Youtubers Upset over Nintendo's New affiliate program

[Megatron]

^ You can't compare youtube to TV.  Mainly because TV stations are corporations and have shit tons of money for that.  Youtube is composed of mainly little people.  Sure there are some big dogs, but 90% of the community make very little money off of these videos.

And Nintendo taking "a little bit" is an understatement.  They are taking 40%.  That's huge!  Most major game channels/networks, including those backed by other game publishers take around 10%.  PLUS, you're forgetting youtube fees.
Youtube takes a cut, then Nintendo takes 40% of what's left.  
So let's say a youtuber pulls in $1 thousand a month.  (which is higher than most of them make, since it requires thousands of views to get that high - average CPM or $$$ per thousand views is between $2 and $7 depending on ad type, and other variables such as better rates for more popular channels).  From what I understand, Youtube can take UP TO 15%, so let's highball it and say 15%.
From the original 1K, that leaves $850.  Now subtract the 40% Nintendo takes, and we are down to $$510.  So about half of what was made.  Then there are gov't taxes - 25% for the average middle class person.  So grand total $382.50 per month.  Basically a third of what THE YOUTUBER CREATED, for showing 5-10 mins of Link to the Past and 8 mins of Super Mario 64.  
It's bullshit.

[FritzWhite]

I do not care if some of you disagree with the laws, or they are poorly written, etc.  The fact is that if someone, let's use AVGN, shows a grand total of 7 minutes of Super Mario 3 and criticizes or comments, etc - Nintendo is entitled to NOTHING.  These types of videos offer a unique, subjective experience that "legally" changes the content of the footage.  Same way movie critics can do this.  They can't show the whole film, but they can summarize and show clips.  Now, as I previously stated, I am NOT defending let's plays or all cutscenes videos, or anything that is just the game in it's entirety,  I am speaking about everything else.

And for everyone claiming intellectual property doesn't apply to reselling games, I have 3 letters for you...D.R.M.  Remember that?  Remember how OK everyone was with that?  How the content creators argued they lose money because people resell?  If they had their way, the used market would be dead and buried.  
And don't bother wasting your breath (or time typing) claiming that these youtubers were built on the backs of Nintendo, Sega, etc.  
Nintendo is a company providing goods and services...they work FOR YOU.  You do not work for them.  You don't buy, they die.  

And let's not forget...technically Nintendo could come to THIS website and argue that (even though these covers are free) they are infringing on copyrighted images of their characters.  So be careful how much power you give these companies.  EA, Capcom, UbiSoft...these companies got greedy in many ways, claiming videos, etc. and ended up losing in the end.      

Youtube takes a cut, then Nintendo takes 40% of what's left.  
So let's say a youtuber pulls in $1 thousand a month.  (which is higher than most of them make, since it requires millions of views to get that high).  From what I understand, Youtube can take UP TO 15%, so let's highball it and say 15%.
From the original 1K, that leaves $850.  Now subtract the 40% Nintendo takes, and we are down to $$510.  So about half of what was made.  Then there are gov't taxes - 25% for the average middle class person.  So grand total $382.50 per month.  Basically a third of what THE YOUTUBER CREATED, for showing 5-10 mins of Link to the Past and 8 mins of Super Mario 64.  
It's bullshit.

I don't feel pity for someone that's getting paid less to yak over a video. It's not a real job unless they're a newscaster (and most of them don't really earn their cut but whatever). If they're lucky enough to get paid for creating content people enjoy then good for them, but no, I don't feel bad because someone isn't making a great living putting out a video which mainly features content that isn't theirs in the first place.

That's fine that you're uninterested in our opinions on the subject, but the OP's question was what are our thoughts on this. If you want to argue fair use laws and compare it to the definition of whether the content has been significantly altered or its purpose fits under the fair use umbrella that's one thing, but the idea, your opinion, that anyone is entitled to a large portion of profits for uploading videos to a website they didn't create featuring content that isn't theirs because they added original commentary is where we're not seeing eye to eye.

One of the major differences between this website making covers and youtubers making videos is that no one here but a few leeches (that, in my opinion, put the TCP website and community at risk) are making money off these covers.

