How do advertisers react when their work shows up on YouTube? How do they react when spinoffs of their work show up on YouTube? Is this a good or bad thing--and is there any fear of copyright
infringement? The answer to all these questions isn't a straight yes or no. The important thing is, it's happening. Kids are uploading their favorite ads to YouTube. Sometimes, it's because they
thought it was funny. Most would agree that's a good thing. Other times, they mess with an ad they've seen, changing it in certain ways in order to poke fun at its message. That may not be such a good
thing. Then there are mock ads where kids copy what they see--like a failed stunt in a funny commercial. In this case, they're presumably copying the spot because they thought it was cool. And that's
another plus. Does that imply copyright infringement? Of course! Should advertisers, like all content owners, do something about it? Absolutely not. Free publicity is a marketer's dream. So you have
to do it and stew when it goes against you, and be satisfied when kids think your work is cool. And by all means, learn something from it. YouTube provides a unique means of unsolicited feedback from
consumers. It's obvious they appreciate good advertising. That's what makes it such a fantastic research tool. The only one who should be fuming about all this is YouTube, which doesn't make a dime
from the ads on its site. But perhaps it should; perhaps YouTube should charge something to advertisers that receive exposure (good and bad) on its site. After all, it's worth something to them. "I
consider it the highest form of flattery to show up on YouTube," says Matt Lindley, an executive creative director at Arnold Worldwide in Boston. Perhaps the next level of video advertising is
something like pay-per-uploaded click?
Read the whole story at The New York Times »
