This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Microsoft changes Game Content Usage rules

#1Eamon696Posted 10/9/2012 5:12:44 PM
http://www.examiner.com/article/microsoft-changes-its-game-content-usage-rules

The article only mentions videos on sites like Youtube, and Blip. But does the Game Content Usage rules apply to reviews of the games too?

Thoughts?
#2LuckNotDoWithItPosted 10/9/2012 5:16:13 PM
I think this is another grey area that will require a lot of testing to see if well......it really is harmful or not. I hate that.

https://forums.halo.xbox.com/yaf_postsm1516207_MS-Game-Content-Usage-Rules-Updated.aspx#post1516207
#3randomweirdoPosted 10/9/2012 7:18:34 PM
I'm actually more surprised that wasn't already the case. Even YouTube's rules for that state that if the content isn't copyrighted by you that you shouldn't put that video up for making money from ads with it.

Not like Microsoft is saying we can't post stuff to Youtube and such, they are just saying we can't make money from it. And considering they own the copyrights for the games, that is well within their rights and it isn't Fair Use any longer if people are making a profit from it.
#4WinternovaPosted 10/9/2012 7:23:12 PM
LuckNotDoWithIt posted...
I think this is another grey area that will require a lot of testing to see if well......it really is harmful or not. I hate that.

https://forums.halo.xbox.com/yaf_postsm1516207_MS-Game-Content-Usage-Rules-Updated.aspx#post1516207


There's no grey area at all - the videos are derivative works under copyright law and Microsoft can have any and all removed at their request.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMKUUUvjjzo
Fan of: Steelers(6-time Champions), Red Wings(11-time Champions)
#5WinternovaPosted 10/9/2012 7:24:06 PM
randomweirdo posted...
I'm actually more surprised that wasn't already the case. Even YouTube's rules for that state that if the content isn't copyrighted by you that you shouldn't put that video up for making money from ads with it.

Not like Microsoft is saying we can't post stuff to Youtube and such, they are just saying we can't make money from it. And considering they own the copyrights for the games, that is well within their rights and it isn't Fair Use any longer if people are making a profit from it.


It wasn't fair use to begin with if it wasn't for review or critique purposes. Fair Use is quite narrow.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMKUUUvjjzo
Fan of: Steelers(6-time Champions), Red Wings(11-time Champions)
#6LuckNotDoWithItPosted 10/9/2012 7:34:03 PM
"Fair use is quite narrow."

Not in this context it isn't. Or else you would have to ban virtually all commentaries. Commentaries about games and so on is perfectly accepted. Fair use is very clear.

Copyrights? Where are your copyright claims going to come from? People normally do not play video from games like story elements, cut scenes or otherwise. They deliberately skip those and have their videos much shorter, showing only gameplay sections.
#7WinternovaPosted 10/9/2012 8:32:01 PM(edited)
LuckNotDoWithIt posted...
"Fair use is quite narrow."

Not in this context it isn't. Or else you would have to ban virtually all commentaries. Commentaries about games and so on is perfectly accepted. Fair use is very clear.


17 USC § 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.


A playthrough commentary of a whole game? LIkely not fair use. A playthrough of a few minutes of an hours-long game for criticism purposes? Fair use. It is on a case-by-case basis, and, frankly, if it's more than a few minutes of a game the copyright holder can get it removed. The poster of the video likely won't have a leg to stand on, let alone the resources to fight it.

LuckNotDoWithIt posted...
Copyrights? Where are your copyright claims going to come from? People normally do not play video from games like story elements, cut scenes or otherwise. They deliberately skip those and have their videos much shorter, showing only gameplay sections.


17 USC § 106 - Exclusive rights in copyrighted works
Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;
(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;
(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;
(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and
(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.


17 USC § 106(2) is the exclusive right in question - a "machinema" is DERIVATIVE work that is prepared using the copyrighted work, therefore it violates that exclusive right of the copyright holder. Additionally, 17 USC § 106(5) is the restriction that would preclude your "commentary" videos if they're not held to be Fair Use.

When discussing any subject, it helps to know a little bit about the subject. Please refrain from arguing against learned opinions until you've studied the topic at hand. And please refer to the likely Fair Use protected YouTube video in my signature.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMKUUUvjjzo
Fan of: Steelers(6-time Champions), Red Wings(11-time Champions)
#8LuckNotDoWithItPosted 10/9/2012 8:40:50 PM
Right here is the key line:

"(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

In other words, are you using someone's complete video/playback of said game as your property to garner commercial gain and run the same?

Then it's not fair use. If you are using said video playback for educational purposes, but do not include content which validates their claim; keep said videos to a certain length, then that falls under fair use.

If in such cases it does not fall under the definition, they can immediately get it tossed off. Why bother with court when they just delete your videos at will. And that is what happens nine times out of ten as is seen today.
#9RenamonPosted 10/9/2012 8:41:36 PM
Dear god, never ever ever link to examiner.com again. I go there get 2 popups, a full page flash ad that actually covers up whet I'm reading after I start reading it, and can't close it for another 5-10 seconds. Find another website.
---
Movies that I believe will come true: Wall-E, Idiocracy
Halo 1 > all other Halo games
#10SunDevil77Posted 10/9/2012 8:43:42 PM
LuckNotDoWithIt posted...
Right here is the key line:

"(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

In other words, are you using someone's complete video/playback of said game as your property to garner commercial gain and run the same?

Then it's not fair use. If you are using said video playback for educational purposes, but do not include content which validates their claim; keep said videos to a certain length, then that falls under fair use.

If in such cases it does not fall under the definition, they can immediately get it tossed off. Why bother with court when they just delete your videos at will. And that is what happens nine times out of ten as is seen today.


Boy, you sure are wrong a lot.
---
When I eat, it is the food that is scared.