• 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

Nozem

Member
This is from a relevant GDC talk.

Video here:
http://gdcvault.com/play/1022063/How-YouTubers-and-Twitch-Streamers







 
He kinda acts like he should be entitled to being abled to make money from using Nintendo's content.

From a business standpoint, I understand how Joe finds this stupid, but legally and morally it's completely okay for Nintendo to not want people use their content, even it does give them free publicity.

Thank you.
 

Paskil

Member
Anyone unironically using Nintendo Defense Force isn't here to have a valid discussion about this.

The way I'm understand this, AngryJoe is Angry that Nintendo wants 100% of the ad revenue from this one video, since it's not on their list of approved games for revenue sharing, but they didn't actually take down the video.

Joe took his ball and went home by setting the video to private, even though Nintendo was fine with letting the video stay up. While that 1 video wouldn't generate revenue, it still would've generated traffic for Joe himself, feeding into his other videos and ultimately making him money.

So I don't get why he's throwing a hissy fit.

I've never actually watched any of these YouTube gaming peoples videos all the way through. But my understanding is that that's the accepted and established business model for them. If you told me that I could still do my job, but aren't going to pay me for it, me refusing to do the job for no money isn't "taking my ball home."
 

Kinyou

Member
Joe took his ball and went home by setting the video to private, even though Nintendo was fine with letting the video stay up. While that 1 video wouldn't generate revenue, it still would've generated traffic for Joe himself, feeding into his other videos and ultimately making him money.
One could almost say that the Mario Party 10 would provide his channel free coverage

Those are all small indie games. I wonder what the charts look like for big games that got tons of ads running everywhere.
 

King_Moc

Banned
And isn't that shady as shit for a developer to do?

The only developer that lets people review games weeks ahead of release? No, not really. They just don't want people swearing over their family products. That was their initial concern with the Smash at Evo thing iirc.
 

MLH

Member
I never understood the anger over Nintendo's youtube policy. They aren't stopping you from uploading "let's play" or any Nintendo game footage; thousands of fans do it every day. It's when you decide you, solely, want to make money off those videos is when Nintendo has a problem with you. You're making a video with the primary content and attraction is content you haven't created (a video game/ trailer/ music, copyrighted content etc.) with some silly commentary added. Being generous, only half of the video is your content so what right do you have to 100% ad revenue?.
 

jfoul

Member
That's a very disparaging way of putting it. Angry Joe also has to manage production/editing of his video content; certainly more than "sitting on his ass playing games".
Exactly. A lot of these people definitely put in a lot of work. Joe tends to run long videos, and does most of the post production himself with a small group.
 

Mytherin

Neo Member
I can't understand Nintendo's mindset here. What do they gain by doing this? All you're doing is scaring off people from making video's about Nintendo games, and for what? A few dollars of ad revenue? The last thing they need is less publicity right now.
 

Alienous

Member
That's a very disparaging way of putting it. Angry Joe also has to manage production/editing of his video content; certainly more than "sitting on his ass playing games".

I'd be far more favourable towards Joe's viewpoint if this was a video like one of the reviews he usually does.

Nintendo allowing someone to upload a 30 minute section of them playing a game and monetize it would be a favour on their behalf, and Joe shouldn't look at it any more than that or expect anything.
 
I'm conflicted in how I feel about it.

Considering the amount of fucks and shits and vulgar language he uses in most of his videos, I don't think Nintendo will be missing him much.

The 60/40 split is rather generous considering Youtubers are uploading content that barely skirts copyright law.

At the same time, I like that Ninty is being reviewed harshly for releasing rather mediocre to outright crappy games.
 
To be honest, a lot of comments here are just drive by posts and try to make fun of Joe that's unnecessary and straight up offensive. That's my only problem. It's not just one or two comments.

Read any thread about Angry Joe on GAF... he drives quite a few people up the wall here for whatever reason... I guess he's undoing the sophisticated and gentlemanly image that gamers have tried to establish over the years, with his angry persona...
 

OmegaDL50

Member
You know the defenders in this thread are right. News websites should not put ads on their webpage because they are making money based on not their content.
/s

The fact this needs to be said and with a sarcasm part is the really sad part.

Youtube personalities like Angry Joe, TotalBiscuit, etc making money on talking about games and sharing their opinion on it.

Websites like Giant Bomb, Gamespot, Eurogamer, etc making money on talking about games and sharing their opinion on it.