As for DRM, it's up to us as consumers to say whether or not that's ok. I feel like things are heading in that direction because other people are gradually becoming more accepting of the idea of renting content rather than purchasing it, but that's the fault of consumers, not the companies. I know I and some others here will be dragged into the digital age kicking and screaming, but we're a pretty small voice relative to the total market. Just the other day I read a topic on another forum about whether gamers miss not having manuals in new games and a lot of people don't give a shit. I think it sucks, but majority rules.

[larryinc64]

@palmer6strings:
Well, the 2 examples you gave are not really what is the problem. Nintendo is not claiming videos with a N64 in the background.
Höfner can't get royalties from A Hard Days Night (Movie) because Paul is seen playing it in the movie. Though Höfner does get royalties form Harmonix for its use in The Beatles Rockband, I think, the copyright is listed in the manual. It would be insane if every object in a video had to have royalties paid on it, though I guess it depends on how you use it, I'm not a lawer I just use Google, and none of this YouTube stuff is about that. There is not even a way to automatically detect objects in YouTube video. Most claims are from audio.

Lets go to the to the guitar riff thing. So you made a successful song. What if a sitcom that makes thousands in ad revenue and DVD sales used your song in a montage or as background music? You deserve royalties for the song, right? It is your work, and the sitcom is profiting off of it without your permission. Or you made a movie, and someone is charging people to see it, or a slightly modified version of it, and not giving any of the profits they made off of your work to you? Both of the uses are not reviewing or parodying your work, so it is not fair use.
In the same way you have to pay royalties for a Led Zeppelin song, why can't Nintendo charge for a Super Mario song?
MST3K had to license the copyrighted movies to riff, Why do I not have to license Zelda to riff?

YouTube is no longer a small site for home movies, many people use it as their main source or entertainment, instead of TV or movies, and many people are making videos and getting paid ad revenue, the same way ABC gets paid for ads on their TV channel.
Many people's jobs are to make YouTube videos in the same way people's jobs are to make TV shows.
I don't see why people can't accept that they have to fallow the same rules people on TV and in movies have too.

If you don't want FOX claiming your video, don't use content form FOX*. If you don't want WMG claiming your videos, don't use content from WMG*. If you don't want Nintendo claiming your videos, DON'T USE CONTENT FROM NINTENDO*.

(*unless it falls under what fair use laws allow.)

Just because people on YouTube are not as big as Disney, does not exempt them from copyright law. There are laws that remove the ability to use your right to claim copyright if you knowingly don't.
The numers I get from HERE and Boogie2988 video, YouTube's cut is way more than 15%, It seems to be around 30%-50%. I do not have ads so I can't say from personal experiences.
YouTube also takes 40% of ad revenue, Nintendo claims 40-or-so percent of the 60% remainder. So its:
Youtube - 40%
Nintendo - 24%
YouTuber - 36%

And the program seems to be more guided at Let's Plays, so its more 1-5 hours of A Link To The Past and Super Mario 64. YouTube still picks up 5 minutes of video and slaps a claim on just because that is how the system works. It can pick up 30 seconds of audio. There were problems with companies who support Let's Plays, but YouTube was still putting claims out even though the company was telling then to stop. And there as a HUGE problem with false claims. I have gotten A few from companies claiming I was using something I was not. Or it abused in a way to silence a bad review, this happened to Total Biscuit a few times. The system is very broken.

I have tested the claiming tech quite a bit.
I used 30 seconds of a Aerosmith song, and distorted it, sped it up: Detected
I the vocals of a Linkin Park song, echoed and made softer, overplayed on a MIDI of the song: Not detected
Used a second of the song Jump by Van Halen, just the "Jump!" no filters: Not detected
Also:
My Mario Kart 64, Super Mario 64 Chaos Edition Hack, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, episodes have no claim.
Wind Waker HD, and Super Mario World form my stream has been.

"ゼルダの伝説 風のタクト HD サウンドセレクション-10_ゼルダの伝説 風のタクト HD サウンドセレクション-大海原", sound recording administered by:
Nintendo

"SUPER MARIO WORLD-SUPER MARIO WORLD_24", sound recording administered by: Nintendo

I'm currently making a Super Mario 64 video and trying to sneak a Beatles song in for a joke, using the same method as the Linkon Park song. I'm being a bad boy.

I'm sending an email to Nintendo of America asking some questions regarding:
Context of how the content is used (Let's Play vs. Review)
Content of commentary (Cursing/ Adult Themes/ critique)
Status on games not on the list.
What to do when claimed contend is in fair use.

