What did everyone think of the latest Jimquisition?

[Story]

Remember to follow the rules of The Escapist's Terms of Service which condemns the use of piracy! I don't want to see anyone banned because of this discussion.


Anyway Jim pointed out the hypocracy of Nintendo's copy right claim and saids by that logic it is okay to steal from Nintendo too.
This is one of the worst episodes I've seen in a while from Jim, if I'm understanding his argument correctly. It's okay to steal because a company does not respect you? And because Nintendo copyright claims YouTubers and fan made projects everyone should just steal things from Nintendo as well...am I missing something here? I rather have a second opinion outside of the YouTube comment section so I thought it would be best to discuss the video over here on the Escapist.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

It's basically just Jim being frustrated with Nintendo. His argument isn't well reasoned or thought out and doesn't make a lick of sense, but I understand where he's coming from.

Nintendo keeps trying to monetize his videos, puts ads into videos he created, and is essentially stealing his work. So in his mind because Nintendo keeps stealing from him then that's a two way street and he can steal from Nintendo, but that's not how law or morality works.

Stealing from a criminal doesn't make you less of a thief.

Honestly though, I don't think he really believes what he's saying, nor is he actually advocating stealing from Nintendo, he's just trying to point out the hypocrisy of Nintendo's copyright claims in a snarky way, which is coming off a lot less snarky than usual because he's very clearly angry about it, and not in a fun way. And who can blame him, between this and the him getting sued by Digital Homicide it's no wonder he's sick of this shit that's getting pulled on youtube.

 

[Story]

Honestly though, I don't think he really believes what he's saying, nor is he actually advocating stealing from Nintendo, he's just trying to point out the hypocrisy of Nintendo's copyright claims in a snarky way, which is coming off a lot less snarky than usual because he's very clearly angry about it, and not in a fun way. And who can blame him, between this and the him getting sued by Digital Homicide it's no wonder he's sick of this shit that's getting pulled on youtube.

Okay well good. I'm glad I'm not the only one scratching my head at this. Sometimes I find Jim to be pretty petty and while I understand his stress, its really starting to affect the quality of his work. If this was a purely sarcastic video I would have expected more comedy and less of a rant.

I guess it doesn't help too that personally none of Nintendo's copy right claim issues effect me which makes it hard to relate to his side. I do understand his point though so there is that,

 

[darkcalling]

Jim's allowed an occasional video that's just an angry rant and after what Nintendo has put him and other Youtubers through I don't blame him for being angry.

The fact that he had to invent the copyright deadlock to deal with stuff like this is proof that A) Youtube really needs to find a better solution, and B) Nintendo needs to learn what fair use actually means and realize that no one is trying to steal their IP. If any of those fan games they've shut down were being sold for real actual money that would be one thing but to the best of my knowledge none of them were.

Also a brief comment on the "Oh Ubisoft" segment, For Honor definitely has some kinks to work out but in my experience the online issues have gone down significantly in the week or so since release. Room for improvement still but not quite as bad from what I've seen.

 

[Story]

Jim's allowed an occasional video that's just an angry rant and after what Nintendo has put him and other Youtubers through I don't blame him for being angry.

Of course he's allowed to do it. But when your title and argument involves doing something illegal using morally unsound logic on a channel with a lot of viewers who hang on your word...that seems irresponsible to me. And yeah Nintendo is one big joke these days and so is the issue of piracy but his video really didn't sit right with me.

 

[darkcalling]

Jim's allowed an occasional video that's just an angry rant and after what Nintendo has put him and other Youtubers through I don't blame him for being angry.

Of course he's allowed to do it. But when your title and argument involves doing something illegal using morally unsound logic on a channel with a lot of viewers who hang on your word...that seems irresponsible to me. And yeah Nintendo is one big joke these days and so is the issue of piracy but his video really didn't sit right with me.

It also just sounded like 90% sarcasm to me though. He clearly isn't being serious, he's just pointing out Nintendo's hypocrisy a bit more bluntly than usual(and Jim's usually pretty damn blunt). I don't condone piracy either but after all the bullshit Nintendo's done with Youtube and how E-shop purchases won't carry over to the Switch E-shop and how subscribing to their new online platform for multiplayer gets you A free game each month FOR a month (as in: you don't get to keep it) I find it hard to feel sorry for them. I was never really planning on getting I switch but I certainly won't feel like I'm missing out on all that.

