• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

AngryJoe receives a Nintendo copyright claim. Hope they enjoyed the ad revenue; Done

R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
xaszatm said:
The ironic thing is that they exact same thing can be said to Nintendo. Nintendo, quite frankly, doesn't need Angry Joe as they already have channels that will create Nintendo related gaming content that match or exceed Angry Joe's. So, in that similar vein, Nintendo isn't losing any sleep for the Angry Joe's views because that is a "drop in a bucket" compared to what they get from all the other people willing to do modern Nintendo content.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that's shortsighted, since the public that watches AJ is the kind of public Nintendo should be interested, aka non-nintendo fans.

I'm pretty sure Nintendo is happy to have GX to create 100% Nintendo videos, is a shame that the public in those videos are probably people that alreayd has Nintendo hardware.

You want your products to get more awareness, not less. That's why when Marvel launches a new movie they want to be everywhere (magazines, billboards, TV, ....) and not on selected places.

Red Devil said:
You mean youtubers that are unaffected otherwise? Yeah sure.
Click to expand...

PewDiePie was unnafected and still complained.
 
V

Vena

Member
Marcel said:
Maybe it's a big whoop for Nintendo but that's not really anything to celebrate compared to personality-driven and more interactive streams on Twitch which definitely draw more than 100k.
Click to expand...

He's talking about live, concurrent hits.

Not even LoL personalities draw in that many concurrent live viewers. If you want to look at Nintendo Direct "views" they are well and above 100k. Like orders of magnitude higher, and they aren't even consolidated in one place as you have people viewing specific trailers or breakdowns over watching the whole thing later.
 
M

Marcel

Member
xaszatm said:
? What the hell does that have to do with anything? If you're referring to my earlier remarks, I was mocking how hyperbolic these threads have gotten. I'm sorry that I wasn't very clear as I'm simply unfunny.
Click to expand...

I'm not singling you out really, just noting the amount of insanity brought into these conversations by some unfortunate examples of Nintendo fans.
 
stargateheaven

stargateheaven

Member
Can i ask something?

We're not fine with a youtuber getting paid to video review a game...

but we're fine for IGN to video review a game?

why is that again?
 
C

Chindogg

Member
Marcel said:
I'm not singling you out really, just noting the amount of insanity brought into these conversations by some unfortunate examples of Nintendo fans.
Click to expand...

The same can be said for the insane defense of Youtube personalities, especially those who seemingly deliberately posted a video to have it flagged so they can complain about it.

stargateheaven said:
Can i ask something?

We're not fine with a youtuber getting paid to video review a game...

but we're fine for IGN to video review a game?

why is that again?
Click to expand...

Reviews != Let's Plays

ShinUltramanJ said:
Wow, you seem to have intimate knowledge of what people are and aren't playing.
Click to expand...

It's been stated several times that AJ and PDP both barely have played any Nintendo games. This is all a wash of controversy for no reason.
 
SmokedMeat

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
antonz said:
Variety Youtubers rarely ever played Nintendo games anyways which is why all the bitching and moaning is hilarious. They never played them anyways but hey controversy drives clicks and views and that is all they want anyways
Click to expand...

Wow, you seem to have intimate knowledge of what people are and aren't playing.
 
M

Marcel

Member
Chindogg said:
The same can be said for the insane defense of Youtube personalities, especially those who seemingly deliberately posted a video to have it flagged so they can complain about it.
Click to expand...

I didn't disagree with anyone who said that AJ's motivations are partially driven by the money he isn't getting for his Nintendo video. I disagree with people who bring crank bullshit like anti-nintendo agenda and controversy for clicks conspiracies straight out of a Kotaku in Action post.
 
V

vinnygambini

Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
stargateheaven said:
Can i ask something?

We're not fine with a youtuber getting paid to video review a game...

but we're fine for IGN to video review a game?

why is that again?
Click to expand...

Reviews != Let's Plays

Furthermore, IGN pays a license to Nintendo to have their content featured on their website (exclusive coverage, among others).

Different situation entirely.
 
X

xaszatm

Banned
Relaxed Muscle said:
I'm pretty sure that's shortsighted, since the public that watches AJ is the kind of public Nintendo should be interested, aka non-nintendo fans.

