Nintendo Takes Money from Lets Players

[Hobbes]

then they should get these weird things called "jobs"

except they already have jobs

Then what are they complaining for?

It's kinda like if someone bumps into you on the street and steals your wallet. Even if you only had 10 units of currency in there, you'd still complain about your money being stolen, no?

It's not quite like that, since they aren't taking money they already had, they are just preventing them from further profiting.

 

[Verbal Rhythm]

Since none of the LP'ers own the entirety of the content they upload, I personally believe Nintendo has each and every right to place ads in LP videos and make money off of it.

When someone makes a remix or cover a song, they don't exactly own "the entirety of the content they upload", but wouldn't you agree that any ad revenue should go to the remix/cover artist instead of the creator of the original song? If Nintendo is really itching to make money off of other people's video, I believe VGM videos uploaded by people like Gilvasunner would be fair game.

 

[Hobbes]

Since none of the LP'ers own the entirety of the content they upload, I personally believe Nintendo has each and every right to place ads in LP videos and make money off of it.

When someone makes a remix or cover a song, they don't exactly own "the entirety of the content they upload", but wouldn't you agree that any ad revenue should go to the remix/cover artist instead of the creator of the original song? If Nintendo is really itching to make money off of other people's video, I believe VGM videos uploaded by people like Gilvasunner would be fair game.

I was exactly thinking of that. AFAIK, artists can't remove covers of their songs from YouTube, nor claim any ad revenue from them. Maybe the difference is that LP'ers are actually showing copyrighted content (although with their additions) whereas artists that remix/cover a song are providing something different enough? I'm no copyright expert, but I'm guessing that may be it.

 

[Baby Mario Bloops]

I predict that a lot of videos will not be backwards since the less original they are, the more safe the video is from copywrite infringement.

Or they could just show the video as unlisted and show select people it.

(Sorry if that idea was already thrown out; didn't read the entire thread)

 

[chillv]

Since none of the LP'ers own the entirety of the content they upload, I personally believe Nintendo has each and every right to place ads in LP videos and make money off of it.

When someone makes a remix or cover a song, they don't exactly own "the entirety of the content they upload", but wouldn't you agree that any ad revenue should go to the remix/cover artist instead of the creator of the original song? If Nintendo is really itching to make money off of other people's video, I believe VGM videos uploaded by people like Gilvasunner would be fair game.

I was exactly thinking of that. AFAIK, artists can't remove covers of their songs from YouTube, nor claim any ad revenue from them. Maybe the difference is that LP'ers are actually showing copyrighted content (although with their additions) whereas artists that remix/cover a song are providing something different enough? I'm no copyright expert, but I'm guessing that may be it.

Since none of the LP'ers own the entirety of the content they upload, I personally believe Nintendo has each and every right to place ads in LP videos and make money off of it. But, since the LP'ers are giving Nintendo's content something additional, as the person quoted in the IGN video said, the fair thing would be to design a profit-sharing model that could work for both parts. Nintendo losing some relatively minor profits won't harm them at all, and LP'ers getting profit for something they in first place shouldn't even have expected to profit from makes the profit-sharing model a perfect compromise, at least in my opinion.

Or well, maybe they expected to make a living by making YouTube videos, which is dumb.

What these two said

 

[2257]

pssst

those are the same person

 

[Rocker64]

Question, does this effect AVGN or people who just do reviews?

I believe it also effects reviewers.

Are the LPers that are bitching really just in it for the money or are they really fervent about entertaining people?

IMO, half and half, i'm sure plenty are just bitching about money but i also know that quite a lot are "really fervent about entertaining people", to use your own words.

 

[Pokemon DP]

if someone wants to make money off of something they love, why can't they? It's not like they're outright stealing and claiming it's their own material.

 

[Crackin355]

if someone wants to make money off of something they love, why can't they? It's not like they're outright stealing and claiming it's their own material.

I agree with this. Making money and enjoying something are not exclusive to each other.

