Nintendo Suddenly Claims Ownership Of Many YouTube Videos

[Nihilm]

No, the best way to have a law changed is to vote that way. Get involved in politics and try to actually make a difference in the world. Mass disobedience is only going to come with criminal charges.

MLK and Gandhi would have disagreed with you here.

Or if you want a less self-glamorizing example, then there is always the Prohibition and it's crash and burn.

Civil Disobedience, whether inspired by a moral statement or a personal attempt at doing what seems to be reasonable for yourself, is useful by demonstrating to the public just how fucked up the law is to begin with, and gathering sympathy to your cause.

Yes, voting is what will ultimately change the law, but won't get to the point of there can even exist a significant Pirate Party platform, if we "just suck it up and deal with it".

But getting burned by sucky copyright law and then whining about it on Internet forums, *is* part of that process.

The big problem is that it never goes BEYOND whining on internet forums. It stays there. And it stays on sites like 4Chan and Reddit. People get into this big circle jerk in their own isolated communities and never do anything about it.

MLK and Ghandi didn't sit in their homes bitching about injustice, they went out and put in an effort to get it changed. They were passionate, involved, and PEACEFUL. And the point is they protested these laws without breaking them. It wasn't illegal to stage a boycott back then. It wasn't illegal to do the Million Man March.

Gamers on the other hand just shout "Copyright Law is bullshit!" and then stop. Nothing productive gets done.

So to solve not doign enough, we should do nothing cause it annoys you personally?

 

[waj9876]

Okay...I'm getting conflicting stories here.

On one side it's "Nintendo is an evil, shitty corporation who deserves to die in a fire for taking ALL of the money LPers are getting."

And the other is "Nintendo is just doing what every other company does, and this isn't as bad as people are making it out to be."

Which is it?

 

[Nihilm]

No, the best way to have a law changed is to vote that way. Get involved in politics and try to actually make a difference in the world. Mass disobedience is only going to come with criminal charges.

MLK and Gandhi would have disagreed with you here.

Or if you want a less self-glamorizing example, then there is always the Prohibition and it's crash and burn.

Civil Disobedience, whether inspired by a moral statement or a personal attempt at doing what seems to be reasonable for yourself, is useful by demonstrating to the public just how fucked up the law is to begin with, and gathering sympathy to your cause.

Yes, voting is what will ultimately change the law, but won't get to the point of there can even exist a significant Pirate Party platform, if we "just suck it up and deal with it".

But getting burned by sucky copyright law and then whining about it on Internet forums, *is* part of that process.

The big problem is that it never goes BEYOND whining on internet forums. It stays there. And it stays on sites like 4Chan and Reddit. People get into this big circle jerk in their own isolated communities and never do anything about it.

MLK and Ghandi didn't sit in their homes bitching about injustice, they went out and put in an effort to get it changed. They were passionate, involved, and PEACEFUL. And the point is they protested these laws without breaking them. It wasn't illegal to stage a boycott back then. It wasn't illegal to do the Million Man March.

Gamers on the other hand just shout "Copyright Law is bullshit!" and then stop. Nothing productive gets done.

So to solve not doign enough, we should do nothing cause it annoys you personally?

What kind of insane breed of logic is that? This isn't an issue of whether it annoys me or not.

That was an example of logic i saw from what you said. Gamers don't do enough when they are complaining about stuff to change anything, so they should stop complaining in general.

 

[Entitled]

The big problem is that it never goes BEYOND whining on internet forums. It stays there. And it stays on sites like 4Chan and Reddit. People get into this big circle jerk in their own isolated communities and never do anything about it.

MLK and Ghandi didn't sit in their homes bitching about injustice, they went out and put in an effort to get it changed.

Sorry for not being a charismatic civil rights leader.

I intentionally gave an alternative example with the prohibition, where there was more emphasis on millions of the little guys breaking the stupid-ass law.

By the way, IP liberalization also has plenty of passionate activists, from the guys at EFF exploiting the current law, pirate parties trying to politically change it in Europe, and it has it's own martyr in the form of Aaron Swartz (rip).

They are the ones doing the hard part. But arguing that I'm not supposed to argue in favor of them because it's "useless", is less than useless.

