Viral?

SkyCopeland

SkyCopeland

So I woke up this morning and hopped on Facebook. Pretty normal modern thing to do, right? Except my Facebook is flooded with all my classmates talking about another of our classmate's videos.

Apparently it's started to go viral, starting at only like a thousand views from yesterday to quickly climbing up to it's 70K+ status at the moment.

People are sharing articles they find of it... and he's super happy about "going viral".

I'm more interested in what exactly qualifies it as Viral. Sure there are articles that are helping get it views, specifically one that popped up on a website called "Digg", had a headline, and perhaps three sentences about the video... and the embedded video.

I imagined viral as something that's posted to a major site that tons of people use and it spreads from there... Most of his traffic is coming from this Digg.

But perhaps that's the start of a viral trend? It'll start small with some unknown site posting it and then once it reaches the eyes of someone at a bigger site it'll get that actual "Viral" boost.

----------------

This is my only personal kind of experience with someone going viral that I know of, in video at least. (My artist friend made a series that got posted on every major culture site after Kotaku noticed his fantasy style Avengers art)

Anyone have thoughts on if this is how it eventually could reach that actual viral status or if this is most likely a very small viralness and will die out before it can get really big?

And of course... if anyone wants to see the video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsMpFb1CNRI&feature=youtu.be

EDIT: It got 4k more views in the time it took me to write this post... 80K+ now.

I'm also just now noticing recently released more popular site articles

Cinemablend
 
Last edited:
this would technically be viral, based solely on the WAY it spreads, rather than what websites cause it, or the level of viewership
 
Cryogenic said:
So I can put a black bar over a logo on a big hollywood movie, delete a word or two out and go viral?
Click to expand...

Do you know Jurassic Park? There are HUGE dinosaurs in those clips that he removed... that's what is impressive... not that he removed the world Jurassic.
 
Cryogenic said:
So I can put a black bar over a logo on a big hollywood movie, delete a word or two out and go viral?
Click to expand...

Go ahead and try it ;)

Is there really a strict definition for viral?
I don't know.
But getting a lot of views from a popular site is a great start.
You need such 'influencers' to really reach a lot of people.
 
sfoster said:
That's exciting.

If only there were a way to easily monetize all those views.
Click to expand...

If only? He has the biggest ad type on it...

250,000+ views now.

340 USD - 850 USD is the estimate using YouTube's average RPM span.

I'd say that's a pretty penny considering he only spent a week working on this, minus the time for our insane classes we go through (some days are 16 hours :D ).

The better question would be if he could KEEP getting that many views on future VFX videos to keep that kind of almost weekly revenue. Or if without the viral help, it's a kind of 1 and a half minutes of fame thing.
 
340 USD - 850 USD is the estimate using YouTube's average RPM span.

I'd say that's a pretty penny considering he only spent a week working on this, minus the time for our insane classes we go through (some days are 16 hours ).

The better question would be if he could KEEP getting that many views on future VFX videos to keep that kind of almost weekly revenue. Or if without the viral help, it's a kind of 1 and a half minutes of fame thing.
Click to expand...

umm.... I would have thought that trying to derive an income from piracy is a bad thing?

To further your conversation, if you/he/him could derive an income from doing simple videos and have them go viral, sure it'd be great. If he had to shoot the whole material, then do the vfx on top, I'm not sure the ballpark of $500 would be worth it. If you could churn out a couple a week without needing to pay others, sure.

Could you build an audience using videos like this and not get sued if you start to earn real coin?
 
Sweetie said:
umm.... I would have thought that trying to derive an income from piracy is a bad thing?

To further your conversation, if you/he/him could derive an income from doing simple videos and have them go viral, sure it'd be great. If he had to shoot the whole material, then do the vfx on top, I'm not sure the ballpark of $500 would be worth it. If you could churn out a couple a week without needing to pay others, sure.

Could you build an audience using videos like this and not get sued if you start to earn real coin?
Click to expand...

I don't think this is piracy at all. In fact it's a good example of parody. Which falls under Fair Use.

For example, no one has sued the Bad Lip Reading people, have they??
 
SkyCopeland said:
If only? He has the biggest ad type on it...

250,000+ views now.

340 USD - 850 USD is the estimate using YouTube's average RPM span.

I'd say that's a pretty penny considering he only spent a week working on this
Click to expand...

You think that's a pretty penny because you're still in school.
If I wanted to go back to my software career I'd be making between $2,000-$4,000 a week steadily.

Getting lucky and hitting the viral jackpot only to cash in on ~$600 is fun, you can take a date out to a nice dinner and show, or you could rent a hot air balloon or something. But it's certainly not going to make anything more than a tiny blip on your long term financial situation.

Imagine for a second if you could monetize that to average of $.50 a view.
Now we're talking about $125,000 that's what I meant. Wishful thinking.

Most internet fame sadly is irrelevant and fleeting.
 
sfoster said:
You think that's a pretty penny because you're still in school.
If I wanted to go back to my software career I'd be making between $2,000-$4,000 a week steadily.

Getting lucky and hitting the viral jackpot only to cash in on ~$600 is fun, you can take a date out to a nice dinner and show, or you could rent a hot air balloon or something. But it's certainly not going to make anything more than a tiny blip on your long term financial situation.

Imagine for a second if you could monetize that to average of $.50 a view.
Now we're talking about $125,000 that's what I meant. Wishful thinking.

Most internet fame sadly is irrelevant and fleeting.
Click to expand...

I'm confused what this has to do with the topic... Software engineer or whatever isn't the film industry. He made money with a short, something everyone in this forum attempts or wants.