Anything anyone want me to add?

[Megatron]

^You're right.  This IS an opinion poll.  And everyone is entitled to theirs.  The problem with opinions, though, is once you open up and reveal your opinion to the world, you are opening yourself to mockery and criticism.  Thus is the way of the world, especially on the internet.
I'm no mocking, but I do try to belittle every now and then.  

The problem I have with this thread (from some, not all) isn't that you have an opinion.  It's because you pass JUDGMENT on others. That's where I get pretty defensive.  

A brief bit of backstory about me - by trade I am an LPC (Licensed Professional Counselor) and ABA Specialist (Autism therapy). As part of my job I am a social justice and civil rights advocate, especially for the LGBTQ community.  And what I encounter every day in helping pass laws and social reform regarding things like gay marriage, etc. are people who have "opinions" about something they know nothing about and go on to criticize, belittle and pass judgment on others.  Freedom of speech and freedom of expression are very big parts of that too, as well as censorship - (now don't get me wrong, politically I am pretty much down the middle and am not a zealot either way) but censorship of the internet and the exploitation of big business over small business is a real and growing concern in the US economy.  So I get very antsy when I start to see this stuff happening.  I don't make youtube videos, but I watch them.  I watch enough to know how hard AVGN, Angry Joe, Spoony and others work to delivery quality content.  And the miniscule amount of footage used does not justify any claim by Nintendo or anyone else.  I am not endorsing piracy or theft, however there are set boundaries as to what is OK and what is not.  According to the black and white, Nintendo is close to crossing the line.  How you feel about this is up to you, but don't get on a high horse and look down at others for what they have chosen to do.  Many of them have done more with their youtube fame than anyone on here will do in a lifetime.  Channel Awesome donates thousands every year to various charities.  How?  Because of these kinds of videos.  But the worst part is that Nintendo doesn't need the money.  They are doing this because according to them  "it's their ball."  And want to decide what YOU do with something you paid for.  If you don't watch youtube videos, then good for you.  You have nothing to do with this situation.  If you DO watch them, and still side with Nintendo, you are a hypocrite and spoiled that you think you are entitled to something.

And Fritz, you're wrong.  Intellectual property does not solely apply to monetary gains.  Nintendo could claim their images as copyright and have them taken down.  They wouldn't be entitled to any money necessarily (at least without a lawsuit), but they can stop you from giving these away.  Remove the data base.  And basically blackball any site that tries to reproduce official Nintendo products.

[Megatron]

So Larry, you seem to be arguing both sides...you want the system in place for lets plays, etc.  But don't for the little stuff and short clips...but it doesn't work that way.  Nintendo is claiming EVERYTHING.  And while they have limited their stuff up front by not doing this wtih Pokemon and others (probably due to having to hsarethe revenue with Game freak and other developers) , the terms of agreement clearly state that Nintendo can alter the deal at any time without warning.  This is Vader ordering Lando to take the Princess and the Wookie to his ship all over again!


"...this deal is very fair and I'm happy to be a part of it!"
Props if you got that joke.

[larryinc64]

I don't feel pity for someone that's getting paid less to yak over a video. It's not a real job unless they're a newscaster (and most of them don't really earn their cut but whatever). If they're lucky enough to get paid for creating content people enjoy then good for them, but no, I don't feel bad because someone isn't making a great living putting out a video which mainly features content that isn't theirs in the first place.

I am one of those people who yak over video games, and this is my mentality on it. I do LPs for fun, and the exposure. I have no plans for this being a job and if I ever get to the point where I am making money off of LPs, I have no problem giving Nintendo a cut of the earnings for the copyrighted material used in them, I do not see the use of Nintendos material in my LPs as fair use. I do have plans for original content to put on the channel to possibly be a job in the future. I'm even learning how to compose music so I don't have to rely on royalty free or copyrighted music. The into to my Power Plaid Punch (Vs. games) is composed by me.

