Nintendo Suddenly Claims Ownership Of Many YouTube Videos

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

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.

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.

1337mokro:

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

1337mokro:

Downplaying things does not a good argument make.

Why does a studio pay the cameraman?

Because he's a technician trained to operate a complicated piece of machinery. In that case, he's no different to a crain operator, or a forklift driver. He's trained to operate machinery, they pay him to do so. Stupid example. next.

All he did was point the camera at what he was told to point the camera.

Lorry drivers just drive lorries to where they're told to drive to. They still get paid. This example is nonsensical, and the fact you even tried to equate it is just ludicrous.

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.

Utter bollocks. Composers like John Williams, Howard Shore, Hans Zimmer and the like not only get paid for composing original music to go with a film, they greatly enhance the experience of the film in doing so. Once again, totally rubbish comparison which achieves nothing.

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.

I've got no idea what you're even talking about at this point.

1337mokro:

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.

Nice try.

Wikis have ads in order to cover running costs. Running a wiki requires users to pay server costs, and keep pages maintained. The server costs for even a small site can be very expensive. Ads cover those server fees. A company can run ads and still be a not-for-profit organisation.

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.

There's a contradiction going on in this sentence.

Nintendo went on record saying they don't want to take down videos, and that they want to encourage fans to share videos. Why would they then threaten to take down videos when they already stated they don't want to do so?

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

Again, server costs. Also, walkthroughs could be classes as educational. I don't know if the matter has ever been brought to court. I do know that printed guides have to be published through a licensing agreement with the game publisher. Which kind of makes my point, I think, not yours.

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.

Wikis don't directly reveal the story as with gameplay videos, they simply summarise. It's the difference between reading a book, and reading the Sparknotes summary of a book.

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.

You do know what the difference is between general use and copyrighted use is, right? No-one is going to file a copyright claim for someone having a general discussion about Mario, for the same reason no-one is going to file a copyright claim of someone talking about Batman, or the Ninja Turtles. General debate is not the same thing as a monetization attempt. When someone tries to upload a video of said copyrighted material, however, you can bet that the parent companies are going to get involved.

Please, just go and read up on some copyright law. I'm getting tired of having to explain the basic fundamentals of it to you. The sight of someone whooping because they think they've scored a goal through their own misunderstanding of how copyright works is just...

Desert Punk:

And...I am not sure I follow you, people dont exactly get paid for talking in the cinema, though a good commentary can add a LOT to a bad movie see, mystery science theater 3,000. Also once the studio owned those films to air them, they didnt have to pay anything extra to dub over them with commentary and air them as something new and rebranded..

Unless they've worked out a license agreement beforehand, commentary companies like Rifftrax and MST3000 are not allowed to sell movies with their commentary on the top. They are only allowed to sell the audio track of the commentary itself. Most times in this instance, they'll then give you instructions on how to sync up the audiotrack with the film.

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.

Desert Punk:

Shouldnt they be suing Gamestop over preowned games and their profiting from the hard work that rightly belongs to them?

Not the same thing at all. A used game can only be played by one person at a time. Also, it falls under consumer rights.

Taking footage of a game and putting it up on the internet is completely different, falling as it does under different copyright laws.

Seventh Actuality:
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.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Desert Punk:

And...I am not sure I follow you, people dont exactly get paid for talking in the cinema, though a good commentary can add a LOT to a bad movie see, mystery science theater 3,000. Also once the studio owned those films to air them, they didnt have to pay anything extra to dub over them with commentary and air them as something new and rebranded..

Unless they've worked out a license agreement beforehand, commentary companies like Rifftrax and MST3000 are not allowed to sell movies with their commentary on the top. They are only allowed to sell the audio track of the commentary itself. Most times in this instance, they'll then give you instructions on how to sync up the audiotrack with the film.

The thing is, they were never SELLING MST3000. They put it on TV, with advertisements to pay for it. You are absolutely right, to resell the items they would need to go into licensing and all that, which is why you cant find a complete set of the series, because some people wont give them the license to publish.

But, that never stopped them from taking the movies they owned various rights to or lisenced to air, puttign their own thing on top and playing it for Ad profit.

Which is precisely what LPers do.

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?

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.

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.

