In any video I have ads on, I am using music by only Blizzard themselves, which is allowed.
Weirdly enough though, on my trailer vids, Youtube actually forced me (kindly) to turn off my ads after about a month. They seem to only want me to have ads on my tutorials.
$143 from 16 months of ads isn't really 'earning money' lol. But you guys can do the math and extrapolate to see how much money Husky or VEVO makes. And my ads don't even do the 15s/30s pre-video ads (if they did, I would remove them!).
You DO need to have 50k+ views PER DAY to make any living off of it. But even coming up with that much content, recording, editing, and uploading takes way too much time.
As far as how I made the money, Youtube asked me to revenue a few vids, which they approved. Then they finally made me a full partner (I guess since Blizz condones it now), but it took almost a year to get approved.
Funny to see. My one old WoW video got about 580 views before I removed it, the majority of those being from France. Brrrrr. Somehow, 15% of those views were from an embedded version, which is odd as I've never embedded it anywhere myself.
Edit: Debates of the Ancients Sixen's idea? My ass! He'd wish he could come up with those awesome jokes =P. Iirc it was a combination of mods, Zeldarules28 coming up with the idea to combine Debates with another map for April Fools.
Okay I withdraw my statement then haha. He came to me with it so I assumed it was him.
Hey guys, another fun thread here about my Youtube stats. I figure it's fun to see since there's not many (known) Youtube people that really ever release their stats...
All time stats:
Total views: 1,116,751
Total likes: 2,994
Total dislikes: 141
Total comments: 3,940
Explain. Why it should even show on highlight? you mean event "player highlights unit?" then unit's flag "cannot be highlighted" needs to be unchecked. It's about units tho, not doodads.
This is probably the issue here. As explained, the unit-highlighted trigger won't fire unless you go into each unit in the data editor (that you want to be highlightable) and go to unit flags, and uncheck 'cannot be highlighted'
My mom is pretty lucky, she is in her 60's and still has her mom (though her dad just died last year). Still, be nice having your parents around at 60.
What happened with Megaupload was simply the publishing and recording industries kicking the board right after losing the game (SOPA not being passed). I'm a law student and I have researched this subject for a paper I had to write on consumer's rights on the Internet. As far as my research went all I can say is that there's widespread confusion and misinformation regarding piracy and intellectual property. For starters the film, publishing, and recording industries have long since been afraid of the Internet because they are following an obsolete business model. The same thing was said about the TV in its own time: how it would hurt the artist and authors by allowing free access to content protected by copyright. However copyright laws forbid profit through distribution of copies or profit through the provision of access to such content (example: selling pirated DVDs or charging people to view a movie I bought). You are of course allowed to share absolutely anything you buy, including data, with whomever you please as long as you do not seek profit from it.
Intellectual property is still property, therefore it is subject to the same laws pertaining to property as an absolute right. The ramifications might be different but it is in essence the same: when you own a car/laptop/house/whatever you have every right inherent to property, meaning you can enjoy/use/dispose/reinvindicate (which means get your stuff back after it's been taken from you) whatever you have purchased. The properties of property (sounds redundant I know) are that it is absolute (though only in name because property is subject to expropriation by the government in certain cases); it is real, which is a distinction in regards to other rights; and it is eternal, that is the right doesn't cease to function when the owner parts with his property, and can only be extinguished by destruction or transfer of said property.
In regards to intellectual property you basically acquire a copy, yet you do not acquire the ownership of the content. The difference between both is that even though you have the right to enjoy/use/dispose/reinvindicate the CD where the copy is stored, you have no right to the content of such. In essence, you cannot apply the concepts of property to the registered material. In other words, you can do anything to the cd/DVD/book and the content stored in there (with the exception of the original copy of the material), however you do not own the song/movie/story you bought and therefore cannot dispose or profit from such as if it were your own. This means that you couldn't, for example, record the song and sell it for a profit, or go to the patent office and modify the registered material. You can however copy and dispose of whatever is stored in your disk as long as you do not violate the author's rights (meaning profiting from the material itself).
Now that that's out of the way let us talk about the industries themselves. They're the middle man in all of this. The artists create materials and sell the publishing rights (and publishing rights alone, I can't stress this enough) to a company which will then redistribute the content to everyone else for a profit. This is what sparks the controversy, because the companies in charge of doing this want to profit as much as they can from material they do not own. And for decades they got away with it while making millions in the process while only paying a meager 3% to the artists and actual owners of such content (not kidding here, only if you're well known can you earn up to 10% of the profit from the sales). This was all fine and dandy until the Internet came along and it allowed consumers to share their own legally purchased copy with everyone else. The concept that downloading intellectual property from the Internet is stealing is completely ludicrous from a legal standpoint. If I purchase a copy containing copywritten content I may not have the right to make copies and sell it, but I can make copies for myself and I can also lend or gift such copies to others. This of course doesn't sit well for the publishing industries because they lose a lot of money due to people resorting to the Internet to acquire copies instead of resorting to their highly overpriced copies. But here's the bottom line: since the availability of copywritten content on the Internet (the invention of MP3s followed by services like iTune, Netflix and others) artists now earn more than they did a decade ago, and the only ones losing here are the publishers. What they are doing right now is fighting with whatever means they have at their disposal to protect an old and outdated business model that has no place or future in today's society.
In short: "piracy" is not a problem of theft, but rather a problem of lack of service. If you do not provide the service customers require, someone else will.
How old are you? I lost my dad almost 1.5 years ago... it's pretty shitty thinking about all you'll miss, but your life will go on as is.
Edit: Man the medical community really needs to step it up so we can stop dieing from things like this... I bet in 100 years humans will be living for very very long periods...
Wow that's crazy how they can just arrest people anywhere for running a site. This is really getting out of hand. Glad we have a trillion dollars worth of companies on our side (google, twitter, yahoo, huffington, wikipedia, etc). I think a bigger fight is going to break out soon; and ultimately justice prevails, ie people win and media companies will have to change their ways. Silly how they can control US govt so easily. Maybe Google should do more lobbying.
And I got nothing against media companies, just they need to get their act together and provide content for us better rather than arresting people to keep an antiquated system in place.
I didn't really have a good direction other than game development for a lot of my life; however, having picked up iOS development in the last 2.5 years, I've really liked that platform and am about to make a pretty good living off of it. Fun stuff!
Good read. I hope the right people can read that and start fixing the system.
People don't mind buying things, but they want to attain it in the easiest way and they want to know they're getting value. If I can go on TPB and get an obscure movie from 1985 (that I love) in an hour then I am going to... but if there was a decent system where I could pay a few bucks and get the same thing, I would. Just a nice flat AVI file, no ads, no waiting, etc...
Same goes for gaming, and Valve did a great job with Steam. I've shelled out a lot of money on old games that I wanted to play again (that happened to be on Steam).
0
@zenx1: Go
In any video I have ads on, I am using music by only Blizzard themselves, which is allowed.
Weirdly enough though, on my trailer vids, Youtube actually forced me (kindly) to turn off my ads after about a month. They seem to only want me to have ads on my tutorials.
0
@Hookah604: Go
It seems random I don't know. But yeah they email you with an automated system.
0
@KorvinGump: Go
$143 from 16 months of ads isn't really 'earning money' lol. But you guys can do the math and extrapolate to see how much money Husky or VEVO makes. And my ads don't even do the 15s/30s pre-video ads (if they did, I would remove them!).
You DO need to have 50k+ views PER DAY to make any living off of it. But even coming up with that much content, recording, editing, and uploading takes way too much time.
As far as how I made the money, Youtube asked me to revenue a few vids, which they approved. Then they finally made me a full partner (I guess since Blizz condones it now), but it took almost a year to get approved.
0
Okay I withdraw my statement then haha. He came to me with it so I assumed it was him.
0
@zenx1: Go
Haha we both have one video that makes up 20-25% of our views.
I'm having trouble keeping up with content honestly. I'm not really interested in SC2 right now (nor have time) so naturally my channel will suffer.
Lol how come you picked out debates of the ancients all of a sudden? By the way it was Sixen's idea if I remember right.
0
Hey guys, another fun thread here about my Youtube stats. I figure it's fun to see since there's not many (known) Youtube people that really ever release their stats...
All time stats:
Total views: 1,116,751
Total likes: 2,994
Total dislikes: 141
Total comments: 3,940
Probably the most interesting (or depressing lol?) stat for people... this is since I've had ad revenue:
On 72,636 page views, I've made $143.39.
Gender:
94.6% Male
5.4% Female
Top Geographies:
US
Canada
Germany
Sweden
UK
Top Traffic Sources:
View referrals from Youtube: 57.1%
Mobile apps and direct traffic: 33.4%
View referrals from outside Youtube: 9.5%
20% of my video views are from embedded sources (hint: sc2mapster lol).
Canada provided only 1/4th of the views that the US did. However, Canada has 1/10th the population of the US.
I have 33k views from South Korea.
Anyone have any other stats they wish to see that I missed? I'd be happy to provide it.
0
This is probably the issue here. As explained, the unit-highlighted trigger won't fire unless you go into each unit in the data editor (that you want to be highlightable) and go to unit flags, and uncheck 'cannot be highlighted'
0
@Taintedwisp: Go
Ah that's tough man; I was 21.
My mom is pretty lucky, she is in her 60's and still has her mom (though her dad just died last year). Still, be nice having your parents around at 60.