I feel people such as JonTron or AVGN should not have any claim by Nintendo for any use, in the scripted riff/reviews they do. I have been toying with ideas for a similar project but in involves way more than shoving a mic in my face and a camera on a tv and seeing what happens. Hell, some PPP episodes take a lot of work in post to make it funny. From the edit pieces I do for victories or failures, to the animated intros I have at hte begining of every series, down to moving around what Matt and I said. In the SM64 episode I'm working on there ws a small bit where Matt kept cutting of my joke, ruining it. The set up was 'Mario eats all the cake himself in front of the starving toad servants'

Matt (Imitating Peach) in RED, Me (As a Toad) in Green

Peach locks us in a room-I only feed Mario.  . . .   Peach locks us- I only feed fat italin plumbers. . . . PEACHLOCKSUSINAROOMWITH only a painting that says 'Peach is watching'.  Ha

I rearranged the words to:
I only feed Mario.   I only feed fat italin plumbers.  Peach locks us in a room-with only a painting that says 'Peach is watching'.  Ha

[Megatron]

I will say, Larry has done an EXCELLENT job advertising his own channel through this argument. 

[FritzWhite]

^You're right.  This IS an opinion poll.  And everyone is entitled to theirs.  The problem with opinions, though, is once you open up and reveal your opinion to the world, you are opening yourself to mockery and criticism.  Thus is the way of the world, especially on the internet.
I'm no mocking, but I do try to belittle every now and then.  

The problem I have with this thread (from some, not all) isn't that you have an opinion.  It's because you pass JUDGMENT on others. That's where I get pretty defensive.  

A brief bit of backstory about me - by trade I am an LPC (Licensed Professional Counselor) and ABA Specialist (Autism therapy). As part of my job I am a social justice and civil rights advocate, especially for the LGBTQ community.  And what I encounter every day in helping pass laws and social reform regarding things like gay marriage, etc. are people who have "opinions" about something they know nothing about and go on to criticize, belittle and pass judgment on others.  Freedom of speech and freedom of expression are very big parts of that too, as well as censorship - (now don't get me wrong, politically I am pretty much down the middle and am not a zealot either way) but censorship of the internet and the exploitation of big business over small business is a real and growing concern in the US economy.  So I get very antsy when I start to see this stuff happening.  I don't make youtube videos, but I watch them.  I watch enough to know how hard AVGN, Angry Joe, Spoony and others work to delivery quality content.  And the miniscule amount of footage used does not justify any claim by Nintendo or anyone else.  I am not endorsing piracy or theft, however there are set boundaries as to what is OK and what is not.  According to the black and white, Nintendo is close to crossing the line.  How you feel about this is up to you, but don't get on a high horse and look down at others for what they have chosen to do.  Many of them have done more with their youtube fame than anyone on here will do in a lifetime.  Channel Awesome donates thousands every year to various charities.  How?  Because of these kinds of videos.  But the worst part is that Nintendo doesn't need the money.  They are doing this because according to them  "it's their ball."  And want to decide what YOU do with something you paid for.  If you don't watch youtube videos, then good for you.  You have nothing to do with this situation.  If you DO watch them, and still side with Nintendo, you are a hypocrite and spoiled that you think you are entitled to something.

And Fritz, you're wrong.  Intellectual property does not solely apply to monetary gains.  Nintendo could claim their images as copyright and have them taken down.  They wouldn't be entitled to any money necessarily (at least without a lawsuit), but they can stop you from giving these away.  Remove the data base.  And basically blackball any site that tries to reproduce official Nintendo products.

I didn't say that intellectual property applies to monetary gains, but that, unlike youtube channels, cover artists here are not doing this for money. Of course Nintendo can still take it down, but the fact that there isn't much money being made off this takes away an incentive for them to do so. Hopefully TCP stays off their radar.

Also, I didn't say I was entitled to shit. Just because someone's enjoyed a video game related video but doesn't agree with said creator making a larger cut off the vid doesn't make them a hypocrite. I enjoy sports and movies but I don't think athletes and actors should make as much money as they do.

Also, nobody is belittling anybody here. We're a respectful community of adults that share similar passions and interests. Saying that people with opinions different from yours don't know what they're talking about sounds close to criticism and passing judgement to me, but to each their own.

I don't agree with gay marriage, but that doesn't mean that I hate homosexuals or feel that they're not entitled to basic human rights. I have friends that are homosexuals, and while I don't agree with that aspect of their life, it's their own business, and I think that many of them are nice people for the most part. I strongly condemn the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church and the like, but I do believe that marriage should be between man and a woman. It's incredibly unpopular nowadays to say that and a surefire way to be labeled as a hate monger by liberals, but I'm not going to change my beliefs because someone else wants to pass disrespect, belittle, or pass judgement. I commend you for sticking to what you believe and fighting for it. I will do the same.