And the point is they protested these laws without breaking them. It wasn't illegal to stage a boycott back then.

Then why did they both get imprisoned by their governments?

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

True, but that's not Nintendo's fault. The fact that reviewers or people with licenses are getting hit is due to YouTube's content ID system being flawed. It can't tell who was a license and who doesn't, so it flags anything that has the content in it regardless of legitimacy. So if anything, while Nintendo isn't exactly the nice guy here a lot of the flak they are getting is due to YouTube's ineptitude.

You assume one thing - that it was a mistake.

If those Reviewers get their add revenue back, then it was an error and no harm done. Fair Use stands.

If they don't... then everything you just said is empty wind. Or... the keyboard equivalent.

I HOPE you're right. But I've seen You Tube crap all over Fair Use WAY too many times to think you actually are right. If you prove to be correct, then I will be pleasantly surprised. But I don't think you will be. I think Nintendo will be keeping all of that add revenue, and screw all of the people on You Tube that used material under Fair Use.

 

[Nihilm]

Okay...I'm getting conflicting stories here.

On one side it's "Nintendo is an evil, shitty corporation who deserves to die in a fire for taking ALL of the money LPers are getting."

And the other is "Nintendo is just doing what every other company does, and this isn't as bad as people are making it out to be."

Which is it?

Both, kind off. What nintendo is doing is different from other companies, but the other companies aren't really being nice about it either, instead of taking all the money the other corporations just take the videos down and what most argueing about being shitty corporations, aren't talking specifically about nintendo, but copyright law and how it is used in general by all the corporations.

 

[StriderShinryu]

As many others have already pointed out, this isn't necessarily about the legality or the rules. It's about essentially free advertising and respect for your fans (and potential fans). Nintendo could have opted to have the videos yanked. Instead, they opted to put claims on the videos such that they continue to exist but all revenue from them goes to Nintendo. That's basically an admission that the videos really aren't all that bad at all.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Okay...I'm getting conflicting stories here.

On one side it's "Nintendo is an evil, shitty corporation who deserves to die in a fire for taking ALL of the money LPers are getting."

And the other is "Nintendo is just doing what every other company does, and this isn't as bad as people are making it out to be."

Which is it?

Yes.

Both are correct. Previously, Nintendo stood in the "we Respect LPs and Fair Use" camp, along side Mojang, Blizzard, and Valve. And, weirdly EA and Activision.

Now, Nintendo has switched over to the "we take all your money" camp with Microsoft and... pretty much everyone who isn't the five companies listed above.

Both, kind off. What nintendo is doing is different from other companies, but the other companies aren't really being nice about it either, instead of taking all the money the other corporations just take the videos down and what most argueing about being shitty corporations, aren't talking specifically about nintendo, but copyright law and how it is used in general by all the corporations.

Ack! Ninjaed!

 

[Sheo_Dagana]

So... the problem here is that Nintendo is going to be making money from the ad revenue someone else was making, but put none of the work Nintendo did into the game? I don't have any particularly strong feelings for Nintendo one way or the other, but it seems like the legality of the issue is on their side.

I know... the dream we all have is to play video games and get paid for it. It sucks that these guys can't do that anymore. And hey, without some Youtube videos, I wouldn't have found certain game secrets or boss strategies, but those are pretty different from LPs.

 

[zinho73]

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?

I do let´s plays but I'm not a youtube partner and do not profit from it. I agree that I should not make money while using a lot of other's people work. I see what I do as advertising and fan service.

I understand if Nintendo (or any other company) wants to block what I do because they cannot control the quality of every let's play and it may harm their copyrighted material. I think it would be e dumb move, because I do think it does way more good than bad - but I get it.

But I cannot get behind the fact that Nintendo wants to profit from my work. There are tons of LPs of Nintendo games, but only a few that have hundreds of thousands of views. This is not Nintendo's work, this is the merit of the Lper. If the LP is making money from that, it is a valid discussion to have, but Nintendo making money from the content imposing themselves is just as unethical, if not worse.

