NeoGAF

CyReN · 06:12 PM

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/developer/rules

Quote:

You may post your Item to a page or website that has advertising, but only if you do not earn any money from that advertising. For example, if you post your video on Youtube or Vimeo and there happens to be an advertisement next to it, then as long as you don't get paid for that advertisement, the fact that there is an advertisement on the page doesn't break these Rules. But enrolling in the Youtube partner program (or other similar programs), where you are entering into an agreement to get paid, is not allowed. On a similar note, if you create and distribute a free app, then you can't earn any money from advertising in that app.

MLG and Rooster Teeth are fine though.

Update from Frankie

Originally Posted by Stinkles:

These guidelines have been out there for months. How many of you are posting from jail? We'll get some clarifying messaging out there, but the legalese won't change, because it's legalese. We'll craft a path through the semantic minefield, however.

Originally Posted by Stinkles:

As I mentioned in the Halo community thread, these rules actually haven't really changed, and even the updated and clarified text has been up there for months. I assume somebody just noticed this and posted this morning because it sort of blew up. This has always been the Legal status for the IP (and MOST IPs in fact), and as you also already know, nobody is being sued, or in jail, etc etc etc.

The language isn't designed to stop kids streaming their games, or covering their costs, it's designed to stop big companies from using somebody else's IP to run a business.

We'll put together some language that will help community people navigate this easily, and give people workarounds.

Interfectum · (10-09-2012, 04:41 PM)

diamount · (10-09-2012, 04:41 PM)

If Activision did a similar rule on COD then that'll be hilarious.

Wario64 · (10-09-2012, 04:42 PM)

That's stupid.

Recarpo · (10-09-2012, 04:42 PM)

I assume this would also mean that streamers who get ad revenue on twitch wouldn't be able to do that anymore?

CrunchinJelly · (10-09-2012, 04:42 PM)

How are Rooster Teeth okay? They're a YT partner. I bet the Lion's share of their viewers come from their YT channel.

Anyway, this doesn't mean anything until MS enforces it.

Avallon · (10-09-2012, 04:43 PM)

I hope this doesn't become a trend... I like YouTube.

Lactose_Intolerant · (10-09-2012, 04:43 PM)

Guild Wars 2 has the same rule. Too many people are making money off streaming and youtube for these companies to not get paid.

Interfectum · (10-09-2012, 04:45 PM)

Originally Posted by Lactose_Intolerant:

Guild Wars 2 has the same rule. Too many people are making money off streaming and youtube for these companies to not get paid.

Oh no... too many fans are making money off freely advertising these company's games!

The Grim Heaper · (10-09-2012, 04:46 PM)

Originally Posted by CyReN:

MLG and Rooster Teeth are fine though.

Poor Machinima.

JJD · (10-09-2012, 04:47 PM)

Man a lot of youtube pros are going to be pissed about this.

Shiggy · (10-09-2012, 04:48 PM)

Reasonable!?

Perkel · (10-09-2012, 04:49 PM)

Originally Posted by Lactose_Intolerant:

Guild Wars 2 has the same rule. Too many people are making money off streaming and youtube for these companies to not get paid.

Sheesh and free advertisment is bad you know.

I bet my liver that if youtube and twitch would rule out all non official gaming videos most of companies including MS would shit bricks and plea to Youtube to change rule.

Something like this was probably included by some lawyer who didn't have anything to do with gaming or PR

A_S · (10-09-2012, 04:54 PM)

Why would they do this?
Next up: "You can't review our game on your site if it has advertisements."
Suddenly I want to buy MS games only "used", if at all.

maquiladora · (10-09-2012, 04:55 PM)

Makes no fucking sense.

They don't gain anything by doing this and they aren't losing anything as it stands.

smh

chubigans · (10-09-2012, 04:55 PM)

Originally Posted by maquiladora:

Makes no fucking sense.

They don't gain anything by doing this and they aren't losing anything as it stands.

smh

Follow the money. [/gerstmann]

Massa · (10-09-2012, 04:56 PM)

Originally Posted by Lactose_Intolerant:

Guild Wars 2 has the same rule. Too many people are making money off streaming and youtube for these companies to not get paid.

Unless the streamers are pirating the game then these companies were already paid.

Lothars · (10-09-2012, 04:56 PM)

Originally Posted by Interfectum:

Oh no... too many fans are making money off freely advertising these company's games!

Yeah I agree it's messed up, I don't know how MS or NCsoft thinks this is a good idea.

TheVoidDragon · (10-09-2012, 04:57 PM)

This is stupid. A lot of people are going to be annoyed with this.

inky · (10-09-2012, 04:58 PM)

Originally Posted by Recarpo:

I assume this would also mean that streamers who get ad revenue on twitch wouldn't be able to do that anymore?

