> You keep saying the incentive is so people go to the site to watch a particular video. But nothing keeps that video on that one site. No, that's not what I'

> You keep saying the incentive is so people go to the site to watch a particular video. But nothing keeps that video on that one site. No, that's not what I'm saying, and I don't know what gave you that idea. The phrase "original content" never even appeared in my comments! People visit to online video platforms to watch videos. If there are no interesting videos, people don't visit online video platforms: they go and do something else with their time. And if people don't visit your online video platform, operators of online video platforms lose money, and go out of business. Consequently, operators of online video platforms have an incentive to ensure that interesting videos get made. This is true even when all videos are available on all the platforms. Same principle: one of my siblings operates a rural hotel, and regularly contributes to a fund promoting tourism in the region. Doing this is a net positive for her revenue, even though some (most!) of the tourists will not stay in that specific hotel when they visit the region, and some might stay in hotels that did not contribute to any such fund. > If what you say is right, how far has ThePirateBay gone to produce original content? TPB has to operate illegally, has an order of magnitude fewer visitors, and two orders of magnitude smaller revenue. They are not in the position to fund substantial original content, and those who accepted their money would risk prosecution. Despite all of that, TPB did fund a limited number of art projects in the past [1]. > Oh that's right, they just take Hollywood content and ads flow just fine. That's the future you're fighting for. Heartbreaking injustice. No comment. [1] https://wikileaks.org/gottfrid-docs/ https://wikileaks.org/gottfrid-docs/