So Nintendo isn't removing videos

#31n00bsaib0tPosted 5/16/2013 1:58:19 PM
Vyers posted...
UponADarkThorne posted...
Robot_Soopa posted...
Some real ignorant ass-hats in this topic.

People shouldn't be able to make a living doing something they enjoy because it's not the typical job society wants them to have?

Or maybe you're just jealous that they can do something they love and make money doing it and you can't.


People can enjoy doing what they're doing for a living, but let's be honest here...

When it comes to making money in the entertainment industry, Let's Plays are a couple steps above people who are famous for the sake of being famous. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think they make the same sacrifices that many musicians, artists, and authors do in order to make it.

Not to mention that if they were doing commentary on movies or covering other people's songs, they'd have to pay royalties. I don't see how this is any different.


Your argument, by the way, is that video games are stupid and vapid, and in fact can be fully understood by watching them.

That is literally the only way that the idea of watching someone play video games on YouTube is the same as listening to a song placed on YouTube.

You legitimately do not understand the difference between an interactive experience and a non-interactive experience?


What is it with you and twisting someone's words to fit your warped idea of what you want them to be saying? You do it constantly.

And how are you not capable of recognizing that royalties should be paid for this if you're making money? If a game is shown in a movie or TV show royalties are paid, so why should someone making money because people watch him play a game be an exception? Quit twisting people's words so you can try and tell them what they are "literally" saying and use some common sense.
---
PSN/XBL- Nifterific
SSF4AE: Balrog, Evil Ryu | UMvC3: C.Viper/Morrigan/Hulk | MK9: Noob Saibot, Cyber Sub-Zero | SFxTK: Ryu/Guile
#32ShadowMario3Posted 5/16/2013 2:15:12 PM
so64 posted...
ShadowMario3 posted...
The annoying thing is when you're with a network who has an agreement with Nintendo that lets them put their monetize their partners' videos, then Nintendo content ID matches them.

Luckily for me, it's not that big a deal, seeing that they only content ID'd one of my videos that had the Lost Woods theme fading in (through the game, not of my own doing). Hopefully they won't content ID anymore and fix everything with the network...


That's probably Youtube's automated system that does that. On Neogaf, they mentioned that some who were partnered with Nintendo also had that happen as well.


Yeah, that is the case, but when I went on to appeal, saying the music was from the game itself and not me adding it to the video, it got rejected by someone behind Nintendo's Content ID system... Nintendo better sort this out with, at the very least, networks like TGS and Machinima.
---
Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/ShadowMario3
#33Robot_SoopaPosted 5/16/2013 6:56:36 PM
UponADarkThorne posted...
People can enjoy doing what they're doing for a living, but let's be honest here...

When it comes to making money in the entertainment industry, Let's Plays are a couple steps above people who are famous for the sake of being famous. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think they make the same sacrifices that many musicians, artists, and authors do in order to make it.

Not to mention that if they were doing commentary on movies or covering other people's songs, they'd have to pay royalties. I don't see how this is any different.


You'd have a point if they just laid out gameplay videos and that was it.

Most of the high profile ones are comedians or have some kind of schtick. It's no different than being a comedian at a comedy club or having a talk show. Your logic is that comedians and people like Stephen Colbert don't deserve their money because they aren't making sacrifices like musicians, artists and authors.

This is capitalism. People have made money doing far stupider things. People are just jealous they're not creative and/or likable enough to pull something like this off and are stuck behind a desk instead.
#34Bikes-Posted 5/16/2013 7:11:34 PM
so64 posted...
Vyers posted...
I'm never a big fan of saying people are mad at LPers because of jealousy, but man, y'all are pretty jealous.

"They shouldn't be making money off of this". Why? Scientifically-speaking, they should. They go through the motions that result in their editing and uploading and character establishment and channel management earning them money.

"Let's Plays should be a hobby". Why? Why should someone work and do LPs at the same time? A film critic will sometimes do it only because he or she loves the job. Roger Ebert was well-off because he got money for telling people what he thought of things. He seemed pretty into it, almost as though it was his hobby. Conversely, a fan of an LPer supports that LPer because the fan enjoys the commentary, the humour, the skill (or lack thereof), etc. Hell, I supported LPs a lot initially because they helped me recapture the feeling of "oh my god" in games with surprise plot twists, such as Portal and The Walking Dead. That's a service.

And we also need to realize that posting videos of gameplay is different than posting a movie or posting a song. When I watch a movie without purchasing it, or if I listen to a song without purchasing it, I am less likely to want to do so. If I watch a game without purchasing it, there is virtually nothing to dissuade me from wanting to purchase it, beyond sheer mediocrity of the game (which I am fully entitled to verify).