I'm pretty sure Nintendo is happy to have GX to create 100% Nintendo videos, is a shame that the public in those videos are probably people that alreayd has Nintendo hardware.

You want your products to get more awareness, not less. That's why when Marvel launches a new movie they want to be everywhere (magazines, billboards, TV, ....) and not on selected places.
Click to expand...

While this is certainly true, we cannot pretend that many gaming personalities tend to stick with what they know. Angry Joe is mostly an Xbox/PC gamer. Similar to how TheRunawayGuys is a primarily Nintendo channel. Even if they don't stick to consoles (or games such as Yogcast and Minecraft), they will stick with certain patterns. It is still completely disingenuous to state that all these personalities as "free publicity" if they aren't likely to create videos around Nintendo to begin with.

But even with this in mind, Nintendo does go after other non-core audiences. They just don't focus on the gamer audiences. Remember Miyamoto appearing in a cooking Youtube channel? Or other channels? I'd say a focus on that is far more important than other gaming channels. That actually focuses on getting non-gamers into gaming, rather than gamers into MORE gaming.
 
O

Orayn

Member
Relaxed Muscle said:
What about GiantBomb?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure GiantBomb have actual industry contacts and work out the details for what parts of games they are and aren't allowed to show in Quick Looks, etc. and how that stuff is monetized.

In an ideal world that's how MCNs like Machinima and Polaris would work, by handling this sort of thing for YouTubers in exchange for a certain cut of revenue, but evidently they don't have arrangements with Nintendo.
 
M

mgs2master2

Banned
olimpia84 said:
I thought Nintendo was cool with people doing this as long as you follow their guidelines and share the revenue? Is this a case of Joe being a selfish asshole and wanting the whole pie instead of a few slices?
Click to expand...

it is almost as if Joe knew what he was doing and wanted to make a huge rant on it. INB4 another rant video that is monetized.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
Chindogg said:
Well stating it's a conspiracy to drive clicks while not disagreeing that it's motivated by driving clicks is a bit contradictory.



What about them? All their videos are still up.
Click to expand...

They don't monetize them on Youtube, but they get money with subscriptions, do you think they should give money to Nintendo?
 
M

Marcel

Member
Chindogg said:
Well stating it's a conspiracy to drive clicks while not disagreeing that it's motivated by driving clicks is a bit contradictory.
Click to expand...

He's mad about the money while not being purposefully malevolent. Again, I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand.
 
C

Chindogg

Member
Beelzebufo said:
Is it? Seems to be the same thing.
Click to expand...

If you're referring to reviews vs Let's Plays, no they're not.

Reviews are snippets of the game to review it's content, protected under fair use.

Let's Plays are full videos of large cuts of the game, if not the entire game itself with commentary included. Those aren't protected under fair use.

Marcel said:
He's mad about the money while not being purposefully malevolent. Again, I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand.
Click to expand...

Purposefully malevolent is debatable.

Relaxed Muscle said:
They don't monetize them on Youtube, but they get money with subscriptions, do you think they should give money to Nintendo?
Click to expand...

They're not making ad revenue off the videos themselves, but the memberships off the site which includes forums, other videos, written reviews, etc. It's not the videos themselves that's making the money.

CambriaRising said:
Giantbomb has their own web player and CBS to back them up. They have had YouTube content ID things happen before on content posted there but they don't really care all that much because the bulk of their traffic is on the site itself.
Click to expand...

This too.
 
P

Palculator

Unconfirmed Member
Orayn said:
I'm pretty sure GiantBomb have actual industry contacts and work out the details for what parts of games they are and aren't allowed to show in Quick Looks, etc. and how that stuff is monetized.

In an ideal world that's how MCNs like Machinima and Polaris would work, by handling this sort of thing for YouTubers in exchange for a certain cut of revenue, but evidently they don't have arrangements with Nintendo.
Click to expand...

But Nintendo's partnership was not intended for MCNs, was it? It was for independent channels that want to monetize their Nintendo content. I've seen monetized Machinima videos featuring Nintendo games, I'm sure they worked some deal for that.
 
C

call_kotaku

Member
xaszatm said:
The ironic thing is that they exact same thing can be said to Nintendo. Nintendo, quite frankly, doesn't need Angry Joe as they already have channels that will create Nintendo related gaming content that match or exceed Angry Joe's. So, in that similar vein, Nintendo isn't losing any sleep for the Angry Joe's views because that is a "drop in a bucket" compared to what they get from all the other people willing to do modern Nintendo content.
Click to expand...

