by Jason Wilk on December 19, 2008

- Y Combinator startup Scribd
has raised its 4th round of financing – $9 million from Charles River Ventures, Redpoint Ventures and Kinsey Hills Group. This puts their total funding at around $12.8 million in an attempt to become the YouTube for documents.
- Launched one year after Scribd, Los Angeles based, DocStoc jumped onto the scene to capture some of the market. DocStoc has raised a total of $4 million and has executed well although still trails Scribd’s traffic. Both companies lack many direct hits and both are heavily reliant on search engines, which happen to love giving embeddable documents a high page rank.
- The battle next year will be to see who can become profitable. Both companies are seeing a lot of visitors, but converting dollars on those people are difficult when the only form of revenue is from google text ads. Although much of the content found on either site (such with YouTube) is unmonetizable, there is a considerable amount that is. Legal, tutorial, career, health & fitness, etc. documents all bring in people to the site that are looking for something specific and the document they eventually find was probably submitted by someone who is able to offer that service. Example: Someone looking for an NDA may be interested in talking with a lawyer, and the document they find may have have been uploaded by a local lawyer.
- Both companies essentially would need to re-format the way their content in these categories are displayed to users, returning documents submitted by local businesses first. This would help convert leads for businesses as well as provide them with incentive to upload more quality documents to the site. This method would let DocStoc and Scribd monetize effectively by having sponsored documents as well as having users submit their email address to embed or download a document. You can charge companies per click on sponsored documents and sell leads to businesses looking for information about users downloading documents in areas relevant to their service offering. Moreover, by driving revenue from the content, both companies can begin to engage in paid search marketing for the areas that their SEO is lacking. Example: If you are searching for an NDA, places like LegalZoom dominate the space because they are a sponsored search result and can measure conversions. DocStoc or Scribd couldn’t make sense of spending search dollars without any way to bring the dollars back in.
- It will be interesting to see who wins this game. I have to assume that one of the companies will be crowned the winner in the end, since both operations require a decent amount of overhead and dollars will need to be brought in. It will be a battle, since both organizations have incredibly talented management, such as Jason Nazar (CEO of DocStoc).
by Jason Wilk on December 8, 2008

- Anvato is a new startup that can identify videos across the web using an automated visual detection engine. Anvato’s technology can recognize content regardless of meta data or destination.
- The company has raised $2 million in a partial Series A funding round led by Oxantium Ventures and is currently seeking more investment.
- This is a great tool for publishers looking to identify their copyrighted content across the web. Once found, a content owner can decide to have the content taken down or begin an ad campaign to monetize on the videos. We have seen similar technology engines come out for finding licensed photos around the web, and recently YouTube has begun offering content owners a way to take down or monetize their videos that are beinng used illegally.
- The problems I see with the company is that it’s not difficult to figure out what destinations are potentially hosting your content illegally. Places like SurfTheChannel aggregate together the sites to go watch free TV shows and if the show isn’t being hosted by one of those sites, it is probably just being downloaded on a Torrent (in which case, you don’t really have much ground to stand on).
by John Jorgensen on December 5, 2008

- UPDATE: Amazon has sent a takedown notice to the Netherlands students that created this plugin, and they’ve complied. The students said it was an “artistic parody” and a “practical experiment on interface design, information access and currently debated issues in media culture.” The plugin can still be found around the web.
- You know all those Somali pirates who have been hijacking ships on the open seas? Well, now you can play your part by hijacking games, TV shows, movies and mp3s from Amazon’s website thanks to a new Firefox extension.
- The extension cross-references products on Amazon with Pirate Bay’s torrent database. If the torrent is there, a “Download 4 Free” link will display on the Amazon product’s page.
- The extension made the Digg front page.
- This could be the type of thing that might push torrents into the mainstream. Outside of techies, most people my age (20s) and up aren’t frequent BitTorrent users. If they could bypass the search engines and hit a button on Amazon I bet they would be a lot more likely to download a movie.
TorrentFreak, CNET
by John Jorgensen on December 4, 2008

- Remember when Google walked away from the Yahoo ad deal?
- It turns out the Department of Justice warned Google they were three hours away from being hit with an anti-trust lawsuit charging Google with currently having an unfair monopoly that would be be furthered by the Yahoo deal.
- Google is now unofficially on notice.
- This news comes at the same time that China’s biggest search engine Baidu is facing 50+ companies gearing up to file a joint lawsuit alleging the search engine is a monopoly.
- When you’re the #1 search engine that decides which websites live or die, having a monopoly almost comes with the territory. Google is treading a thin line, as they must. We’ll see if they can stay on the right side of it.
TC
by John Jorgensen on December 2, 2008

- Baidu, China’s #1 search engine with 70% market share (vs. Google’s 26%) is facing an upcoming joint lawsuit by as many as 100 companies who are tired of the search engine’s monopoly status and bullying tactics.
- The root of the problem lies within Baidu’s advertising system. Unlike Google which separates paid search results from organic, Baidu mixes paid results seamlessly into organic results making impossible to tell the difference between the two without checking hyperlinks (paid results are precluded with http://baidu.com for tracking purposes). For a good explanation of Baidu’s paid advertising, go here.
- In November, critics on Chinese state television blasted Baidu’s business model and accused them of allowing unlicensed medical sites to take up top spots in search results (Baidu has said they will remove these sites) and of blocking sites that chose not to pay for keywords (Baidu denies).
- A group of lawyers has already gained the support of 50 companies for a joint lawsuit against Baidu. The group says they will wait to file the suit until the total reaches 100.
- Baidu’s business model does not provide a fair representation of search results for its users. By mixing paid and organic results they taint the concept of true search. Some may argue that the top organic results on Google are practically paid anyways due to all the cash they’ve dropped into SEO, but there’s still a big difference between fighting your way to the top via building out a big content site and instantly buying your way into the top results with a zero-value sales page. Besides, has Baidu seen how much money Google is making doing it the up-front way?
FT