Desert Punk:
[

The thing is, they were never SELLING MST3000. They put it on TV, with advertisements to pay for it. You are absolutely right, to resell the items they would need to go into licensing and all that, which is why you cant find a complete set of the series, because some people wont give them the license to publish.

But, that never stopped them from taking the movies they owned various rights to or lisenced to air, puttign their own thing on top and playing it for Ad profit.

Which is precisely what LPers do.

Yeah, and who do you think the ad revenue went to during MST3000?

AC10:
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.

Apparently, Nintendo has only just signed up to Youtube's Content ID service. It may be that there are still kinks to work out regarding sorting through which videos have already been licensed. By many accounts, Youtube's Content ID system isn't the most accurate or reliable service imaginable.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

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.

Except fans of the game will still be uploading LPs, and Nintendo will still be saying it's absolutely fine to do so.

It still hurts them. You, and probably Nintendo, are looking at this like it's simply a win/lose state: there are all these videos out there on Youtube of their games, and they can make money off them, if they assert they're theirs. Sure a few will be taken down, but that's no problem because they're all created equal...

Except they're not. There are dedicated LPers out there who pull in the major viewership numbers, people tune in to watch them specifically, and if they leave, the lion's share of the overall Nintendo viewership will go with them. They are also the people with the largest incentive to pull their videos down, and leave. There will always be some videos out there, but the high traffic ones are likely to go away.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Starke:

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.

Except that the interactivity of games happens within the very strict parameters already set up by the developers. To elaborate on your remix analogy mentioned below, remixing an album means changing it in entirely new ways the original artist couldn't have forseen. Playing a game is interacting withing the script, the rules and the mechanics already set up by the developer to be followed. Unless you're playing Dward Fortress, you're not creating anything new, you're reading from a script the developers wrote.

Then you either have never seen an LP, or never seen a decent one.

I'll try to walk you through this. A game isn't that different from a piece of music. Not a musical performance, the actual piece itself. It has an intended pattern, an intended direction, and it demands things from the performer to make that happen.

At this point the performance, and the LP, becomes more about how good, or how inept the performer is. The primary goal for an LP is to either show a masterful performance, or, far more commonly, show someone completely coming unglued under the challenge.

In most cases the LP ceases to be about the game, and becomes about the player. I've seen two LPs of Dead Space, one by an excellent player, and one by a terrible one. The Excellent player was entertaining, just for the sheer insanity of some of the things they were doing during the game. The terrible one was hilarious as the game lead him into a faux nervous breakdown. It's the same game, the same linear path, with very little opportunity to deviate from it, but the two performances were so different from one another that claiming it's what the developers intended to happen is comical.

There are certainly other LPs out there, Spoiler Warning comes to mind, that are supposed to be about the game itself, usually in some mix of a deconstruction, or an examination of background material. There are some really informative LPs loose on Youtube.

And this is still not even touching speed runs, which are deliberately about breaking the game in the most efficient way possible. Saying that finishing Deus Ex in 45m was just following the script is even more ludicrous than the Dead Space example above.

Finally, nearly any sandbox style game with a procedural element, almost by definition, can't fit what you're describing. If it's Skryim or Terraria, there is no way the developers can predict the exact path the player will follow.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

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.

And if I then tried to profit from that remix album without giving the original artist his royalty and writing fee, I would end up in a shitload of legal trouble.

A fee, yes. But, Nintendo isn't asking for a cut and never asked for one, they're asking for all of it.

Which goes back to the whole part about this basically being free advertising for Nintendo, and their desire to dispense with that. I know, I know, you've been saying that some people don't buy games because of LPs and then citing Walking Dead, which is probably a really bad example, but, anyway, the fact is LPs drive sales, and they cost sales, and without hard numbers, all we can say with absolute certainty is, "more people know about Game X if there are two or three high profile channels doing LPs of it, than if no one touches it." With a fairly reasonable inference that if more people know about Game X, then Game X has more potential customers.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Desert Punk:
Leave it to Jeffers to pop in and defend Nintendo to the death, fanboys unite ect ect...

At your service.

Fucking douchebags. Edit: Then again, Nintendo turns out shit games anyway, so nothing really of value lost if LPers do LPs of better games.

Oh wow... not sure if serious, or just...