0
Good post from SC2 General forums:
What happened with Megaupload was simply the publishing and recording industries kicking the board right after losing the game (SOPA not being passed). I'm a law student and I have researched this subject for a paper I had to write on consumer's rights on the Internet. As far as my research went all I can say is that there's widespread confusion and misinformation regarding piracy and intellectual property. For starters the film, publishing, and recording industries have long since been afraid of the Internet because they are following an obsolete business model. The same thing was said about the TV in its own time: how it would hurt the artist and authors by allowing free access to content protected by copyright. However copyright laws forbid profit through distribution of copies or profit through the provision of access to such content (example: selling pirated DVDs or charging people to view a movie I bought). You are of course allowed to share absolutely anything you buy, including data, with whomever you please as long as you do not seek profit from it.
Intellectual property is still property, therefore it is subject to the same laws pertaining to property as an absolute right. The ramifications might be different but it is in essence the same: when you own a car/laptop/house/whatever you have every right inherent to property, meaning you can enjoy/use/dispose/reinvindicate (which means get your stuff back after it's been taken from you) whatever you have purchased. The properties of property (sounds redundant I know) are that it is absolute (though only in name because property is subject to expropriation by the government in certain cases); it is real, which is a distinction in regards to other rights; and it is eternal, that is the right doesn't cease to function when the owner parts with his property, and can only be extinguished by destruction or transfer of said property.
In regards to intellectual property you basically acquire a copy, yet you do not acquire the ownership of the content. The difference between both is that even though you have the right to enjoy/use/dispose/reinvindicate the CD where the copy is stored, you have no right to the content of such. In essence, you cannot apply the concepts of property to the registered material. In other words, you can do anything to the cd/DVD/book and the content stored in there (with the exception of the original copy of the material), however you do not own the song/movie/story you bought and therefore cannot dispose or profit from such as if it were your own. This means that you couldn't, for example, record the song and sell it for a profit, or go to the patent office and modify the registered material. You can however copy and dispose of whatever is stored in your disk as long as you do not violate the author's rights (meaning profiting from the material itself).
Now that that's out of the way let us talk about the industries themselves. They're the middle man in all of this. The artists create materials and sell the publishing rights (and publishing rights alone, I can't stress this enough) to a company which will then redistribute the content to everyone else for a profit. This is what sparks the controversy, because the companies in charge of doing this want to profit as much as they can from material they do not own. And for decades they got away with it while making millions in the process while only paying a meager 3% to the artists and actual owners of such content (not kidding here, only if you're well known can you earn up to 10% of the profit from the sales). This was all fine and dandy until the Internet came along and it allowed consumers to share their own legally purchased copy with everyone else. The concept that downloading intellectual property from the Internet is stealing is completely ludicrous from a legal standpoint. If I purchase a copy containing copywritten content I may not have the right to make copies and sell it, but I can make copies for myself and I can also lend or gift such copies to others. This of course doesn't sit well for the publishing industries because they lose a lot of money due to people resorting to the Internet to acquire copies instead of resorting to their highly overpriced copies. But here's the bottom line: since the availability of copywritten content on the Internet (the invention of MP3s followed by services like iTune, Netflix and others) artists now earn more than they did a decade ago, and the only ones losing here are the publishers. What they are doing right now is fighting with whatever means they have at their disposal to protect an old and outdated business model that has no place or future in today's society.
In short: "piracy" is not a problem of theft, but rather a problem of lack of service. If you do not provide the service customers require, someone else will.
0
@Selfcreation: Go
Thanks for the post.
0
@Taintedwisp: Go
You mean heart attack?
How old are you? I lost my dad almost 1.5 years ago... it's pretty shitty thinking about all you'll miss, but your life will go on as is.
Edit: Man the medical community really needs to step it up so we can stop dieing from things like this... I bet in 100 years humans will be living for very very long periods...
0
Wow that's crazy how they can just arrest people anywhere for running a site. This is really getting out of hand. Glad we have a trillion dollars worth of companies on our side (google, twitter, yahoo, huffington, wikipedia, etc). I think a bigger fight is going to break out soon; and ultimately justice prevails, ie people win and media companies will have to change their ways. Silly how they can control US govt so easily. Maybe Google should do more lobbying.
And I got nothing against media companies, just they need to get their act together and provide content for us better rather than arresting people to keep an antiquated system in place.
0
Cool looking terrain!
Also, I almost read Team 'nigma' wrong. Almost...
0
I didn't really have a good direction other than game development for a lot of my life; however, having picked up iOS development in the last 2.5 years, I've really liked that platform and am about to make a pretty good living off of it. Fun stuff!
0
@Hookah604: Go
Good read. I hope the right people can read that and start fixing the system.
People don't mind buying things, but they want to attain it in the easiest way and they want to know they're getting value. If I can go on TPB and get an obscure movie from 1985 (that I love) in an hour then I am going to... but if there was a decent system where I could pay a few bucks and get the same thing, I would. Just a nice flat AVI file, no ads, no waiting, etc...
Same goes for gaming, and Valve did a great job with Steam. I've shelled out a lot of money on old games that I wanted to play again (that happened to be on Steam).