Streamers usually have agreements with companies (like Machinima) who license them the right to stream and monetize their content for certain games.

With twitch.tv and similar sites being so popular now, they just want a piece of the ad revenue pie.

borius · (10-09-2012, 04:58 PM)

what about people who review the game?

Castor Krieg · (10-09-2012, 04:59 PM)

Originally Posted by maquiladora:

Makes no fucking sense.

They don't gain anything by doing this and they aren't losing anything as it stands.

smh

They are losing "potential" revenue, which some hack in Microsoft thinks is important enough to antagonize the community. Fuck yeah, so many bad managers, my career prospects look better every day!

diffusionx · (10-09-2012, 04:59 PM)

Originally Posted by Massa:

Unless the streamers are pirating the game then these companies were already paid.

Buying a game doesn't give you an unfettered right to make money off it. I pay for my cable sub, doesn't mean I can charge admission to watch the World Series (that's the point of that "expressed written consent" boilerplate they play during every game).

I don't think that putting Youtube ads next to a Halo 4 teabag video is something that MS gets upset about, but it's their right.

Interfectum · 05:01 PM

Dear fan,

Thanks for creating a popular Youtube video featuring you playing Halo 4. With all those millions of hits you probably sold a few copies of our game to users who would have otherwise not bought it. Thanks.

Unfortunately it looks like you might have made some money off this video. So, uh, please remove it or we will sue the fuck out of you, your family and your cat.

Your Gamertag is dumb,

Microsoft Legal

P.S. - Halo 4 DLC is out next month!

Jason Raize '75 - '04 · (10-09-2012, 05:00 PM)

Gameplay videos with commentary are perhaps the most effective advertising tool a game can have.

Freshmaker · (10-09-2012, 05:01 PM)

Originally Posted by CyReN:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/developer/rules

This also comes after Halo 4 not having Spectator mode, as someone who makes content for the Halo series this HURTS us a lot.

MLG and Rooster Teeth are fine though.

Why would they have any legal leg to stand on for this?

Polishin8r · (10-09-2012, 05:01 PM)

Originally Posted by maquiladora:

Makes no fucking sense.

They don't gain anything by doing this and they aren't losing anything as it stands.

smh

they could loose potential sales, perhaps someone might buy the game because of fan made trailer, or some cool gameplay

BladeoftheImmortal · (10-09-2012, 05:03 PM)

I'm going todo it anyway.

Foshy · (10-09-2012, 05:04 PM)

Is there any reason why Microsoft should be opposed to this? I seriously don't get how this could hurt them in any way.

jediyoshi · (10-09-2012, 05:04 PM)

Originally Posted by cjelly:

How are Rooster Teeth okay? They're a YT partner. I bet the Lion's share of their viewers come from their YT channel.

They directly partnered with MS and got the rights for licensing eons ago, especially otherwise they wouldn't exactly be selling episodes on the Xbox Marketplace. And specifically for RvB it's probably evened up, they deliberately delay the release of their new episodes to be on YT for a while after it's premiered on their site.

Castor Krieg · (10-09-2012, 05:04 PM)

Originally Posted by Freshmaker:

Why would they have any legal leg to stand on for this?

Because they give you a licence to use the software which prohibits you making any money of it. You accept the licence when you install the game on PC/boot up the game on consoles.

BibiMaghoo · (10-09-2012, 05:04 PM)

The death of playthrough videos.

Make some more dollar from those that want to watch the game instead of buy it, for whatever reason.
They can buy the game like everyone else.

Metroid Hunter · (10-09-2012, 05:05 PM)

Their game and their IP. They can do whatever they want with it, including stopping people from posting "Let's Play" and the like on YouTube.

And quite a bit of people actually play pirated games on those channels.

Danny 117 · (10-09-2012, 05:08 PM)

You always had to ask before you could monetise Halo videos anyway. Just now the answer is always no! I'm quite happy just posting Halo videos for my own enjoyment and the enjoyment of others.

What's this about no spectator mode in Halo 4?

bkfount · (10-09-2012, 05:10 PM)

Originally Posted by Foshy:

Is there any reason why Microsoft should be opposed to this? I seriously don't get how this could hurt them in any way.

They're a giant soulless corporation that couldn't give a shit about the kind of people that helped establish the xbox brand in the first place.

I'm bailing on them next gen.

snap0212 · (10-09-2012, 05:10 PM)

Originally Posted by Metroid Hunter:

Their game and their IP. They can do whatever they want with it, including stopping people from posting "Let's Play" and the like on YouTube.

