• 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.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Jim Sterling is being sued by Digital Homicide

gocubs

Member
Mar 27, 2012
349
0
0
Glad to see this wasted lawsuit finally come to a end. Digital Homicide should pay for all the lawyer fees.
 

gossi

Member
Feb 18, 2013
4,690
1
0
Has anyone from DH commented on this?, are they still making games?

From memory: I think Steam stopped publishing their games after they tried suing Steam customers for negative reviews. Unless I'm mixing them up with another company.
 

danowat

Banned
Aug 30, 2014
13,908
553
665
From memory: I think Steam stopped publishing their games after they tried suing Steam customers for negative reviews. Unless I'm mixing them up with another company.

I just wondered if they were making games and releasing them elsewhere, or have they just shut up shop.
 

Jimmyfenix

Member
Oct 27, 2013
21,587
0
695
Glad it's over...

Now he's ready to get sued by Nintendo for telling everyone it's okay to pirate their games in his latest video.

I mean , I like the guy and I find his videos funny, with often very interesting critiques of the game industry in general, but I do feel like he's "fishing for controversy" and that his constant slandering will eventually backfire on him. He kinda got lucky that Digital Homicide were a bunch of amateurs who love painting themselves in a corner... But when a big publishers bites, he'll probaly regret going to war.

I get that he doesn't like the fact companies are trying to take a youtubers ad revenu for using footages from their games... Although seeing him constantly gloat about abusing loopholes in the content ID system doesn't exactly make him seem like the "good guy" in this story. It's like a guy that gloats that he pirates games because he hates DRM... That doesn't really make you a "good" guy... And gloating about it in your videos certainly isn't the best idea imho...

He's abusing the system in place and gloating about it ,claiming he has every right to use any footage from anything and ignoring existing copyright laws. Granted, there are clauses about creating new content out of existing footage, but still ,you're using something you did not make yourself to generate traffic on your own account, so you're at least partially accountable and responsible if you upload content from other companies/users/etc.

Sterling seems to forget something about the game and studios he covers, it's their game, their IPs, their brands and their reputation, and they are "kinda" right in claiming that "borrowing" content and using it to generate views is akin to stealing content, in some regards.

If I take a movie trailer and use it to generate clicks but doing a "reaction video", I fully expect the movie company to take ownership and maybe file for a takedown... Seems logical to me, in a sense. Yes, I'm adding something, creating new context, but I'm still using their footage, their IP to generate clicks, so it seems natural to me to perhaps I should not be making all the money off these videos. Granted, there's something wrong with a system where all the money goes to the publisher and none goes to the youtuber, so I get his anger, but still, there are better ways to get the message across than "copyright deadlock" and gloating about it.

It doesn't help that Sterling often "borrows" footage mostly to shame developpers , then proceeds to basically slander the company for the whole duration of the episode. So you're using their footage AND basically telling the world your company is garbage, your games are garbage, your employees are bad and whatever you feel like saying sucks about your franchises, your corporate identity and so on. You're talking things they worked their ass off creating, then slandering them in the process, and you expect to be able to keep doing it week after week without pissing off anyone.

Granted, youtube personalities have a right to have opinions, but to me journalists should try to remain neutral, objective , unbiaised, to keep an open mind and defintively not to slander developpers like he often does. Granted, Sterling claims he's not a game journalist, he's not a "reviewer", arguments which he uses to justify his opinions... But in the end, I feel he often acts as a rather "toxic" individual, treating game companies as evil, power hungry corporations hell bent on sucking all fun out of videogames.

Still, he has nice boglins, so all is forgiven.

Fuck Nintendo
 

Maximo

Member
Jun 23, 2014
8,078
0
0
Glad it's over...

Now he's ready to get sued by Nintendo for telling everyone it's okay to pirate their games in his latest video.

I mean , I like the guy and I find his videos funny, with often very interesting critiques of the game industry in general, but I do feel like he's "fishing for controversy" and that his constant slandering will eventually backfire on him. He kinda got lucky that Digital Homicide were a bunch of amateurs who love painting themselves in a corner... But when a big publishers bites, he'll probaly regret going to war.

I get that he doesn't like the fact companies are trying to take a youtubers ad revenu for using footages from their games... Although seeing him constantly gloat about abusing loopholes in the content ID system doesn't exactly make him seem like the "good guy" in this story. It's like a guy that gloats that he pirates games because he hates DRM... That doesn't really make you a "good" guy... And gloating about it in your videos certainly isn't the best idea imho...

He's abusing the system in place and gloating about it ,claiming he has every right to use any footage from anything and ignoring existing copyright laws. Granted, there are clauses about creating new content out of existing footage, but still ,you're using something you did not make yourself to generate traffic on your own account, so you're at least partially accountable and responsible if you upload content from other companies/users/etc.

Sterling seems to forget something about the game and studios he covers, it's their game, their IPs, their brands and their reputation, and they are "kinda" right in claiming that "borrowing" content and using it to generate views is akin to stealing content, in some regards.

If I take a movie trailer and use it to generate clicks but doing a "reaction video", I fully expect the movie company to take ownership and maybe file for a takedown... Seems logical to me, in a sense. Yes, I'm adding something, creating new context, but I'm still using their footage, their IP to generate clicks, so it seems natural to me to perhaps I should not be making all the money off these videos. Granted, there's something wrong with a system where all the money goes to the publisher and none goes to the youtuber, so I get his anger, but still, there are better ways to get the message across than "copyright deadlock" and gloating about it.