The fact that some people in this thread are apparently "okay" with one and not the other is hypocritical.
 

Denton

Member
I never understood the anger over Nintendo's youtube policy. They aren't stopping you from uploading "let's play" or any Nintendo game footage; thousands of fans do it every day. It's when you decide you, solely, want to make money off those videos is when Nintendo has a problem with you. You're making a video with the primary content and attraction is content you haven't created (a video game/ trailer/ music, copyrighted content etc.) with some silly commentary added. Being generous, only half of the video is your content so what right do you have to 100% ad revenue?.

If making videos is your day job, then not getting paid for it is kinda...bad.
So you are not going to make videos that you cannot get paid for..which is what Joe is doing. No other company that I know of behaves similarly as Nintendo. I am sure they are all wrong and Ninty's got it right!
 

legacyzero

Banned
Huh? I didn't realize that IGN owns Xenoblande Chronicles, Mortal Kombat, GTA etc....


Do any of you know how news works? Fair use? anything???

I'm pretty sure Nintendo must have a deal with those folks. I think Nintendo actually GIVES them that stuff.
 
You gotta wake up, Nintendo. You're so tight on your IP, that you're willing to lose the goodwill you create to protect it. Even those that don't stand to make money off of it.

How could you not be SUPER flattered that somebody spends their time showing love and passion towards your IP? It blows my mind! So while people like Notch are swimming in pools of money in part because Youtubers, you're unable to realize that it's a real thing.

What's cheaper? Not earning a small amount of money because some person made a video about your property? Or millions in marketing budget?

Well nintendo is still sitting on their treasure of gold coins ( just look at it it's in every mario game ) and they want to control everything marketing from start to finish.

A sad state of , we don't care that we could spend less money to get our point across , we have tons of money already.
 
I never understood the anger over Nintendo's youtube policy. They aren't stopping you from uploading "let's play" or any Nintendo game footage; thousands of fans do it every day. It's when you decide you, solely, want to make money off those videos is when Nintendo has a problem with you. You're making a video with the primary content and attraction is content you haven't created (a video game/ trailer/ music, copyrighted content etc.) with some silly commentary added. Being generous, only half of the video is your content so what right do you have to 100% ad revenue?.

Youtubers trade exposure for the ad revenue.

Literally no one is arguing that Nintendo doesn't have the legal right to claim all the ad revenue just that it is stupid of them
 

Floody

Member
I'm not defending Nintendo, but what did Joe think was going to happen? Didn't Nintendo recently flag one of his other videos too?
 
One could almost say that the Mario Party 10 would provide his channel free coverage


Those are all small indie games. I wonder what the charts look like for big games that got tons of ads running everywhere.

Well he made the video, edited it, devoted time that could have been spent editing, filming something else. This is the dudes only job, and he probably took a decent hit financially from the claim.
 
This is from a relevant GDC talk.
Interesting presentation. You can probably add Minecraft, Five Nights, and Broforce to the list.
Heck I totally missed out on Fibbage but saw RoosterTeeth play it and bought it.
It does help. There would at least be some people who saw Joe enjoy Bowser Mode and picked it up.
 

Yado

Member
Did you really not understand what he was saying? For a console doing as poorly as the WiiU, any extra coverage or awareness could help the console. Angry Joe making a positive WiiU video for a couple million viewers is almost like spending hundreds of thousands on a TV commercial for the same size audience.

The fact that people are actually defending Nintendo's YouTube copyright bullshit is just ridiculous. Is it just corporate fanboyism at this point?

Angry Joe isn't some Wii U saviour. 2 Million followers or not, his videos aren't going to make any noticeable difference to their sales. It really doesn't matter if he makes videos featuring Nintendo games or chooses not to.
 

ash321

Member
I never understood the anger over Nintendo's youtube policy. They aren't stopping you from uploading "let's play" or any Nintendo game footage; thousands of fans do it every day. It's when you decide you, solely, want to make money off those videos is when Nintendo has a problem with you. You're making a video with the primary content and attraction is content you haven't created (a video game/ trailer/ music, copyrighted content etc.) with some silly commentary added. Being generous, only half of the video is your content so what right do you have to 100% ad revenue?.
Because this is their share of the "100%" ad revenue.

60% go to Google. 10% go to the network. (Ex: Jesse Cox earn 6 cent per view on his videos)

if you agree to Nintendo's policies. They will 60% ad revenues before Google get their part. Also good luck if you a small youtuber. Your video will be stuck in "approvals" hell circle.
 