Only games they've announced for it that looked interesting anyway were the new Mario and Zelda titles anyway. And I've always HATED the Zelda games.

 

[Erttheking]

I can't really advocate piracy, but at the same time I can't really condemn it either, doubly so for Nintendo when they're doubling down on the hypocrisy, much like Jim points out.

Overall, how I feel towards someone who's pirating a game depends on how available the game is. If you're pirating a game that's currently available for one dollar that can go towards charity on the Humble Bundle...come the fuck on, what's wrong with you? If, on the other hand, you're pirating Fire Emblem Path of Radiance, a game that Nintendo has done fuck all to make available on any of its digital services, despite the recent explosive popularity of Fire Emblem and your only other options are to buy the game for a hundred dollars on Amazon, a hundred dollars that Nintendo will never see a single cent of, then yeah, I find it really freaking hard to criticize.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I can't really advocate piracy, but at the same time I can't really condemn it either, doubly so for Nintendo when they're doubling down on the hypocrisy, much like Jim points out.

Overall, how I feel towards someone who's pirating a game depends on how available the game is. If you're pirating a game that's currently available for one dollar that can go towards charity on the Humble Bundle...come the fuck on, what's wrong with you? If, on the other hand, you're pirating Fire Emblem Path of Radiance, a game that Nintendo has done fuck all to make available on any of its digital services, despite the recent explosive popularity of Fire Emblem and your only other options are to buy the game for a hundred dollars on Amazon, a hundred dollars that Nintendo will never see a single cent of, then yeah, I find it really freaking hard to criticize.

Any pirated game is revenue lost to the developer/publisher, even if the game is out of print, and is so old that I was NOT BORN YET when it was released and therefore have no way to get a copy, and was never released in my region anyway.

Wait...

Clearly Nintendo really wants my money for this game that they have no way to sell me.

 

[Story]

Jim's allowed an occasional video that's just an angry rant and after what Nintendo has put him and other Youtubers through I don't blame him for being angry.

Of course he's allowed to do it. But when your title and argument involves doing something illegal using morally unsound logic on a channel with a lot of viewers who hang on your word...that seems irresponsible to me. And yeah Nintendo is one big joke these days and so is the issue of piracy but his video really didn't sit right with me.

It also just sounded like 90% sarcasm to me though. He clearly isn't being serious, he's just pointing out Nintendo's hypocrisy a bit more bluntly than usual(and Jim's usually pretty damn blunt). I don't condone piracy either but after all the bullshit Nintendo's done with Youtube and how E-shop purchases won't carry over to the Switch E-shop and how subscribing to their new online platform for multiplayer gets you A free game each month FOR a month (as in: you don't get to keep it) I find it hard to feel sorry for them. I was never really planning on getting I switch but I certainly won't feel like I'm missing out on all that.

Only games they've announced for it that looked interesting anyway were the new Mario and Zelda titles anyway. And I've always HATED the Zelda games.

It was the 10% that wasn't sarcastic that bothered me I guess then. That's what's so confusing about the video is it went like this on the issue: "yes you should pirate (no not really silly), wait yes you should (don't do it I mean), yeah you should because they don't respect the law anyway (but you really shouldn't), now this is the serious part of video stressing that Im being sarcastic so really don...you know what? I can't even finish that because fuck them." So yeah that's where Jim's anger caused him to get away from his point.
Now to make things clear I'm not defending Nintendo because that's a losing battle for sure (they are very much out of touch with the times) but that doesn't mean I shouldn't judge Jim on this video and its muddled message because this type of logic an be applied to any company hell, any circumstance really.

 

[Story]

I can't really advocate piracy, but at the same time I can't really condemn it either, doubly so for Nintendo when they're doubling down on the hypocrisy, much like Jim points out.

Overall, how I feel towards someone who's pirating a game depends on how available the game is. If you're pirating a game that's currently available for one dollar that can go towards charity on the Humble Bundle...come the fuck on, what's wrong with you? If, on the other hand, you're pirating Fire Emblem Path of Radiance, a game that Nintendo has done fuck all to make available on any of its digital services, despite the recent explosive popularity of Fire Emblem and your only other options are to buy the game for a hundred dollars on Amazon, a hundred dollars that Nintendo will never see a single cent of, then yeah, I find it really freaking hard to criticize.

