| General Category > General Discussion |
| Youtubers Upset over Nintendo's New affiliate program |
| << < (5/12) > >> |
| larryinc64:
--- Quote from: noemann on January 30, 2015, 03:18:59 PM ---However, I cannot stand legal bullies: Licensed by Nintendo means "we don't own the rights." Nintendo only owns the rights to a handful of titles, such as Mario and DK. Nintendo is starting to resemble the NFL and Toys Are Us (remember the Road Kills Are Us website? LOL) --- End quote --- Nintendo is only doing this with a few select games. The program IS ONLY FOR games that feature Nintendo frachises, but not all of them. Super Smash Bros, Kirby and Pokemon are not on the list, and are unaffected by any claim on a video. My video from New Years, of Super Smash Bros. For Wii U has a small but of Wind Waker HD at the end, and the only content matched the Wind Waker music. As I said, I see it as a licensing fee. Many YouTubers who complain about copyright law has no idea how it works. I am using Nintendo music and images in my video, for the use of entertainment and not review or satire, it is not fair use, I have no problem giving any future ad revenue I may get for the use of their copyrighted works in my video. |
| noemann:
--- Quote from: larryinc64 on January 30, 2015, 03:58:20 PM ---Nintendo is only doing this with a few select games. --- End quote --- I guess i misunderstood the subject as being all games and even strategy guides (in part for argument is fair use; in whole is infringement.) anyway, i do not post such content but i do enjoy watching a quick strategy video (in part not in whole) my apologies to Nintendo as i see no bullying. |
| FritzWhite:
--- Quote from: Megatron on January 30, 2015, 03:44:50 AM --- --- Quote from: FritzWhite on January 30, 2015, 02:36:44 AM --- Not a big deal at all. It's not your content to begin with. They can do what they want with it and they'll do just fine without your so called advertising. I love Wii U and am looking forward to the new 3DS on their own merits. --- End quote --- This is the type of thinking that has nearly crippled the internet with SOPA and the loss of Net Neutrality. To avoid a very long winded speech about copyright and fair use, let me summarize...As soon as Nintendo, or anyone else, releases a product for sale, and it is purchased by the consumer, the consumer can claim ownership in some capacity. They bought it. They can do with it what they please - they want to break it, eat it, give it away, share it - it is THEIRS to do so. Copyright comes in to play in terms of "sharing" this with others. In terms of showing this content to others, video games are not movies or music. They are classified differently because they are interactive, meaning that one cannot get the experience of playing a video game by watching. Unlike other forms of media (movies, music) that are passive. *quick side note* there is something to be said for people who just post all the cutscenes or just put up the entire game without commentary, or anything else ** Once a youtuber, blip user, twitch user etc puts up a video with commentary or edited in some way, the user has ALTERED the original product, meaning that it is NOT the same as if you or I bought it in the store. it is its own unique experience. So because of this, copyright is generally not claimed - it falls under the fair use clause which stipulates that a medium may be used for review or parody purposes (as well as a lot of other legal stuff) The reason this is so blown up is because Youtube is very friendly to copyright holders (for fear of getting sued) so anyone at any time can place a "claim" on a video. Youtube then determines if it is legit. The problem is that this results in a "strike" on a youtuber's account. 3 strikes you're out. YOu'll notice that Twitch TV and Blip are safe havens for a lot of this - it's because they are not as friendly to copyright holders as youtube. For now. Anyway - before you start defending the video game companies' "rights" to their games, start thinking about reselling or lending/renting games - if they had their way, you couldn't do that either. The only way you could play their games was to buy it yourself at the MSRP. *See Microsoft, circa 2013 Xbox One Reveal* This new 60/40 split is pretty stingy. Some partnership programs iffer up to 90% ad revenue, so Nintendo is just trying to cash in. And as for Nintendo not needing free advertising? The Wii U has been out over 2 years and sold less than 10 Million units WORLD WIDE. That is worse than the Gamecube. There are still reports of people thinking the "Wii U" is an add-on for the Wii. 3rd party titles are almost non existant (or just really bad ports). So the 3DS does great...but Nintendo shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth when people are showing off Bayonetta 2 or some other "must own" game for the Wii U that 85% of the casual market (who make up the majority of gamers, especially on Nintendo) doesn't know exists. And as for Youtube not helping? Tell that to Minecraft, Five Nights at Freddie's and Goat Simulator to name a few. *gets off soapbox* --- End quote --- Actually, they're quite a bit like movies. Games being interactive doesn't change the fact that the content is the publisher's to share as they see fit. Just because you bought a copy of the game doesn't mean you own the content for it anymore than owning a movie gives you the right to make money off showing it publicly. The comparison to selling used games just isn't there. I can sell my used my used game or movie that I purchased. This has always been ok and always will be unless everything moves to a digital format. Making money by showing other people content from my game is totally different and at the discretion of the publisher. If Nintendo or any other company is against that, it's their call on if and how their content is shared. As for whether it's a smart move of them to lose on some potential free advertising, I don't think it's such a big deal. People are still going to find the games they want to play one way or another. On this note, they should be doing a way better job of advertising the Wii U, but pandering to some youtube mooches is not important to this. |
| larryinc64:
On the topic of free advertising, Nintendo might be getting free advertising from YouTubers, but YouTubers who only do parodys and let's plays got free advertising from Nintendo and other gaming companies. I got into Nintendo from early videos by people like AVGN, I got into AVGN from looking for information on Nintendo. I would never know who AVGN if it was not for Nintendo. Game Grumps, Egoraptor, JonTon, Smooth McGroove, Mega64, Screwattack, Pewdiepie, Brentalfloss, Duane and Brando, Polaris, Jesse Cox, Jim Sterling, Zero Punctuation, Peanut Butter Gamer, Pat the NES Punk, Lazy Game Reviews, Boogie2988, ReviewTechUSA, Gaming Historian, GameXplain, and Power Plaid Plays (AKA Me) The entire career of these YouTube users are launched on the backs of Nintendo and other gaming companies. |
| wiggy:
--- Quote from: Megatron on January 30, 2015, 06:36:36 AM ---^ You do purchase the license, and under fair use laws you are allowed to take certain liberties with that license. Showing 20 mins of random footage while critiquing the controls constitutes a review and under fair use protection, i.e. Nintendo cannot claim ownership...except in the mystical place of "youtube land" --- End quote --- Fair use, and civil law in general, is almost always misinterpreted. Hell, lawyers struggle with and fight over it, as it's loosely written, and it's not at all with you or I in mind. Seeing as YouTubing has actually become a profession, and the income generated from the videos which are profitable depend very heavily on the footage and imagery which Nintendo owns, I think it's totally within Nintendo's rights to claim some of that revenue. People should be happy that they're not simply shutting them down entirely. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |