-
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.
Massive Gaming YouTube Channels Getting 100s of Flagged Videos Continuously
- Thread starter zakislam
- Start date
crazyrabbits
Banned
The problem is that there's no real way to differentiate what is and isn't "fair use", at least at present. The algorithm simply checks its database against snippets of material, and if that material matches (regardless of how long it is), the system flags it.
This has disturbing implications for the entire site. I'd go so far as to say it could destroy the very fabric of Youtube.
This goes far beyond video games. Every video with a snippet of a music track owned by a company, regardless of its intent, will likely be flagged under this process. Under this system, everyone is a culprit, regardless of intent. One of the videos posted earlier in this topic showed a copyright claim being leveled on a snippet Frank Sinatra music by 10 different companies, based on the fact that the rights kept flipping from holder to holder.
There is no way any individual with so many matched content claims is going to sit for hours spending time disputing every single one of them. This is going to drive more and more people away, and it's a damn shame.
jacksepticeye
Member
As a let's player myself too I have sold a lot of people on some games they had never heard of before I brought it to their attention
The game sales will only predominantly die for games that lack any type of gameplay, or are just truly awful games. Both of which I would be more than fine with going away.
NoPiece
Member
I care because I see it as part of a bigger war that big media corporations are waging on content creators. And sadly, YouTube used to have all this potential to power the little guy, now it is aligning with the dark side.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
There are people who make tens of millions of dollars a year playing games. But that's somehow not considered weird.
jacksepticeye
Member
The people who do make money from it as their main source of income?
I don't get it either, people have a stigma towards youtube gaming channels
ShinMaruku
Member
It's really silly how some people don't think of some of the youtube content is not a real job. Yes some of these let's plays are lazy as fuck, but the ones who have value created are worthwhile jobs.
Some go through some great editing and optimizations on their videos those take work.
Some go through some great editing and optimizations on their videos those take work.
Seraphis Cain
bad gameplay lol
crazyrabbits
Banned
I don't think it's as high as that, but there are some Youtubers who earn a sizable chunk of change. Pewdiepie makes, according to most metrics, at least $750,000 - $1 million a year.
It's even begun fragmenting some long-running fan communities. TheBajanCanadian, a Minecraft LP'er, probably makes a good $250,000 - 750,000 a year (very big/popular videos), and teamed up with a group of other like-minded players to pursue "business opportunities" as a collective called TeamCrafted, to the point of alienating their friends who weren't as popular/didn't get enough views.
Another guy, xJawz, was a CoD player who apparently earned enough to buy an expensive sports car and get his own place in L.A. off doing one-to-two videos a night.
The potential is there, so I'm not exactly surprised to see YT/publishers picking up on the money that's being made. Doesn't make what they're doing right, though.
Someone playing a game has an aspect of performance that commenting over a video does not, though I could see a legitimate complaint about someone uploading cutscenes. But gameplay has similarities to someone uploading a video of them skateboarding and the skateboard company filing a complaint. Copyright law is outdated.
ShinMaruku
Member
Comrade Stalin
Banned
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
Well, if YouTube is really going to go all the way with this, I hope this will finally push a much better streaming alternative for gamers in the spotlight.
ShinMaruku
Member
That depends on if there is somebody with the right idea in the right place is there to provide that. The better thing is to sort this out right here and stop the issue from spreading. The issue people don't have it in them to really push this fight out and get it sorted. People just sort of roll over.
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
Google has a lot of experience in not giving a fuck about what users have to say in terms of Youtube feedback.
Gintoki313
Banned
Feel sorry for GhostRobo. He makes very informative and entertaining videos. Hope he can get it straightened out somehow.
It is weird timing. PS4 and Xbox One comes out encouraging people to share there gaming experiences, then Youtube comes and does the opposite.
It is weird timing. PS4 and Xbox One comes out encouraging people to share there gaming experiences, then Youtube comes and does the opposite.
ZedIndyLil
Member
Yeesh. So the impression I get from the OP is that, at the moment, it's not clear how much of this is direct copyright holder intervention and how much is troll exploits of the new Youtube rules?
I won't wade into the general monetization debate other than, yeah, I guess Youtube can set whatever rules it likes. But the way this is being done is essentially overturning an entire community overnight.
I won't wade into the general monetization debate other than, yeah, I guess Youtube can set whatever rules it likes. But the way this is being done is essentially overturning an entire community overnight.
Not sure how much blame YouTube/Google deserve here. They're going to lose out on money too. It's mostly legal pressure from the publishers.
To be fair, tougher content ID behavior doesn't discourage sharing in general, only monetization. I doubt that's what Microsoft or Sony assumes that's how a typical console owner will use sharing functionality.
Monetization has little to do with copyright law, from my understanding.
edit: this seems like a good summary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZ90zDQ8vXo
Are they Google/Youtube hired workers???
No they are not, just opportunist who YT/Google will make sure they stop eating off them.
Google didnt pay Millions in cash money for YT to have some guy name GhostRobo who didnt pay a dime get money off them.
I say YT starts a paid subscription for these ghost robo types, or give 50% of the money they "make" off their site go to YT/Google you know the owners of the site mr robo uses?, fair.
I see where you're going with the skateboarding analogy but you get a lot more of the experience watching someone game than skateboard.
I'm really not sure how to feel on this matter. The videos are comprised of someone else's entire video and sound assets and you're making money off it.
