Oh, ok. I didn't know that I was a mod, thanks.
Some people just like to troll...
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
AngryJoe receives a Nintendo copyright claim. Hope they enjoyed the ad revenue; Done
- Thread starter Khalifa Jayy
- Start date
Oh, ok. I didn't know that I was a mod, thanks.
Some people just like to troll...
TheSlySoul
Member
People like to think the video does not edit itself.
Oh well, it isn't like you can get a $60,000 salary being an editor... oh wait, you can!
protomouse
Member
Under copyright law they kind of are. Re-publishing an entire work with added commentary is hard to consider fair use. Let's plays aren't reviews.
Publisher's copyright claims in these cases are righteous. YouTube personalities tend to come across as though they have the right to make money off of other people's work. You could of course argue that Nintendo would benefit more from the good will of YouTubers (which I believe), but it's pretty bad form by these Let's Play'ers to victimize themselves when they're not in the legal clear.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I explained through the thread several times.
You can't create a direct correlation between Joe not doing Nintendo videos and sales, that's NOT the point. The point is that Youtube is an efficient marketing tool,if Minecraft created a sinergy with Youtubers and if it's now a 2 billion IP, it's partially because of it.
So, Nintendo is struggling with sales, why would they not use efficetively or partially ruin such a tool because of a few pennies?. You want your product to be more visible not less. If Youtubers and streamers stop playing your games, your product awareness is reduced in those places, replaced by EA, Ubisoft, Sony, MS games and console and whatever company that isn't as backwards as you are.
When the Joe or the biggest Youtuber ever, are openly annoyed with you, that also creates a negative publicity that is innecessary and damaging when your games and consoles aren't that successful in the last years.
So yeah, Nintendo products aren't that successful anymore, so they want to Joe, and every damn Youtuber out there to speak about Mario Party 10, SSB and the Wii U, because they need it, because more awareness is a good thing, even if there isn't a 1:1 correlation between views and sales.
Now, I hope you stop the whole argument of "They didn't sold Wii U's because Youtubers aren't doing videos, iamrite?"
……forgetit
Member
Like I said, it's the guys full time job and only source of revenue. If an audience finds entertainment in what he does, then he deserves revenue for providing the entertainment. I mean would anyone say the guys who made Xplay back in the day deserved to be payed for the show?
Eyemus Lutt
Member
This is from a relevant GDC talk.
Video here:
http://gdcvault.com/play/1022063/How-YouTubers-and-Twitch-Streamers
You realize you're just proving the point that these youtubers are beneficial to small indie studios with no marketing budgets and not to giant publishers like Nintendo.
razgriz417
Member
This.
In the same way that Angry Joe is unwilling to be made a chump by uploading his Nintendo videos without monetization, Nintendo is unwilling to support someone simply uploading a video of their game and the money going to them.
It'd be nice if either side would just not give a shit, but they've both decided to say 'fuck you' to the other. "No free advertising for you, Nintendo", "No money for uploading you talking over our game, Joe". Neither is owed anything.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Right, the problem is that Joe would throw a fucking fit if someone did that.
call_kotaku
Member
It's just a bit alarming for Nintendo fans to support the company so voraciously even when they end up defending obviously bad decisions. Whatever you think about the Let's Play phenomenon, Nintendo doesn't gain anything by forcing popular youtubers to go cover their competitors' games. It was the same situation when Nintendo tried to shut down EVO, but thankfully they turned around on that.
You realize that the main point of my post was that Nintendo operates under completely different parameters than the small indie devs listed in that presentation, thus making that data worthless when talking about Nintendo?
He also doesn't have views.
I believe AbdallahSmash026 like GameXplain has a business relationship with Nintendo directly. He's certainly not big like AngryJoy but he has over 130K subscribers and over 30 million views. You can see that here.
AngryJoe isn't ignorant of what Nintendo does or how they handle things. He's covered it before. He should have expected this.
Furfuryl Furforate
Banned
not from a legal perspective or he'd have to go to court and argue it being transformative but he instead just chooses not to cover nintendo games anymore.
I didn't see the video, but wasn't it just a let's play? It's my impression that those take a lot less effort than editing/filming something like a review.
When it's about monetizing an edited review that just shows snippets from the game I'm actually on the youtubers side.
My response:
Suppose in this instance that he actually does a "Lets Watch: Angry Joe", where it's this specific Angry Joe video featuring oboshua's commentary and a recording of oboshua watching and making that commentary pasted onto the lower left corner of the Angry Joe video - would it be acceptable for oboshua to receive ad revenue or should Angry Joe take action?
