Support NeoGAF

[ChosenPredator]

why do threads on him on gaf always turn into massive negativity ones about him, does Gaf just not like people on youtube and only a select few are liked?

that sucks though if i was a youtuber i probably wouldn't go near nintendo stuff.

 

[Maximo]

Fair as far as I'm concerned. The video wouldn't exist without Nintendo's content in the first place.

Lol *Hey Youtubers come to our event to try out the Switch, don't forget to work hard and make videos of it so we can monetize them and take all the money*

 

[-shadow-]

I know he's just exaggerating but what legal leg does he have to stand on if he takes to Nintendo to court?

A review is fair use and for that you're allowed to use copyrighted material as part of your presentation/demonstration. But the thing is how strong this case is in regards of making money on YouTube.

 

[blankempathy]

Is this real?

He compared people ignoring Nintendo's over controlling stance on YouTube to people ignoring and not caring about the patriot act. Really odd thing to say considering they're two very different things. Also yes Joe has been down this road before when he uploaded him playing Mario party or mario kart fully aware that he'd get a copy right strike. Then made a video ranting about it. Did he ever follow through on playing Wii u games on twitch/youtube for his fans that bought him his Wii u and games?

 

[Holundrian]

A new Nintendo. I don't care much for AngryJoe but stuff like that irks me because it's just another thing showcasing that Nintendo is still out of touch.

 

[funkystudent]

Just think of how fun its going to be when Nintendo is copyright claming all the videos the Switch will be uploading to youtube

 

[Inuhanyou]

Joe and Nintendo(and its fans) have never mixed before.

Its unfortunate cause his Switch impressions from the conference were really good.

 

[Godzilla's Left Toe]

Not 100% sure, but I think they did say it would on the Treehouse Live.

It says it does on the switch accessories page.

 

[Gnub]

He too angry for Nintendo.

 

[Chaos17]

Dude even I got copyright claims, I HAVE LIKE 300 SUBS:

Vid here

My video was 17 minutes long with highlights of my reactions. Maybe they took offense to my xtreme clickbait thumbnail?

This have been already covered, Nintendo dislike anyone who aren't part of their youtube membership (something lie that, you need their agreements to show their stuff, they don't want you monetize their work without their accord).

This has been a lot discussed last time Angry joe got a strike down by Nintendo and we discovered that he didn't wanted to let Nintendo have a part of his money so he didn't wanted to sign an agreement with them.

 

[Maffis]

I don't feel sorry for Joe at all, why not just avoid doing Nintendo videos?
Now he plans to review Zelda and will take them to court over it, if they claim his review.

But why should he have to avoid doing reviews for Nintendo games? Because Nintendo is so out of touch on youtube gaming channels? He's like any other reviewer, but because he's not a as big as IGN or Gamespot, his videos are constantly being removed. No other console platform does this, other than Nintendo. And why? His reviews was fucking positive? They are really, literally, shooting themselves in the foot by not grasping how youtube works.

 

[blankempathy]

But why should he have to avoid doing reviews for Nintendo games? Because Nintendo is so out of touch on youtube gaming channels? He's like any other reviewer, but because he's not a as big as IGN or Gamespot, his videos are constantly being removed. No other console platform does this, other than Nintendo. And why? His reviews was fucking positive? They are really, literally, shooting themselves in the foot by not grasping how youtube works.

Yes nintendo is missing out on free press but that's what they want and until the law or youtube changes that's how things are. There's an alternative but Joe doesn't want to become a nintendo partner/member or whatever they call it likely because he doesn't want to split any of the money he makes with them. again all this has been discussed before the last time it happened.

 

[SmokedMeat]

I'm willing to bet Nintendo only wants Youtubers who are never critical of their products. Anyone they fear might not pour praise over everything Nintendo is blocked.

 

[Warablo]

Nintendo doesn't take the videos down. He takes them down and puts them back up hoping they're not claimed the second, third, etc time.

Of course, he doesn't want Nintendo to "own" him and get his money just because he says Nintendo.

 

[Doctre81]

Dude even I got copyright claims, I HAVE LIKE 300 SUBS:

Vid here

My video was 17 minutes long with highlights of my reactions. Maybe they took offense to my xtreme clickbait thumbnail?

