TR Member Perks!

It was only yesterday that YouTube announced that they would finally be offering a new pay-to-view service that will allow users to watch videos ad free. YouTube Red, on top of allowing ad free viewing, offers numerous other perks such as offline viewing and exclusive content. However it’s already leaving a bad impression for some, as it was discovered that Google has started removing the videos of content creators who don’t sign up for the new system. With the new YouTube Red came a new revenue sharing contract for partner creators, and Google is requiring them to sign up. Creators who don’t, will see their videos hidden from the public until they concede. This was confirmed in the FAQ for the YouTube Red announcement

Google explained that the reasoning for this is so viewers will know all the content they view will work with YouTube Red, however this doesn’t fully explain why creators are being so quickly coerced into the contract. They go on to say that 99% of the content on YouTube will still be available with YouTube Red, and claim most partners have already signed up. They wouldn’t say exactly how much creators will receive under the new system, but said the vast majority of revenue goes to content creators. However, an article from TechCrunch points out that most recent contracts only promise 55% of ad revenue, well below programs like Spotify and Apple Music. YouTuber Total Biscuit confirmed this in a Sound Cloud regarding YouTube Red. While the majority of content creators likely won’t hesitate to sign up, the coercive factor hasn’t done anything to make Google or YouTube Red look good, calling back the time when Google came under fire for forcing Google+ onto YouTube. 

YouTube Red itself has already been criticized by content creators who claim it will hurt smaller channels, in addition to the tactics beings used to force creators to jump on board. The way the new program works for content creators, is the $9.99 a month is split between every partner a user watches. It is split based on viewing time, which benefits users with more or longer videos. Smaller channels fear it will widen the gap between their content and already popular channels.

Other content creators like Total Biscuit say the new program will end up benefiting creators in the long run, but thus far few content creators have commented on the tactics being used to force partners to sign. Since YouTube is by far the most popular video site on the web, it seems like Google can get away with decisions like this without taking much of a punch, however more creators are turning to alternatives like Vimeo, or to services like Spotify for music. More creators may start speaking out after the new programs start effecting their monthly income, whether it be positive or negative.


Kindra Pring

Staff Writer

Teacher's aid by day. Gamer by night. And by day, because I play my DS on my lunch break. Ask me about how bad my aim is.



  • And they said nintendo was bad..all hail the google overlords of garbage website designs and bad business decisions.

    Really we just need a video site that is 100% against copyright and DMCA laws.

  • garf02

    it makes sense tho, “content creators” only get paid for the views, which reflect on views of the ads, no ad means no views to google ad but yes to the creator. google dont make $$ but the creators does

  • BurntToShreds

    A video site that didn’t abide by DMCA or copyright laws would be sued into oblivion. The reason why YouTube takes down videos and implements ContentID is so they could avoid lawsuits like the one they got into with Viacom a while back.

    Google and YouTube’s hands are tied by ridiculous US copyright laws and the sheer volume of content that gets put on their site (300 hours per minute. No, that’s not a typo).

    What need to change are the existing copyright laws that affect every online service, not YouTube.

  • garf02

    also, ultimately, is their platform, and they are lending it so youtubers can make some e-fame.
    Sometimes, people over estimate their own worth IMO

  • Jeronimo

    What the flying fuck, holy shit.

    rip youtube
    rip twitter
    rip free internet

  • FlamingoJet

    No, they just need to stand up to the fucking copyright pigs and force them to obide by law.

  • An Honest Opinion

    Wow.

    Not entirely surprised because it’s GOOGLE, but still…fucking WOW.

  • oop

    rip adblock

  • Dave

    No, you’re completely wrong. If google gave the finger to “copyright pigs” and lost the subsequent lawsuit just once, they’d lose DMCA safe harbor protection and literally cease to exist within 24 hours from all the lawsuits being flung at them.

    Burnt is right; what needs to change is the law or its interpretation, just like in this recent fair use case (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/09/takedown-senders-must-consider-fair-use-ninth-circuit-rules). So next time, either do research, understand the subject matter, or don’t make uninformed, childish, and destructive comments on what is in contention for the most serious legal issue on the internet today.

  • YouTube has not forced me to sign up. In fact I haven’t seen anything about this on my channel

  • morzinbo

    So what is a youtube partner?

  • HolyHell95

    For your health.

  • Phasmatis75

    Same, but my channel is pretty obscure.

  • CM Dubya

    With Google’s obsession of trying to rule the Internet, it’s not like they would even try to challenge the rules in the first place….

    They’d be more like “Yo hey man, let us help ya’ll out, how can WE get some of that cut, eh? Eh? Eh?”

  • Dave

    Simply untrue. The media and entertainment industry has been trying to lynch google for years, and DMCA safe harbor and fair use arguments have been the only things keeping google safe. They’ve been attacked for:
    -Youtube uploads
    -Youtube comments
    -Youtube existing
    -Thumbnails in google search
    -First sentence of a webpage in google search
    -Links to torrenting sites in google search
    -Notification that torrent links have been removed from search
    -Generic notification that something has been removed from search when that something was a torrent site
    -Email attachments
    Thankfully, either fair use, the DMCA, or reasonable interpretations of the concept of “making a copy” have seen courts rule in google’s favor so far. And the Fair use case I linked to above is extremely promising – if more courts adopt this reasoning, it would destroy DMCA trolling and abuse entirely.

  • BurntToShreds

    Further evidence that the media/entertainment industry still hates Google: The MPAA has been making a concerted effort to use Attorneys General to take down Google: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150724/15501631756/smoking-gun-mpaa-emails-reveal-plan-to-run-anti-google-smear-campaign-via-today-show-wsj.shtml

  • Nope Naw

    I’ll just copypaste what I wrote on AlphaOmegaSin’s comment section for his video on Youtube Red.

    “”Luckily, this isn’t going to change anything, virtually, about the website.”

    Not right now maybe. But being the utter cynical bastard I am the way I see it is this. They’re adding the monthly fee thing and changing nothing else except requiring people to sign on to the new way of doing things. As the hubbub about the signing on requirement dies down they start working towards removing the ability to upload videos freely. They’re slowly wittling away at the user’s options by gradually moving them towards their goals. Stragglers (the people who don’t sign) slowly fall to the wayside and are eventually forgotten.

    Dont’ believe me? They’ve been doing this for YEARS.

    The subscription grid? The video response feature? Fucking Google+?!

    I say people are right to be up in arms about that requirement to sign on. If you’re not letting your users opt into a new feature, but rather forcing them to opt out, then you’re doing something scummy.”

  • Travis

    A YouTube partner is anybody that uploads enough content regularly that YouTube says “Hey, wanna make (us) some money and monetize those videos?”

  • Travis

    YouTube isn’t going to shut down any channel that doesn’t “sign-up” for YouTube Red. I.E., only people that pay the subscription fee will be able to make videos.

    Near as I can tell, it’s just a matter of accepting the Terms and Service update. Technically, you have to give YouTube permission for them to give you YouTube Red money. That’s all it is.

  • Clay Cromer

    I got a notice about it but they haven’t twisted my arm to do anything.

  • Travis

    This headline is a complete lie. The writer should probably learn WTF she’s talking about before continuing.

  • the7k

    More like rip techraptor.

    I honestly thought this site was better than just flat out lying to get clicks, but I guess every tech blog is the same.

  • Actually if someone were to host a Youtube Knock-off in china they could totally get away with it. China as doesn’t abide by US copyright laws. CHINA IS THE FUTURE!