Upcoming Changes to MCNs & Monetization for Network Partners - Affiliate and Managed

[maurice barnett]

Cutting the nose off to spite the face. YouTube already has all of the same safeguards in place, but what this does is punish the legit users, not the abusers. The abusers are the ones distorting footage, adjusting the speed of songs and all sorts of other nonsense in addition to the copyrighted stuff. In turn, because they ****** around, now everyone else is hurt as a result.

For those who say it's no big deal, that's because your channels don't earn any money. Channels that do earn money, especially who do their content on current affairs or such are now being told to upload their content days in advance and scheduled so that it's monetized when it goes live. That way you don't lose out on the ad revenue generated in the initial burst from your subscribers.

It punishes everyone for the actions of the few. I hope they've done some fixing of the Adsense review for partners. Because unless my memory is foggy, I can recall videos being stuck in review indefinitely as YouTube had evidently just forgotten about them. Two days is a cakewalk compared to that, but still way too long.

couldnt have said it better myself

 

[Tarmack]

@Tarmack This was posted separately:

"Beginning in early January, newly-uploaded videos will occasionally go through a process called monetization review. This review is performed by YouTube, and will determine if your content is in compliance with YouTube’s current terms of use and copyright standards. Once your content has been submitted, the approval process usually takes between a few hours to a few days. This system will be based on trust-algorithm, so the more often you’re approved, the less often you will be reviewed."

Actually, I did see that as well. What I would like to see is channel history taken a bit further back though too. At this point, long standing channels have already proven their worth IMO. There should be a starting position of trust if you've been running a channel for a year or longer without ever having even edged close to a copyright issue. Hopefully they do right by their community, but if anything Google has done lately is any indicator, I wouldn't hold my breath. I'm still harping on Curse to find out if they're really going down a heavy managed route. If they do, they'll be the only MCN doing it because nobody else is.

 

[Sinc]

Actually, I did see that as well. What I would like to see is channel history taken a bit further back though too. At this point, long standing channels have already proven their worth IMO. There should be a starting position of trust if you've been running a channel for a year or longer without ever having even edged close to a copyright issue. Hopefully they do right by their community, but if anything Google has done lately is any indicator, I wouldn't hold my breath. I'm still harping on Curse to find out if they're really going down a heavy managed route. If they do, they'll be the only MCN doing it because nobody else is.

this...is.....what....the......algorithm.....is....for...lol i swear, you missed the only part he put in bold.

 

[markkaz]

@Sinc We don't know if everybody is being judged starting from today or from our history.

 

[Tarmack]

this...is.....what....the......algorithm.....is....for...lol i swear, you missed the only part he put in bold.

No it isn't. The portion in bold, if you'll bother to read it again, says nothing about past approval. Indeed the paragraph itself states beginning in January, while the bold part states the more you are approved, not the more you have in the past been approved. Please stop trying to be a troll, just for a f*****g minute, it's getting tiresome.

 

[Sinc]

@Sinc We don't know if everybody is being judged starting from today or from our history.

i ment the algorithm is the "Trust" system he speak of, it didnt exist before, so they cant be blamed for it now trying it out, in the future it would work for everyone, like he wishes it would on its release.[DOUBLEPOST=1386307895,1386307817][/DOUBLEPOST]

what ever you said.

i wont even justify this with a proper response.

 

[Alex1522]

I don't see the big deal. As long as you're uploading content you have the rights to, it's not going to affect you. If you're uploading content you don't have the rights to, well that's you're own fault entirely.

I agree with that... And besides who cares?! Just uploade for fun and if it gets banned uploade something else xD!

 

[JustSomeGermanDude]

@Sinc We don't know if everybody is being judged starting from today or from our history.

Guess: Everyone who is claiming now and gets pushed into monetization will start from zero cause they have no monetization history. For everyone who isn't in a network there's no change at all, cause that's simple how monetization is and has been. Starting from zero isn't a big deal though. Its not like you're starting with 3 days of review and slowly work your way up, it's more like starting <3 hours and if you screw up it gets longer.

 

[maurice barnett]

No it isn't. The portion in bold, if you'll bother to read it again, says nothing about past approval. Indeed the paragraph itself states beginning in January, while the bold part states the more you are approved, not the more you have in the past been approved. Please stop trying to be a troll, just for a f*****g minute, it's getting tiresome.

sinc gets off on getting on other people just another fabled keyboard thug....... [DOUBLEPOST=1386314993,1386314897][/DOUBLEPOST]

Guess: Everyone who is claiming now and gets pushed into monetization will start from zero cause they have no monetization history. For everyone who isn't in a network there's no change at all, cause that's simple how monetization is and has been. Starting from zero isn't a big deal though. Its not like you're starting with 3 days of review and slowly work your way up, it's more like starting <3 hours and if you screw up it gets longer.

well said.....lol i hope your correct on this

 

[unknown_user90483573867]

Even vloggers?