I can't remember the last time I looked at a Nintendo Exclusive and said "that actually looks fun"... probably Mario 64 or Metroid Prime... :\

Well it was bound to happen eventually, but the really scary part is Google is enforcing copyright claims without any legal process... they were the biggest opposer to SOPA/PIPA and now they are running those exact legislations singlehandedly.

And no the matter is not one sided, just as LP-ers made money on the games content Nintendo now makes money on LP-ers content, this matter is for a court to decide and not Google giving way to the bigger money bag... then again legal systems might do the same so be ready for a harsh LP winter.

Damn it Nintendo! I've been waiting to use this image for a long while...

image

The first thing that pops up is you guys going "corporate" on us....Damn it Nintendo!

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
EDIT

Turns out this is not a unique thing. In fact, this is industry wide practice. Nintendo have simply finally decided to do what the rest of the industry already does. If you read the terms of Youtube's monetization service it says:

image

Link

You realize the part you highlighted wouldn't actually include things like reviews, LP's, or anything else in which the video creator does anything more than simply play the game right? It doesn't make the point you seem to think it's making.

You and everyone else may not like it, but Nintendo is right here.
No one watches the LP's because of the commentary. They watch it because of the gameplay.
And the gameplay is part of the game, which is owned by Nintendo.

Take a LP, put the sound in 1 video, put the video in another. Put both on youtube. Which would will have more hits?
The gameplay obviously.

Also, according to the ToS of youtube, you have to get the permission from the content owner in order to make LP's. I know from experience with Minecraft. Even tho Notch explicitly stated we can make LP's, youtube still took down quite a few videos until you linked to the part of the MC site stating you have the right to make LP's.

So... Nintendo is right.
Whether this is a good/bad/dick move from Nintendo... I don't know. I'm not informed enough to know the impact LP's have on game sales.
It helped with Minecraft. I bought Minecraft because of a LP.
But I also know that it quite a few people didn't buy the Walking Dead game because they didn't feel the need of buying one.

Maybe LPlayers should change a bit what they do. Posting the whole single player campaign can certainly lower the amount of sales because it can be a free alternative to playing it. It's a whole different matter with sandbox games like MC because the LP can never show you everything to be a free alternative.

Instead of making a LP's of the whole single player campaign, they should only show parts of games. That way people can still see if the game is good, without it being a free alternative.

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.

TB don't do "Let's Play"s, he does first impressions. What he said was that he played games because he knew part of his followers buy certain games he didn't personally liked (like platformers and puzzle games) and he felt he needed to do WTF on those to inform his subscribers on the quality of the game exactly because some of his subscribers love those types of game.

So, bravo, you took what he said and totally misunderstood everything. Hard to beat. *slow clap*

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Desert Punk:
[

The thing is, they were never SELLING MST3000. They put it on TV, with advertisements to pay for it. You are absolutely right, to resell the items they would need to go into licensing and all that, which is why you cant find a complete set of the series, because some people wont give them the license to publish.

But, that never stopped them from taking the movies they owned various rights to or lisenced to air, puttign their own thing on top and playing it for Ad profit.

Which is precisely what LPers do.

Yeah, and who do you think the ad revenue went to during MST3000?

That ad revenue went right back to the studio created MTS3000. They already paid for the rights to the other movies, so they were not entitled to anything that the studio did with it after the film was sold to the studio, other than reselling it, which ads are no reselling.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Desert Punk:

Shouldnt they be suing Gamestop over preowned games and their profiting from the hard work that rightly belongs to them?

Not the same thing at all. A used game can only be played by one person at a time. Also, it falls under consumer rights.

Taking footage of a game and putting it up on the internet is completely different, falling as it does under different copyright laws.

A) wasnt talking to you

B) It is the same thing they were complaining about, Person X benefiting financially from person Z's hard work without person Z getting any cut of the profit even though person X added nothing.

Anything beyond that such as whining about what some brain dead old fucks who dont know the first thing about technology says is beyond the point

BiH-Kira:
You and everyone else may not like it, but Nintendo is right here.
No one watches the LP's because of the commentary. They watch it because of the gameplay.
And the gameplay is part of the game, which is owned by Nintendo.

Take a LP, put the sound in 1 video, put the video in another. Put both on youtube. Which would will have more hits?
The gameplay obviously.