Personally if I was doing something I enjoyed and I had the ability to earn enough money to live off of, I would do that.

 

[Purple Yoshi]

if someone wants to make money off of something they love, why can't they? It's not like they're outright stealing and claiming it's their own material.

I agree with this. Making money and enjoying something are not exclusive to each other.

Personally if I was doing something I enjoyed and I had the ability to earn enough money to live off of, I would do that.

I'm just trying to work this out. I'm not exactly a legal expert, but I really don't know if this is legal. LPing in itself is fine, in my opinion. It's just the getting money part that crosses the legal line. Because they're not getting paid by Nintendo to promote the game, they're being paid by Youtube to put adds on their videos. But, you know, the videos happen to be about other things than the adds.

I actually have no idea why youtube videos are monetized in the first place.

 

[YamiHoshi]

Everyone, all you earn on YouTube has to be Taxed, so it is a real job., not all jobs are related to putting your arms on Supermarket products, and put them into the shelfs.

I actually find it even worse people started to see it now, instead of a half year ago, when it actually started to happen.
This is my most accurate opinion about this:
http://gbatemp.net/threads/nintendo-claiming-ownership-on-youtube-videos-featuring-their-product.347986/page-9#post-4645300

 

[2257]

I actually have no idea why youtube videos are monetized in the first place.

you... you don't??

youtube has to make money, you know. running the servers for the third most popular website in the world can't be cheap

 

[Purple Yoshi]

I actually have no idea why youtube videos are monetized in the first place.

you... you don't??

youtube has to make money, you know. running the servers for the third most popular website in the world can't be cheap

No, I get THAT. I don't get why money is going to the uploaders in the first place. I didn't even know you COULD get money from it until a few months ago.

 

[Crackin355]

I actually have no idea why youtube videos are monetized in the first place.

you... you don't??

youtube has to make money, you know. running the servers for the third most popular website in the world can't be cheap

No, I get THAT. I don't get why money is going to the uploaders in the first place. I didn't even know you COULD get money from it until a few months ago.

Probably because the user is the one that created the video. The game is Nintendo's, the rest is the person (Commentary, Editing, Recording, etc.). Not everybody that LP's get money, just the ones that are popular enough to get a partnership.

 

[Lorenz Hellman Gloucester]

http://penny-arcade.com/report/article/nintendo-takes-legal-action-against-its-own-community-claims-rights-over-yo

Apparently Nintendo is getting all money made off of lets plays of Nintendo games.

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.”

Nintendo can make money off of these videos, see their stats and even block them altogether if they want.

I recommend reading the article, it isn't actually that long and i can't summarize *bleep* for my life.


This pisses me off. A lot. Over the past few years i have slowly started to dislike Nintendo for some of their (IMO) poor choices, but this just pushes it over the *bleep*ing edge. This is ridiculous.

Discuss. (Would this topic fit better in Entertainment and Media? I wasn't sure.)

you DO know that nintendo is only getting 20% of the money from it, right?

 

[Rocker64]

http://penny-arcade.com/report/article/nintendo-takes-legal-action-against-its-own-community-claims-rights-over-yo

Apparently Nintendo is getting all money made off of lets plays of Nintendo games.

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.”

Nintendo can make money off of these videos, see their stats and even block them altogether if they want.

I recommend reading the article, it isn't actually that long and i can't summarize *bleep* for my life.


This pisses me off. A lot. Over the past few years i have slowly started to dislike Nintendo for some of their (IMO) poor choices, but this just pushes it over the *bleep*ing edge. This is ridiculous.

Discuss. (Would this topic fit better in Entertainment and Media? I wasn't sure.)

you DO know that nintendo is only getting 20% of the money from it, right?

Tell me where you got this information.

