Nintendo Suddenly Claims Ownership Of Many YouTube Videos

[Steven Bogos]

Nintendo Suddenly Claims Ownership Of Many YouTube Videos

Claiming copyright on fan videos means that ad revenue will go to Nintendo instead of the video's creators.

Nintendo is reportedly flexing its YouTube copyright muscle by issuing "content ID match" claims on "Let's Play" videos featuring its game franchises. Prolific YouTuber Zack Scott [http://www.youtube.com/user/ZackScott], who is currently playing Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon, claims that Nintendo has made content claims on several of his videos, meaning ad revenue received from those videos will instead go to Nintendo rather than Scott. It's a pretty jerk move from Nintendo, as although it is true that Scott is uploading gameplay from its games, his viewers watch his gameplay videos to hear his commentary and review, and it seems unfair that Nintendo should simply take all the ad revenue when he's the one putting in the hard-yards maintaining a fanbase.

"Since I started my gaming channel, I've played a lot of games. I love Nintendo, so I've included their games in my line-up," said Scott, warning that until Nintendo's claims are straightened out, he won't be playing its games. "I won't because it jeopardizes my channel's copyright standing and the livelihood of all LPers."

Several other YouTubers, including Thomas Was Alone creator Mike Bithel, have chimed in, also claiming that Nintendo is making content ID match claims on their videos, According to popular gaming video conglomerate Machinima [http://www.machinima.com/], Nintendo's claims have been increasing recently, and they appear to be doing it deliberately.

Nintendo has issued GameFront [http://www.gamefront.com/nintendo-flexing-copyright-clout-on-youtube-lets-play-channels/] the following statement in relation to the copyright claims:

"As part of our on-going push to ensure Nintendo content is shared across social media channels in an appropriate and safe way, we became a YouTube partner and as such in February 2013 we registered our copyright content in the YouTube database. For most fan videos this will not result in any changes, however, for those videos featuring Nintendo-owned content, such as images or audio of a certain length, adverts will now appear at the beginning, next to or at the end of the clips. We continually want our fans to enjoy sharing Nintendo content on YouTube, and that is why, unlike other entertainment companies, we have chosen not to block people using our intellectual property."

The statement seems to be a rather curt "be thankful we didn't just block you guys" rather than an actual explanation of why they feel they can steal people's ad revenue.

Content ID matches are less severe than 'copyright strikes,' which YouTube issues a channel after processing a verified request for the full removal of a video by the copyright owner. When a content owner issues a Content ID match, it allows them to monetize that video with in-video ads, block it in certain countries, or even block it from playing worldwide. If a channel receives too many Content ID matches, it can lose its "good standing," which would hinder YouTubers from making money off any of their videos.

Source: Game Front [http://www.gamefront.com/nintendo-flexing-copyright-clout-on-youtube-lets-play-channels/]

Permalink

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Wow, what a dick move. Nice job harvesting hatered from your fans you idiots.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

This is incredibly short sighted... I've bought many games because I saw people playing them on youtube, games I would never even heard of or even considered buying and I'm sure I can't be the only one.

Youtube is basically free marketing but now Nintendo actually wants to be PAID for the privilege of doing marketing for them? Fuck 'em

I'm glad their games are of virtually no interest to me.

 

[Calibanbutcher]

If I was a let's player, I would simply replace all my commentary on nintendo-related videos with unrelated swears of the highest order, completely irrelevant to the game and gamplay an play some really annoying music over it to top it of.

Or just delete the damn videos from youtube...

 

[an annoyed writer]

People have been doing gameplay commentaries with Nintendo's games for years, but just now they're doing this? I think there might be something more going on here. They've been losing money on the WiiU and until recently, the 3DS. I think this is more along the lines of desperation on the execs' part than anything else. When in the red, Nintendo traditionally fights in the dirtiest manner possible. I expect more of this behavior, especially if the WiiU continues to perform as it is right now.

 

[Doom972]

Apparently Nintendo doesn't think that it's losing fans fast enough.

Ever since they came up with the Wii it seems that they're trying to alienate core gamers as much as possible.

Also, YouTube has become very unfriendly to small content creators. Changes to YouTube's search algorithm prioritize corporate-owned content and makes the visibility of small content creators much smaller than in the past.

 

[Charli]

It's also worth noting that for every person who says "I bought ___ because of an LP I watched" there's another person who admits "I ended up not buying ____ because I watched an LP instead."