Also, according to the ToS of youtube, you have to get the permission from the content owner in order to make LP's. I know from experience with Minecraft. Even tho Notch explicitly stated we can make LP's, youtube still took down quite a few videos until you linked to the part of the MC site stating you have the right to make LP's.

So... Nintendo is right.
Whether this is a good/bad/dick move from Nintendo... I don't know. I'm not informed enough to know the impact LP's have on game sales.
It helped with Minecraft. I bought Minecraft because of a LP.
But I also know that it quite a few people didn't buy the Walking Dead game because they didn't feel the need of buying one.

Maybe LPlayers should change a bit what they do. Posting the whole single player campaign can certainly lower the amount of sales because it can be a free alternative to playing it. It's a whole different matter with sandbox games like MC because the LP can never show you everything to be a free alternative.

Instead of making a LP's of the whole single player campaign, they should only show parts of games. That way people can still see if the game is good, without it being a free alternative.

No. No I don't. I don't even watch let's plays. I put it on, I listen to what the person says. While I do other things. I can't actually remember the last time I watched the video for a let's play. I am sure quite a few more people do the same.

It makes sense to do this (dick move or not). Youtube is basically one of many markets that has made video game guides all but a thing of the past. As such, this is one way of maintaining that lost revenue.

With the WiiU not making the desired sales, I think Nintendo is buckling down to weather a storm. They're being pretty savvy here and doing what it may take to ensure that they see the generation of consoles after this one.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Bla bla bla, failed arguments

Assumption! The studio is a big production, it could just be three guys with a camera, ed wood style baby, hardly a trained technician, yet even then the camera man will still demand some form of compensation.

Assumption! Ad revenue ONLY covers server costs and never has a surplus or has any other motive than server costs. Sites can be run for profits you know. Many of them are.

Assumption! Composers are also sound editors. The guy adding music TO the movie is not the one that MADE the music. We call them sound editors, all they do is basically what an LPer does, put audio to a video file :D Of course they are hired by the company to do that, but I couldn't resist pointing out your perpetual double standards of what constitutes effort.

The list goes on. Really too much for me to point out and pointless because you missed the point of those examples. All my examples were about you nullifying what the LPer does by downplaying their work. So I just did the same thing to other professions. Now if I want to do what you did just now.

The LPer is a comedian adding snark and funny remarks to gameplay footage to alleviate moments of boredom and heighten the experience. Should these people then not be paid for their effort and work?!

I think the point is made here that downplaying things gets you nowhere.

Well of course they said they wanted people to share videos, that means more ad money for them! After all now that they get the money from those ads, why would they not want to share them? The point is not what Nintendo wanted to do, that is obvious MAKE MONEY! (how many more times am I gonna have to repeat this?) and they didn't give a shit about anything else. The issue is that there is a very easy solution which involves taking down the videos or JUST REMOVING ADS!

I don't know how many times you are going to ignore that there was an option where the videos would stay on the air and nobody would have made money off them. However that was not the option they took was it? No the big dollar glimmered in their eyes and they took it with both hands. ALL of it, not even leaving a crumbly 1,2 or even 3% for the people that actually draw in viewers. No they took it all, ignored the option that would have nobody profit off these videos and then pretend it's to encourage some kind off bullshit community sharing stuff.

Remember it's not just LP's. They put out a press statement basically saying that ANY VIDEO, review, commentary, video walkthrough or even fan video, which contains a certain amount of footage will get hit. Regardless if it had ads or not and regardless of form and purpose. In fact they are reserving the right to add advertisement to videos that did not have advertisement. All they really need is you posting a video with fucking 5? 6? 7,5 minutes of gameplay? You see they don't actually tell us what the limit is!

Here is the quote if you forgot to read it in the article;

"For most fan videos this will not result in any changes, however, for those videos featuring Nintendo-owned content, such as images or audio of a certain length, adverts will now appear at the beginning, next to or at the end of the clips."

Now how fucking scummy is that? It's not just the commercial LPers, it affects ALL videos with a certain unspecified length of Nintendo owned images or audio. Fuck I could make a completely unrelated video featuring a song from a long forgotten NES game and according to this statement they could hijack the video and funnel the ads money to themselves. Technically I am featuring Nintendo owned audio in my video and thus Nintendo has the right to own every profit it makes because that 3,11 minute 8 bit loop is why people watch it right?

