Dylan, KTL, BBC World Service interview - Google responds at last

[fergie_mac66]

you goto hope that the old adage "the bigger they are the harder they fall" will come to pass .

seem to remember ebay had to make a big change in the way the treated people

 

[maxi77]

One though may be to see if your MEP may be interested in taking this up as the EU has had some success in making life hard for Microsoft for abusing a monopoly.

 

[fergie_mac66]

One though may be to see if your MEP may be interested in taking this up as the EU has had some success in making life hard for Microsoft for abusing a monopoly.

the terms are def' unfare and there must be a lot of people out there who have been caught by them . If google are still making money from the ads , there appears to be no proof one way or other as to what is happening to the advertisers fees

 

[Sybarite]

"If google are still making money from the ads , there appears to be no proof one way or other as to what is happening to the advertisers fees"

This is the aspect that I would explore. My gut feeling says its Dylan's strongest argument - along of course with the vocal support from people here.

 

[fergie_mac66]

Yes could be a lot of dosh if thousands of people have had adsense accounts stopped and all or even a percentage still running ads ! hesitate to speculate at the potential income!

 

[BrendanS]

google say that money from stopped accounts goes back to advertisers. Might be worth asking if that still happens for ads showing after the account is closed - I suspect it does

 

[prv]

the terms are def' unfare

Unfair terms (as determined by a court) are illegal, but only in consumer contracts. Businesses are assumed to be savvy enough to look after themselves. I assume Google would argue that people signing up to display its ads are operating as a business, and they're quite likely right especially when the sums are as large as Dylan's.

Pete

 

[dylanwinter]

Business v consumer contracts

Unfair terms (as determined by a court) are illegal, but only in consumer contracts. Businesses are assumed to be savvy enough to look after themselves. I assume Google would argue that people signing up to display its ads are operating as a business, and they're quite likely right especially when the sums are as large as Dylan's.

Pete

I am sure you are correct - also the fact that the monthly check was coming from switzerland means that anything I signed up is outside EU tax and I assume contract law.

needless to say I still had to pay tax on what they paid me - but they did not have to pay EU or US tax on their profits.

However, it does seem to me that the contract is drawn up so that they can pull out any time they choose - at no notice - and it seems can also seize back money for work already done. As my KTL Lawyers subsriber said - "wow - these guys are really expensive - don't fight them".

As you say, by the end of this work for google - because that is who I have been making films for over the past twio years it was turning into £15,000 a year business

and stil no contact with anything but a computer

- however, to have such a business closed down by a computer is a new twist and suggests that perhaps the law is lagging behind the technology - or the algorithms.



I am sure that Google are trousering the profits from the adverts being run against my films rather than passing them back to the advertisers - why would thay give money back to the advertisers who are presumbaly getting good value from the 1.5 million hits a month.

Scuttlebutt in its whole life has had 600,000 posts

- that is two weeks of hits on my trucking films - substantial amount of business

and puts the size of the yachting business in the UK into some sort of perspective

Google could close down any number of sailing websites at a moments notice.

For me the web has really added to the enjoyment of my sailing - not least because I meet people from these forums - and within a few clicks and a few pagesof reading the maritime knowledge of the world is on my desktop.

D

 

[Twister_Ken]

Scuttlebutt in its whole life has had 600,000 posts

- that is two weeks of hits on my trucking films - substantial amount of business

and puts the size of the yachting business in the UK into some sort of perspective

Google could close down any number of sailing websites at a moments notice.

612,954 posts. Average views per post, maybe 500. So 306 million 'hits'. And that's just Buttlescutt.

 

[idpnd]

I am sure that Google are trousering the profits from the adverts being run against my films rather than passing them back to the advertisers - why would thay give money back to the advertisers who are presumbaly getting good value from the 1.5 million hits a month.

That's certainly the single most annoying bit. Their business model is perfect in that they don't normally pay any casual contributors anything for their hits, and may generously share advertising revenue with successful content producers (presumably to entice them to produce more content). However, if they cancel your contract for any one of the 2 million plausible reasons specified, you're back to being a casual user without any participation in the clicks generated

 

[dylanwinter]

posts versus threads

612,954 posts. Average views per post, maybe 500. So 306 million 'hits'. And that's just Buttlescutt.

TK

I fear you might be confusing posts with threads

perhaps an average of 500 views per thread

unless its about mobos, anchors or ensigns of course

so maybe a bit shy of 306 million

In my experience crudely applied measuring sticks - like is what I done in comparing trucking films to scuttlebutt - are dangerous things

very easy to trip over them

However, I assume that if we could offer YBW 1.5 million its a month on scuttlebutt they would be reasonably happy to have me aboard - who knows PBO might even offer me a column

on second thoughts.... if they have watched my films and seen my boats..... hardly match their high standards

new a new sailing amagazine called "the floating bodger"

massive advertising spend from gaffa tape, araldite and errrr.... thats it

Dylan

 

[prv]

However, it does seem to me that the contract is drawn up so that they can pull out any time they choose - at no notice - and it seems can also seize back money for work already done.