Let's plays are a fantastic way to promote a game and companies should not be so greedy about it. The youtube licensing as it is already protects that. Send some cease and desist notes and make a let´s play kit available for fans, with customized intros and outros. By all means, keep people from gaining money using your work - but do not use your leverage to do the same thing and hide behind a PR smoke screen.

 

[Something Amyss]

Wouldn't this have implications for reviewers? What's the difference between an LP and a review?

Reviewers generally don't upload the whole game or large sections of gameplay.

Of course, Jim Sterling has made mention that some of his videos have been blocked on YouTube because, despite standard use of clips in review and commentary generally falling to Fair Use, YouTube doesn't necessarily give a crap. Companies can get your shit pulled by filing DMCA notifications without actually owning the content in question.

The fact is, Fair Use rights have eroded over the years and corporations have an incredible amount of power these days, but Fair Use should apply to excerpts for review or commentary purposes.

Nope. Fair Use covers excerpts of material used for educational purposes. It doesn't cover the entire piece of media being uploaded to Youtube, as is the case with LPs.

You do know it's more than just educational purposes, right?

I still see little difference. It's just text as opposed to video. Oh I know! They aren't making any money of of it. XÞ

It probably has more to do with the fact that they legally can't go after walkthroughs. You may not see the difference, but the law certainly does.

No LPers being paid means no more Let's Plays. No more Let's Plays, no more free marketing. No more free marketing, less visibility. In short, it's another example of why copyright laws need to be reworked. There needs to be some sort of leeway for fan-based content.

Not all LPers are doing this for money, however. All this means is "less exposure," which probably doesn't impact the "House of Mario." Exposure tends to be an issue for companies without Nintendo's ubiquity and brand recognition.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Didn't Sega do this a while back too? Rather disappointing, Nintendo. It didn't help Sega with struggling sales, I don't think it's going to help you either. In fact, I don't think it helps anyone when any game company does this. Fans will no longer talk about your games for fear of getting in trouble, and you will lose out on potential sales because people are not talking about your games.

 

[blizzaradragon]

True, but that's not Nintendo's fault. The fact that reviewers or people with licenses are getting hit is due to YouTube's content ID system being flawed. It can't tell who was a license and who doesn't, so it flags anything that has the content in it regardless of legitimacy. So if anything, while Nintendo isn't exactly the nice guy here a lot of the flak they are getting is due to YouTube's ineptitude.

You assume one thing - that it was a mistake.

If those Reviewers get their add revenue back, then it was an error and no harm done. Fair Use stands.

If they don't... then everything you just said is empty wind. Or... the keyboard equivalent.

I HOPE you're right. But I've seen You Tube crap all over Fair Use WAY too many times to think you actually are right. If you prove to be correct, then I will be pleasantly surprised. But I don't think you will be. I think Nintendo will be keeping all of that add revenue, and screw all of the people on You Tube that used material under Fair Use.

That's true, at this point it is speculation. But at the same time I don't see how it won't go that way as targeting those that have the licenses to do so already would just make this whole move be thrown out. From what I'm seeing, it comes down to the people who are being flagged to fight back as I don't see YouTube themselves going through every video flagged and asking who has a license to use their stuff and who doesn't, cause let's face it we're talking about YouTube here. Now if the people who are getting flagged but have licenses aren't doing anything, then yeah I see what I said to be worth as much as a dog fart. It'd kind of be like an employee who gets extra on his paycheck due to an error but doesn't report it, except in this case the employee is getting thousands to millions of little paychecks. Ultimately, we'll just have to wait and see though. I wish I could find out what happened on YouTube regarding similar situations when other companies started doing this such as Microsoft so we could see some sort of comparison, but so far my research has come up with squat...

 

[zinho73]

Okay...I'm getting conflicting stories here.

On one side it's "Nintendo is an evil, shitty corporation who deserves to die in a fire for taking ALL of the money LPers are getting."

And the other is "Nintendo is just doing what every other company does, and this isn't as bad as people are making it out to be."

Which is it?

It is the first one.

The second option is harder on the end user because some companies are downright demanding that their content to be removed, but it is more honest.

Nintendo is kind of doing an "eye for an eye" thing: you stole my work, now I'm steeling yours.