What I do know is when I first heard of Let's Plays the legality was one of my first questions and it seemed at best a grey area, so I'm not surprised this is happeneing.
Hope this doesn't affect SupraDarky's videos.
Almost no one who uploads vgm monetizes their videos because that content isn't theirs. Definitely will not be an issue.
SargerusBR
I love Pokken!
Considering a
hypoteticaly scenario where Youtube becomes shitty and censored as hell, what other options people should move to? Dailymotion? Vimeo?
likely
ShinMaruku
Member
Who said anything about youtube. It's the copyright area that can be dealt with and the various publishers. You hit the source and making a new place to do these things would be redundant.
If Zuckerberg is smart he has already create an Alternative...
Gormless Noodle
Member
Don't know about their monetisation possibilities, but Blip at least is an alternative used by some sites that allows for monetisation and doesn't let companies rampantly flag shit.
It's definitely a gray area and yeah, it's not a 1:1 comparison to skateboarding -- interactive media has elements of linear media and elements of skill/performance, and copyright law was written before games were a consideration. Under current law, Let's Play videos would almost certainly not be successfully defended in court because the law is written with things like film in mind.
Personally, I think the laws need to be updated and gameplay should be fair use (when the input determines what happens in the video, that input is creating the content in my opinion -- video games are interactive, so in my view non-interactive video isn't the copyrighted content unless it's a trailer or someone else's VIDEO being copied). When the user is showing cutscenes (youtube is video, cutscenes are video, so that's 1:1 in my eyes) or just letting the music play, then that's where I'd draw the line (though admittedly, as with a lot of copyright law, it'd still be a fuzzy line).
The laws are severely outdated. Music remixes are super popular and that's still a gray area legally. Society has evolved and copyright laws need to catch up.
crazyrabbits
Banned
You're greatly simplifying the point, though.
Just because they weren't "hired" by Google, per se, doesn't mean there isn't some type of payment-for-work system that is currently on the site. Likewise, there are many people who are part of YT's Content Creator program that either signed up or gave personal information in exchange for being able to post the type of "transformative works" that the system is falsely accusing them of stealing.
Except that Google isn't losing money because of "GhostRobo". Those are profits being generated by users viewing the ads - the issue is whether developers/publishers/content owners deserve some and/or all of that money, and at what point a work becomes "fair use" or "transformative".
Likewise, Google ostensibly did this to get a video-sharing site of their own, as Google Video went nowhere. They threw money at it and acquired it, and are changing the rules as they see fit.
Again, this has to do with YT/Google kowtowing to pressure from content owners (some of which are apparently not aware and/or against this system) rather than being pissed that they aren't getting money for themselves.
You must not understand how YT partnership works, this may sound crazy so hold on to your seat, Google offers these people to put ads on their videos because it makes Google money. No partnered YT channel takes money from Google it actually makes money for Google.
IrishNinja
Member
man, YT's shaky ground is only worsening, yet dailymotion/etc alternatives don't seem very viable at the moment either. really glad i don't have any work tied into them, but as someone who's valued silent walkthrough videos (especially thoroughly edited and 100% completion ones, talk about going above & beyond!), i really hate that people putting in such effort are being locked out for what's basically a bid to fully control content in an industry already obsessed with replacing my outlets with PR speak as it is.
As soon as daily motion or some other site becomes viable, the publishers will gang up on them and pressure them just like they do with youtube. Youtube is changing their policy to avoid a huge lawsuit against a team of publishers (and risk setting a new legal precedent that could hurt youtube's viability further). What makes you think DailyMotion or any other company is interested in being taken to court?
Gintoki313
Banned
True. This is mostly only bad for those that gain money from there gaming videos, not the ones that do it for fun. Sometimes I forget that this is just flagging videos, not removing them.
IrishNinja
Member
yeah, that does seem the inevitable conclusion, and i doubt any of these alternatives are interested in moving around like pirate bay/etc, much less go down with the ship in a fight for consumer advocacy...it's just that, with google + youtube, i've particularly little faith that however this ends up, the format will be nearly as enjoyable as it's been all these years prior.
you're tragically right though, that's a very logical outcome - if any of the other options became more appealing for not having such restrictions (and i could easily see a few trying to catch in a potential exodus) it'd only be a matter of time before the same fell upon them.
ZehDon
Gold Member
So, they went and did it. I have to admit, I didn't think YouTube would just flip the switch. I hate being wrong all the time.
I guess copyright now extends past the point of sale, past the gateway of fair use, past the binding terms and conditions you might have with other companies, past the limits of fair use of your own content and has finally reached the wonderful point of:
I get that this is all because Google's contenting trawling algorithmic surveys are not up to par, but I can't help but feel this is just testing the waters.
Can't wait for the day that reviews are considered copyright infringement.
I guess copyright now extends past the point of sale, past the gateway of fair use, past the binding terms and conditions you might have with other companies, past the limits of fair use of your own content and has finally reached the wonderful point of:
I get that this is all because Google's contenting trawling algorithmic surveys are not up to par, but I can't help but feel this is just testing the waters.
Can't wait for the day that reviews are considered copyright infringement.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
BlazeHedgehog
Member
People who make a living off this, obviously.
If you don't care about the status of Youtube monetization then why are you in this thread?
ZehDon
Gold Member
Hahaha, nice. This is obviously Google's trawling going haywire, but it's a scary proposition. Don't like a review? Hit it with copyright infringement.