There is no contradiction here, there is just me and everyone else but you pointing out that doing this is a dick move because it basically takes user bases that took years to build, tells the people that built them to go suck on a rock, then turns around and says this is all so you can share them and so we can make even more money because the more people you share it to the more we make. Not to mention the incredibly vague bullshit rules by which they will judge what is and is not infringing. It is legalized bullshit of the highest standard and you just can't get enough of it.

Also I don't think you actually know what a wiki is by the way you describe it. "They don't directly reveal it like with gameplay" No they just transcribe the exact events... which is the same thing if all you care about is story, which your original argument was, you learned the story, so you didn't buy the game, that was your argument against LPs.

We are not talking wikipedia here, we are talking game wiki's. Wiki's that basically are dedicated to containing all information about the game or other piece of media. Seriously, go fucking read a wiki and then come back here and tell me you just read a summary of the story when I can go read a wiki and end up knowing what some characters favourite breakfast is.

Hmpf... I just hope this bites them really in their backsides. I think publishers are really underestimating the PR effect of LP videos, video reviews etc...

Mind you people who are arguing that watching someone play a game is experiencing gameplay, no, no it is not.

Gameplay is experienced by playing it not by watching it. LP's might make it possible for you to experience by watching it and game devs might make it possible for ou to experience by playing it, while if i rip the audio of a playthrough video, I will make you experience it by listening to it, but all in all it's not the same thing.

BiH-Kira:
You and everyone else may not like it, but Nintendo is right here.
No one watches the LP's because of the commentary. They watch it because of the gameplay.
And the gameplay is part of the game, which is owned by Nintendo.

Take a LP, put the sound in 1 video, put the video in another. Put both on youtube. Which would will have more hits?
The gameplay obviously.

Even if any of that is true, that's not really here nor there. The fact is that the person making a LP has added to the original content and has, at the very least, some rights to the video. It is not right at all for Nintendo to be the only one to profit from it when someone else has added substantive work to create the video in question.

Vivi22:

You realize the part you highlighted wouldn't actually include things like reviews, LP's, or anything else in which the video creator does anything more than simply play the game right? It doesn't make the point you seem to think it's making.

Did you read the part above it?

Without the appropriate license from the publisher, use of videogame or software user interface must be minimal. Video game content may be monetized if the associated step-by-step commentary is strictly tied to the live action being shown and provides educational or instructional value.

How many LP commentaries fall strictly and exclusively into the 'educational' or 'instructional' band? Not many. A large chunk of LPs of new games seem to showcase the LPer playing the game for the first time, and being surprised/shocked/startled at whatever the game throws at them. Therefore, they can't claim it as an educational walkthrough, as they blatantly don't know the game themselves. Even ignoring that, most LPs have commentors talking random bollocks about nothing in particular. Maybe you'll get some commentary related to what's going on on-screen. But very few LPs rigidly stick to the mandate of providing an entirely educational walkthrough with no random bollocks thrown in.

LPs certainly don't try to keep gameplay footage 'minimal'. The opposite, in fact. Most LPers don't do short videos of particularly difficult levels, they do (or try to do) the entire game. That doesn't count as minimal.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Vivi22:

You realize the part you highlighted wouldn't actually include things like reviews, LP's, or anything else in which the video creator does anything more than simply play the game right? It doesn't make the point you seem to think it's making.

Did you read the part above it?

Without the appropriate license from the publisher, use of videogame or software user interface must be minimal. Video game content may be monetized if the associated step-by-step commentary is strictly tied to the live action being shown and provides educational or instructional value.

How many LP commentaries fall strictly and exclusively into the 'educational' or 'instructional' band? Not many. A large chunk of LPs of new games seem to showcase the LPer playing the game for the first time, and being surprised/shocked/startled at whatever the game throws at them. Therefore, they can't claim it as an educational walkthrough, as they blatantly don't know the game themselves. Even ignoring that, most LPs have commentors talking random bollocks about nothing in particular. Maybe you'll get some commentary related to what's going on on-screen. But very few LPs rigidly stick to the mandate of providing an entirely educational walkthrough with no random bollocks thrown in.