It doesn't help that Sterling often "borrows" footage mostly to shame developpers , then proceeds to basically slander the company for the whole duration of the episode. So you're using their footage AND basically telling the world your company is garbage, your games are garbage, your employees are bad and whatever you feel like saying sucks about your franchises, your corporate identity and so on. You're talking things they worked their ass off creating, then slandering them in the process, and you expect to be able to keep doing it week after week without pissing off anyone.

Granted, youtube personalities have a right to have opinions, but to me journalists should try to remain neutral, objective , unbiaised, to keep an open mind and defintively not to slander developpers like he often does. Granted, Sterling claims he's not a game journalist, he's not a "reviewer", arguments which he uses to justify his opinions... But in the end, I feel he often acts as a rather "toxic" individual, treating game companies as evil, power hungry corporations hell bent on sucking all fun out of videogames.

Still, he has nice boglins, so all is forgiven.

If it was just straight up walkthroughs with no commentary or edits I would agree that Nintendo is in their right to claim or perhaps strike people, but Nintendo is disgusting with their content ID cliams. People can do Reviews/Previews/News Segments and if ANY of it includes a few seconds of Music or Footage owned by Nintendo it gets claimed, thats not protecting their IP thats being fucking assholes and abusing a broken system to profit off peoples own hard work for minimal monetary gain.
Nintendo has no respect from me in regards to the dictatorship they have taken with Youtube, im glad I don't give Nintendo any money with how they treat their dedicated fanbase both on Youtube and paying customers.
 
Aug 25, 2014
695
0
0
Really glad it's over this went on for faaaaar too long

I really just want Jim to post in here just saying

"Thank god for me"

would be amazing
 
Apr 1, 2013
27,155
28
580
Kent, England
Glad it's over...

Now he's ready to get sued by Nintendo for telling everyone it's okay to pirate their games in his latest video.

I mean , I like the guy and I find his videos funny, with often very interesting critiques of the game industry in general, but I do feel like he's "fishing for controversy" and that his constant slandering will eventually backfire on him. He kinda got lucky that Digital Homicide were a bunch of amateurs who love painting themselves in a corner... But when a big publishers bites, he'll probaly regret going to war.

I get that he doesn't like the fact companies are trying to take a youtubers ad revenu for using footages from their games... Although seeing him constantly gloat about abusing loopholes in the content ID system doesn't exactly make him seem like the "good guy" in this story. It's like a guy that gloats that he pirates games because he hates DRM... That doesn't really make you a "good" guy... And gloating about it in your videos certainly isn't the best idea imho...

He's abusing the system in place and gloating about it ,claiming he has every right to use any footage from anything and ignoring existing copyright laws. Granted, there are clauses about creating new content out of existing footage, but still ,you're using something you did not make yourself to generate traffic on your own account, so you're at least partially accountable and responsible if you upload content from other companies/users/etc.

Sterling seems to forget something about the game and studios he covers, it's their game, their IPs, their brands and their reputation, and they are "kinda" right in claiming that "borrowing" content and using it to generate views is akin to stealing content, in some regards.

If I take a movie trailer and use it to generate clicks but doing a "reaction video", I fully expect the movie company to take ownership and maybe file for a takedown... Seems logical to me, in a sense. Yes, I'm adding something, creating new context, but I'm still using their footage, their IP to generate clicks, so it seems natural to me to perhaps I should not be making all the money off these videos. Granted, there's something wrong with a system where all the money goes to the publisher and none goes to the youtuber, so I get his anger, but still, there are better ways to get the message across than "copyright deadlock" and gloating about it.

It doesn't help that Sterling often "borrows" footage mostly to shame developpers , then proceeds to basically slander the company for the whole duration of the episode. So you're using their footage AND basically telling the world your company is garbage, your games are garbage, your employees are bad and whatever you feel like saying sucks about your franchises, your corporate identity and so on. You're talking things they worked their ass off creating, then slandering them in the process, and you expect to be able to keep doing it week after week without pissing off anyone.

Granted, youtube personalities have a right to have opinions, but to me journalists should try to remain neutral, objective , unbiaised, to keep an open mind and defintively not to slander developpers like he often does. Granted, Sterling claims he's not a game journalist, he's not a "reviewer", arguments which he uses to justify his opinions... But in the end, I feel he often acts as a rather "toxic" individual, treating game companies as evil, power hungry corporations hell bent on sucking all fun out of videogames.

Still, he has nice boglins, so all is forgiven.

You make no sense. Copyright laws would support him, but you've got companies like Nintendo and Activision claiming his videos regardless of whether they fall under Fair Use or not. You're acting like his 'copyright deadlock' is a bad thing, but he does it to break the automated systems which try to monetise videos that he puts out without adverts on (because he makes his Jimquisition revenue through Patreon).

This sort of shit probably needs to go to court in a Class Action lawsuit so that courts can determine what constitutes Fair Use and publishers like Nintendo who try and claim every video get told to go fuck themselves.

That being said, as much as I dislike their abuse of YouTube's Content ID, I don't agree with Jim's stance on pirating their games in response.