Topic: Nintendo & Youtube: Copyright & Revenue Claiming

[VladCT]

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/05/16/nintendo-enforces-copyright-on-youtube-lets-plays?abthid=5194b3ca49fe79bd6e000004
Content Patch - May 17th, 2013 - Ep. 085 [Nintendo targets Lets Plays]
As The Cynical Brit said, this does not affect only Let's Plays, but also other videos with Nintendo content, be it reviews or whatnot. With that out of the way, discuss.

[Ratty]

I don't understand how anyone could be surprised at this. Nintendo is being a lot nicer about it than they could have been honestly. I understand TB's argument that a lot of people watch Let's Plays (especially for the really big monetized Let's Players) for the player rather than the game. But the truth is still that those players are playing off of the game footage. It's not like these LPers are doing stand up comedy and Nintendo is monetizing them for Nintendo-related jokes. LPers are using all of the work that video game companies put into the graphics, music/sound and game engine, that's a much bigger investment and a lot more work than just playing the game and talking. And much as I love to stick up for the little guy I can't see Nintendo as being anything but fair here. It was only a matter of time before video game companies started wanting to exercise more control over how their content is used and monetized on youtube.

[Kale]

Heard about this a while ago.

I hate Hate HATE Lets Play videos. most of them are uninteresting to put it lightly, annoying to be more blunt. Though I do watch some, because there are "interesting" ones. Rarely.

I don't think TB is right in this. I'm ABSOLUTELY certain that Nintendo knows what they are doing. They might think they are entitled to their money from ads, but the crap they were saying about being unlike other content providers doing whatever and whatnot, is something they know is BULL. They just want to look like they are good by the fools who might take them from their word.

Other topic is... Single Player games, it's still like a game of chess, or solitaire. The game might have set rules, but they have often been broken. Bugs and all. And even ones without known bugs or them being used, the game is never exactly the same unless it's a cutscene filled one. *cough* heavy rain*cough*

Nintendo is fucking retarded, and I hope they get boycotted and they lose massive sales with a big point to the lack of good "honest" info through things like Lets Play. At this point, Nintendo hasn't really released anything really interesting for me. So if they die in a fire, I'm not gonna care much.

[VladCT]

I don't understand how anyone could be surprised at this. Nintendo is being a lot nicer about it than they could have been honestly. I understand TB's argument that a lot of people watch Let's Plays (especially for the really big monetized Let's Players) for the player rather than the game. But the truth is still that those players are playing off of the game footage. It's not like these LPers are doing stand up comedy and Nintendo is monetizing them for Nintendo-related jokes. LPers are using all of the work that video game companies put into the graphics, music/sound and game engine, that's a much bigger investment and a lot more work than just playing the game and talking. And much as I love to stick up for the little guy I can't see Nintendo as being anything but fair here. It was only a matter of time before video game companies started wanting to exercise more control over how their content is used and monetized on youtube.

Do remember that this could also possibly shut down journalistic reports on their games as well by taking away revenue. Let me reiterate: Let's Plays aren't the only ones that are affected by this. That's how indiscriminate Youtube's system is.
As for my stance on this, this is almost like using a shotgun to take care of a fly; you're just going to end up causing unnecessary collateral damage.

[Ratty]

Do remember that this could also possibly shut down journalistic reports on their games as well by taking away revenue. Let me reiterate: Let's Plays aren't the only ones that are affected by this.
As for my stance on this, this is almost like using a shotgun to take care of a fly; you're just going to end up causing unnecessary collateral damage.

This is true, a proper amount of footage should be allowed for the purposes of review and reporting but unfortunately Nintendo hasn't told us how much footage there has to be in a video for them to make these claims. I would hope they're willing to work with reviewers and divulge the automatic limit of footage for monitization. Is it 2 minutes of footage, 10?

PS - I understand the automated system is extremely flawed (which is why I hope they give more information about the suggested limits to the amount of footage you can show before being flagged etc. since Nintendo's statement suggests it is based on a certain timelimit to how much of their content is shown) but if they wish to retain some kind of control over the use of their content what alternative is there for Nintendo? I mean iirc there's literally like a hundred years worth of footage uploaded onto youtube on a regular basis, even with a costly full time staff doing nothing but reviewing videos tagged "Nintendo" it seems unlikely the could keep up with it manually. I suppose the best option would be for those who are doing "legitimate reviews" (and I know defining that is tricky in itself) to apply with youtube for some kind of exemption from the automated searcher. I've known something like this was going to happen for years, as TB notes in his video most people who thought about it probably did. Nintendo is just the first to take this kind of action on a mass scale. But I don't see the kind of cynical predatory nature in their actions that Sega displayed when they flagged down those Shining videos.

[Neobelmont]

This is true, a proper amount of footage should be allowed for the purposes of review and reporting but unfortunately Nintendo hasn't told us how much footage there has to be in a video for them to make these claims. I would hope they're willing to work with reviewers and divulge the automatic limit of footage for monitization. Is it 2 minutes of footage, 10?