Look at the name of your video. And the pic you used. lol

 

[Inuhanyou]

Yes nintendo is missing out on free press but that's what they want and until the law or youtube changes that's how things are. There's an alternative but Joe doesn't want to become a nintendo partner/member or whatever they call it likely because he doesn't want to split any of the money he makes with them. again all this has been discussed before the last time it happened.

That is an explanation of the reality, not the ideal scenario. That doesn't not excuse their ass backwards policies, only tells you what they do and 'that's how things are'.

Nobody should be cowing to Nintendo's demands or attempts at total monetization control because they feel like they are above reproach. Again, literally nobody else does this except them. If somebody tried to actually pursue legal action, i think they'd have a case against them.

I think Jim or someone else should try

 

[blankempathy]

That is an explanation of the reality, not the ideal scenario. That doesn't not excuse their ass backwards policies, only tells you what they do and 'that's how things are'.

Nobody should be cowing to Nintendo's demands because they feel like they are above reproach. Again, literally nobody else does this except them. If somebody tried to actually pursue legal action, i think they'd have a case against them.

I didn't say it was ideal. if someone wants to attempt to change it go for it. In the mean time there's no shortage of other games to cover. Let Nintendo's policy work against them. it would be an interesting case since I don't think they issue copy right strikes to take down videos. People aren't being silenced. The issue is about who deserves to profit.

 

[Caipirinha]

I'm willing to bet Nintendo only wants Youtubers who are never critical of their products. Anyone they fear might not pour praise over everything Nintendo is blocked.

This, which is ironic because Joe was incredibly soft on the Switch reveal, I think in a few weeks when it has all sunk in he will be a lot more critical, but for now he was pretty forgiving and still Nintendo complained..

The company is still living in the early 2000s.

 

[Mike Golf]

So do videos from publications/sites like IGN and Eurogamer get claimed as well or are the majority of them on Nintendo's youtube creators agreement/deal where they still tet the lion's share of the profits? Legitimately wondering how news sites handle this or if they get a pass in the system.

 

[Zetta]

If I were him I just wouldn't do anything related to Nintendo, why bother when it will more than likely get taken down.

 

[Gunslinger]

Don't you have to be partners with Nintendo to monetize Nintendo related video? I don't know why Joe feels special. But if he is part of the Nintendo partnership then they should revert the copyright strike.

 

[AkelisRain]

Something like this falls under fair use, Nintendo is taking advantage of their size and hope people are to afraid to fight back.
https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html

 

[Shengar]

It's even funnier when you considered the video is mostly positive in tone lmao
Other recommended crap video got that Nintendoomed vibe instead

 

[Justinh]

Why does angry Joe get his own strikes?

lol

People have been doing it ever since YouTube started Content ID - inverting the video, rotating and stretching it, changing the hue values, and even changing the pitch of songs to try to stop them being flagged by automated systems.

Yeah, I remember even a MaximumPC article, back when they had their own website, showing how to slow down a song just enough to fool the Content ID system. I'm guessing that Content ID evolves and learns though.

 

[hamchan]

I'm willing to bet Nintendo only wants Youtubers who are never critical of their products. Anyone they fear might not pour praise over everything Nintendo is blocked.

Well yeah. That's why Youtubers have started to receive special benefits and exclusives that game journos don't get from companies like Bethesda. If the Youtubers are going to be negative (or truthful) too then the company might as well block them.

 

[Faddy]

Something like this falls under fair use, Nintendo is taking advantage of their size and hope people are to afraid to fight back.
https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html

Youtube do not need to host Fair Use content.

If you don't like Youtube policy you are free to use a different service.

 

[Mike Golf]

Youtube do not need to host Fair Use content.

If you don't like Youtube policy you are free to use a different service.

You do realize it's not up to youtube to call what is and isn't fair use right? Besides they're not directly choosing what is and isn't, they just continue to run a bot that is heavy handed so they don't get heat from corporations regarding videos on their site and have to deal with them directly. The irony of course being the content creators they fuck with this algorithm are the ones that made youtube popular in the first place, but hey fuck them it's big now and used by everybody so why care.

 

[R_thanatos]

Not surprised

Nintendo and Atlus ( japan ) are ridiculous when it comes to copyright strikes on youtube.