[FritzWhite]

I don't feel pity for someone that's getting paid less to yak over a video. It's not a real job unless they're a newscaster (and most of them don't really earn their cut but whatever). If they're lucky enough to get paid for creating content people enjoy then good for them, but no, I don't feel bad because someone isn't making a great living putting out a video which mainly features content that isn't theirs in the first place.

I am one of those people who yak over video games, and this is my mentality on it. I do LPs for fun, and the exposure. I have no plans for this being a job and if I ever get to the point where I am making money off of LPs, I have no problem giving Nintendo a cut of the earnings for the copyrighted material used in them, I do not see the use of Nintendos material in my LPs as fair use. I do have plans for original content to put on the channel to possibly be a job in the future. I'm even learning how to compose music so I don't have to rely on royalty free or copyrighted music. The into to my Power Plaid Punch (Vs. games) is composed by me.

I feel people such as JonTron or AVGN should not have any claim by Nintendo for any use, in the scripted riff/reviews they do. I have been toying with ideas for a similar project but in involves way more than shoving a mic in my face and a camera on a tv and seeing what happens. Hell, some PPP episodes take a lot of work in post to make it funny. From the edit pieces I do for victories or failures, to the animated intros I have at hte begining of every series, down to moving around what Matt and I said. In the SM64 episode I'm working on there ws a small bit where Matt kept cutting of my joke, ruining it. The set up was 'Mario eats all the cake himself in front of the starving toad servants'

Matt (Imitating Peach) in RED, Me (As a Toad) in Green

Peach locks us in a room-I only feed Mario.  . . .   Peach locks us- I only feed fat italin plumbers. . . . PEACHLOCKSUSINAROOMWITH only a painting that says 'Peach is watching'.  Ha

I rearranged the words to:
I only feed Mario.   I only feed fat italin plumbers.  Peach locks us in a room-with only a painting that says 'Peach is watching'.  Ha

For the record, I like your videos and respect you more for not coming out and saying 'fuck Nintendo, this is my $.' Keep making vids bro.

[larryinc64]

So Larry, you seem to be arguing both sides...you want the system in place for lets plays, etc.  But don't for the little stuff and short clips...but it doesn't work that way.  Nintendo is claiming EVERYTHING.  And while they have limited their stuff up front by not doing this wtih Pokemon and others (probably due to having to hsarethe revenue with Game freak and other developers) , the terms of agreement clearly state that Nintendo can alter the deal at any time without warning.  This is Vader ordering Lando to take the Princess and the Wookie to his ship all over again!


"...this deal is very fair and I'm happy to be a part of it!"
Props if you got that joke.

Gah. I can't type responses fast enough

Well, YouTubes systems are set to claim everything. It does not distinguish length, it finds if content (mostly audio) is used and claims it without a real person ever seeing it. It is a broken mess.

CONTENT ID and DISPUTING CLAIMS 101

If a video is claimed, 2 things can happen:
It will be taken down from public viewing or it will have ads on it.

On your creator studio page, the video say 'Matched third party content.' next to the edit button.

Clicking on it will bring you to a page that says:

Your video may include music that is owned by a third party.

To hear the matched music please play the video on the right. The video will play from the point where the matched content was identified.

Your video is available and playable.

Copyright details:

[The track in question]
sound recording administered by:
[Companys]

If you don't want this claim on your video, you may be able to remove the song.  
[Ok, got it]

If you think this is an invalid claim, you can file a dispute.

Learn more about how claims impact your videos.

Clicking [Ok, got it] or ignoring this will leave the ad on the video, regardless if it is true or not.

Clicking File a depute. will take you here:

I believe this copyright claim is not valid because:
I own the CD / DVD or bought the song online.
I'm not selling the video or making any money from it.
I gave credit in the video.
The video is my original content and I own all of the rights to it.
I have a license or written permission from the proper rights holder to use this material.
My use of the content meets the legal requirements for fair use or fair dealing under applicable copyright laws.
The content is in the public domain or is not eligible for copyright protection.
[Continue]

You select the one closest to what applies to you, with the top 1/2 of the options representing ways that do not count as fair use.

Choosing one of the the lower 1/2 brings you to a page with a text box where you can state your case.

When I was wrongfully claimed on a video, I said something like "your content is not at the timestamp, that was another piece of music I got permission to use." In that case it picked up one song as another, one I have no idea what it was.

