Frank Knoll will teach you everything you need to know to make massive profits on YouTube. In YouTube Profits, he describes how to post videos, write compelling SEO descriptions, add annotations, and attract viewers to your content. You’ll discover various types of ads you can use, such as overlay ads, sponsored cards, or skippable video ads. Frank explains the marketing tools you need to promote your YouTube channel, get more views, and attract more subscribers!
The SEC late last year prodded the company to explain why it doesn’t share YouTube data, according to regulatory filings in February. Accounting rules require companies to disclose revenue for operating segments that account for 10% of a company’s total revenue, profit or combined assets. YouTube’s numbers are included in Alphabet’s advertising figure.
During the same court battle, Viacom won a court ruling requiring YouTube to hand over 12 terabytes of data detailing the viewing habits of every user who has watched videos on the site. The decision was criticized by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which called the court ruling "a setback to privacy rights". In June 2010, Viacom's lawsuit against Google was rejected in a summary judgment, with U.S. federal Judge Louis L. Stanton stating that Google was protected by provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Viacom announced its intention to appeal the ruling. On April 5, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reinstated the case, allowing Viacom's lawsuit against Google to be heard in court again. On March 18, 2014, the lawsuit was settled after seven years with an undisclosed agreement.
In April 2013, it was reported that Universal Music Group and YouTube have a contractual agreement that prevents content blocked on YouTube by a request from UMG from being restored, even if the uploader of the video files a DMCA counter-notice. When a dispute occurs, the uploader of the video has to contact UMG. YouTube's owner Google announced in November 2015 that they would help cover the legal cost in select cases where they believe fair use defenses apply.