 

[Rats Off To Ya]

Fair as far as I'm concerned. The video wouldn't exist without Nintendo's content in the first place.

Fuck that. No company should have monetary control over commentary and criticism of itself. Nintendo makes great games but that doesn't mean they get to stifle free expression.

 

[Hattori]

Ranting about it is not going to help, he's got a big following why not use that influence and reach out to a Nintendo publicist/PR and sort it out. Empty threats are not going to work against a multinational company.

 

[EscapeArtist]

What causes a copyright strike against a video like this vs like... a let's play of Twilight Princess HD? (this is the first thing to come to mind because I just watched Two Best Friends Play - Twilight Princess just yesterday).

 

[Smiles and Cries]

But why should he have to avoid doing reviews for Nintendo games? Because Nintendo is so out of touch on youtube gaming channels? He's like any other reviewer, but because he's not a as big as IGN or Gamespot, his videos are constantly being removed. No other console platform does this, other than Nintendo. And why? His reviews was fucking positive? They are really, literally, shooting themselves in the foot by not grasping how youtube works.

I still don't feel bad for the dude, yes his options are not to do Nintendo reviews.
Why do you think he did a Switch video? because that is the trending topic that would bring views. He wants to get paid that is fine but Nintendo wants to get paid too.

I joined the Nintendo Creator's Program, if he really wanted to review Nintendo games just do the same. I get 10 cents every few months on PayPal from NOA that is how silly the whole thing is. Joe has millions of views his earnings is high up there he has made his money from his review work. Nintendo does not want to play the game the same way just move on dude.

Joe knows Nintendo fans have a rabbid following

ETika just did a whole 24 hours live stream just for the Switch presentation, why is he not bitching about Nintendo claiming his videos?

there are so many Nintendo focused youtubers that deal with that shit on the daily they work harder than Angry Joe has to right now. Joe wants to be treated special, he wants to be exempt from shit that happens to even PewDiePie

I would support Joe more if he stuck to his guns when he had a final fuck Nintendo rant, he said he would not play or review their games on his channel. I respected that because he did not like the Nintendo Creator's Program shit. Why is he back doing this again?

Youtube is the one he needs to be angry at for allowing these claims.

I would gladly take all the money my channel makes if Youtube was willing to protect my Splatoon content from Nintendo I'll make 30 cents instead of 10 cents

Joe might want to make $3,000 instead of $1,000 I don't blame him. but dude make your $3K from PS4 and X1 reviews stay away from Nintendo content.

If this dude gets a free pass, I want a free pass for my channel too. I think he may have pissed off the wrong people I am sure some you tubers have a better deal going with Nintendo where this stuff is never an issue. I think the Drama helps Angry Joe's bottom line he got a thread for his last Nintendo rant. He gets a thread for this one there are other youtubers who would love to get a thread on Neogaf each time they said something against a game or game company. Those clicks add up.

I think Nintendo fully understands how youtube works they just want to get a cut from all youtube content that features their products

Can you imagine getting 10 cents for every Mario video on Youtube each month?
That is money the company wants a piece of.

 

[Budi]

he is not the only one who got marked.

why is he the one who is making a fuss about it?
nintendo is strict when it comes to monetizing their content.


they have a right since i know myself 3friends who youtube with their pirated roms and isos.

they dont even buy the cheap shit from steam, instead they simply download shit from somewhere and youtube it to get some money.

sad world.

Edit: It's funny how people still think that Nintendo is taking down his Nintendo related content.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Well yeah. That's why Youtubers have started to receive special benefits and exclusives that game journos don't get from companies like Bethesda. If the Youtubers are going to be negative (or truthful) too then the company might as well block them.

The people I subscribe to like AJ don't sugar coat anything. I couldn't follow a YouTuber that's just a publisher shill.

 

[Matt]

You do realize it's not up to youtube to call what is and isn't fair use right? Besides they're not directly choosing what is and isn't, they just continue to run a bot that is heavy handed so they don't get heat from corporations regarding videos on their site and have to deal with them directly. The irony of course being the content creators they fuck with this algorithm are the ones that made youtube popular in the first place, but hey fuck them it's big now and used by everybody so why care.

The point is that, even if something does fit the legal definition of "fair use," YouTube is under no obligation to host any videos.

