There are many ways in which YouTube has revolutionized a number of industries. At a fundamental level, it is a service which has helped shape how video content is not only viewed, but also created and made available to the masses. This latter aspect being of particular importance as thanks to the increased ability for anyone to become a 'YouTuber', the video upload service also offers those fortunate enough to rake up big viewing figures, a way to seriously monetize their channels. However, with any form of monetization, there is always likely to be more shadier elements coming to light. One of which is hitting the headlines now due a court legal battle which now seems to have been resolved. While it would be presumed that a legal YouTube court battle could be between the establishment and its contributors, this legal battle is between content creators, or more accurately, those who claim control of a channel. More to the point, this is a dispute which has now seen $20 million being awarded to one of the sides.
According to the reports, Brandon Keating and David Moss have been awarded the $20 million for what is said to be a reneged 2012 agreement by Brian Martin and Marko Princip, who were the previous partners of Keating and Moss. The battle revolves around the VideoGames channel which currently has access to more than 3.3 million subscribers. Again, according to the details, Martin and Princip are said to have given partial control of the channel to Keating and Moss, although it is claimed that payments and the abiity to make use of that control were largely not available to Keating and Moss. Forming the basis of the reneging of the arrangement. As a result, it seems that as well as the $20 million monetary award, the court has also awarded Keating and Moss a controlling interest in the channel.
While this might seem like a very specific scenario, it is one which is likely to grow in its frequency. As services like YouTube become more profitable for contributors and with the current ways in which channels can be created and content supplied, the revenues that can be generated and realized are likely to prove to be fighting points in other cases going forward. In fact, in many ways this current case could prove to be a benchmark for others who may have felt they have ever been wrongly treated by the channels they helped create, manage or supplied content for.