Jimquisition: Copyright War

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Not that it matters in the end, but we really have no way of knowing how many of these videos are actually getting flagged by the publishers and how many are just getting automatically pulled the broken and glitchy pattern-matching bots... And the publishers aren't the ones who forced YouTube to implement those godawful systems in the first place (that credit goes to Viacom).

Honestly, it was only a matter of time. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner. The fact that publishers would use their legal powers to get a slice of the revenue or shut it down, shouldn't be a shock. It should be expected. I hope LPers have backup plans and jobs.

What's really idiotic is that the Publishers would ultimately benefit if they gave these channels a little leeway.

It's so bizarre that companies would be this gleefully complicit in aiding their competition. Now I could dig a company's argument that piracy of their product -at least in theory- loses them money given that people are enjoying an un-negotiated complete commercial experience.

But LPs? Trailer Footage? Reviews? The only way I can conceive of that hurting a company is if a product sucks and the footage proves it. But then, they've got bigger problems don't they?

I can only hope that we see an explosion of lesser-known and otherwise under-covered titles that realize people showing off their stuff only means more dollars for them. That these bloated, anachronistic dinosaurs of a bygone era finally collapse under their own weight to make room for the more agile and savvy species.

JoJo:
Maybe it's time for an alternative to YouTube, since the site seems to be becoming rapidly taken over by corporations and Google +. Anyone got any suggestions for a viable alternative video site?

Doesn't matter. The joke is as Jim said. It means that Capcom, Sega, etc, will just not get the media coverage. Which basically means, as Jim said, they will cover other games. COnsoles and the 3A industry seem to be throwing itself into fits and they probably rightly are. Indie games are now starting to take decent bites out of their market now that indie devs no longer need to bend over for these same publishers in order for their games to see any distribution.

If you forbid people from talking about you then no one will talk about you and after abit no one will remember you exist.

Good on yah Jim. Always happy to have an extra slice of fuck-off pie in my week. Stand your ground homie. We'll stand with you, (and others of your ilk) wallets at the ready.

The fastest way to get me to not buy your game is to make me watch pewdiepie.

"Is a Youtuber not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

No, says Youtube, it belongs to the videogame publishers..."

I could understand if they were just limiting monetization, but they're taking down anything with their copyright's content. This whole scenario is completely borked. I mean, these publishers should check any gaming forum on the internet right now, and they'd see that they're screwing up big time.

The biggest blame of all, however, I think falls upon Youtube for rolling out the red carpet for copyright owners to do this. Its as if SOPA had passed, and it was Google, owner of Youtube, at the forefront of the fight against SOPA! I don't even understand why they're doing this, aren't LPs and other videogame content like an entire third of Youtube's total views? The Google+ stuff was stupid, but this is like supervillian behavior - incredibly short-sighted, stupid, and malicious.

Andy Shandy:
content irrelevant

I can tell tis the season, your gif is back.

OT: Wait... publishers are being pricks? I thought they stood up for consumers' rights and Jim was doing a sarcasm show... well that changes things...

But this isn't really a surprise now is it? Publishers have been trying to control every aspect of "their" games. They control the development, marketing, distribution, and they want to control it post-launch. Hopefully publishers will start dying off in time without game developers being forced to fold and this whole middle man /gatekeeper BS can get resolved.

LetalisK:
Good. Lemme say that again: Gooooooooooooooood. I hope the publishers go buck wild and punish every LPer they can for every little reason they can. And then, when they come back whining that the indie crowd is growing larger because of a growth in free press and that they want a slice of that because their sales have dropped, we can tell them to go suck on it.

Here's your rope, publishers. Have fun.

I'm worried that the damage already done by that point will be too much. If the system is bent over backwards to serve them, it won't matter if some decide to stop making use of it, the system is still broken and easly abused by design.

I don't see what publishers are going to gain from this. They aren't going to produce videos like the ones they are taking down, so it's irrelevant that YouTubers are making money off playing their game because they have no way to move that revenue to their coffers. It is simply money that is being taken out of the marketplace - less money for YouTubers, less money for Google, and ultimately less money for publishers for anyone who might be influenced to buy a game from a Let's Play video. The only way they could capitalize on getting that revenue is in producing their own videos or perhaps loading up complete walkthroughs of games - not likely.

It's NOT like showing a movie you buy and charging people to watch it in any way - or whatever asinine analogy they might be making. Games are simply a different medium.

UberPubert:

JoJo:
Maybe it's time for an alternative to YouTube, since the site seems to be becoming rapidly taken over by corporations and Google +. Anyone got any suggestions for a viable alternative video site?

