BigBallinStalin wrote:Woodruff wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:AndyDufresne wrote:This has been on the news for a couple of days, but thought I would post it on our Off Topics: Nintendo grabs money, control from fans promoting its games on YoutubeIn what's sure to be one of its most unpopular moves in recent memory, Nintendo has decided to claim ownership over many popular YouTube videos featuring its games. Specifically, they've targeted “Let's Play” videos, where online personalities play games and offer running commentary.
These videos serve as a sort of mega-hybrid between a livestream, a game review, and a walkthrough. Nintendo has decided that because the videos lean so heavily on their products for the visual element that they fall under their copyright. As of now, the advertising revenue from these videos will go to Nintendo instead of the YouTube creator.
Nintendo is using Youtube's Content ID system to make this happen. The service searches Youtube for video or audio that matches a company's content, and then gives them control over that Youtube submission. “Identify user-uploaded videos comprised entirely OR partially of their content, and choose, in advance, what they want to happen when those videos are found,” the official page states. “Make money from them. Get stats on them. Or block them from YouTube altogether.”
The real question that nobody seems able to answer right now is why Nintendo is bothering to legally pursue fans who are spreading the word about their games. YouTube ad revenue is famously low, and the earnings from Nintendo videos are virtually nil by the standards of an international corporation.
What a bunch of shitheads (Nintendo, that is). Another example of how copyright laws reduce innovation and production.
For me, it's not even that...it's incredibly short-sighted on their part. These guys are MAKING NINTENDO MONEY by doing what they do. Why would they want to cut that out?
Aside from that, like thegreekdog, I'm rather "meh" as far as whether these guys get paid or not. I just think it's a dumb move.
Sure, there's that--from Nintendo's perspective, and yeah it doesn't make sense. I'm just responding to the typical argument I hear which supports patents and copyright law.
I'm miffed about their money being stolen by Nintendo because they provided a service which people demanded, and through that demand, some portion clicks on Ads at their YouTube channel. The ad revenue can serve as supplemental income for those who provide valuable services. When Nintendo and its swamp of lawyers bully YouTube and shove their USG-mandated laws in their face, then we should all be annoyed that a company + government laws is stealing revenue which was honestly made.
Does that not work the other way? These folks wouldn't be able to create their service which people demanded without Nintendo creating the games. That's why I'm meh.