Support NeoGAF

[zma1013]

I don't get it

Nintendo can't put ads on this video and monetise it because it has other company's games in it that Nintendo doesnt own.

 

[Tregard]

Fans of The Genius Game will know this as an "Extreme Ways" move.

 

[Drencrom]

Also known as the Three Stooges Effect:

It has been said a thousand times before, but there really is a Simpsons gif/pic for everything.

 

[redcrayon]

I don't get it

If multiple people want a cut of the video's monetised value through a copyright claim, none of them get one as soon as one of them flags it as 'non-monetised', I think.

Edit: explained better above.

 

[RecRoulette]

One small detail missing: Kotaku is now profiting off of Jim's work. They are the real masterminds here.

Really though, smart workaround for a shitty system.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Hahaha, well done. However, new changes will go into effect surely when this catches on.

 

[Occam]

The time has come for YouTube alternatives, anyway. Forced, unskippable 6s commercials embedded in the video stream? Screw you.
This is what happens when you give too much power to a single company.

 

[The Flash]

Smart. Very smart.

 

[Mindlog]

Well earned shit eating grinned. A lot of those going around this week.

 

[Spaghetti]

Came for this gif and was not disappointed.

Smart move, Jim. I got a real kick out of it.

 

[Alienous]

Hahaha, well done. However, new changes will go into effect surely when this catches on.

Well, it's not a flawless system. Nobody gets any money, including Jim. The catch here is that Jim is willing to give ad revenue up for a better viewing experience.

 

[Corronchilejano]

Hahaha, well done. However, new changes will go into effect surely when this catches on.

Will it ever though?

How many people upload non monetized videos and can also sneak in footage that will surely be claimed?

 

[anexanhume]

Yeah, so if he knows he's going to get flagged anyway (by showing literally seconds worth of footage, as some companies like Nintendo are just that consistently notorious) he might as well not have people make money off of his work who have no ethical claim to monetising it but are able to cos Content ID is a bag of shite.

It's a great move but the cynic in me just says they'll fix Content ID and make it worse.

 

[Aztechnology]

Jim Sterling admitting what Nintendon't.

 

[eyeball_kid]

Has anyone tried to sue Nintendo for this? I don't see how showing footage for review or commentary purposes would not fall under Fair Use.

 

[DannyDanger]

Amazing

 

[ibyea]

Hahaha! Awesome!

 

[Jotamide]

Well done Jim. Fuck Content ID leechers.

 

[C.Olimar788]

The time has come for YouTube alternatives, anyway. Forced, unskippable 6s commercials embedded in the video stream? Screw you.
This is what happens when you give too much power to a single company.

Personally, I see no problem with the ads when at least a healthy majority of the revenue generated is going to the video's creator. When companies can just jump in and leech money off of things they have no right to, well...

In any case, I hope that this sort of thing continues to gain steam and YouTube finally fixes their broken bullshit.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Well, it's not a flawless system. Nobody gets any money, including Jim. The catch here is that Jim is willing to give ad revenue up for a better viewing experience.

Agreed.

Will it ever though?

How many people upload non monetized videos and can also sneak in footage that will surely be claimed?

Not sure, but they always like to take away nice things, lol.

 

[NoFaceNico]

That's awesome! I always wondered if this would work! I figured the companies would give up rather than fight each other. I didn't expect that one of those companies could (or would want to) take away monetization and that their choice overrides the others. This is great news!

 

[Aztechnology]

Are we not talking about the content of the video at all? Like how this is a pervasive issue with Nintendo's design philosophy now? I mean it's awesome he did the copyright stuff. But that's only a small fraction of the video. Or should I wait for the actual video thread?

 

[Sinatar]

Are we not talking about the content of the video at all? Like how this is a pervasive issue with Nintendo's design philosophy now? I mean it's awesome he did the copyright stuff. But that's only a small fraction of the video. Or should I wait for the actual video thread?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1211489

 

[Steroyd]

Has anyone tried to sue Nintendo for this? I don't see how showing footage for review or commentary purposes would not fall under Fair Use.

That was the whole point of the #WTFU (Where's The Fair Use) that was doing rounds among youtubers a couple of months ago.

 

[Mahonay]

This is why we need people like Jim Sterling.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

Are we not talking about the content of the video at all? Like how this is a pervasive issue with Nintendo's design philosophy now? I mean it's awesome he did the copyright stuff. But that's only a small fraction of the video. Or should I wait for the actual video thread?