I can't really advocate piracy, but at the same time I can't really condemn it either, doubly so for Nintendo when they're doubling down on the hypocrisy, much like Jim points out.

Overall, how I feel towards someone who's pirating a game depends on how available the game is. If you're pirating a game that's currently available for one dollar that can go towards charity on the Humble Bundle...come the fuck on, what's wrong with you? If, on the other hand, you're pirating Fire Emblem Path of Radiance, a game that Nintendo has done fuck all to make available on any of its digital services, despite the recent explosive popularity of Fire Emblem and your only other options are to buy the game for a hundred dollars on Amazon, a hundred dollars that Nintendo will never see a single cent of, then yeah, I find it really freaking hard to criticize.

Any pirated game is revenue lost to the developer/publisher, even if the game is out of print, and is so old that I was NOT BORN YET when it was released and therefore have no way to get a copy, and was never released in my region anyway.

Wait...

Clearly Nintendo really wants my money for this game that they have no way to sell me.

Here's the difference though. Jim wasn't really making a case for piracy with expecations in this video. Instead he said Pirate all of Nintendo's games even the ones readily available, new, and up coming. Because Nintendo doesn't respect the consumer anyway, why should we? An eye for an eye if you will.

 

[Story]

Because Nintendo doesn't respect the consumer anyway, why should we? An eye for an eye if you will.

Completely agree.

 

[Kyrian007]

I was fine with it. I don't condone piracy either, and gaming youtube to steal from content creators doesn't affect me. But on the other hand, its very hard for me to have any sympathy for multimillion dollar corporations. "Oh boo hoo, someone stole a nickel from them and pirated a game. How ever will they survive?"

I don't pirate, I don't advocate others do either. But it is hard for me to condemn anyone for doing it. If its not some tiny indie studio... its a victimless crime. Because multimillion or billion dollar corporations (to me) simply cannot be "victims."

And as far as Jim's video. He clearly says that he isn't suggesting anyone pirate or steal anything. He can't help it if others take his verbatim words to be sarcasm or irony or whatever. That's their perception of what he said, not the literal meaning of the words he spoke.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

I agree with several of Jim's points and I understand his anger. Nintendo has been a real cantankerous git in their overly zealous 'protection' of their IPs. But I feel his response is iffy. It's muddled and confusing, and far to easy to construe as him openly advocating piracy to his viewers. At best it won't do anything to advance his and other youtubers cause, at worst it may cause a notoriously headstrong entity like Nintendo to buckle down even harder.

Remember to follow the rules of The Escapist's Terms of Service which condones the use of piracy! I don't want to see anyone banned because of this discussion.

I think you may have meant to say condemns or similar there, instead of condone (to overlook, disregard, give tacit approval). Unless it's meant as some kind of nod to the contents of the video, in which case, it's a little weird.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

I assumed it was clickbait bullshit. It makes more sense than the alternative, that Jim Sterling is actually advocating for piracy here

Because Nintendo doesn't respect the consumer anyway, why should we? An eye for an eye if you will.

Completely agree.

That's batshit crazy. Just because Nintendo does some shitty things (which I agree are pretty shitty) doesn't give you some moral right to go vigilante pirate on their asses and illegally download all their games

If you're gonna pirate, at least admit you're doing something wrong and illegal. You're not some warrior for better YouTube practices, you're a thief

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

Well, if I was a Youtuber that had had fair use videos claimed and monetized by Nintendo I probably would pirate their stuff just out of the "fuck you too buddy" principle and sing to anyone around about the benefits of emulation and ROMs.

As it is, I've not played a Nintendo game since the N64 period despite now having very easy access to ROMs and emulators, purely through lack of interest.

Otherwise I think Dirty Hipsters covered it pretty well.

 

[Cowabungaa]

using morally unsound logic

It's not all that unsound, especially in social contract theory. His argument boils down to this; if two parties are in a contract with each other and one party breaks that contract, it's morally permissible for the other party to also stop following that contract. That's because in this situation the injured party is left only with burdens and the offending party with all the benefits which is a morally unjust ratio. Contracts are there for the mutual benefit of both parties and distribute burdens and benefits in an agreed manner, after all, and its ability to function relies on both parties adhering to that agreed-to distribution.