To be fair, however, depending on the type of film critic( visual or written) they have to get permission from the company if they use any footage from the movie they are reviewing. And I think that is the crux here. If those that LP's games and such want to be paid for it, they should get permission from the content holder and/or pay a fee. Otherwise, you get into the issue of fair use and whether or not if the video was made with profit in mind and if it was made for profit in mind is the video a parody or whatnot...It becomes a hassle.


IIRC using clips from a movie is fair use, as long as you don't play half the movie or so. People like the nostalgia critic use film clips all the time and they at least claim it's within fair use (I'm not too familiar with the laws myself though).

Also why yes Nintendo has legal power to do this it's a stupid idea, now partners will stop posting nintendo related stuff which is just depriving nintendo of free advertising for the most part. With plot related IPs I could understand wanting to keep LPs down, but Nintendo focuses mainly on gameplay for most of their series. People will buy games if they look good, I doubt anyone watches a mario LP and decides that now they don't need to buy the game. Nintendo is simply running a previous win-win situation.

Hell I've watched walkthroughs of point and clicks and still bought the game, sure I don't account for everyone, but I have bought quite a few games based solely on that fact that a LP made it look fun.
#35Valkerion757Posted 5/16/2013 7:22:07 PM
Let me clear this up.

They are adding ads. Meaning, When you watch a video on youtube that is a nintendo game, instead of seeing Taco Bell, you will see an ad for the newest nintendo thing. Nintendo gets their money for getting an ad played, like anyone else, and the person who uploaded the video gets their money for having an ad played on their video, if they have that account status.

No money lost on either end, just nintendo signing a deal to have their ads on youtube is all.
---
PSN: Valkerion7 (KoF13:Benimaru, Shen, Daimon ) (BBCS: Litchi/Valkenhayn) ~ (SSF4: Rose/Makoto)~ (GG: Anji, I-No)
XBL: ValkerionSeven (Same games as PS3)
#36Bikes-Posted 5/16/2013 7:32:26 PM
Valkerion757 posted...
Let me clear this up.

They are adding ads. Meaning, When you watch a video on youtube that is a nintendo game, instead of seeing Taco Bell, you will see an ad for the newest nintendo thing. Nintendo gets their money for getting an ad played, like anyone else, and the person who uploaded the video gets their money for having an ad played on their video, if they have that account status.

No money lost on either end, just nintendo signing a deal to have their ads on youtube is all.


"Update - Our friends at GameXplain bring up an interesting point. The blurb above from Nintendo 'doesn't mention that it cuts off all revenue to the creators of any claimed videos.' Apparently that's the situation, with GameXplain already being impacted. To clarify, 'it's only for the claimed videos' right now, but that could change."
#37UponADarkThornePosted 5/16/2013 7:32:41 PM
Vyers posted...
UponADarkThorne posted...
Robot_Soopa posted...
Some real ignorant ass-hats in this topic.

People shouldn't be able to make a living doing something they enjoy because it's not the typical job society wants them to have?

Or maybe you're just jealous that they can do something they love and make money doing it and you can't.


People can enjoy doing what they're doing for a living, but let's be honest here...

When it comes to making money in the entertainment industry, Let's Plays are a couple steps above people who are famous for the sake of being famous. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think they make the same sacrifices that many musicians, artists, and authors do in order to make it.

Not to mention that if they were doing commentary on movies or covering other people's songs, they'd have to pay royalties. I don't see how this is any different.


Your argument, by the way, is that video games are stupid and vapid, and in fact can be fully understood by watching them.

That is literally the only way that the idea of watching someone play video games on YouTube is the same as listening to a song placed on YouTube.

You legitimately do not understand the difference between an interactive experience and a non-interactive experience?


No. My argument is that video games are intellectual property, owned by the company that publishes them, and the said company has the right to protect their investments in anyway they see fit. I despise EA as a company, but if they did this, I'd support their choice. Just like I support authors with a strict "no fan-fiction" stance.

And I well understand the difference between an interactive and non-interactive experience (though calling music non-interactive is depressing as **** especially considering how music can move people emotionally or start a movement) - but that doesn't change the fact that both are intellectual properties that are owned by someone.
---
http://www.last.fm/user/wolfbornson
#38ShadowMario3Posted 5/16/2013 8:29:32 PM
Valkerion757 posted...
No money lost on either end, just nintendo signing a deal to have their ads on youtube is all.


Money is lost on the YouTube Partners who have been able to claim the videos through their network.
---
Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/ShadowMario3
#39FredSavage27Posted 5/16/2013 9:57:37 PM(edited)
There's a difference between a review that uses excerpts from a work to illustrate their point, and a play-through of an entire game.
#40BuretsuPosted 5/16/2013 10:04:12 PM
Why would Nintendo remove THEIR videos? They're making money off of them, after all.
---
no i tried resetting game i even start violent slamming cartridge on wall but all it does make static noise when i put into DS, the problem not fix! -ReconUnit