Nintendo Suddenly Claims Ownership Of Many YouTube Videos

[IronMit]

well it's their game. In any other market this would be standard practice.

Buttt when all your more successful competitors with more market share are not doing it then this is pretty stupid

 

[Voltano]

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.

I don't think that is what Charli is talking about. I agree there is no objectively good/bad game everyone can agree on. However I think what Charli was meaning that some people watch LPs (Lets Plays) of games to evaluate whether the game would be enjoyable for them.

Its a variation on the whole issue with used/pirated games debacle. Some people buy used games or pirate games to "try" out the game, to see if it would entertainment them enough. Since some developers/publishers like to villianize used game sales and piracy is still seen as an stealing, the next best option people have for judging whether a game is worth their time is reviews or LPs. What is considered a good/bad game is in the eyes of the gamer, and some might watch a few LPs to judge whether they should open up their wallet for a game (I know I did this a few times before purchasing a game).

 

[Cecilo]

But then comes the argument that some people do not go to certain Let's Players not for the video they are showing but for the person who is talking. By nintendo doing this, they are saying that "No. You only care about our games that are playing", which is not always true. They are profiting off other people's personalities.

 

[General Twinkletoes]

This is pretty common actually. For most of the game commentators who are really getting a lot of money from it are only allowed to do it because the organisation they work for (I.E The Game Station, Machinima) can get them permission. Jesse Cox talked about how the reason he's allowed to make any money from LP's is because TGS got him permission to do it. Otherwise, his videos would be shut down if he monetized them.

Some companies and games (Minecraft, FTL, and valve games off the top of my head) will let anyone make videos and use it for money. However most of the time, if you're making money of LP's and you don't have permission, companies will get pissed.

Still a dick move, but it's not the "OMG NINTENDO ARE EVIL SONS OF BITCHES" that I've seen going around. This isn't very uncommon. I'm pretty sure youtubers like Chuggaaconroy who are part of a company are still able to get money off it, aren't they? That's my understanding of it, and that's really no different from most companies. If I started making Guild Wars 2 footage and monetizing it for instance, I'd be shut down or told to not monetize.

If people working for TGS and Machinima can't monetize, then this is a terrible decision, but I'm pretty sure that's not the case. As it stands, they are acting the same as most companies.

 

[Thaluikhain]

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.

Yeah...no. He's using their stuff. Just because someone works hard to get a fanbase using someone else's stuff doesn't mean they are entitled to it. You can't say the fans are just interested in his ramblings, otherwise he could just as easily make them without gameplay footage.

 

[Dastardly]

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.

The difference is that the company itself designs and releases the trailer. And the trailer doesn't contain all of the major plot twists, reveals, or other "payoff" moments that you would only get by seeing the movie. LPs of story-driven games take a lot of the surprise out, and it's often enough for some folks not to feel like buying the game -- they've already gotten to experience the story.

In this case, a player (not the company) is making a video. That player is not just "spoiling" content, but also using Nintendo's work, slapping their own name on it, and then making money on that. Why should they get to make that money? What work have they done on that content?

It's not their commentary, or people would watch a "Let's Just Talk" from that person over a "Let's Play." It's not their video editing, as it mostly involves showing gameplay footage and making elementary annotations. They're watching it because of the game content.

Now, you'll notice that companies like Nintendo aren't causing the global takedown of walk-throughs, cheat lists, hint guides, etc. Why? Because those don't feature the entire game's content, and the makers aren't making lots of money from that content.

 

[Seventh Actuality]

Most copyright laws allow the use of footage like that for the purposes of criticism and review, don't they? I'd have thought LPs fell into that category. As with most cases like this though, it's the big company cracking down on people who don't have the resources to defend their position.

It would be more understandable if Nintendo had just decided to stop potential breaches of copyright, but actually fucking stealing people's money? I know nobody gives a shit about the Wii U, guys, but there have to be better ways to boost revenue.

 

[Griffolion]

They'll regret it when nobody is bothering to upload footage of their games in 12 months time. Being a dick will always come back to bite you in the ass, Nintendo.

 

[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.

Except that its their game. Why shouldn't they profit from it? What is it that LPers add which is so original it turns the video from Nintendo's content into their own? I don't count stream-of-consciousness rambling, as that hardly counts as something you 'compose'.

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?

Why do people feel they should be paid for playing someone else's game in the first place? Game reviewers at least put the time into writing and filming reviews, which count as original composed content. Why should filming my average co-op session on a game with some friends all of a sudden entitle me to make money from a game? All I've done is hit 'Record' on an otherwise normal session of gaming. Since when does that entitle me to money?

They already do profit from their games. They SELL them for crying out loud. Let's Players are pretty much giving them free advertising!!! And in case you didn't already know, Nintendo isn't paying them ANYTHING. (Nor should they)

And why do you feel that people should not be paid for putting out content that there is a demand for? It's not about Reviewers being more original, never was, but you've brought it up for no apparent reason.

 

[V8 Ninja]

On one hand, this is not a community-friendly move. Then again, if you're doing a Let's Play for money, why are you doing an LP? It's all a thick, grey line. I'll also be the first to admit that I don't know how copyright laws work.

EDIT: The whole "I'm Let's Playing This Game For Money" issue is the reason why I stopped watching TotalBiscuit's content; in several videos he continued to say that he was only playing certain games because he, "had to," not because he genuinely cared about the game in question or wanted to play the game. To me, that's not the reason that a person should be doing an LP.