We can of course argue whether the application of that argument works here, considering there's a multitude of parties involved, there's power imbalances and more such real-world complications that make it a bit more muddy than abstract moral theory.

That's batshit crazy. Just because Nintendo does some shitty things (which I agree are pretty shitty) doesn't give you some moral right to go vigilante pirate on their asses and illegally download all their games

If you're gonna pirate, at least admit you're doing something wrong and illegal. You're not some warrior for better YouTube practices, you're a thief

It's not about two wrongs making a right or not, it's about a breach of contract and whether the injured party still has to be expected to adhere to it despite not getting any benefits out of it any more.

 

[Nazulu]

Nah, the joke is it's so ridiculous it's funny (the backwards way of how Ninty see copyright and his "solution"), but I agree with others here it was over-shadowed by his disappointment with Nintendo.

This is one of the main reasons I'm annoyed with Nintendo and vote with my wallet, I'm glad it hasn't been forgotten.

 

[Story]

I agree with several of Jim's points and I understand his anger. Nintendo has been a real cantankerous git in their overly zealous 'protection' of their IPs. But I feel his response is iffy. It's muddled and confusing, and far to easy to construe as him openly advocating piracy to his viewers. At best it won't do anything to advance his and other youtubers cause, at worst it may cause a notoriously headstrong entity like Nintendo to buckle down even harder.

Remember to follow the rules of The Escapist's Terms of Service which condones the use of piracy! I don't want to see anyone banned because of this discussion.

I think you may have meant to say condemns or similar there, instead of condone (to overlook, disregard, give tacit approval). Unless it's meant as some kind of nod to the contents of the video, in which case, it's a little weird.

Yes I did, thank you. I'm correcting it now.

 

[Story]

using morally unsound logic

It's not all that unsound, especially in social contract theory. His argument boils down to this; if two parties are in a contract with each other and one party breaks that contract, it's morally permissible for the other party to also stop following that contract. That's because in this situation the injured party is left only with burdens and the offending party with all the benefits which is a morally unjust ratio. Contracts are there for the mutual benefit of both parties and distribute burdens and benefits in an agreed manner, after all, and its ability to function relies on both parties adhering to that agreed-to distribution.

We can of course argue whether the application of that argument works here, considering there's a multitude of parties involved, there's power imbalances and more such real-world complications that make it a bit more muddy than abstract moral theory.

That's batshit crazy. Just because Nintendo does some shitty things (which I agree are pretty shitty) doesn't give you some moral right to go vigilante pirate on their asses and illegally download all their games

If you're gonna pirate, at least admit you're doing something wrong and illegal. You're not some warrior for better YouTube practices, you're a thief

It's not about two wrongs making a right or not, it's about a breach of contract and whether the injured party still has to be expected to adhere to it despite not getting any benefits out of it any more.

Fair point but here is the difference:
Jim seemed to me to be encouraging (but not really, but yes really) his audience to pirate wether or not they are fan game creators or YouTube contributors. If he just said himself or the effected parties in this instance that arguement might stand a little better but even you yourself said it was flimsy.

 

[jklinders]

It was pretty ranty. He's had beef with the way Nintendo shows contempt for fair use for quite a while now. So far as i can see it was consistent with his position on their attitudes in the past.

Now we can look at this as the pure hyperbole it was or we can take it a little more literally. The core thrust of his argument is that Nintendo makes claims on his ad free paid for by patreon video series when he shows a couple of seconds of a Zelda game. This is taking ownership of his content using the portions of copyright law that favors them with no respect for his rights. The hyperbole is turning Nintendo's logic back on them in it's most logical core way.

As usual he is an asshole about how he makes his point. As usual he exaggerates his response to make a point and no; despite the hyperbolic title of the video, which I can't help is being used as a shiny red cap to flutter across Nintendo's bull eyed bully division to maybe start a real war with these hypocrites; he's not actually telling people it's OK to pirate. He's simply saying that if copyright law worked the way Nintendo thinks it does it would be because it would protect NO ONE. I wish him luck. This isn't exactly Digital Homicide he's going after here.

That was my reading of his video anyway. Your mileage may vary.