« links for 2007-03-14 | Main | links for 2007-03-15 »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

i wonder if goog thought they could just roll over content providers' rights. is it all about the advertising revenue or is there something else at work here? or is this simply the "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine?" generation when it comes to intellectual property? i don't understand their justification.

I agree that this would be best resolved with a happy medium, that will please both parties, but how often does that really happen?

The big question is do all these online content providers honestly believe that banners, leader boards and skyscrapers, along with embedded ads on the videos, is really going to turn into significant ROI, like legacy advertising on radio and TV? My speculation is that someone will figure a better way to do interactiver advertising and leave these antiquated ideas in the dustbin.

Anne and Jeff,

Deep down I think it is about advertising revenue and control. Nobody in corporate America wants to be Amazoned any more.


The comments to this entry are closed.


* indicates required


  • Eric Is AdWords Qualified