But they are letting people make money by doing the videos. They just want a small cut of the ad revenue and want to make sure you're not being a total shithead with their IP on the internet.
-
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
- Thread starter Khalifa Jayy
- Start date
But they are letting people make money by doing the videos. They just want a small cut of the ad revenue and want to make sure you're not being a total shithead with their IP on the internet.
DoktorEvil
Banned
If you know the workarounds, more than you think.
I am off in fantasy-tangent-land? You're the one who brought up sports writers and commentators in a thread about video games and YouTube.
Why should you support the argument you just made? I don't know. Why did you even bring it up?
ViperVisor
Member
You have to pay for the rights to 10 second highlights.
There is a ton of ignorance in this thread, not from you but others.
NoFaceNico
Member
Sure did! Maybe it was you!
If you read his quote he specifically said he owns 50 games for the Wii U.
Nice avatar, fanboy. Gosh, I couldn't imagine you would be supporting Nintendo.
Actually, I now have a question, does Nintendo take down videos that use its characters in inappropriate settings? Like those multiple sprite Mario videos in days long past (or modern like the if Sega bought Nintendo video) or those SFM videos with Mario characters? It seems that these ad things only apply to their video games themselves.
After Twitch Plays Pokemon i spent over 1000 USD in Nintendo Products, believe me, it was all because TPP. I was very angry with Nintendo before i because i felt alienated by the Wii and their "new market", "blue ocean" talk and i had promised to never buy any Nintendo product ever again but i could not resist the urge to come back after watching it on Twitch.
Is this petty insulting really necessary? Like, does it add anything to this conversation at all?
Note that most of my posts in this thread haven't been pro-Nintendo as I do disagree with how they are over zealous on their IPs.
Souldestroyer Reborn
Banned
Yeah. Nintendont know what they're doing.
It's a bit of a stupid stance imo.
It's a bit of a stupid stance imo.
ShinMaruku
Member
Exactly. The bump they would give a nintendo game is tiny if any would.
J
Jpop
Unconfirmed Member
Starwolf_UK
Member
I'm not reading through 38 pages so I'll say this.
Despite Nintendo saying it would be 48 hours before a video is approved I am not aware of anybody having any videos approved yet. It has been months as well.
That is as big a problem as everything else with the program. I like to think
not approving anything is NOAs way of rebelling against NCL (Kyoto court listed in the terms and conditions implies it is their idea) by producing such a huge backlog that the only way to clear it is to employ additional staff which exceed the cost of the ad revenue at which point they'll close the program, give content ID the middle finger and google will have to find another way to make youtube profitable.
Perhaps they are counting virtual console and eShop games which that list you posted does not (they said 50 games not 50 games sold at retail). But it easier to dismiss people as loonies I suppose than be civil and just ask "are you counting virtual console and eShop games?".
RustyNails
Member
Do other companies behave the same way or is this a strange occurrence?
I hear they are working on high density cartridges as their next console format.
call_kotaku
Member
Console gaming as a whole might be a shrinking market if all the doomsayers are correct, so Nintendo fostering long-term brand loyalty as opposed to making successful games or consoles might not be as catastrophic as it sounds. If all Nintendo does in 10 years is sell amiibos I don't know if it's necessarily better or worse depending on the state of the industry.
Basically, denying free coverage is stupid and backwards for a gaming company that wants to sell games or hardware, but that might not actually apply to Nintendo.
Isn't this bannable?
You can air yourself playing a game of football without paying for broadcasting rights. None owns the right to the sport, just the specific events that someone organized. So by that argument you would be allowed to record yourself playing a game but not steal someone elses footage.
jakonovski
Member
Sports events pretty much work on gameplay as performance, which is dead easy since no one owns the rights to sports.
The issue with gaming is that it's an IP heavy product sold to end consumers in order for them to create their own performance.
The issue with gaming is that it's an IP heavy product sold to end consumers in order for them to create their own performance.
he released a new Video about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz09W2Z6OOU
Everything these guys do is backwards. Bunch of morons in suits.
TheSlySoul
Member
I think it mostly has to do with the new emerging market of entertainment.
Shows like Tosh.0, Daily Show, and Ridiculousness did not exist years ago. The closest thing was AFV, but people had to submit videos so there was no issue.
There is a fine line between what you need licensing for and what is fair use.
ClosingADoor
Member
This is standard practice for most companies. Try uploading a game or movie trailer for example. It will get matched and ads for the publisher.
If anything, how most gaming companies are handling Let's Plays is the opposite of the standard on Youtube.
Yes of course. You can also make your own Mario Party clone with your own characters and put a Let's Play online. That is not the issue. But when you put in stuff that is the IP of someone else (for example uploading a FC Barcelona match) the rights are with the IP-holder. It is then up to that IP-holder to decide how to deal with it.
I mean the work he does on the channel doesn't step from the gamer side of him, but every decision of what games to play, how to speak, what scenes to show etc. it to maximize profitability, hence being a business man.
This is no different than from what the ex IGN people Colin, Greg etc. are doing on their new channel which is to plant quotes like "Wii U looks like a Fisher Price toy." Clearly Colin doesn't mean that and it's something they put in there for the sake of publicity.
