Nintendo To Begin YouTube Affiliate Program

[FAST6191]

Comparing Let's plays with cinema movies is kinda dumb tbh. and even if you are not claiming to have created the game shown in a Let's Play, the characters of a game don't have a cameo in your videos, your videos are about them. Also keep in mind that you are earning money from the Ad service that YouTube presents not from selling your Let's Play's. That's a huge difference that people tend to forget.
Wreck it Ralph is a product that you bought. Earning money through a product that uses copyrighted assets or characters is illegal unless both companies are okay with it (in other words the creators of the movie have to pay).
Let's Plays is a hobby that you don't buy to watch. Lets Players earn money because they activated ads provided by YouTube not because they sell videos that use copyrighted assets or characters.
If ninty should leech from somebodies money then it's the amount of money that YouTube earns, not the creator of the video.

Though various IP law systems could use a tweak the fact remains it is much the same logic as far as the law is concerned.

What? That does not change a single thing and is functionally identical. I do not pay to watch TV either (well TV license aside) and you can bet TV show makers, that also do not sell their TV show to me, at least until the DVD comes out, are troubled by this.
In fact have a video detailing exactly that (skip to around 2:30).


The Youtube vs Viacom stuff more or less did this, indeed it may well have been what let to this sort of thing we see today.

Nothing you said makes any sense in any reading of any functioning intellectual property system I have ever read up on (and they are all pretty similar in the broad strokes).

 

[Foxi4]

People are mixing up terms. There's a huge difference between character cameos in "Wreck it Ralph" which is an original movie in and out of itself and transformative work which is taking a pre-existing product and adding your own creative input into it, be it in the form of a review, a riff, a parody or any other such modification/transformation. If I take the Mona Lisa, give it a mustache and a beard and put a fedora on her head to make a statement about neckbeards, that's transformative work. I just used 100% of someone's painting but I changed the message entirely, making it a whole new piece. Now, for example if I take New Super Mario Bros. and make a "machinima" using the in-game engine, I took the original work and transformed it by adding new expression and meaning (video game changed into a "movie" with its own plot giving it a new meaning). That's fair use right there.

 

[grossaffe]

Comparing Let's plays with cinema movies is kinda dumb tbh. and even if you are not claiming to have created the game shown in a Let's Play, the characters of a game don't have a cameo in your videos, your videos are about them. Also keep in mind that you are earning money from the Ad service that YouTube presents not from selling your Let's Play's. That's a huge difference that people tend to forget.
Wreck it Ralph is a product that you bought. Earning money through a product that uses copyrighted assets or characters is illegal unless both companies are okay with it (in other words the creators of the movie have to pay).
Let's Plays is a hobby that you don't buy to watch. Lets Players earn money because they activated ads provided by YouTube not because they sell videos that use copyrighted assets or characters.
If ninty should leech from somebodies money then it's the amount of money that YouTube earns, not the creator of the video.

So your argument is that the difference is because money is made through advertising? That certainly doesn't make a difference, otherwise network TV stations which play over the air would not have to pay to air movies because people don't pay to get, say, NBC. NBC makes its money from advertising, so why can't they air Wreck-it Ralph and just happen to get money because people pay them to put in advertisements at certain intervals? The bottom line is that their Intellectual Property is being monetized by other people. Just because it's not directly sold does not make it legal.

 

[FAST6191]

People are mixing up terms. There's a huge difference between character cameos in "Wreck it Ralph" which is an original movie in and out of itself and transformative work which is taking a pre-existing product and adding your own creative input into it, be it in the form of a review, a riff, a parody or any other such modification/transformation. If I take the Mona Lisa, give it a mustache and a beard and put a fedora on her head to make a statement about neckbeards, that's transformative work. I just used 100% of someone's painting but I changed the message entirely, making it a whole new piece. Now, for example if I take New Super Mario Bros. and make a "machinima" using the in-game engine, I took the original work and transformed it by adding new expression and meaning (video game changed into a "movie" with its own plot giving it a new meaning). That's fair use right there.

To be fair the mona lisa is probably (photographs of paintings and the like get very odd and as you probably do not have an older than copyright length digital image..... it is the same with public domain books and typesetting and sometimes fonts) whatever the local equivalent of public domain is at this point, also without any trademark issues.

I am not sure machinima falls under traditional fair use either, not to mention the earlier examples of review and, at least in some countries, parody are enshrined aspects of fair use. Even in straight up animation suites the licensing can get quite tricky, a more clear cut example probably coming in video codecs (internal use vs sale vs whatever).

 

[grossaffe]

To be fair the mona lisa is probably (photographs of paintings and the like get very odd and as you probably do not have an older than copyright length digital image..... it is the same with public domain books and typesetting and sometimes fonts) whatever the local equivalent of public domain is at this point, also without any trademark issues.

I am not sure machinima falls under traditional fair use either, not to mention the earlier examples of review and, at least in some countries, parody are enshrined aspects of fair use. Even in straight up animation suites the licensing can get quite tricky, a more clear cut example probably coming in video codecs (internal use vs sale vs whatever).