Unfortunately that's basically not going to happen. Any video site hosted on the servers of the size that would be required to hold the raw amount of video footage on youtube would probably have to be owned by a corporation of sorts.

Which isn't to say there aren't web sites with the same capabilities as youtube but they absolutely lack the capacity.

yeah, except that it doesn't really NEED *ALL* of Youtube's server capabilities. Youtube is just utterly glutted with trash that noone watches. Ever. Stuff people just upload for themselves or whatever. Last statistic I heard on it, 48 hours of footage was uploaded to youtube every hour. So really, it's impossible for less then 50 people working non-stop to watch it all, and I imagine 90% of it is total trollop horseshit.

Not to mention, a few big names move house, that will benefit the third party immensely, allowing them to grow at the expense of Youtube.

I know it's not true for many other people, but when I watch a full Let's PLay, I then DON'T buy the game. It's why i've only bought one game this entire year, and that was GTA V. I guess those count as lost sales?

I am not sure what bothers me more, is that the Publishers (or someone on their behalf) is making all these claims or that YouTube made their system so automated this can happen. I think it falls more to YouTube, for like anyone if a Publisher can find something to exploit they will just like a person can to a game because they can. To me this should be something Google should look at improving for they might lose more then the Publishers for if people can't find the content they want on YouTube they are going to go elsewhere and then they don't get their ad revenue.

I was waiting for this. Lately, if a game mostly focuses on story, and the gameplay is just a pacing element one must perform to move the story along, I just watch the Let's Play. A good Let's Play'er will improve the experience with witty commentary, over me sitting by myself jumping through the hoops I need to in order to learn more of the story.

As someone who prefers that games deliver good gameplay rather than a narrative, I don't mind depriving narrative game makers of their revenue in this way, particularly while it is perfectly legal on YouTube. Mostly I just watch the first 3 or 4 episodes before I decide the narrative isn't very good, but sometimes the story is really good, so I go the whole way.

It is totally understandable to me that the owners of the content would have a problem with this. I'm still rooting YouTuber's, because it is a good way to experience games freely that I wouldn't buy.

heck you dont even need footage to have your review taken down. in latest news the publishers of "train simulator 2014" have been flagging negative steam reviews as "off topic" to get them deleted. apparently steam then removed the button and is reviewing the flagged content.

crap cant have someone who has purchased your game and has dozens if not hundreds of hours with it possibly having an opinion thats in any way criticl.

i still say this is in lead up to the trans pacific partnership agreement being accepted.

im half expecting the youtubers to not only get their videos banned but eventually facing a court case for copyright infringement

Viacom eventually either gave up or came to some sort of agreement about people posting music videos, so publishers will be forced to cave in after a year or so as well, because if you start taking their videos down, they'll just reupload them on a different account or tell everyone to upload their videos to their own accounts or open their own sites & host their videos on Blip, DailyMotion, Veoh, or Vimeo, moving it to another video hosting site any time it gets taken down.

Bold, but meaningless.

Not more than a month a go you were whining that it's unfair that readers were miffed at outlets getting free PS4's. You pleaded that you needed those kickbacks to do your job, and that without them you couldn't do your job.

Outlets have gone under before, and contributors dropped because publishers black listed reviewers. If you think that you can survive then you're in contradiction with yourself from just last month.

If you actually can get off of the kickback you might become a real game journalist, but until then what you're doing is little more than talk. Male bravado to bluff the publishers.

The game publishers might not be the ones flagging the videos tho, Capcom has at least tweeted that they aren't make the claims and are looking into it.

https://twitter.com/intent/user?original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fkotaku.com%2Fyoutube-channels-crippled-by-copyright-claims-1480717110&screen_name=Capcom_Unity&tw_i=410559475959885824&tw_p=tweetembed

According to this Kotaku article it's the music in the video that's getting flagged so it's more likely music publishers that are behind this which is not any more surprising or wrong.

http://kotaku.com/youtube-channels-crippled-by-copyright-claims-1480717110?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Facebook&utm_source=Kotaku_Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow

Pretty spot-on there. I too hope that the ignorance and shortsightedness of publishers is eventually going to 'pay off' in an explosion of interest in indie and middle-sized games while AAA companies squander the easily tapped resources at their disposal. People are sick and tired of copyright strikes, content censorship, corporate oversight, and yeah, maybe some people don't make money that they could have made independantly and not detracting from publishers, but the downside is a less active community and worse general opinion. Which is fine. Sow the seeds, reap the whirlwind, people have hated publishers for a long time and to see them fail due to their own practises, which have been vocally opposed often and loudly, might even be enjoyable.

likalaruku:
Viacom eventually either gave up or came to some sort of agreement about people posting music videos, so publishers will be forced to cave in after a year or so as well, because if you start taking their videos down, they'll just reupload them on a different account or tell everyone to upload their videos to their own accounts or open their own sites & host their videos on Blip, DailyMotion, Veoh, or Vimeo, moving it to another video hosting site any time it gets taken down.

