Making any profit at all on a service that hosts and streams 4K video from everyone to everyone over the Internet while also compensating the creators of that video is no mean feat.
They split revenues 55/45 with creators. That level of profit sharing is basically unheard of in television, film, books, etc.
Again, yea, there are monopoly concerns, but you’re going to move the goalposts to “anything scalable” being worth stealing from then good luck to you.
I’m not going to pretend I don’t use Adblock, but when sites actually enforce using it, I’m not going to pretend they’re evil for doing it.
They are not responsible for the content, so they are not a publisher, more like the company that prints the newspapers. Imagine if NYT printers charged more if NYT decided to raise the sticker price?
Why not charge creators for the infrastructure cost?
YouTube Premium starts at 14$ which is wildly un-representative of the price it takes to run the site.
You mention revenue sharing - but either you are a publisher and share both revenue and responsibilities with creators, or you are not a publisher.
If we for a moment imagine that they are a publisher, then they better pay their content creators a livable wage - or not sign them - and the content creators better not show ads, as I have already paid them through YouTube.
If we imagine for a second that they are merely a distribution platform, then they better not interfere with what I see with ads, or make a value judgement on my curated feed - ISPs also don't interject ads into your browsing.
I never said that they should not be able to make money. But services like YouTube tries their absolute best to both have the cake on eat it. And that is not fair.
Nebula is there, it’s not free either.