For every trailer a company puts out the same equal reactions are met.

I have done both from lets plays, one has made me a steady customer of a game series I had no idea even existed until I saw a lets play. Another turned me off a game entirely.

(Let me break this down for you, if you make GOOD GAMES. This kind of thing is extremely beneficial to you when someone is talking it up while playing it. If you're a hollow company with nothing of worth to consumers at the moment, you're covering your ass by screaming copyright!! and preventing people from seeing how mediocre your product is as much as possible. This is the real reason. Nothing else)

Lets plays are something entertaining to put on when I am drawing.
If Nintendo wants out of that. Fine. Pay for all your advertising, no skin off our noses when no one cares when you put out yet another shitty mario game. I would hope this causes a wider boycott of Nintendo coverage on the popular YTers. We don't need to give them attention when they clearly don't want it.

 

[wulfgar_red]

i hope this will backfire.
either by boycott, "voting with your wallet" approach or just by drop in their sales thanks to lower advertisement of their products/trademark (IMO let's plays are free ads).
f*^& them, no money from me

PS actually LP creator should sue Nintendo for not paying for advertisement of their games

 

[1337mokro]

"GIVE US MOAR MONEY!!!!!"

Yes Nintendo we got the message. You didn't have to bullshit around it, I guess you REALLY wanted to join SEGA on the Youtube LP ban list, I guess NintenDOES what SEGA did. Enjoy nobody playing your games on youtube anymore. I feel bad for a few Nintendo specific youtuber though, they are going to be screwed over by this pretty hard.

The good news is everyone will probably jump ship to a different videohost, so it might equally harm youtube and they will finally have to stop sucking every copyright holders cock and sometimes actually stand up for the people that provide them with content. Fair Use has not been upheld for a LONG time on youtube, maybe they will have to step up their game once people start claiming that pictures of the cats they sold to other people also belong to them and all revenue must go to the pet stores.

 

[ASnogarD]

Right or not, the LP'ers will simply drop all their Nintendo based videos and look elsewhere... I am 100% certain there are other publishers / developers that will welcome more fans and attention.
I am pretty sure this move will bite Nintendo in the butt, and Nintendo will end up backing out and trying to encourage fans back into the fold.

This move is as bright PR wise as playing Russian roulette with a magazine fed pistol.

 

[loa]

Well I do suppose it would be a lot safer not to create review videos with game footage, screenshots or to even write about any nintendo product then if they even think about just claiming copyright ownership that way because "be glad we don't just get you blocked".

Right?

I mean this site IS your livelihood and they just scraped on the foundation of it all.

 

[FourCartridge]

There's an update on the Game Front article:

As part of our on-going push to ensure Nintendo content is shared across social media channels in an appropriate and safe way, we became a YouTube partner and as such in February 2013 we registered our copyright content in the YouTube database. For most fan videos this will not result in any changes, however, for those videos featuring Nintendo-owned content, such as images or audio of a certain length, adverts will now appear at the beginning, next to or at the end of the clips. We continually want our fans to enjoy sharing Nintendo content on YouTube, and that is why, unlike other entertainment companies, we have chosen not to block people using our intellectual property.

For more information please visit http://www.youtube.com/yt/copyright/faq.html

Sounds like a false alarm to me, unless I'm missing something...

EDIT: Oh wait, it was already in the article. Oops.

 

[rodneyy]

It's also worth noting that for every person who says "I bought ___ because of an LP I watched" there's another person who admits "I ended up not buying ____ because I watched an LP instead." On the Reddit thread on the topic, there are people who admit not buying The Walking Dead, 2012's GOTY just to remind you, because they watched an LP online instead, and didn't feel the need to then buy it having seen the story play out.

There are very real issues regarding copyright when it comes to LPs and how they affect sales, and I can't blame Nintendo for this when all they're doing is stopping profiting from their games, not stopping people posting videos altogether. If someone is dependent on LPs for their livelihood, I'd ask why they're not making original game video content as well?

wile i agree with your point on the walking dead i belive it would be, if not a unique issue, not as common as you imply to counter the argument. it might have lost sales as a direct result of LPs however it is heavily story driven and wile other games have strong story elements they have gameplay as well to back that up. so even if part or all of a story has been revealed you can still derive enjoyment from the action of playing out the story.