I submit it to the people who put the claim and 2 days later it was removed.


YouTubes copyright claim system has been broken for years. I run a fan channel I started in 2010, where I uploaded 2 albums and a movie made by The Rutles. A Beatles parody band by ex-Monty Python members. I got a claim on a few videos saying 'WMG has a claim on this video, it will continue to be available though" but it was taken down anyway. I cubmited a claim quoting the mesage I got and it was put back up. To this day, out of the 49 videos on the channel that consist of copyrighted material, all are available and only 6 have been picked up. Looking at them now, it seems WMG released the claims that i ignored, kept the 3 I accepted, WMG has a unaccepted claim on a video posted in 2014, one video has a song from another company, and one song is calmed by:
"The Rutles-Nevertheless", sound recording administered by:
WMG (Claim released.)
"NEVERTHELESS", musical composition administered by: 0:15 (The song starts at 0:01)
PRS CS (Who is this?)
Sony ATV Publishing (why only this video?)

The Aerosmith claim on one PPP video:
"FLY AWAY FROM HERE", musical composition administered by: 1:12
STIM CS
ARESA
SUISA CS
UMPG Publishing
SACEM
PRS CS
EMI Music Publishing
UMPI

Who are all of these people, minus EMI?

Back on track... If a video is wrongfully claimed, you c

To clear things up:
I think Nintendo has a claim on Let's Plays, not Reviews or Parodies.
YouTube needs to fix the broken claim system because it keeps claiming crap it should not. It is not Nintendo's fault that YTs system claims everything, they just gave them the reference files for content to look for, and YT handles that. If you are wrongfully claimed, you can depute. If the company does not drop the wrongful claim, you take them to court. That is how the content ID system works, and it is YTs fault. You don't have to have any proof of ownership or right to claim a video for someone to do so. You just tell YT, "hey, I claim this", and YT slaps a claim on it. It sucks.

I'm arguing the idea of Nintendo claiming Lets Plays, not the practice of YT slapping claims on everything due to a broken system.

I am going to email Nintendo and get some answers on what Nintendo considers fair use, I see the program guided at Let's Plays and not at reviews. I could be wrong, and if I am, then my opinion on the program will change.



Also, Thanlks Fritz 

[Megatron]

Also, nobody is belittling anybody here. We're a respectful community of adults that share similar passions and interests. Saying that people with opinions different from yours don't know what they're talking about sounds close to criticism and passing judgement to me, but to each their own.

DO you know what you're talking about?  From what I have read in this thread, and on the internet in general, I'd say most of the posters have stated they have very limited knowledge about the subject and are either Nintendo white knights, or just picking a side based on their limited knowledge.  Some have even said they don't care about youtube creators and they shouldn't be making money on this.  
This isn't a criticism necessarily, but if you don't know what you're talking about then you can have an opinion, but it is not an EDUCATED opinion.  It's like someone hearing something from a friend fro ma friend from a friend.  By the time the information gets to you, it is so diluted that often it's just a shadow of what it once was (see the telephone game).  And, unfortunately, those opinions make up the majority of people

As I said, you are entitled to your opinion.  But as I also said, once you voice it, I am entitled to belittle you or anyone else for having that opinion.  And you are entitled to belittle me for mine.  God bless free speech, right?  

And you may ask - doesn't that hurt your cause or dilute your argument?  That you would belittle someone over having an opinion about NINTENDO GAMES AND YOUTUBE!?  
This isn't about youtube.  This isn't about Nintendo.  This is about rights and freedom to do things without having big business or government step in to take it away.  Everybody loves watching AVGN or Egoraptor or PewDiePie until they find out they make more than you do.  Then there's a twinge of jealousy.  That stirring of "get a real job".  And the utter entitlement feeling that youtube creators shouldn't be paid - it's just youtube.  Yet people still enjoy their FREE entertainment.  They still laugh at AVGN's shit jokes.  They still watch Gamegrumps.  They still listen to reviews, and look up walkthroughs and let's plays when a game gets too tricky.  But the guy working for $13.75 an hour, or the 16 hour foreman who puts in blood and sweat into his work, all they see are a bunch of kids talking into a camera and making money because of it.  "Get a REAL job."
It's the people who look down on others and judge them for what they do - who don't value a form of work or entertainment because it isn't what they consider to be "a career."  And if you're OK with Nintendo taking a cut - then start to think about the clothes you wear to work.  If Dockers or Haggar or Levi start taking a cut of what you make because you wear those clothes to work.  Or if you're in sales, your barber wants a cut of your check because he makes your hair look good, and statistics show that the more attractive the seller, the more likely the sale.  I mean, after all, you ARE showing off their work and making profit because of it.

