OK, I have a few questions about this.
They are asking for 2% of your gross. Does that mean 2% of ALL gross revenue you earn in this business or 2% of the gross revenue earned from sites with streaming videos on them? I have pay sites with videos but a significant % of my income comes from Adult Check Gold sites where I don't use any videos at all. And why is it 2% of the gross? That seems extremely unfair.
Second, why are they asking for recurring fees instead of a flat fee of, say, $100.00? If they charged everyone a hundred bucks they'd still make a bundle and would'nt have to pay their lawyers all that money to take people to court.
Third, did Acacia actually create the technology for streaming video or did they just buy the patent in order to make money?
Fourth, do they want 2% from the webmaster AND 2% from the company he purchased the video rights from? If the producer has already paid the licensing fee why should the webmaster have to pay it again? How much fucking money do they need?
Fifth, are they going to want 2% from affiliates who simply promote sponsors that have video content? I can't believe that they would try to do that since it is so friggin' ludicrous.
Didn't someone try to get a patent for hyperlink technology a few years back? What happened with that?
I wish they owned the patent on SPAM.
And finally, is there no end to corporate greed?
They are asking for 2% of your gross. Does that mean 2% of ALL gross revenue you earn in this business or 2% of the gross revenue earned from sites with streaming videos on them? I have pay sites with videos but a significant % of my income comes from Adult Check Gold sites where I don't use any videos at all. And why is it 2% of the gross? That seems extremely unfair.
Second, why are they asking for recurring fees instead of a flat fee of, say, $100.00? If they charged everyone a hundred bucks they'd still make a bundle and would'nt have to pay their lawyers all that money to take people to court.
Third, did Acacia actually create the technology for streaming video or did they just buy the patent in order to make money?
Fourth, do they want 2% from the webmaster AND 2% from the company he purchased the video rights from? If the producer has already paid the licensing fee why should the webmaster have to pay it again? How much fucking money do they need?
Fifth, are they going to want 2% from affiliates who simply promote sponsors that have video content? I can't believe that they would try to do that since it is so friggin' ludicrous.
Didn't someone try to get a patent for hyperlink technology a few years back? What happened with that?
I wish they owned the patent on SPAM.
And finally, is there no end to corporate greed?
Comment