to YouTube, in some cases we serve ads into that on YouTube.com. When people embed those we reserve rights to serve ads in the future.
It is not a white-label service. We do offer a hosting service, but it is not a direct alternative to the companies that you mention. There are some big differences. It is a YouTube-branded experience. It is free. The price you pay for using it is you must participate in the YouTube community.
I guess it is only fair to offer the tool for free in exchange for keeping the ad inventory. But I wonder whether it wouldn’t make sense to offer the publisher a share of the ad revenue, at least for the video that is viewed on the publisher’s site…
July 14, 2009 at 3:10 am |
Who said it is? Umm. You are curious about whether it wouldnât make sense to offer the publisher a share of the ad revenue at least for the video that is viewed on the publisherâs siteâ¦.