Viacom had actually taken Google to court over the whole thing and Google ended up winning the case. After that Viacom just stopped flagging stuff all together. I remember back in 2009 it was a huge problem because they ended up flagging LPers who were doing Ratchet and Clank Future: A Crack in Time claiming to own the rights to it and were threatening Google with legal action. Surprisingly Google actually had the balls to take their threat and took them to court, winning in the end.

Zachary Amaranth:
But this is the internet, where throwing the baby out with the bathwater is a national sport.

I hereby nominate this statement for 'Motto of the Moment'.

Seriously, is there a proper procedure for this?

rbstewart7263:
You know if it benefits pewdiepie its a bad thing.

I'm beginning to wonder if PewDiePie spends his off-days going around kicking puppies into threshers or something. It's the only way he could possibly deserve the rampant amount of hate I'm seeing here.

synobal:
The fastest way to get me to not buy your game is to make me watch pewdiepie.

And then he apparently uses the money he earns from puppy-kicking to pay thugs to go into homes and force people to watch his channel or something.

I mean, seriously. I don't like him; I find his voice annoying and his mannerisms cloying. So y'know what I do? I DON'T WATCH HIS VIDEOS. YouTube gives you that option! Maybe Jim needs to do an episode on this sense of self-importance so many people have, where something they don't like should be destroyed.

Imp Emissary:
Indeed. Thank God for you, Jim. =w= b

Also, side question;

Who is happy about this!? Besides publishers, of course

I guess if you don't like a specific youtube personality, you could be happy that they are getting the screws put to them, but I don't see one guy/gal you don't like getting burned being worth all the others you may like/don't hate also getting burned.

But rejoicing it as a whole? WHY!?

P.S. You really don't need them, Jim!
You have all of us. ;3

People who hate Let's Players. They believe that they're over paid for a minimum amount of work. Though making it big is liken to winning the lottery as for every person that gets rich there's dozens working tireless who no one will ever hear about. Corporate CEOs make anywhere from 200 to 300 times more than the average worker of their own companies and typically work less than 20 hours a week. There are sports stars that make more than the president. But Let's Players are where we draw the line God damn it! My friend Mandy puts in between 3 to 6 hours a day for over a year now. She has a grand totally of 93 followers and... she could go buy a Big Mac with how much she makes in a day!

Then there's the people who worship corporations as if they are our new pantheon of gods.

Could somebody do me the favor of explainig what the difference between a publisher and a gamecompany, like Bethesda, is? Where is the line drawn? What does the publisher do?

First time he said 'Capcom' I swear I heard 'Crapcom'... Had to rewind to be sure.

if this means less talentles cretins making bank by screaming like a demented 12 year old girls, well im all for it. but then if they pout a law infront of me that would euthanise these people and all their fans id sign it as my good deed to the gene pool

Someonetookmyname:
Could somebody do me the favor of explainig what the difference between a publisher and a gamecompany, like Bethesda, is? Where is the line drawn? What does the publisher do?

Bethesda is sort of both. Developers actually make the game, Publishers to my knowledge handles physical production and marketing and funding. Bethesda is both, they publish their own games, and they published Dishonored and a few other things (which are less notable).

shrekfan246:
Yep, I was just discussing this in that Youtube LP shitstorm thread the other day. Everyone celebrating the attacks against LPers are really just encouraging publishers to be allowed to exert more and more control over what we the customers are allowed to see, which at the end of the day should be the last thing customers want, because publishers are notoriously stingy with releasing actual relevant information and often even outright lie about the state their games are in.

What I found the most, frankly, insulting about all of the arguments on the side of the publishers, however, is that there are people who simply refuse the idea that LPing a game can be a legitimate job; Who claim that it requires zero effort, time, or money on the behalf of the person creating the videos to just throw out a video on Youtube and then start raking in millions and millions in ad revenue (which in itself is a hilarious misconception as well). And that because these people are simply piggybacking off of "other people's work", they shouldn't be allowed to make money, as if that doesn't happen in every other industry in the entire world.

Sorry, I'll get off the soapbox, I'm sure what I've already typed will draw the ire of the two or three people who valiantly oppose LPs anyway. Good show, Jim, and I indeed wish that Google would actually stand up for the people who draw in the ad revenue rather than actively dicking them over at every turn. They seem to be trying their damnedest to switch people over to other services, which I guess could be a little commendable in a roundabout way.

