As I stated in my article for TechCrunch recently, there are 3 parties that need to be compensated when it comes to videos: 1) Content Owners; 2) Content Creators [users that might mash things up to create “original” creations] ;and 3) Publishers (MySpace users and bloggers, etc — people/companies that post a video on their website).
Revver compensates content creators and publishers (“sharers”), but only based on the ad revenue. Flixya is a website that compensates publishers. And as mentioned in the article above, YouTube will soon be compensating based on ad revenue.
But what about the content owners and creators that would like to charge for viewing of their videos — and/or the users that are willing to pay a premium to bypass advertising? iTunes and Google Video are allowing main-stream media to sell their videos per-play/download (i.e. episodes of The Office, Grey’s Anatomy, etc on iTunes for $1.99 each and CSI, Star Trek, etc on Google Video for $1.99 each).
YouTube was the big winner, but Guba, Revver, Metacafe and others are hoping to be the next big winner. I think giving the ability for all content owners/creators to charge for their work at whatever price they want, could be that differentiator.
My proposed company would take a % cut of the revenues from the content creator (thus if they charge $1.99 per view/download — maybe we’d do a 50/50 split and thus collect $0.99 and pay-out $1.00 to the content creator).