Nintendo Suddenly Claims Ownership Of Many YouTube Videos

[1337mokro]

Actually by that reading 'simply' means 'only'

When you are adding narration and the like you are providing original content along with the playing of the game, thus by Youutube's standards it can be monetized.

Nope, as this is where the debate comes in. Does adding rambling stream-of-consciousness narrative count as adding original content? I doubt it, otherwise people who talk in the cinema could claim the same.

This is supported by...all the LPers who narrate and get paid for it.

The majority of whom are affiliated with networks like Fullscreen or Machinima who have licensing agreements already set up publishers and developers.

Downplaying things does not a good argument make.

Why does a studio pay the cameraman? All he did was point the camera at what he was told to point the camera. Why does the guy adding music to a movie get paid? All he did was put music tracks he probably didn't even make himself on top of the footage. Fuck why do we even pay for a movie we see? All it did was play when I sat in a chair. It's their fault for playing it on the wall the chair was facing, I'm not paying for that shit.

Heck why does anyone get paid we could break down anything anyone does into something that adds nothing if we wish to describe it that way. However when we get right down to it the sum of parts is greater than it what it started with, so even if you regard commentary as that weird bumpersticker it's still there, the irony being that often people will come just to watch the bumpersticker rather than the car it's on.

It also good to know that you basically dissed MST3K by calling them incoherent stream on consciousness ramblers. Should earn you allot of fans on the internet

Now again yes MST3K did have the rights, the LPers don't, without the rights, MST3K could not broadcast, the LPers just get all the money they make, or would have made because some of them did not run ads before this, and it gets funneled to Nintendo. See the amazing difference?

Nintendo had multiple options, they picked the scummiest bottom-feeding one there was. Is it legal what they did? Yes, I am not disputing that. Is it fair? Good for PR? Fuck no!

 

[Nihilm]

I made my entire point on the subject in the thread in Gaming discussion about this.

So all I will say here is that copyright law is inherently stupid at the moment and just because what Nintendo does is legally right it is morally wrong and that is why it should be opposed.

Laws should not always be followed, because in some cases some laws are flawed.

 

[1337mokro]

A wiki is not sold for profit. It counts as free educational material, and is thus exempt. The minute people start selling wiki summaries for profit (what a weird fucking day that will be), Nintendo can demand they get a license fee for including names and descriptions of copyrighted characters.

Which is why some wiki's have ads right? It is also why Nintendo just removed ads right? Oh wait no they funneled the revenue from ads on those videos to themselves... Ouch... It's hard to see someone break his own side of the fence in half. It's good to know though that your Virtual Boy goggles are set to denial at full strength. Should probably make it quite easy for you to ignore the blatantly obvious. Mainly that if it was about people making money off of their products, they could have just taken down the videos and ads, but no, they wanted more money, so they kept the ads and funneled it all to themselves.

Also wiki's for profit? They are called walkthroughs, several sites that have them also run ads.

However it is nice that you just sidestepped the issue in favour of beating a strawmen. I would still like you to address your statement that videos are directly harmful to sales because they reveal the story but wiki's somehow are not when they do exactly the same. Sometimes even in greater detail because they go into backstories and lore.

Gameplay programmed and scripted by the developers.

Which you describe using words which still means your basically repeating what the devs did, copying, even in your own words, is not new content, it's funny that you seem to have a giant double standard here. Not to mention copyrighted or trademarked words, which basically equal copyright infringement when used.

Mario TM.

 

[Nihilm]

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

Nope. Not a dick move. This is a standard industry practice nowadays. Nintendo has just finally started to do it.

Regardless, if someone is making money off of YOUR work, wouldn't you get kinda peeved and want to get that money that rightfully belongs to you?

I wouldn't care about the money enough, unless I am so poor that I can't allow myself even the tiniest of luxuries nor basic needs. Money is just an abstract thing we created and then gave value. Money is a means to an end not an end itself.

If I created something and someone made money off my work with something like a LP, I would be proud that I made something, someone could make money off of like that. Same way if I made a game and another game dev made a carbon copy with only a few changes, I would feel proud that I am worth copying.