Angry Joe by himself may represent a very small portion of the coverage, but Nintendo's policies have basically made it impossible for anyone who already makes a living covering games on youtube to justify any time spent playing their games. I'd argue that it represents a source of direct marketing and community good will that Nintendo can't rightfully ignore, especially in their current market position. Joe is just the one stirring up controversy, while the other big names just never bothered with Nintendo stuff.

If Nintendo weren't already the aloof uncle of the gaming space, as a fan I'd be asking why they aren't paying Minecraft let's players to play Nintendo games, since it's a direct route to a massive young fanbase, and way cheaper than running a TV ad. I don't care if Nintendo markets via a medium I don't care about; Nintendo doesn't need to market to me because I already buy their games, the problem is the millions of people who don't.
 
B

BY2K

Membero Americo
Here's the email I sent to Nintendo when they first announced their Niconico program.

Hi,

Me and a colleague have a project to start a channel commentating on our live footage of games, with the idea to focus on games made and published on Nintendo platforms. However, there has been some frictions these past months between Nintendo and the content creators, as user created videos, mainly on Youtube, were taken down or marked as intellectual property by Nintendo, which scared potential content creators away.

Recently however, Nintendo of Japan announced their support of content creators and even announced a reward program for channels with great performance on the niconico video website. Does Nintendo of America have a similar view and is also supportive toward content creator on website such as Youtube? Would it be possible to create such videos without fear of having our channel taken down?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Hello Jonathan,

Thank you for contacting Nintendo of America. I would like to first apologize for the delay in our response. We have been especially busy and thank you for your patience as we reply.
Regarding your email, I can appreciate your concerns regarding this announcement made by Nintendo Co., Ltd. Your comments regarding this subject are important to us; as such, I have documented your email and will share it with the relevant departments at Nintendo, so your feedback is heard.
At this time, Nintendo of America hasn't made any similar announcements. Please keep in mind, Nintendo subsidiaries from other regions are separate and distinct from ours. If or when we make any announcements regarding this topic, we'll be sure to share all of the details at our website (http://nintendo.com).
As for your questions, while we are grateful for all the requests we receive for permission to use Nintendo properties, we receive thousands of requests and do not have adequate staffing to review them all. Therefore, our general policy is to decline all such requests, no exceptions. I realize this isn’t what you wanted to hear and thank you for understanding.
Although we are unable to grant permission, use of Nintendo properties without our formal permission may still be allowed depending on the circumstances. You are encouraged to seek your own legal counsel if you have any questions about whether your particular proposed use is permitted without Nintendo's authorization. This is not a comment on whether we believe your particular proposed use is permissible—Nintendo cannot provide legal advice.

Sincerely,

Nintendo of America Inc.
Curtis Neal
Click to expand...

Not much of an answer, but I tried. Ignore the part about me starting a channel, it didn't go through because of unforeseen circumstances. And that was BEFORE they announced the Youtube program where they take 60-70% of the revenue.
 
C

Christine

Member
REDDRAGON said:
Thanks for the response.

I was just trying to say that the posts that more or less go along the lines of "Oh no, he gets paid to play video games. What will he do now?" aren't exactly seeing the whole picture, because producing, filming, and editing the videos does take a lot of hard work. Perhaps I didn't convey my message all that well then.
Click to expand...

None of us can claim unbroken success on that count. His work shouldn't be dismissed, but it doesn't entitle him to profit or distribution rights, only the ability to restrict outside reproduction of his output.

None of the realities of the system serve to absolve Nintendo of the responsibility of their own choices, however. Anyone taking the stance that Nintendo's actions are justified because they are legally available to them under copyright is being pretty fucking ridiculous.
 
C

Chindogg

Member
Marcel said:
As are Nintendo's strategies from their weak position. Thanks for this stating the obvious exercise that I'm part of on Page 56.
Click to expand...

I guess it's a matter of opinion.

I just find it funny that Joe willingly posts a video that he knows will get CID'ed (a feature that has nothing to do with Nintendo) then blames Nintendo for it.