And I know some people argue that making a LP requires no work at all. Those people are just wrong. As in any craft there are good and bad people. God LP normally involves hard work and/or someone with a lot of charisma and skill in the game.

 

[sirjeffofshort]

I kinda know going into this that it's probably not going to be a very popular opinion, but I don't really have a problem with this. I think Nintendo is well within their right to get paid for the use of their intellectual property and it is actually a fairly cool move on their part to leave the videos up and not outright sue or ban the users.

Of course I do realize that the commentary does inherently change the product, and that people are return users for the personality attached to the channel, but it IS still a video chiefly made up of their assets. Commentary being just one piece of the overall whole (art, design, music, SFX etc.), saying that Nintendo has no right to any compensation just seems naive to me. Of course I think in a perfect world it should be some sort of a revenue split, but even then Nintendo would have to end up with the lions share of the money.

But in our imperfect world we are left with this solution. Nintendo says "It's cool to use what's ours, we will seek compensation on our own." leaving the fans to decide whether or not its worth it to them. If you are a career LPer and only in it for the money (and I don't mean that in a negative way, there's no shame in doing something for the money, it's called a job.) then just don't do those games, if you are just a huge fan that wants to pay tribute to a game you love, then go ahead and don't worry about it.

 

[blizzaradragon]

Didn't Sega do this a while back too? Rather disappointing, Nintendo. It didn't help Sega with struggling sales, I don't think it's going to help you either. In fact, I don't think it helps anyone when any game company does this. Fans will no longer talk about your games for fear of getting in trouble, and you will lose out on potential sales because people are not talking about your games.

Kind of. Sega didn't keep the videos up, they just took down anything that used their content. A better example would be Microsoft which did this same thing back in October, so only those who have licenses to use their products such as Machinima can use them to make money. Haven't been able to find a comparison to what Microsoft did to what is happening with Nintendo though.

If anyone out there has evidence, an article, or something showing what happened with any videos that were making ad revenue when Microsoft did this, please let me know. I want to do a comparison to know whether what is happening now(legitimate videos with license agreements being flagged due to YouTube's content ID system) is something that happened when Microsoft did this same thing or if they took another route. So many questions, so little evidence...

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

That's true, at this point it is speculation. But at the same time I don't see how it won't go that way as targeting those that have the licenses to do so already would just make this whole move be thrown out. From what I'm seeing, it comes down to the people who are being flagged to fight back as I don't see YouTube themselves going through every video flagged and asking who has a license to use their stuff and who doesn't, cause let's face it we're talking about YouTube here. Now if the people who are getting flagged but have licenses aren't doing anything, then yeah I see what I said to be worth as much as a dog fart. It'd kind of be like an employee who gets extra on his paycheck due to an error but doesn't report it, except in this case the employee is getting thousands to millions of little paychecks. Ultimately, we'll just have to wait and see though. I wish I could find out what happened on YouTube regarding similar situations when other companies started doing this such as Microsoft so we could see some sort of comparison, but so far my research has come up with squat...

Fair enough.

I just remember another fan-project video that fell under Fair Use and parody getting taken down entirely a couple of years back. They protested with You Tube, but to no avail. It wasn't with a video game, but a TV show, but it set a certain precedent in my mind that You Tube + Fair Use = Suck it.

Like I said, I hope it doesn't go that way this time. I hope you're right. But, due to previous You-Tube burns, my hopes are not high.

 

[Mr.Pandah]

As an LP'er, or once was, the time and editing that is actually put into making a decent video is not given as much credit as people think. I would love to just hit record and have my audio and video files automatically synced up and cutting out unnecessary noise and parts that don't need to be in the video amongst many other things.

Anyways, I think Nintendo shouldn't have the ability to profit off of things like this. Just doesn't make sense to me.

I agree, but I guess according to Jeffers and Nintendo they consider you a talentless hack who offered nothing of value or originality. I know how much work it takes to put one together, as I have a friend who does it, whichb is why those arguments piss me off so much.

Yeah, it's rather unfortunate that LP'ers are viewed in that manner. It was so time consuming for me because I like everything to be near perfect in terms of presentation and what not so this is why I actually gave it up. I do miss doing it but god...between my actual job and that, I had no time for anything else...which turned it into just another job. =/