Jigorath

Banned
I like that he acts like the content he is creating does anything for Nintendo.

It does a lot for Nintendo. Joe's videos reach a very large audience and many of them trust his opinions. If Joe makes a positive review for a WiiU game I'm sure that would be enough to convince a lot of his fans to go buy the game. Especially since his fanbase is mostly made up of Xbox/Playstation gamers who probably don't buy a lot of Nintendo products.
 

PirateKing

Junior Member
Read any thread about Angry Joe on GAF... he drives quite a few people up the wall here for whatever reason... I guess he's undoing the sophisticated and gentlemanly image that gamers have tried to establish over the years, with his angry persona...

It's weird because most of his videos he's not even angry. I watch the show and enjoy his vids. I've disagreed with some points and a particular video. Especially his older vids were, different not that that "pro".

I know for a fact I'd be in his position if i had the chance to be. My friends have met him in person and said he's one of the coolest guys you can talk to.

Also, the people that think his job is easy... Yeah, you guys have no idea how tiring it can be, just like any other job.
 
The only developer that lets people review games weeks ahead of release? No, not really. They just don't want people swearing over their family products. That was their initial concern with the Smash at Evo thing iirc.
I disagree, I guess we don't know what criteria Nintendo uses for the "approval process". If it is up just profanity then that's fine, but if it's being used to filter negative publicity then I stand by my original statement.
 

vareon

Member
I don't like AngryJoe's video (or any youtubers for now) but yeah I'd be pissed off too. It makes sense from a legal perspective, but that's it. Not a shred of human consideration behind it. It's like Nintendo wants to be the faceless giant corporate and does whatever it can to enforce it.
 

FGMPR

Banned
Yeah, about the "free" advertising, I think any company would prefer to have a controlled advertising over the "free" one. He sounds so entitled.

Yeah, and the drama is not new. He's living Nintendo every 3 months. Really classy.

Tell that to the Publishers like Paradox or Bohemia. Imagine what the sales of games like Cities: Skylines, Crusader Kings 2, Divinity: Original Sin or Arma 2/3/Dayz would be like without the torrent of unregulated coverage that came along with those games/mods releases. These middle-budget productions don't have the money to spend on anything resembling a decent sized marketing campaign, and thus, to them, streamers and Youtubers like Joe are a lifeline. Why else do you think Pillars of Eternity was distributed out to streamers before its release? And it isn't just about making small budgeted productions a decent return, either. DayZ has sold over 3 million; Cities almost 1 million in a couple of weeks; Divinity is at a million; ARMA 3 is at 1.6 million; ARMA 2 much more than that. These are incredibly niche titles compared to anything Nintendo puts out, and yet they are making big money. It's crazy to turn your back on this kind of marketing, especially when your product is as good as Nintendo's.

Most of the time, I feel like most of those publishers seeking to attain such heavy handed control over the viewing of their products likely have something to hide (eg: Ubisoft with AC: Unity). In Nintendo's case, however, it's pretty clear this is a symptom of their inflexabile nature, which is too bad for them, because they will lose more out of this stance than the vast majority of streamers out there.
 
I never understood the anger over Nintendo's youtube policy. They aren't stopping you from uploading "let's play" or any Nintendo game footage; thousands of fans do it every day. It's when you decide you, solely, want to make money off those videos is when Nintendo has a problem with you. You're making a video with the primary content and attraction is content you haven't created (a video game/ trailer/ music, copyrighted content etc.) with some silly commentary added. Being generous, only half of the video is your content so what right do you have to 100% ad revenue?.

If I understand it correctly, for someone to monetise a video nintendo first has to approve the video's contents.

Can you see why this is bad?
Can you imagine if EA and ubisoft etc did this? How they would abuse it?

Either allow monetising youtube videos or don't (I'd rather they don't), but don't involve publishers in it it'll corrupt the whole thing to the core.

Even regular game journalists (which are already beholden to publishers and on a pretty tight leash if they don't want to lose access to content before release and often act like a bunch of ballwashing corporate shill cowards because of it) know to seperate their editorial from the website monetisation.

A world where angry joe gets paid his cut of the youtube revenue by the publishers instead of google is a world where the paradox interview or the major nelson 'it's not a switch you can turn off or on' would not happen.
It would be a world where every youtube video is frankieOnPC telling viewers how great battlefield 4 is right before launch, causing millions of people to buy a broken turd in a bag because they have no way to find out that it is in fact a broken piece of shit, because the videos they are watching to find information about the game are made by a paid shill.
 