PS - I understand the automated system is extremely flawed (which is why I hope they give more information about the suggested limits to the amount of footage you can show before being flagged etc. since Nintendo's statement suggests it is based on a certain timelimit to how much of their content is shown) but if they wish to retain some kind of control over the use of their content what alternative is there for Nintendo? I mean iirc there's literally like a hundred years worth of footage uploaded onto youtube on a regular basis, even with a costly full time staff doing nothing but reviewing videos tagged "Nintendo" it seems unlikely the could keep up with it manually. I suppose the best option would be for those who are doing "legitimate reviews" (and I know defining that is tricky in itself) to apply with youtube for some kind of exemption from the automated searcher. I've known something like this was going to happen for years, as TB notes in his video most people who thought about it probably did. Nintendo is just the first to take this kind of action on a mass scale. But I don't see the kind of cynical predatory nature in their actions that Sega displayed when they flagged down those Shining videos.

Now it makes sense to me it's sega all over again.

why n why? I tend to watch lp. One of my favorites are mat &pat  .As for lp's like chuggaconroy ehh I can  his videos going down real fast since most of them are Nintendo related iirc.

[Abnormal Freak]

People making money off of Let's Plays (and they're almost always mouthbreathers) are schmucks anyway so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I don't buy the "game's always different" argument. Two people who have played the same game will share over 90% of the experiences.

[Kale]

Schmucks that make money off of what they enjoy. Seems like a fine thing, from the sound of it.

And if you're gonna say that experience thing. That's basically the chess analogy. Anyone who plays chess would have 90% of the same experience. Anyone who race cars will have 90% of the same experience. Same track, same cars, right? What do you say about that? Racing against other people? Multiplayer? Would you say then, that multiplayer is an exception?

How about time attacks on a course? would that not be similar as a single player experience?

[Inccubus]

I don't think they should be allowed to make these claims at all. Video games are interactive media. I understand movies and music being restricted because if you put them up for free the IP owner looses profit. Nintendo DOESN'T LOOSE PROFIT from videos about their games. If anything it's free advertisement. Hell I could even understand if they did this for video walk-throughs IF the game in the walk-through has a guide available. But what they did is bullshit and bad PR for Nintendo. And with the bad PR going around the last couple of years you'd think Nintendo's legal department would have thought this through better.

[A-Yty]

Nintendo - clinging to pennies while kicking over a bucket of big bills.

Guess this has something to do with Wii U struggling in the market. Really, really short-sighted, though.

[A-Yty]

People making money off of Let's Plays (and they're almost always mouthbreathers) are schmucks anyway so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

To this, I sort of agree. But then again, he who asks for money, isn't the stupid one, but the one who gives it (or in this case, watches those videos).

Just remember that guys like AVGN rely on their playthrough material, even if it isn't as much as LPs.

[Kale]

I don't think they should be allowed to make these claims at all. Video games are interactive media. I understand movies and music being restricted because if you put them up for free the IP owner looses profit. Nintendo DOESN'T LOOSE PROFIT from videos about their games.

One argument (playing devil's advocate) is that some people will watch and never buy because they "experienced" the game with the lets play video. As Abnormal Freak seems to think, the game isn't  very different in each play through. If you believe that, then they might lose profit because watching was "enough" as the experience isn't different enough. Not that I do believe that, because I think that type of thinking is silly.

Just want to say, that although I referenced Abnormal Freak thinking that games don't differ much per play through, the part after that is just my thoughts. Too often, people seem to think I'm trying to say that they said it. So I'm just putting that there, so I don't have to spend posts later about this crap.

[A-Yty]

If you play a game just for the story or if the game relies heavily on cutscenes, it's actually valid point. I admit I watched Metal Gear: PO's cutscenes just to know what was happening. Not much intrigued me about the gameplay and I didn't have a PSP. Same with MGS4. I did end up buying both devices after a couple of years and ended up with MGS: PO, but haven't gotten around to playing it (and probably won't any time soon).

But maybe that means developers should focus more on gameplay instead of trying to be a movie so that the people are compelled to buy or borrow the game. Some Silent Hills are rare exceptions to a story/cutscene/atmosphere-driven game that is still best experienced through actual playthrough. The gameplay is not that great, but I think it's a must to play something like SH2 through instead of just watch someone else do it.

[Kale]

I can agree with that... Though, I don't think there are any Nintendo Game that emphasizes story over game play.

But lets...see... Legacy of Kain games, I'd think that'd be a series that would lose out on a lets play video. That game, after the first Soul Reaver has pretty boring gameplay. Story though, is amazing. Most other games though, eh....

[TheouAegis]

I don't think there are any Nintendo Game that emphasizes story over game play.

RPGs
Not as many now, but... And then you can get into a grey area. Could Nintendo enforce ad revenue from Lets Plays of Chrono Trigger or Final Fantasy VI, which were originally Nintendo's property in the SNES days but are now Sony's property in the PSX days? Front Mission 1st and Front Mission: Gun Hazard could be Nintendo property, but the other Front Missions are Sony's. And what about games like B.O.B. or Zombies Ate My Neighbors that were cross-platform?