the other losses games could incure due to this is if a game is bad, getting a bad reaction from the LPer or not looking fun. in that regard youtube is very much like the playground. one kid gets a game over the weekend and then on monday at school they tell their friends if its worth playing or not. if its a handheld game maybe they take it in and show others a bit of them playing it. if its a popular game or they start doing it a lot then maybe they start charging their friends 20p to watch.

as has been said it seems more akin to free advertising than anything else thought i imagin as ever my viewpoint is skewed in favour of the little guy. i would have thought a more prudent move would have been to find the larger LPers and request certain limits on their work. say only so much game footage, more than fair use but not half the game, or limit the playthrough to early stages rather than the ending.

all this seems to do is alienate a section of their user base, not just the LPers but the people who watch and like them and so feel compassion towards the people negativly affected and lowers your games exposure after release they might still play the game but no longer make a video of it.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

There are very real issues regarding copyright when it comes to LPs and how they affect sales, and I can't blame Nintendo for this when all they're doing is stopping profiting from their games, not stopping people posting videos altogether. If someone is dependent on LPs for their livelihood, I'd ask why they're not making original game video content as well?

1. This isn't about LPers profiting off Nintendo's games, it's about Nintendo doing this SOLELY so that THEY can profit of let's plays. They aren't doing this to "protect" anything, they're doing this out of greed.

2. People apparently like to watch Let's Plays. What's wrong with giving people what they want and letting Youtube put some ads on it and making some cash for themselves?
It's like you're saying "Oh you work in an office? Well why don't you start your OWN business? Unless you do you don't deserve to get paid".


OT: It's like they're trying to make up for EA's conscience acting out this week.

 

[Legion]

*snip*

I agree with this. People can still make Let's Plays, they just can't make money off of them, and I don't see what's wrong with that.

This false sense of entitlement to making money off of other peoples intellectual property is quite sickening to be honest. If Nintendo had said that they couldn't do them at all, that'd be another matter entirely.

 

[Charli]

It's also worth noting that for every person who says "I bought ___ because of an LP I watched" there's another person who admits "I ended up not buying ____ because I watched an LP instead."

For every trailer a company puts out the same equal reactions are met.

I have done both from lets plays, one has made me a steady customer of a game series I had no idea even existed until I saw a lets play. Another turned me off a game entirely.

(Let me break this down for you, if you make GOOD GAMES.

Yeah, stop right there. There is no such thiing as objectively good or objectively bad. Those things are subjective, and subject to differ among individual gamers. You can't claim 'good games' as some kind of objective standard to be applied in copyright cases, for the same reason film copyright isn't based on which films got the best reviews. When gamers cannot agree whether something is unanimously good or not, then any claim of using 'good games' as some kind of decider in copyright is just silly.

Congratulations you've just responded yourself into a corner. If this entire affair is subjective to the individual than what detriment is MORE exposure to the game? If they've nothing to hide, what difference is it to someone staring over their friends shoulder at the game, or expecting 'paid companies' to exhibition gameplay. Films and Games no longer sit in the same categories anymore, this comparison is moot. One is a 20+ hour interactive time sink, very small percentages are going to sit through the entire playthrough. Movies are designed to be one time sit throughs and observed only. Games are an interactive media and cannot be experienced merely through watching, tell any person watching their friend play a game and you'll know for a FACT the fun is in the commentary and discussion, all the 'gaming enjoyment' is achieved by the person playing.

All of this is free advertising. End of. The person player may have a subjective opinion that sways watchers over the quality of the content in the game, but at the end of it, you are STILL merely snuffing out free exposure. The watchers are not playing the game, they are merely observing and listening, the same thing that the companies themselves do at e3 but on a grander and more efficient scale.

Do you wanna know how many of my brothers friends (aged 9) have gone back to play the old sonic games MERELY because they saw a lets play of it online. All of them. Every single one, begged me to point it out to them on Steam so they could all play it and try all the fun hidden secrets and glitches they'd seen demonstrated online.

Forgive me if your comparisons fall short on me, because I still believe this is a stupid stupid stupid move. And nothing will convince me otherwise when I've seen it work to such availment as a positive for these idiotic companies.

If your entire game experience IS only credible in the 'watching it' then congrats, you've made a shitty 'game'. And that my friend, is anything but subjective. For some it might be, but they they should know what kind of 'games' they enjoy anyway. If all they feel like doing is watching them, then I must question why the movie or tv industry has failed to cater to their needs and exploit that niche somehow...