Yeah, Machinima is a grey area at best.

 

[The Catboy]

I feel like this video towards the end really covers the problems with Nintendo and their stance on Youtube. Even if they are doing this, it's not going to help them because it's still going to push people away from making videos for their products. Compared to Sony, that allows you to stream your games for free, straight from the system.
Nintendo is killing their own products with how much they seem to hate the internet. I know they make Nintendo Directs, but those really only draw in the same people over and over again, which isn't going to help them.
Nintendo promised the Wii U would go all out and they've barely allowed it to move.

 

[KingVamp]

I wonder what Foxi4 think about this.

 

[Gahars]

I wonder what Foxi4 think about this.

The video or the youtuber?

Foxi4 may be a resilient man, but I don't know how anyone can stomach more than 30 seconds of this guy's output.

 

[Clydefrosch]

the weird thing is, people still think its the 1970's when word of mouth was actually a thing, because people didnt have the internet and whole free websites in the business of reviewing games.

 

[RchUncleSkeleton]

Nintendo Begins it's own undoing. Farewell old friend, you're really screwing yourself.

 

[CathyRina]

So your argument is that the difference is because money is made through advertising? That certainly doesn't make a difference, otherwise network TV stations which play over the air would not have to pay to air movies because people don't pay to get, say, NBC. NBC makes its money from advertising, so why can't they air Wreck-it Ralph and just happen to get money because people pay them to put in advertisements at certain intervals? The bottom line is that their Intellectual Property is being monetized by other people. Just because it's not directly sold does not make it legal.

There is really one rule if you are doing RPG maker games and want to sell it.
All assets need to be yours, if not you can't sell them. However you can add adfly do your download link if you can't sell it because you have lets say bowser in it.
It's the same issue just in a simpler form.

 

[FAST6191]

Damn it KingVamp. I had forgotten that guy existed.

There is really one rule if you are doing RPG maker games and want to sell it.
All assets need to be yours, if not you can't sell them. However you can add adfly do your download link if you can't sell it because you have lets say bowser in it.
It's the same issue just in a simpler form.

You can, it is much the same as you can probably find someone to buy a copy of your bowser laden game. It could still see you pinged either way.

 

[KingVamp]

For the record, I'm on the fence about all this.

The video or the youtuber?

Foxi4 may be a resilient man, but I don't know how anyone can stomach more than 30 seconds of this guy's output.

So, it's the guy himself, not his actual opinions that bothers him?

Damn it KingVamp. I had forgotten that guy existed.

lol

 

[osirisjem]

You clearly hate Nintendo so guess it's time to change that Mario avatar.

I exclusively own Nintendo consoles.
I'll admit it's tiring to see Nintendo make mistake after mistake.
It's hard to understand a company that would release a console like the Wii U and think it was going to do well.

 

[FAST6191]

[aosin]So, it's the guy himself, not his actual opinions that bothers him?

His content, his ideas on things/logic regarding issues, his delivery.... other than him seemingly having a tripod and a knowledge of what a cut is his stuff is basically everything I, and seemingly many others, hate about the youtube set. That he also looks somewhat like me is just salt in the wound.

I think it was Guild that used the term basement dwelling shitnerd, rarely do I encounter terms so apt.

 

[grossaffe]

There is really one rule if you are doing RPG maker games and want to sell it.
All assets need to be yours, if not you can't sell them. However you can add adfly do your download link if you can't sell it because you have lets say bowser in it.
It's the same issue just in a simpler form.

And so that differs from my example of free over-the-air broadcast supported by ads?

 

[CathyRina]

And so that differs from my example of free over-the-air broadcast supported by ads?

The point was the last part. "Just because it's not directly sold does not make it legal."
RPG maker games using copyrighted assests that are indirectly sold by using ads instead of charging money are legal.
It's the same thing with YouTube. The only difference is that YT became so mainstream that companies wanted them to change their content rules for stuff like movies, TV series and Music. In the process creating a confusion in which we are now about game footage. Watching a full gameplay of a game doesn't hurt the sales at all. Sales for games like RE6 or COD are stable even though the majority of YouTubers could say that they don't like these games for whatever reason. Many companies see this but Nintendon't. Instead of making their own channels watch worthy they just wanna grab other people's money.

 

[FAST6191]

The point was the last part. "Just because it's not directly sold does not make it legal."
RPG maker games using copyrighted assests that are indirectly sold by using ads instead of charging money are legal.

In what universe?

 

[Foxi4]

I wonder what Foxi4 think about this.

If I had any more power than I do now, anyone posting AlphaOmegaSh*t would get +25% Warn for the first offense and +75% on the second. This entails a permanent IP ban. It's a good thing that I don't, but I'm still contemplating removing the video from your post.

;O;

So, it's the guy himself, not his actual opinions that bothers him?

I never got far enough into any of his videos to learn more about his opinions, his demeanor was always enough for me to close the tab within 15 seconds tops.

 

[CathyRina]

In what universe?

This Universe by reading the EULA which nobody does.