Look, if you know about this stuff, and still side with Nintendo, then that is your choice.  If you have no idea what this is and don't really care (and you actually decided to read this rant anyway), then keep on trucking.  But if you don't know what you're talking about, and adamantly ague against because you feel youtube isn't a real job, or they are not entitled to be rewarded for the hard work they put it, then you are a part of the problem.  This is the equivalent of the guy on his couch who thinks that "invading" is always the answer to diplomatic disputes.  Or the parent who refuses to discipline their child and expects the school to make sure their child learns.  Or the people who hide behind religion to complete acts of terror.  Don't just have an opinion.  Know WHY you have an opinion.

[Megatron]

I am going to email Nintendo and get some answers on what Nintendo considers fair use, I see the program guided at Let's Plays and not at reviews. I could be wrong, and if I am, then my opinion on the program will change.

I would have no problem with this.

And Fritz, I am not directing this at you, we've interacted before and you're a cool guy, but rather I'm referencing people on the internet as a whole.  And when you build a career working in politics and fighting overbearing legislature, you tend to develop a bit of an argumentative personality

[larryinc64]

Megatron, you are blaming Nintendo for what YouTube does. You do not seem to know how Content ID works, I have been studying this as it developed, I started uploading YouTube videos in 2008.

Nintendo does not manage what individual claims are put on what video, YouTube does. Nintendo, like WMG, EMI or any other corporation looking to use content ID hands YouTube a sample of audio or video of content they hold a copyright on. The file gets put in YouTubes servers, and there is a program that scans videos uploaded for content id matches. A claim is automatically placed on the video and the video ether gets removed or has ads placed on it/ ad revenue diverted from the content maker. If the claim is false, the video maker has to contest it. IT is guilty until proven innocent. The claim is sent to the company, and they will release the claim if the claim is false and they are not evil. YouTube does not handle disputes. If the claim is wrongful and the company won't let up, you have to take them to court. YouLube does jack shit.
The company does not even have to prove they own it. I can claim the content of a video that is not mine and steal a few days of ad revenue while it gets sorted out.

The system sucks, and it has been like this for years, mostly due to Google. Many YouTubers have been struggling with this and Google has done jack shit to fix it.

[Megatron]

Larry, I am referring to Nintendo's new Share Plan the "Nintendo Creator Program".  This is a youtube thing - but it is mostly Nintendo, as they are the ones deciding the monentary split.  Nintendo has long been a difficult IP to use and "this" is their plan to rectify that...although despite looking interesting on paper it screws the content creators.  Nintendo has announced a new share plan to feature content creators who use their IP in their videos.  Essentially it's a registration act. 
"In order to earn the money, YouTubers can register specific videos or entire channels with Nintendo. Individual videos can earn 60% of advertising proceeds, and registered channels can earn a little more—70%."

As I have said, other Publishers have similar things...but with a 90/10 split, not 60/40.  And the 70/30 split means that you register with Nintendo ALL of your videos.  Meaning they take 30% of everything you put up, even if it doesn't have their content in it.

[Megatron]

While I still need to do some more research as to how far back in 2012 this goes but here is what I have pieced together (very brief summary)

2012:  Nintendo Announces the Nintendo Creators Program
2013:  Nintendo starts claiming 100% of videos posted with Nintendo IP content using the content ID youtube bs you already talked about.  This essentially drives content creators crazy
2015:  Nintendo releases Nintendo Creators Program...thus "allowing" creators to use their IPs at the aforementioned percentages.

Nintendo pulled a Coca Cola.  They took away something people loved.  Introduced a new variable, which everyone hated.  Now they release this savior to the people to solve a mess they started a few years ago.  (look up New Coke if you weren't around in the 80s)

So yes, this IS Nintendo's doing. Youtube just helped them out with their shitty services.  This clearly was planned by Nintendo.  This was calculated and precise...and I hope it blows up in their face.  Because if this works, every fucking publisher is going to have one of these and nobody will bother with game footage anymore.