5 ms·
I fail to see how this behavior helps artificially preserve their status as a monopoly or constitutes a nefarious dealing to create a monopoly, and the fact tha
by fusiongyro 8y ago
I fail to see how this behavior helps artificially preserve their status as a monopoly or constitutes a nefarious dealing to create a monopoly, and the fact that Blender is using this opportunity to switch to another provider is not going to reinforce your point about YouTube being a monopoly.
- cvwright 8y agoNo you're right, this particular behavior doesn't help to preserve their monopoly. It's evidence that they already have one. Companies who have to survive in a competitive marketplace don't typically go around driving away customers en masse. This is like something from 1990's Microsoft.
- cwyers 8y agoIn what sense is Blender a customer if they aren't monetizing their videos, though?
- falcolas 8y agoIn the same sense an open source project is a customer of GitHub's. The exchange of money is not required for someone to be a customer of a service.
- cwyers 8y agoThat's a user.
- hueving 8y agoCustomers pay money. Users provide data and marketing.
- virgilp 8y agoWell, strictly speaking, this is a legitimate dictionary definition that doesn't involve money: > a person of a specified kind with whom one has to deal [edit] Youtube has 3 kinds of customers (or users, if you wish): publishers, viewers and advertisers. It makes sense to separate them like that, but not based on a "pays/ does not pay" criterion. If PewDiePie is a customer, then most definitely Blender Foundation is a customer too.
- krychu 8y agoIf money is the criterion of being a customer then they are one by driving traffic to other monetized videos, via recommended feed, or via follow up searches, that would otherwise not happen. Anyone having a YT channel will tell that ‘suggested video’ is a dominant traffic source so it’s not an edge case. In sum, YT was already making money thanks to Blender videos.
- fusiongyro 8y agoThey're moving to another provider. Do we have different definitions of monopoly? All this is evidence of is that YouTube are assholes.
- azernik 8y agoHaving a monopoly isn't illegal. Using monopoly powers in certain ways is, and this isn't one of those ways. And yes, companies who have to survive in a competitive marketplace drive away non-paying customers all the time. Because they're not paying, and so the slight chance of turning them into paying customers, or benefiting existing paying customers, is worth the loss.