Does anyone think it is a good idea for Google to monetize the actual content of YouTube via copyright fees? By providing an innovative set of tools for content creators to sample and edit existing content, maybe Google can charge (A VERY SMALL) premium to users trying to edit and author content using existing content. EX: fan videos. Bleh; talking out of my ass, it doesn't matter. YouTube will be profitable eventually given the proliferation of mobile marketing initiatives.
I hope more and more companies adopt their transparency philosophy. 2nd comment: I love to see dinosaur business structures shutter with innovation! Why do they think that things won't change?
It wasn't really stupid...it was more naive. He asked that question because he doesn't really have a clear understanding that he end user has a choice when accessing the net...he just thinks because Google is so popular...their synonymous with owning the net.
I really like the way Eric Schmidt answers the questions, quickly assessing the info and generalizing a question to a more broader perspective, refusing trick questions and so on. His answers are always calm and directed towards Googles best interest: consumer benefit.
Its all to do with oppotunity cost, someone looking at any content on the web are not looking at content on TV, whether the content is professionally or CGM content.
consuming media? consuming ads? consuming tv through the Internet? *sigh* it's not the direction I would like the Internet to go. I recommend AdBlock Plus to everyone - it blocks virtually all advertisements on the Web and let you surf faster.
you do realize that if you eliminate the ads online you are essentially removing everything from the internet? Either that or you'll have to pay for everything online. Say byebye to youtube. And google..oh, and hulu...and addictinggames....and..................................
You're probably right but not necessarily. Look how wikipedia managed to live on donations. Google started as a research project at Stanford. Personally I think ads are really irritating no matter how intelligently put on a site you're reading. Maybe some hint on how to manage this would be servers like thepiratebay where people risk problems with law for the sake of.... (I'm not sure why). I hope ads aren't the only choice.
why must google give money back. the UK should invent its own companies and stop begging US companies to give back?
oswaldkuyler 2 months ago
Eric Schmidt is really a successful person I am his Fan.
VundaF 3 months ago
CERRRÓ CON BROCHE DE ORO
makinamati 11 months ago
So Eric, who is a brilliant man, doesn't support regulation of Google but supports Obama et al. Contradiction noticed by anyone?
BigGunsBates 1 year ago
Does anyone think it is a good idea for Google to monetize the actual content of YouTube via copyright fees? By providing an innovative set of tools for content creators to sample and edit existing content, maybe Google can charge (A VERY SMALL) premium to users trying to edit and author content using existing content. EX: fan videos. Bleh; talking out of my ass, it doesn't matter. YouTube will be profitable eventually given the proliferation of mobile marketing initiatives.
NAYuen83 2 years ago
the man knows what he is talking about
sanjerese 2 years ago
I hope more and more companies adopt their transparency philosophy. 2nd comment: I love to see dinosaur business structures shutter with innovation! Why do they think that things won't change?
overtext 2 years ago
such a stupid question at 20:35
hoyun 2 years ago 2
It wasn't really stupid...it was more naive. He asked that question because he doesn't really have a clear understanding that he end user has a choice when accessing the net...he just thinks because Google is so popular...their synonymous with owning the net.
overtext 2 years ago
I really like the way Eric Schmidt answers the questions, quickly assessing the info and generalizing a question to a more broader perspective, refusing trick questions and so on. His answers are always calm and directed towards Googles best interest: consumer benefit.
gytisbl 2 years ago 2
I completely agree with you...his methods instill confidence in the observer.
overtext 2 years ago
Eric is great.
m5boarddotcom 2 years ago
Kind of funny, no traditonal media , you are not getting a google cheque , now clap...
Cormac77 2 years ago
Its all to do with oppotunity cost, someone looking at any content on the web are not looking at content on TV, whether the content is professionally or CGM content.
Cormac77 2 years ago
consuming media? consuming ads? consuming tv through the Internet? *sigh* it's not the direction I would like the Internet to go. I recommend AdBlock Plus to everyone - it blocks virtually all advertisements on the Web and let you surf faster.
kid29a 2 years ago
you do realize that if you eliminate the ads online you are essentially removing everything from the internet? Either that or you'll have to pay for everything online. Say byebye to youtube. And google..oh, and hulu...and addictinggames....and..................................
5L3v3n 2 years ago 5
You're probably right but not necessarily. Look how wikipedia managed to live on donations. Google started as a research project at Stanford. Personally I think ads are really irritating no matter how intelligently put on a site you're reading. Maybe some hint on how to manage this would be servers like thepiratebay where people risk problems with law for the sake of.... (I'm not sure why). I hope ads aren't the only choice.
kid29a 2 years ago
nice
coijoi 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
boring
Mustkunstn1k 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Third
gsmmadness 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
second!!
PadelManiaZzZz 2 years ago
Comment removed
ViktorBluhme 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
faggot
adamtoner123 2 years ago
xD I don't really know why I wrote that comment :)
I know I'm a faggot!
ViktorBluhme 2 years ago