Christine said:
None of us can claim unbroken success on that count. His work shouldn't be dismissed, but it doesn't entitle him to profit or distribution rights, only the ability to restrict outside reproduction of his output.

None of the realities of the system serve to absolve Nintendo of the responsibility of their own choices, however. Anyone taking the stance that Nintendo's actions are justified because they are legally available to them under copyright is being pretty fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...

That's fair. I personally feel that developers do have the right to have some kind of say in the content created with their IP, creatively and monetarily. Some disagree with that notion, and that's fine. But I don't fault any person or corporation for asking a cut and/or review of the content before it goes live.
 
C

Camoxide

Unconfirmed Member
BY2K said:
Here's the email I sent to Nintendo when they first announced their Niconico program.





Not much of an answer, but I tried. Ignore the part of my starting a channel, it didn't go through because of unforeseen circumstances. And that was BEFORE they announced the Youtube program where they take 60-70% of the revenue.
Click to expand...

Just looks like a standard paragraphs response.
 
P

Palculator

Unconfirmed Member
BY2K said:
Not much of an answer, but I tried. Ignore the part about me starting a channel, it didn't go through because of unforeseen circumstances. And that was BEFORE they announced the Youtube program where they take 60-70% of the revenue.
Click to expand...

Other way around. 30-40%.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
Orayn said:
Revenue sharing like YouTube, maybe not, but you can bet there's someone who talks to Nintendo and hammers out the details on what parts of games they'll be showing in upcoming videos and how.
Click to expand...

They did several Let's Plays, full games in which they use a subscription model instead of ad revenue model. I'm just asking since people says Let's Plays are out of the question regarding getting money out of them, how that works in the case of GB.

Because they have CBS backing they have more rights than Youtubers?
 
M

Moon_frogger

Member
Village said:
* looks a wii u sales*

Maybe they should totally start caring I don't know.

maybe they should acknowledge the current landscape of video game entertainment I don't know.

Or this the thread where we pretend nintendo is totally ok, because we are going to smugly jealous of the person on the video making money.

This isn't directed at you mind you, a lot of people in this thread
Click to expand...
Look, If angryjoeshow hasn't tipped the scales to a Nintendo wii u utopia by now, I seriously doubt losing his exposure is going to hurt them much. Don't their games still sell in the 10's of millions? I think they'll be ok. Just a hunch of course. Also, I'm pretty sure his petty, greed fueled tirades have given them more exposure than his normal videos would anyway.
 
O

Orayn

Member
Relaxed Muscle said:
They did several Let's Plays, full games in which they use a subscription model instead of ad revenue model. I'm just asking since people says Let's Plays are out of the question regarding getting money out of them, how that works in the case of GB.

Because they have CBS backing they have more rights than Youtubers?
Click to expand...

Well yeah, CBS is a pretty big media outlet who can get in direct contact with publishers at a moment's notice. They're not operating within the framework of someone else's site and rules like YouTube.
 
T

Tom Nook Sawyer

Member
vinnygambini said:
Reviews != Let's Plays

Furthermore, IGN pays a license to Nintendo to have their content featured on their website (exclusive coverage, among others).

Different situation entirely.
Click to expand...

Cite? I keep seeing people claim this without ever seeing any evidence. I doubt IGN's paying developers anything
 
M

Marcel

Member
Red Devil said:
Another opinion on the case, I'm just gonna leave this here, viewer discretion reccomended: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACxVUcCq4Lc
Click to expand...

uEAoCto.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Last of Us knock off removed from Nintendo eShop as Sony stakes copyright claim
News
44
3K
Kerotan replied
Card game developer says it paid an 'AI artist' $90,000 to generate card art because 'no one comes close to the quality he delivers'
Drama Game Dev 2 3
119
9K
Caffeine replied
Phil Spencer interview - Says that their intent is for all Xbox games, including Call of Duty, to be available on Xbox Game Pass Day One
2 3
102
8K
Kenneth Haight replied
Amazon Prime Day 2023 - Best Deals On Nintendo Switch Games, Consoles, Accessories, Micro SD Cards And More
10
2K
Gambit2483 replied
  • Poll
[DFC Intelligence] Does Nintendo Have the Best Online Subscription Service?
23
2K
Bruno_Arrais85 replied
Top Bottom