 

[Starke]

I said this more or less in the other thread on the topic, but I'll say it again here- hitting 'record' on a gaming session and punctuating with with occasional swear words or "WTF!" does not equal the same as creating original content.

I wouldn't be able to post the entirety of the Hobbit online with my ramblings over the top, nor would I be able to post then entirety of Daft Punk's new album with me talking over the top. In both cases, I'd get hit with a takedown notice pretty damn quick.

When you're doing an LP of a Nintendo game, you're using Nintendo's content. Sorry, Fair Use doesn't apply to posting whole sections/the entire game up online. Fair Use is meant to apply to small snippets or excerpts used for a specific purpose. Posting the entirety of a game falls outside of Fair Use. And I'm sorry, but most LPs I've seen hardly had witty original commentary over the top.

Fair Use isn't, and never has been about quality. If it was, then we wouldn't have that Movie Movie franchise, and the world would probably be a better place, at least for that. Fair Use is about specific circumstances where copyright does not apply.

The catch is, as much as developers and publishers want them to be, games aren't movies. This falls under the transformative clause of Fair Use. If a game is nothing but a non-interactive ten hour movie, then sure, whatever, it's infringement, but the thing is, games aren't.

If we go back to your Daft Punk analogy, if you take the entire album and remix it, it is, or at least, should be, Fair Use. Of course, we live in an era when the RIAA and MPAA go fucking batshit at the very prospect of Fair Use existing as a concept.

Now, you might not like it. But your opinions don't render something as non-fair use.

If you want to make money from gaming, but don't want to actually make games, then try your hardest to make original content worth watching, a la Jim Sterling, Yahtzee, Moviebob. Those guys use hardly any game footage at all, and what they do use easily falls under Fair Use. I enjoy Adam Sessler's videos, and all he does is stand in front of a camera and ramble. I think he's (mostly) informative and intelligent, and I hope he makes a good living from videos like that.

Someone hitting record on a regular game session and expecting to get paid? Sorry, you've got limited sympathy from me if you're trying to profit like that from someone else's game. Try actually creating something to make money from.

As it is, Nintendo are still supporting LPs, so it's not like they're hitting everyone with takedown notices. They're just not letting other people profit from using their stuff.

The problem is of course, LPs are a kind of performance art. Nintendo isn't actually playing the game, offering cometary, which, if anyone is actually watching, better be entertaining in its own right, cutting the video together, which is a hell of a lot more involved than you seem to understand. And, at the end of the day, Nintendo wanders in, claims everything for their work.

Not a cut of the ad revenue, all of it.

Oh, and remember, there's no prohibition against public performances of games. Because, again, as much as the developers would like them to be, games are not films.

 

[Charli]

Okay the people quoting me are just picking out what the choose to respond to and crying about it merely from a 'I believe it works this way and not a combination of both with different weights of pro's and cons'. You didn't respond to: Time investment, the example I provided that clearly outlined an example of a positive result from a lets play, and are just blindly frothing at the mouth to defend the indefensible dickswinging. They are not working this out in a diplomatic way, therefore, this is still bad publicity.

And they aren't just taking down videos posted by people who are taking in revenue now either. (Personally I adblock these people unless it's a review since, I agree it should not be a paid experience) Amateur reviewers and lets players are receiving violations as well.

And Sega are still on the naughty step too. I don't let companies off the hook that easily, tons of high profile reviewers are STILL boycotting them exposure. As they should.

An extremely small percentage of people are going to sit through a 50+ parter of a story based game. (If that is truly their only selling point) If they do, I Must ask again, where is the niche for this that has been overlooked? I think more people I've talked to go out and get the game second hand (I Have a small group to work with, but doing a study might be the way to find this out, a couple of posts on reddit does not a good argument make, if you feel the need to devalue my example from the playgrounds of this earth, namely my brother and his 8 or so friends, so then we are at an impasse.)

And statistically weighing commentaries over game play views over 'silent gameplay' veiws. The commentary versions of each usually win out. Often. People absolutely are attracted to commentary over gameplay. There are even a entire strain of commentary channels. Alot of them reporting violations now.

The people doing 'silent game play runs' to me, are not lets plays. And need to be slapped down.

But some people here are determined. I will leave you now to your views, and continue what I need to be doing which is working/watching (listening to) a lets play that isn't from a nintendo game.

I hope the next time your creations need exposure you're only granted it through paid advertising as well. I rely on people circulating my shit through tumblr, youtube and twitter personally, and I encourage the hell out of it as long as my name remains on it. Otherwise I'd be sunk for spare cash.

 

[rapidoud]

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.

The average nintendo customer doesn't browse youtube.

Reflect on that; this is a drop in the pond for sales. If there was a serious backlash about this (there isn't, yet) on many major sites, then MAYBE they may stop, but nintendo's average customer has no idea what an LP is besides a storage media.

 

[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.

The average nintendo customer doesn't browse youtube.

Reflect on that; this is a drop in the pond for sales. If there was a serious backlash about this (there isn't, yet) on many major sites, then MAYBE they may stop, but nintendo's average customer has no idea what an LP is besides a storage media.

Then why even bother with this whole stunt if their customers don't even watch these LPs?