- Jul 16, 2009
The curious part is not what it does, but what it does not: entail any advantage whatsoever to Microsoft.Tiger Sora said:But. But, this doesn't affect me, nor 99.9% of anyone else. So a few dozen youtubers have lost their revenue streams. Now they have to get real jobs like regular people. That sucks cause I know what it's like to have a super easy job, but, real life sucks.
Video content providers are in no way competing with any Microsoft venture, and while on first look it might be intended to troll Google, it would be a laughably ineffective way of doing so. Google doesn't suddenly stop getting ad revenue when it doesn't pay the uploader.
Until somebody provides a sensible explanation as to why they would even deem it worth the time writing the EULA, I'll assume it to be lawyer shenannigans. Maybe they were bored.
TB would fall under fair use, as he is using the material for review purposes. Which doesn't mean Microsoft might not ready the lawsuit cannons anyway.RvLeshrac said:And I'm sure he monetizes the videos without first obtaining the rights necessary to do so from the developers.gigastar said:TB does get monetisation for his videos, in fact in a recent video he explicitly stated that his only source of regular income is the money coming in from his videos. And according to him its enough that he doesnt need to find a regular job.RvLeshrac said:Uploading a video to YouTube != enabling monetization for that video.Hazy992 said:Well if that's the case how are channels like Yogscast and TotalBiscuit allowed then? TotalBiscuit has almost a million subscribers and Yogscast even more.RvLeshrac said:On YouTube, the monetization agreement EXPRESSLY PROHIBITS enabling monetization of game videos.
Or, you know, the opposite of that.
This EULA is aimed at the vast swathes of content that have no satirical or review purpose whatsoever, and merely seek to entertain.