Companies can write whatever they want in a contract, but if it contains unfair terms and falls under the scope of UTICCA[1], those terms are still void. As I understand it the courts generally interpret "fairness" in the sense of a balance of power - if the company awards itself all the power in the relationship and the right to do all kinds of arbitrary detrimental acts to the consumer without comeback, the contract will be held to be unfair. This applies especially if they don't draw special attention to clauses which a reasonable person would find surprising.

Your problem is that your contract probably isn't a consumer contract, plus the territory questions.

Pete
(Not a lawyer)

[1] Unfair Terms In Consumer Contracts Act

 

[fergie_mac66]

google say that money from stopped accounts goes back to advertisers. Might be worth asking if that still happens for ads showing after the account is closed - I suspect it does

if that is the case then advertisers would have to have credits showing somewhere on their paperwork err computer generated invoices ? Any advertisers on here do you/they get refunds shown? . If google say they refund , and nobody has any evidence of any refunds. what would that be ?

 

[Ubergeekian]

Pity the interviewer didn't ask him to justify the fact that Google is still placing ads on your site and, presumably, trousering the revenue.

But not charging him for hosting and streaming his videos ...

 

[DogWatch]

descriptions of silly numbers of hits snipped

D

If your films are as popular as this, can you not sell your own advertising, even within the films?

You would then own your own destiny surely?

Goggle have been extremely helpful to you in this, they have pointed out the types of business who you can target. Plonk the advert at the beginning of the film and you can even stick them back on google using free hosting no?

youtube even allow you to add clicky links to films, so you can make it easy to click to your own advertiser, dvd sales, anywhere YOU want to go.

Just a thought.

On the sailing site, you could push local businesses as you go around, it will take longer to organise, but isn't that what your kids are for? You bigged up the service you received from the depth sounder problems, I bet you made less than a penny for that, it could have earned you commission if you had approached it differently. I know this goes against your everything should be free, but either you want to make a living or you want to post hobby videos.

From your recent posts I guess you want a bit of both.

Sorry to harp on about stuff I know nothing about, but it seems to me if goggle see you as a cash-cow, there must be some way you too can exploit it.

 

[nathanlee]

If your films are as popular as this, can you not sell your own advertising, even within the films?

How lovely that would be. Alas, they will not let you because it is in competition with their own ad service. Google are, in their entirety, an ad agency. Nothing more.

 

[DogWatch]

How lovely that would be. Alas, they will not let you because it is in competition with their own ad service. Google are, in their entirety, an ad agency. Nothing more.

There is more to the web than goggle nathan, well actually while everyone relies on it maybe not. I did suggest he could still host on YT, but he could just as easily rent his own space.

 

[nathanlee]

There is more to the web than goggle nathan, well actually while everyone relies on it maybe not. I did suggest he could still host on YT, but he could just as easily rent his own space.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that.

YT is a massive network with ten of millions of people on it all day, looking for nothing other than video content. There is a recommendation engine that suggests other videos you may like. I could watch a video about a mirror offshore, and find the KTL stuff, for example.

More probably, a user could be viewing truck films, and then have Dylan's films recommended. This is how they get so popular. If you remove that mass ready rolled, pre primed audience from the mix, and just rely on people searching Google/Bing (what else is there these days?) for "truck videos" then the numbers would drop absolutely massively.

Also, because of the video specific content on YT, the search phrases are more attainable. Dylan could quite feasibly get to the first page of results for "trucks", for example, but to do that in a generic search across the whole web as on a fully fledged search engine.. well, in real terms it's unlikely. Not impossible, but given the commercial outfits you'd be in competition with, and the mass of non video content, then it's not a realistic goal for joe blogs.

In short, without YT as a platform, Dylan's videos would have never got as many views as they have.

Google & Youtube know this. People on it are held firmly by the balls.

 

[Lakesailor]

It's a shame, but you are entirely correct.
There are other upload video sites.
But can you name them?

Building traffic and market awareness for an individual site is nearly impossible these days.

The numbers are so huge and enormous that the cost of reaching so many hits far outweighs the benefit.

 

[Lakesailor]

It's a shame, but you are entirely correct.
There are other upload video sites.
But can you name them?

Building traffic and market awareness for an individual site is nearly impossible these days.

The numbers are so huge and enormous that the cost of reaching so many hits far outweighs the benefit.