Basically, if Nintendo requested a take down and YouTube said no, YouTube could defend themselves in court by citing fair use. However a YouTuber suing Nintendo over a takedown request would be a significantly more murky idea.

 

[LordBaztion]

I dont know why he keeps trying with nintendo stuff.

 

[Rats Off To Ya]

Don't you have to be partners with Nintendo to monetize Nintendo related video? I don't know why Joe feels special. But if he is part of the Nintendo partnership then they should revert the copyright strike.

Joe's not the one acting like he's special. Nintendo thinks they have the right to claim any video about themselves, and they know they can throw around a lot more weight than a puny little YouTuber. It's bullying, it's corporatism, and here we have people defending it because Joe said some mean things about them once.

 

[Budi]

Joe's not the one acting like he's special. Nintendo thinks they have the right to claim any video about themselves, and they know they can throw around a lot more weight than a puny little YouTuber. It's bullying, it's corporatism, and here we have people defending it because Joe said some mean things about them once.

Well it's in their rights. Is it nice to the Youtuber, no.

 

[metalslimer]

I can understand people don't like him, but I can't believe the level of corporate ballwashing going on in here. If this was EA, no one would be defending this.

 

[Rats Off To Ya]

Well it's in their rights.

Is it? That's yet to be challenged in court, because people like Joe don't have the means to do it.

 

[Holundrian]

I can understand people don't like him, but I can't believe the level of corporate ballwashing going on in here.

Yep pretty scary how willing people are concede internet freedoms to their corporations just because they're fans. We've reached a place with Sony and Microsoft and Valve generally allowing all that stuff. I don't see why Nintendo should be special in that regard doesn't matter if they're legally right because legislation can't deal with the internet. It doesn't make it ok. Really this was a chance for Nintendo to get behind the times and show they get it.

They don't fucking get it on any level. Really looking forward to what their online is going to be with stone age policies like that.

You're not helping by labelling people's opinions as ballwashing.

Who cares people deserve to be called out for their bullshit. It's people like that, that would welcome idiocy like the abolishment of net neutrality in the name of nintendo.

 

[Lima]

Nintendo just shot themselves in the foot.

 

[Renekton]

I can understand people don't like him, but I can't believe the level of corporate ballwashing going on in here. If this was EA, no one would be defending this.

You're not helping by labelling people's opinions as ballwashing.

 

[malfcn]

If Nintendo is targeting him, that's clear abuse of the system.

 

[Greatest Ever]

Nintendo being Nintendo, no surprise here.

Not that the plight of a YouTuber, no matter how big a fan I am of his (AngryJoe is great you scrubs), would be the one to make me "vote with my wallet," especially when it's video games at the end of the day, but I'll certainly add this to the ever increasing pile of reasons why I won't buy a Switch.

A company so inanely unable to get with the times on certain things without realizing how to grasp the willingness of fans that got them there in the first place will only pull a Wii U again.

 

[Robot Pants]

Who likes this guy? Completely obnoxious and zero talent. I still remember a couple years ago at PAX when he showed up to the AVGN panel and people booed him. Lmao

Lmao get em

Joe is legit. Time for you to see the light, my child

 

[Schnozberry]

The point is that, even if something does fit the legal definition of "fair use," YouTube is under no obligation to host any videos.

Basically, if Nintendo requested a take down and YouTube said no, YouTube could defend themselves in court by citing fair use. However a YouTuber suing Nintendo over a takedown request would be a significantly more murky idea.

There's also the issue of jurisdiction and international law, as Nintendo's copyrights and trademarks generally originate in Japan, where there is no current provision for fair use.

 

[Budi]

Is it? That's yet to be challenged in court, because people like Joe don't have the means to do it.

I'm neither lawyer or a judge, so ofcourse I can't say for sure. But I haven't seen people calling what Nintendo does illegal. Scummy, greedy and fucked up. That's what I've seen.

 

[Matt]

There's also the issue of jurisdiction and international law, as Nintendo's copyrights and trademarks generally originate in Japan, where there is no current provision for fair use.

Yep, that too.

 

[NYR]

I hope Nintendo claims his Zelda review just to see him sue them. Of course, in typical Angry Joe fashion, he'll post his review in late May and then bitch about having to make the very content that made him famous.