The ironic thing about some of the comments in that thread was most were only happy because it would affect LPers they don't like like Pewdiepie.

So the fall of one LPer is justified by thousands of casualties in the crossfire.

Someonetookmyname:
Could somebody do me the favor of explainig what the difference between a publisher and a gamecompany, like Bethesda, is? Where is the line drawn? What does the publisher do?

Bethesda is two companies; Bethesda Softworks (publisher) and Bethesda Game Studios (developer).

They're both owned by their parent company Zeni-Max (founded by a Bethesda Softworks founder) which owns most of the studios Bethesda Softworks publishes for.

ZeniMax isn't a publisher in the same way EA is, they're mostly just a company created by Bethesda Softworks to hold their companies they publish for (and Bethesda Softworks).

Mid Boss:

Imp Emissary:
Indeed. Thank God for you, Jim. =w= b

Also, side question;

Who is happy about this!? Besides publishers, of course

I guess if you don't like a specific youtube personality, you could be happy that they are getting the screws put to them, but I don't see one guy/gal you don't like getting burned being worth all the others you may like/don't hate also getting burned.

But rejoicing it as a whole? WHY!?

P.S. You really don't need them, Jim!
You have all of us. ;3

People who hate Let's Players. They believe that they're over paid for a minimum amount of work. Though making it big is liken to winning the lottery as for every person that gets rich there's dozens working tireless who no one will ever hear about. Corporate CEOs make anywhere from 200 to 300 times more than the average worker of their own companies and typically work less than 20 hours a week. There are sports stars that make more than the president. But Let's Players are where we draw the line! My friend Mandy puts in between 3 to 6 hours a day for almost two years now. She has a grand totally of 93 followers. She could go buy a Big Mac with how much she makes in a day.

Then there's the people who worship corporations as if they are our new pantheon of gods.

Indeed. I have seen a little bit of that even here, today.

Also, I am reminded of how Yahtzee and others have mentioned how it sometimes seems like fans of some companies act almost as though they are in an abusive relationship.

Hope you have a good day, and good luck to your friend! =w= b

Dragonbums:

So the fall of one LPer is justified by thousands of casualties in the crossfire.

I think you meant that the other way around - The hundreds/thousands of people who could potentially lose their jobs in the crossfire are justified by the fall of one LPer.

The ironic thing about some of the comments in that thread was most were only happy because it would affect LPers they don't like like Pewdiepie.

But yes, I noticed that as well. Because, as we all know, nobody should be allowed to make money producing music because the likes of Justin Bieber become famous. And actors shouldn't be paid either because Kristen Stewart has been well-paid. Athletes, too, because of Michael Vick. It's obviously an evenly proportionate response to something you just don't like that much that you can easily ignore, to wish for everyone in the same line of work to suddenly no longer have a form of income. Right?

I never got that mind set, being jealous or angry because of someone else's legitimately gained success is just pathetic and quite petty.

I bet if they were making bank on silly videos they wouldn't be so quick to hope other people who do the same fail.

The Rogue Wolf:

rbstewart7263:
You know if it benefits pewdiepie its a bad thing.

I'm beginning to wonder if PewDiePie spends his off-days going around kicking puppies into threshers or something. It's the only way he could possibly deserve the rampant amount of hate I'm seeing here.

synobal:
The fastest way to get me to not buy your game is to make me watch pewdiepie.

And then he apparently uses the money he earns from puppy-kicking to pay thugs to go into homes and force people to watch his channel or something.

I mean, seriously. I don't like him; I find his voice annoying and his mannerisms cloying. So y'know what I do? I DON'T WATCH HIS VIDEOS. YouTube gives you that option! Maybe Jim needs to do an episode on this sense of self-importance so many people have, where something they don't like should be destroyed.

Rogue Wolf, I don't watch his videos, I was just saying that granting exclusives lets plays, to individuals whom might appeal to a lot of people isn't always the best idea because they could very well not appeal to just as many people.

If I go to learn about a game and I go on youtube and the only let's plays of that game is from Pewdiepie or TObuscus I'm not going to be watching their videos which means I won't be buying that game.

Exclusive let's play is a stupid idea and I'm quite frankly amazed that the industry seems to be trying to shift to that. You'd think free advertising for their games would of been a just fine business model.

Given that both Sony and Microsoft have been at great pains to highlight the streaming/recording/media sharing features of their brand spanking new consoles, one would think they might take a moment to knock on a few doors and make a few phone calls to tell publishers to stop pissing in the communal watering hole.

But I guess that's probably excessively optimistic.

Hey Google? Now would be a good time to not be evil.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here