Zero²;158809240 said:
Never heard of him, but I'm sure he knew the risks?
He did. Reason why I think he just did this to complain (rally his troops maybe? I don't know.). He could have said awhile back when they announced this "I won't be doing Nintendo games." and left it at that.

So you can keep your stuff up regardless. Basically Joe is whining about not making money?

Yes. It's his job so if he isn't making money off it, it's not worth it. If it's his main source of income, I can see why he would not want to do it.

It's the complaining about it is what I don't get and why I don't feel sorry for him.
 

Nozem

Member
My response:


So, let's imagine you actually did this:

People who don't know Angry Joe will watch Angry Joe's video's on your channel. They like them a lot. They want more Angry Joe video's! They discover that Angry Joe's own channel is the fastest way to watch new video's. So they subscribe to Angry Joe's channel.

Congrats, you've just helped Angry Joe to a lot of new subscribers.

Just like Angry Joe could've helped Nintendo to a lot of new customers.
 

BatDan

Bane? Get them on board, I'll call it in.
So you can keep your stuff up regardless. Basically Joe is whining about not making money?

Exactly.
And again, this has happened to him before. He's complaining for the sake of complaining.
He knew the risks of putting up a Mario Party 10 video, but he did it anyway.
I'm sorry, that's the same thing as hitting your hand with a hammer, then doing it again and expecting it not to hurt.
 

lenovox1

Member

We should not compare the fortunes and figures of games with little to no marketing budget behind them to games with the force of a multi-billion dollar company behind them.

When it comes to Mario Party 10 specifically, that game's presence among "enthusiast" gamers featured prominently among social media platforms means little.
 

Alienous

Member
I hadn't even heard of them until Angry Joe showed me the light. Grats to him for trying to bring awareness about these plucky upstarts.

I can't believe that this Mario Party thing got to its tenth entry before Angry Joe introduced it to me, and 1.99 million of my friends.

This Mario character sure has a bright future.
 

Jebusman

Banned
Well he made the video, edited it, devoted time that could have been spent editing, filming something else. This is the dudes only job, and he probably took a decent hit financially from the claim.

But was he ever entitled to that money in the first place? If I spent 1000 hours working on a masterpiece of a video, and put it on youtube, should I demand the expectation of financial compensation for it?

Because that's what I'm getting from AngryJoe, and a large part of the Let's Play community in general. They live in a world where they HAVE to be compensated for their work. The very idea of doing this stuff without any compensation (or the "potential" compensation going to the owner of the property they are using) is lost on them.

There's no personal passion left.

That's why I shed no tears for Joe.
 
The fact this needs to be said and with a sarcasm part is the really sad part.

Youtube personalities like Angry Joe, TotalBiscuit, etc making money on talking about games and sharing their opinion on it.

Websites like Giant Bomb, Gamespot, Eurogamer, etc making money on talking about games and sharing their opinion on it.

The fact that some people in this thread are apparently "okay" with one and not the other is hypocritical.

Yeah, if you overlook the simple fact that websites like IGN etc all have agreements with the companies whose content they present/edit/report that regulate monetization and copyright stuff, then sure...

But yeah, hypocrites and such.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Did you really not understand what he was saying? For a console doing as poorly as the WiiU, any extra coverage or awareness could help the console. Angry Joe making a positive WiiU video for a couple million viewers is almost like spending hundreds of thousands on a TV commercial for the same size audience.

It's nice that there are so many people trying to make things easier for dumb people like me.
or people who can't identify a joke or irony, I can't be sure which one is really true.

He's talking about 2 million people that are following a guy playing PC and Xbox games (and recently PS4) as if those 2 million would suddenly see the light of Wii U and go out and buy the console and the games, now that Angry Joe would play them. That's not how youtube works. This is not some exclusive audience. Whoever uses youtube as a main hub for game info also knows that they can follow more channels covering things that they are interested in. So if someone is even vaguely interested in Nintendo games would also follow some other channels besides AJ's by now. Because he showed a total of 1 game last year and 1 game this year. That's fucking it. If someone is so not interested in Nintendo games that they don't know about them until AJ's show them 99% won't spend money on a Nintendo console and games.

I'm not talking about Nintendo policy. I'm talking about AJ's entitlement and the crazy assumption that any audience relevant for Nintendo among those 2 millions subcribers is lost. That's all.
 
Top Bottom