Also if he could make 600 a week, four videos a month, he'd make more than the average American a year.

Sure he wouldn't make as much as you with software... But he'd be doing exactly what he wants.
 
SkyCopeland said:
I'm confused what this has to do with the topic... Software engineer or whatever isn't the film industry. He made money with a short, something everyone in this forum attempts or wants.

Also if he could make 600 a week, four videos a month, he'd make more than the average American a year.

Sure he wouldn't make as much as you with software... But he'd be doing exactly what he wants.
Click to expand...

He would be making more than the average american but he would have no health insurance, no benefits, no 401k. But that's not going to happen - you can't go viral on a regular basis.. unless you've got a good friend justin bieber with a billion followers tweeting your every video, going viral is a rare and uncontrollable circumstance.

That brings me back around to what this has to do with the topic.
Making any money at all with a short is nice.. so is getting 250,000 views.. an accomplishment to be proud of for sure.

It's like hitting the jackpot! Which is exactly the point of my lament.
To succeed exceptionally and getting a million or a quarter million views is about the best one can hope for and it's still a poor man's pocket money. It's a kick in the balls.

A stark reminder that ultimately we should be focusing on feature films and not shorts.
Or we should be innovating the way that short films are monetized.
 
SkyCopeland said:
I don't think this is piracy at all. In fact it's a good example of parody. Which falls under Fair Use.
Click to expand...

Is it fair use?
Or is it actually sampling?
Like Vanilla Ice sampled Queen by removing everything but the baseline in Ice Ice Baby?

I think parody would be when the shots were reshot in an empty parc.
(But I'm no legal expert.)

Anyone interested in the 'mechanics' behind virals, I recommend:
Contagious by Jonah Berger.
He did a lot of research on what properties virals have.
Unfortunately: adding those properties does not guarantee something to go viral.

Btw, a few years ago there was some video artist that erased humans and human activities from stockvideos to create videos with empty cities. (Can't find the videos, btw)
 
I don't think this is piracy at all. In fact it's a good example of parody. Which falls under Fair Use.
Click to expand...

I suspect it's not covered by fair use, nor the exemption under parody. Would the actors be owed fees? What about John Williams? I'm not a lawyer so my opinion doesn't really count and all I have are questions and unqualified opinions. Not sure if the $500 would cover the lawyer fees to work it out ;)

no one has sued the Bad Lip Reading people, have they??
Click to expand...

You'd have to ask their lawyer.

Isn't that Startrek fan film being sued putting up enough red flags?? They're only raising money (they're not even trying to make money) based on other people's IP, not even using footage and they're getting sued?

I'm just saying, once you start to make real coin, wouldn't you be worried the big boys will want to add that money to their coffers?

It's like hitting the jackpot! Which is exactly the point of my lament.
To succeed exceptionally and getting a million or a quarter million views is about the best one can hope for and it's still a poor man's pocket money. It's a kick in the balls.

A stark reminder that ultimately we should be focusing on feature films and not shorts.
Or we should be innovating the way that short films are monetized.
Click to expand...

There are people earning a decent living from doing Youtube videos. It's a very different beast from feature films.
 
Sweetie said:
I suspect it's not covered by fair use, nor the exemption under parody. Would the actors be owed fees? What about John Williams? I'm not a lawyer so my opinion doesn't really count and all I have are questions and unqualified opinions. Not sure if the $500 would cover the lawyer fees to work it out ;)



You'd have to ask their lawyer.

Isn't that Startrek fan film being sued putting up enough red flags?? They're only raising money (they're not even trying to make money) based on other people's IP, not even using footage and they're getting sued?

I'm just saying, once you start to make real coin, wouldn't you be worried the big boys will want to add that money to their coffers?
Click to expand...

"A parody is a work that ridicules another, usually well-known work, by imitating it in a comic way. Judges understand that, by its nature, parody demands some taking from the original work being parodied. Unlike other forms of fair use, a fairly extensive use of the original work is permitted in a parody in order to “conjure up” the original." - See more at: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/#sthash.pIVcYKN2.dpuf

Fair Use works this way - If you blatantly rip off shot for shot copyrighted movie and you're making fun of it. You're parodying. If you take their clips and reedit them for humor (AKA Bad Lip Reading, This Thread's Topic Video, Those Fake Trailers That Turn Horrors into Comedies,etc.. ) You are still safe thanks to Fair Use allowing you "extensive use of the original work".

However, if you create a NEW entry into an IP, you are breaking copyright. Fan Films are spin-offs of material they don't own the right too.

Fan Films are NOT parodies. They are NOT Fair Use. Even fan art is copyright infringement. Cosplay is copyright infringement. There was actually an international law attempt by the US and Japan to arrest people that made fan videos to IPs and Cosplayers.
 
So you're saying, I could take 98-99% of Jurassic park, alter 1 to 2% of it, using that 1-2% to ridicule the movie (maybe we could put a laugh track down and tell a dinosaur joke or two!) and release it in cinemas and I'd be home free using the parody fair use? That's about what this video did.

Maybe you're right, but I don't see argument holding water in court. Who knows?
 
Sweetie said:
So you're saying, I could take 98-99% of Jurassic park, alter 1 to 2% of it, using that 1-2% to ridicule the movie (maybe we could put a laugh track down and tell a dinosaur joke or two!) and release it in cinemas and I'd be home free using the parody fair use? That's about what this video did.

Maybe you're right, but I don't see argument holding water in court. Who knows?
Click to expand...

Remember to re-do the sound track too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w-58hQ9dLk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top