We already had a thread for this week for thsi jimquisition.

 

[Mechazawa]

I'm a confused about what's happening. He claims Nintendo would want to monetize the video, but the reason he's able to use the Erasure music is because Nintendo(And Take Two) flagged the video as not to be monetized?

 

[CertifiedFP]

It'll work until the Megacorps demand it work no more and Youtube devises a system to make sure all corporate parties involved get their way.

I mean, I could easily come up with a workaround in which all monetizing parties get a split of the ad revenue based on proportion of claimed content.

 

[Shotgun Kiss]

Well, it's not a flawless system. Nobody gets any money, including Jim. The catch here is that Jim is willing to give ad revenue up for a better viewing experience.

Jim does earn money. He just earns earns it via Patreon; not ads.

 

[Aztechnology]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1211489

We already had a thread for this week for thsi jimquisition.

Oh thanks guys, I typed Jim Sterling into the search instead of Jimquisition. That would explain it.

 

[Fushichou187]

Very clever. It'll be interesting to see how Youtube maneuvers to satisfy the corps. Will they ban the use of inserting copyrighted content from two different companies in the same video to prevent its content ID system from melting?

The idea of corps being able to claim a "portion" of content to be monetized piecemeal would get mind-bogglingly convoluted real quick.

 

[Zaventem]

Can they still do a takedown?

 

[Nere]

I have a feeling tomorrow that video will say taken down due to copyright infringment.

 

[NoFaceNico]

I'm a confused about what's happening. He claims Nintendo would want to monetize the video, but the reason he's able to use the Erasure music is because Nintendo(And Take Two) flagged the video as not to be monetized?

You're right. I wonder why they didn't request to monetize in the claim. I just checked a video of mine that was claimed by Nintendo last year and they did monetize it.

 

[Zetta]

My life is complete now, thank you Jim fucking Sterling, son!.

 

[freethoughtbubble]

Jim's a god damn genius.

 

[giant_frying_pan]

Jim, you brilliant bastard.

 

[Hale-XF11]

Awesome, I hope it catches on with other youtube channels.

 

[Calabi]

It's a great move but the cynic in me just says they'll fix Content ID and make it worse.

Probably if they are allied with the other corporations and wanting to please them. But otherwise, changing it, the work required doesnt really benefit Youtube. And it's not like the companies can force them to change it, they really would have to go to courts to fight one another.

edit: Thinking about it couldn't this be used as a form of protest. If a load of popular Youtubers did this for a few days or week on all their videos, they could cause Google to lose a lot of money in ad revenues.

 

[Mass Effect]

This is a very smart move, but unfortunately, I think it will eventually pan out like this:

 

[MMaRsu]

Probably if they are allied with the other corporations and wanting to please them. But otherwise, changing it, the work required doesnt really benefit Youtube. And it's not like the companies can force them to change it, they really would have to go to courts to fight one another.

Do you think? They will just give em a big sack of money and ask youtube to 'correct' this mistake

 

[blastprocessor]

Man that dance at the end made me chuckle tick up.

 

[VariantX]

Hopefully this catches on an will light a fire under their butts to fix their garbage system. Until then, if you want that sweet, sweet ad revenue you'll have to fight it out in Jim' s blood-soaked gladiator pit.

 

[Imperfected]

I'm a confused about what's happening. He claims Nintendo would want to monetize the video, but the reason he's able to use the Erasure music is because Nintendo(And Take Two) flagged the video as not to be monetized?

There is no provision for multiple companies monetizing a single video, as far as I'm aware. Therefore is more than one company tries to claim a video, it becomes a fight between those companies and their armies of lawyers, none of whom are particularly likely to be interested in the expense for the sake of meager YouTube ad pay.

In other words, he's not allowed to use the Erasure music any more than he's allowed to use Nintendo game footage, but doing both means that neither rights holder can easily and casually claim the video without having to deal with the other. (This is, in fact, why he also used several other types of footage highly likely to be claimed: to increase the chances of multiple claimants.)

This isn't really a solution to the Fair Use problem, it's just a way of sticking it to especially greedy companies that try to monetize even ad-free videos.

 

[II-Vanguard-II]

Jim you brilliant bastard

 

[Gnome Scat]

Good man.

 

[magawolaz]

Ahahah, brilliant!

 

[Lashley]

I love you Jim, you magnificent bastard.

 

[Abounder]

He's the hero that the gametube industry needs. Brilliant!

 

[dreamfall]

THANK GOD FOR HIM