 

[Pokemon DP]

I'm just trying to work this out. I'm not exactly a legal expert, but I really don't know if this is legal. LPing in itself is fine, in my opinion. It's just the getting money part that crosses the legal line. Because they're not getting paid by Nintendo to promote the game, they're being paid by Youtube to put adds on their videos. But, you know, the videos happen to be about other things than the adds.

The game was made by a studio owned by Nintendo, and then sold to the consumer for whatever the base retail price is in the consumer's country. That is the full extent of the transaction, nothing more, nothing less. In fact, publishers trying to dominant the consumer's experience even well after they've purchased their copy of the game is one of the biggest problems with the game's industry at the moments (EA, Sony, and Ubisoft are just a few of the particularly terrible examples).

The copy of the game the LPer has was still legally purchased (I hope), and it is now their own copy. They aren't burning it and selling the fake copies for their own profit; they aren't claiming property ownership; they aren't stealing any services or products from Nintendo. They are simply making a video of themselves playing their own purchased copy of the game, the same leeway that allows game reviewers, journalists, and this very Wiki to use trademarked content from the games they cover. Last I checked, Porple is making a profit off this site.

 

[2257]

No, I get THAT. I don't get why money is going to the uploaders in the first place. I didn't even know you COULD get money from it until a few months ago.

if youtube pays people who upload popular content, it encourages them to stick around and put more content on youtube. this keeps people coming back to youtube to see the new content from channels they enjoyed watching before, and so youtube also makes a profit on it

Last I checked, Porple is making a profit off this site.

i thought he was taking a loss. afaik the level of advertising doesnt cover the server's price

 

[YamiHoshi]

Actually, YouTube is so well advertised in every possible way (free and paid), Google makes lots of income without actively working on anything else (only passively).

 

[Driftmaster130]

I uploaded an SMS music clip for my Let's Play (added it to the video) but it said it was claimed by Nintendo. What happened?

 

[YamiHoshi]

Which of the 10 is it?
Your last Video was from 2 months ago, so I don't know which one it is.

And that Nintendo is in fact Wiinoma, which Claims random Nintendo-related Videos on any possible time (either after Uploading, or after months).

 

[Pokemon DP]

i thought he was taking a loss. afaik the level of advertising doesnt cover the server's price

Maybe he is, I haven't asked him about his financial situation personally. Either way, my point still stands that this site operates on the same liberties that should allow LPers to make advertising revenue off their videos.

 

[2257]

Actually, YouTube is so well advertised in every possible way (free and paid), Google makes lots of income without actively working on anything else (only passively).

are you... talking to me?

 

[Purple Yoshi]

I uploaded an SMS music clip for my Let's Play (added it to the video) but it said it was claimed by Nintendo. What happened?

Was it from the original soundtrack? Because a lot of people who upload soundtracks get them removed.

 

[Walkazo]

i thought he was taking a loss. afaik the level of advertising doesnt cover the server's price

Maybe he is, I haven't asked him about his financial situation personally. Either way, my point still stands that this site operates on the same liberties that should allow LPers to make advertising revenue off their videos.

Let's hope Nintendo doesn't agree that databases filled with their artwork, screenshots, as well as summaries and direct quotations operate on the same liberties as LPers. They're piggish enough to bite one hand that feeds 'em... Although our copyrighted-material-to-wiki-generated-content ratio is a lot better than LPs, and that'll probably keep us safe and "fair use". Hopefully.

Anyway, what they're doing to the LPs is contemptuous. Nintendo pays all sorts of staff and companies and whatnot for advertising, but then turns around and says that LPers getting paid from external sources is a bad thing? How is that fair? How is that logical? You'd think Nintendo would be glad for the free advertising, but no, apparently it's not enough. Yes, the LPers are making money off playing games that Nintendo made, but how is Nintendo making money off videos that the LPers made any different? Aside, of course, from the fact that the money Nintendo will make is a pittance to them, rather than a paycheck for the fans, which actually makes the whole thing a lot more greedy than what the LPers are doing, and only slightly less petty and self-defeating than removing the videos outright would have been.