YouTube suit is fight for control of content

YOUTUBE SUIT IS FIGHT FOR CONTROL OF CONTENT
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Meg James and Dawn C. Chmielewski]
So why is Viacom bothering to sue YouTube? It's all about control, and money. Networks won't give YouTube much of their most-popular material because they believe that Google Inc., which owns YouTube, isn't protecting their copyrighted content. What's more, Google isn't offering to pay them what they think is enough. And even if the networks could sort out the financial issues, they still want to dictate which ads would be placed around their clips — and not have their shows thrown into the mishmash of fistfights, karaoke performances or ladybugs having sex. Most advertisers "want to be in the VIP section, the section that requires a higher price for admission," said Tim Hanlon, an executive with French advertising giant Publicis Groupe. "YouTube's audience is a polyglot and random. It's one gigantic lowest common denominator." Emily Riley, a Jupiter Research analyst, said the amount of money advertisers spend on social networking sites such as YouTube amounts to pocket change. The majority spent less than $250,000 in the last 12 months, Riley said, and only a tiny percentage of advertisers spent more than $1 million. By contrast, Walt Disney Co.'s ABC collected $1.7 million for each 30-second spot during the Academy Awards telecast. YouTube is still trying to figure out how to make big money on its massive audience. It has relied on banner advertisements, drawing an estimated $15 million in ad revenue last year.
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-youtube15mar15,1,4829...
(requires registration)

* Copyright still matters
[LA Times Editorial] Some Internet romantics view this kind of litigation as typical of lumbering, old-economy behemoths. Incapable of innovation and suspicious of technology, content conglomerates such as Viacom respond by filing lawsuits. But like the "useful arts" mentioned in the Constitution, the programs owned by Viacom and other entertainment companies cost money to produce. Companies have the right to protect that investment — even in the age of YouTube.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-ed-google15mar15,1,...
(requires registration)

* Viacom's billion-dollar suit against Google sounds laughable.
[WSJ op-ed by Paul Kedrosky] "whether Viacom wins or loses, the future of digital media won't be anything like the past, and the sooner Mr. Redstone gets that through his head, and the sooner he stops thinking he can control the media world, the better for him and for shareholders."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117392637770937728.html?mod=todays_us_op...