LPs certainly don't try to keep gameplay footage 'minimal'. The opposite, in fact. Most LPers don't do short videos of particularly difficult levels, they do (or try to do) the entire game. That doesn't count as minimal.

Greedy company: Oh yes, a let's player talked about anything that wasn't happening in the video, now we have the right to take the 50 or so bucks an average LP'r witout a huge following would make a month away from him and blast his videos with ads. Better do it because legally we are allowed to do so and let's spin it in a positive way in the media so we don't have a big backlash against it. Oh how it is good to be rich.

Attention Xbox & PS owners: if Microsoft & Sony have official streaming services for the new consoles, they are not gonna want LPers going freelance on YouTube.

LP's are primarily driven by popularity do I seriously have to even say this?

Yogscast's main channel's first episode of Don't starve
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24sjZ83qyKI
834k Hits

Sip's First episode of Don't starve(who's art of the yogcast's gang/party/whatevertheycallit)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsgGa1p-4Gg
400k Hits

MadDijnn's First's Episode
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPcWnLjGHb4
2k Hits

People don't want to just watch Super Paper Mario with anyone, they want to watch it with Chuggaaconroy or a YouTube personality they like.

The only real reason anyone would watch a LP to avoid buying the game is with a game heavily based on story, I think we can all say Nintendo is very, very safe in that department.

Lets Plays are a pretty good way to advertise a game (as long as the game isn't shit and the LP-er isn't a moron) and they cost the publishers absolutely nothing. It's free marketing! Sure they don't have control over what the commentator is saying, but if there are lots of people uploading playthroughs of your game then the extremes will be balanced out a little.

I myself have bought games that I wasn't sure about or hadn't heard of prior to watching an LP of it. That is money they wouldn't have received otherwise and was probably more than they would get from the advertising of one video view.

If Ninty want to have some control over Lets Plays why don't they set up an official 'Nintendo Approved' thing and have people pay a small fee and pass a few checks to be an official Nintendo LP-er. They can make sure the videos are of a decent quality so their product gets shown off nicely without it being overlaid with racism, swearing etc. and the video creator will get a bit of free advertising from being an official Nintendoer. People who don't already follow specific LP-ers might be more inclined to see something that is backed by the official source and is being held up to a certain standard.

Or maybe they are just being a bunch of twats and don't give a shit as long as they are making money? That's easier.

uggg Nintendo you never cease to amaze me. Still I do have a question, does this count for retro games?

Way to be part of the giant fucking greedy asshole machine Nintendo.

CriticalMiss:
Lets Plays are a pretty good way to advertise a game (as long as the game isn't shit and the LP-er isn't a moron) and they cost the publishers absolutely nothing. It's free marketing! Sure they don't have control over what the commentator is saying, but if there are lots of people uploading playthroughs of your game then the extremes will be balanced out a little.

I myself have bought games that I wasn't sure about or hadn't heard of prior to watching an LP of it. That is money they wouldn't have received otherwise and was probably more than they would get from the advertising of one video view.

If Ninty want to have some control over Lets Plays why don't they set up an official 'Nintendo Approved' thing and have people pay a small fee and pass a few checks to be an official Nintendo LP-er. They can make sure the videos are of a decent quality so their product gets shown off nicely without it being overlaid with racism, swearing etc. and the video creator will get a bit of free advertising from being an official Nintendoer. People who don't already follow specific LP-ers might be more inclined to see something that is backed by the official source and is being held up to a certain standard.

Or maybe they are just being a bunch of twats and don't give a shit as long as they are making money? That's easier.

Do you think LPs would cease to happen because of this? Your points are all completely valid and I do use LPs to decide on game purchases. But I think people will do this for free. That is the effect of globalization of the internet. There will always be people who are passionate enough about this kind of thing to do the work for free.

Understanding this as a way to recomp revenues lost to the death of video game guides is a little more reasonable. My guess is that LPers will just get smarter about the way they do it and add enough personal content to sidestep Nintendo's claim to it. This is like the time that guy made a Harry Potter Encyclopedia without adding any additional content of their own. Had they added significant non-copywritten content they would have been allowed to proceed. Instead, they lost the case because they were just reorganizing another person's work and then selling it.

 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