They don't do that. They just want to make sure that if someone earns money from the videos being on YouTube, it's not the person uploading but they themselves.

Other companies just send you a copyright noticed when you upload playthroughs of their games - even demos. Stupid.

dygiT · (10-09-2012, 05:10 PM)

This guy who just made $4.25 off of YouTube videos in the past year is fucking up our fiscal year expectations. We need to put a stop to this tyranny. Who knows what he'll be capable of once he makes enough to register Hypercam?

Carl · (10-09-2012, 05:11 PM)

Oh no, how dare these people advertise your game and get paid for it.

LiK · (10-09-2012, 05:12 PM)

LAME

maquiladora · (10-09-2012, 05:14 PM)

Originally Posted by Metroid Hunter:

Their game and their IP. They can do whatever they want with it, including stopping people from posting "Let's Play" and the like on YouTube.

And quite a bit of people actually play pirated games on those channels.

The price of potentially a few pirated games versus the free advertising from millions of hits?

Also, this doesn't stop those people pirating those games anyway.

BruiserBear · (10-09-2012, 05:16 PM)

I cannot comprehend why they'd implement such a rule. They are not hurt one bit by the people who make Halo videos.

Originally Posted by bkfount:

They're a giant soulless corporation that couldn't give a shit about the kind of people that helped establish the xbox brand in the first place.

I'm bailing on them next gen.

This kind of nonsense makes me want to do the same.

jwhit28 · (10-09-2012, 05:16 PM)

How can Microsoft justify charging MLG and other companies for rights to stream or make Halo content if they don't at least try to stop anyone else?

Xanathus · (10-09-2012, 05:19 PM)

Originally Posted by jediyoshi:

They directly partnered with MS and got the rights for licensing eons ago, especially otherwise they wouldn't exactly be selling episodes on the Xbox Marketplace. And specifically for RvB it's probably evened up, they deliberately delay the release of their new episodes to be on YT for a while after it's premiered on their site.

Sounds like Rooster Teeth and other direct partners are getting exclusive access to these videos, which means more viewers and ad money for them. Which also means partnering agreements become more valuable and MS can charge more. Follow the money indeed.

grimshawish · (10-09-2012, 05:19 PM)

Originally Posted by Jason Raize '75 - '04:

Gameplay videos with commentary are perhaps the most effective advertising tool a game can have.

WHAT? Don't be stupid, look at all the videos that Dayz gets! It doesn't even chart whilst a game like Arma II is first for months on months!

Seriously though this is a bit stupid; I think some people are worrying that single player content is being removed with some people following the story online (some do do this tbf) and sometimes deciding to not pick up the game or wait for the next.

Personally I think this is a tiny group of people, and they probably can't afford the game (will maybe pick up the franchise in the future being a big positive) at that moment; so trying to stop this is massively counter productive as we know for a fact that people see content they like and use that to decide if they want a game. Show someone enjoying your game and others will think they can enjoy it too.

Didn't realise they'd got rid Spectator Mode, is forge gone too then? Thats just stupid; it was the only 'excellent' thing about Halo 3 multiplayer (outside of maybe 2 excellent maps) and really added to the experience to set it apart from the modern war shooters.

Am slightly worried that some issues seen in some videos to do with things like view distances popping in and not being at all seamless or distant are maybe a reason for this. I just don't see why you'd do this unless your worried about a RE6 situation; to stop people so easily seeing and instantly agreeing with the issues instead forcing them to buy it to see if the reviews are true.

Ofc this could just be the worry of an RE6 situation by suits and NOT a reflection on the game, but I do wonder if wondering about how to deal with an RE6 situation has affected them.

JesseZao · (10-09-2012, 05:20 PM)

They don't want free ads from "youtube/twitch stars" playing their game?

Sixfortyfive · (10-09-2012, 05:21 PM)

This only makes sense if MS is actively trying to monetize streaming themselves.

Otherwise... lol.

Sean · (10-09-2012, 05:21 PM)

Originally Posted by Freshmaker:

Why would they have any legal leg to stand on for this?

It's their content being used, they can enforce any kind of rules they'd like really. As an example, just because someone buys The Avengers on Blu-Ray doesn't give them the right to upload scenes from the movie to YouTube and then monetize it.

With that said, there should be a better system in place. Work something out where both Microsoft and the video creator get a cut of the advertising revenue, that way everybody wins.

jbug617 · (10-09-2012, 05:22 PM)

Apparently some people on twitter says this not really new news. You always had to get permission to monetize Halo.

fly high ~ayunite~ · (10-09-2012, 05:22 PM)

Don't support this.

BlazinAm · (10-09-2012, 05:23 PM)

Originally Posted by Interfectum:

Where is that from?