This type of thing that has an agenda behind it annoys me. I'm looking for genuine content. Also I can't tell if reaction videos to stuff like Smash character announcements are actually real or if people exaggerate. I guess when there is money involved everything goes to the shitter.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Oh please, he's not going to lose anything. He'll continue covering everyone else's videogames as he always has, and Nintendo can continue having less free coverage than everyone else on YouTube.
Beelzebufo
Banned
Exploratory
Banned
Oh well now that you explained the joke I get it! Brah-voe.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Except Nintendo isn't the one paying him in this case~ It's pretty much Nintendo coming in, seeing Youtube is paying Joe, and taking Youtubes money for themselves.
DoktorEvil
Banned
Reading isn't your strong suit either friend.
You can go back and find the multiple posts that have me saying "Nintendo doing this is a bad move". It's clearly anti-consumer.
But they can strongarm Joe and any other Youtuber because they have legal clout. And I can see the other publishers following suit if they were strapped for income.
I do not wish for the 80s or 90s where Nintendo would bully any other competitors out of the US market and were operating a monopoly.
So, please leave if your going to resort to calling me a fanboy just for having a slowbrah avatar.
It is.
Nope, Nintendo has no problem with that. It's when the video is monetized using their content that they have a problem. Like how if you make a shirt with Disney characters on it, cool, but if you sell it without the consent from Disney to use their property, then you're going to have problems. Joe knew Nintendo's policy on this and did it anyway, and when they wouldn't let him make money off of the video he pulled it and started ranting.
This reminds me. As a casual soccer fan it is nearly impossible to find good highlights of games on the Internet. Wanna see some amazing goal on YouTube? Only if the picture is completely warped. Kills my interest when people are overprotective. I'm happy to watch the champions league and World Cup and Euro but the organizations behind these events are downright anal.
Same goes for Formula 1. Why can I not find any "spectacular moments" on YouTube? F1 is at fault for losing me as a fan. I used to watch back in the late 90s and early 2000s. Stopped and try to come back during the full blown Internet age and F1 has not adopted on that front.
Beelzebufo
Banned
That's true. "Refused to let profit off of them"?
Except there wouldn't be money for Nintendo to take if not for the game they developed and the IP they own, because the video about Mario Party 10 wouldn't exist. Not to mention that Nintendo would only take a percentage of the money if Joe would simply follow the appropriate guidelines.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Again, even if Joe were to not monetize the video, Nintendo would swoop in, monetize that video, and make money for themselves.
Even if the video has like, 20 views, Nintendo will swoop in and monetize it. It's really...archaic.
Yeah well if the concept of money didn't exist, Nintendo wouldn't be making video games, they wouldn't even exist. If Pangaea never split, they'd never be called nintendo. hows that for ya
CastorTroy
Member
Having met Angry Joe, I can easily see him reacting this way, so it's no surprise. If he doesn't get exactly what he wants all the time, he'll let you know about it.
I'm sure he wrote pissed-off letters to Santa Clause saying he was "done" with him when he was 10.
I'm sure he wrote pissed-off letters to Santa Clause saying he was "done" with him when he was 10.
jakonovski
Member
That's just cable TV trying to ward off the wolves for as long as possible.
Beelzebufo
Banned
So "refuse to let profit off of them" works then?
TheSlySoul
Member
Yeah as long as the ad switch is on, it would have been CID matched.
Watching South Park again, ha ha.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Nope, because those who upload Nintendo videos without the intent to profit still get hammered~ It's something else entirely.
jakonovski
Member
I don't think much works for Nintendo these days, sadly.
-MD-
Member
Huh?
I honestly couldn't give 2 shits about WiiU 3rd party support or mobile games. It's there for exclusives.
This is actually all transforming art. They use the content, but they criticizing, commenting or parodying by competently altering the original work to be almost unrecognizable (in a bold way). There are properly some indifferences and limits, what those people can do with the content to earn money, but they should be poster child of transforming art.
In my opinion playing a game, doesn't count as transforming art. You don't do anything, the developers didn't think of. They created anything, you can do with the game. Also people misunderstand "transforming art". This is about completely changing, what the original work was about or was trying to express. All the Let's Play Videos just place another layer on the work, but don't actually transforming.
ClosingADoor
Member
Doesn't have to be. All videos go through Youtubes automatic ID system. If the content matches some known assets (for example a song, part of a movie, etc) the decision for monetizing goes to that IP-holder. So even if you didn't intent to put ads in front of your video, if it gets matched a company can decide to automatically put their ads in front of it.
There are dozens of other channels doing Mario Party 10 videos. Some of these channels have more subscribers than AngryJoe. Hell, some channels even received advance copies from Nintendo so they can do videos before the release date.
I'm sure Nintendo is fine without AngryJoe.
I'm sure Nintendo is fine without AngryJoe.
Oh, please.
Nintendo didn't allow him to use their game in his web show that he does as a job to make money. This isn't some love letter.
Beelzebufo
Banned
You don't get hammered, you just don't profit lol. That's exactly what I'm saying. The video stays up and everything.
I mean, it's a decent attempt at a deflection, but it doesn't really change the fact that Nintendo has the right to profits generated from their IPs.