 

[Fu11Frontal]

Why are you guys jumping on each other? Honestly, I don't know too much about this community but it really seems like Jeffers is just trying to explain that everyone else already does this...and everyone willfully ignores that because of his alleged "fanboyism." Yeah...I'm not doing VG forums anymore.

 

[1337mokro]

Why are you guys jumping on each other? Honestly, I don't know too much about this community but it really seems like Jeffers is just trying to explain that everyone else already does this...and everyone willfully ignores that because of his alleged "fanboyism." Yeah...I'm not doing VG forums anymore.

Goodbye! Didn't know who you were, but I'll miss you probably.

Now as to why everyone is jumping on jeffers? Well if he had a good point we might care. His attitude seems to be however that this is a totally alright move without any bad points and LPers are talentless parasites who suck off the great big Nintendo for sustenance.

Nobody here is actually trying to argue legal vs non-legal. It is legal, Nintendo could barge into their channels and slap cocks over their entire videos if they wanted to. That would on the other hand be an even bigger DICK move than this.

 

[Nihilm]

Why are you guys jumping on each other? Honestly, I don't know too much about this community but it really seems like Jeffers is just trying to explain that everyone else already does this...and everyone willfully ignores that because of his alleged "fanboyism." Yeah...I'm not doing VG forums anymore.

Goodbye! Didn't know who you were, but I'll miss you probably.

Now as to why everyone is jumping on jeffers? Well if he had a good point we might care. His attitude seems to be however that this is a totally alright move without any bad points and LPers are talentless parasites who suck off the great big Nintendo for sustenance.

Nobody here is actually trying to argue legal vs non-legal. It is legal, Nintendo could barge into their channels and slap cocks over their entire videos if they wanted to. That would on the other hand be an even bigger DICK move than this.

bravo sir, bravo

I'll say it again it is not about whether it is legal or not.

 

[Mr Binary]

The way this is really seeming to me is Nintendo is 'taking their ball and going home.' They're just leaving a picture of the ball for all the other kids to look at when they are playing with it all alone.

 

[Karadalis]

Wait a sec... what about third party games?

For example... can nintendo make this claim when the lper is playing monster hunter on the wii u? I mean it is capcoms game not nintendos...

So would this claim only work for nintendo made titles like any mario, zelda, metroid etc. title?

 

[UltraPic]

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.

If you read the manuals, cartridges, discs it say's public broadcasts are prohibited, and that's what lp's are.

 

[Waif]

Allow me to explain the situation as I see it. The people making these let's play videos are using content that Nintendo worked hard on, and paid for themselves. For a Let's Player to be benefiting from the hard work of other people, and not to mention the possibility of revenue being lost in sales. I think Nintendo has every right to want to gain ad revenue from videos that show the games in their entirety. I mean if I spent tens of millions of dollars making a video game only to find out someone uploaded videos of it making a profit from my work. I'm gonna be pretty annoyed, and the nicest thing I could do is simply ad revenue away from them. So yeah people are looking at this that Nintendo as the aggressor and the Let's Players as the victims, but to me anyways it's the other way around.

 

[Something Amyss]

Most copyright laws allow the use of footage like that for the purposes of criticism and review, don't they?

Fair Use law is generally contingent on the audience (public v private) and the amount of material copied. Using an entire game's footage is almost certain to NOT hold up to Fair Use.

 

[Mr Binary]

Wait a sec... what about third party games?

For example... can nintendo make this claim when the lper is playing monster hunter on the wii u? I mean it is capcoms game not nintendos...

So would this claim only work for nintendo made titles like any mario, zelda, metroid etc. title?

Technically it is being playing on a Nintendo console, so yes. They actually called copy-right on a couple of my Monster Hunter Tri videos that were posted a few years back. I'm considering just not doing any of the GR quest recordings I had planned.

 

[Weaver]

Isn't Zack Scott signed up with one of the big video game networks? They have a legal team for this kind of thing.

More to the point, the sad thing is the little youtubers who have ad-free videos will now have them with ads all over them.