My response:
So edgy!
There's a difference between doing this -vs.- doing it and stating (or showing) your opinion about the quality of the product you're uploading footage of.
Nintendo needs all the help they can get in terms of coverage. The past has shown that a very small thing can turn into a viral sensation/meme. Imagine if Nintendo did something like this for the Angry Luigi video for example. That small thing gave Mario Kart 8 a ton of mainstream coverage (it was even shown in local news media).
It's silly, shortsighted, and outdated -- just like so many other things about Nintendo.
If you don't think it's a relevant audience for Nintendo then that's on you. Nintendo should jump on anything that gets them more awareness but I don't expect Reggie to start making good decisions now.
Sure, Nintendo might not need free advertising as much as indie devs. But they're still complete and total idiots for prohibiting free advertising.
Free advertising that's proven to work way better than regular ad campaigns even.
milkham
Member
I think what happens in a case like this is that any ad revenue angry joe's video makes goes to the nintendo, so his video makes them money.
Auto-Reply
Member
Let's say you have a job that you love, you are privileged because you can chose your projects to work on, but you are not rich and you still depend on getting paid somehow.
Would you chose projects that don't generate any income? Dedicate time and effort into it?
Would you chose projects that don't generate any income? Dedicate time and effort into it?
They don't take it down. They just take all the money.
People are so backwards thinking on this. This guy have over 2 million followers. No matter what game he post he will make $XXX amount of money because he will get views from his followers. So Nintendo comes in and take this money since he post a video of their game. He work hard to get millions of viewer. It has nothing to do with the game itself. If it was the game then any "Joe" that post a video would get equal views. Good luck getting over triple digits.
He built this millions of viewer not ever covering Nintendo games at all. So why should they be allowed to take all the money just because he covers their game?
Furfuryl Furforate
Banned
I just pointed out a contradiction in the part I quoted I didn't go into the comparison at all.
TheSlySoul
Member
Indeed.
Wii U will die selling only 12 million units.
BBQMan
Member
It applies to any game really. Sure the biggest benefit will be for Indies. But you would still see a bump in sales for Big Name titles.
PreFire
Member
So Nintendo doesn't want anyone else to profit off their products. Do they know what people are doing with rare Amiibos on eBay?
Listen, I love Nintendo and grew up on it.. But you have to admit this is a shitty move on their part and anyone doing something similar.
I would rather them take down the video, but instead, the ad revenue Joe built up with his viewers (he gets more views on other lets plays and reviews) goes directly to Nintendo? He doesn't even get a fucking percentage?
This is the Twitter/YouTube era, Nintendo. We don't live in caves and we would like to share our content if we buy your game and upload it.
If the guy makes money by playing video games for a living (lucky guy) and a company will pull a dick move like Nintendo, why would you continue making videos with their content? That's like your boss calling you in to work, but without pay.
As much as some people hate lets plays, it's still a form of income. When DJ's play music on radio stations or clubs, they don't own the music but can play it and talk about it, and get paid for it without music artists complaining. Same thing when people do covers (sing a known song word for word but with their own voice) , I'm pretty sure they make money depending on how many views they get.
If I buy your product, I can do whatever I please with it as long as it's legal. This so called copyright infringement that Joe commited is nonsense. He bought (or was donated) the game, it's available to everyone, and he did what he and almost the entire gaming industry does, he streamed. Just because he had a nice chunk of money coming his way, you think it's yours because it contains your content? Wtf?
So if I'm wearing a name brand hat and mention how much I like the hat in my video, that name brand makes money off of my video if it gains ad revenue?
Sorry if I'm not making sense, it's early and I'm on mobile.
I love Nintendo, but this is a dick move. Btw I'm not defending Joe, I'm just generally speaking.
Listen, I love Nintendo and grew up on it.. But you have to admit this is a shitty move on their part and anyone doing something similar.
I would rather them take down the video, but instead, the ad revenue Joe built up with his viewers (he gets more views on other lets plays and reviews) goes directly to Nintendo? He doesn't even get a fucking percentage?
This is the Twitter/YouTube era, Nintendo. We don't live in caves and we would like to share our content if we buy your game and upload it.
If the guy makes money by playing video games for a living (lucky guy) and a company will pull a dick move like Nintendo, why would you continue making videos with their content? That's like your boss calling you in to work, but without pay.
As much as some people hate lets plays, it's still a form of income. When DJ's play music on radio stations or clubs, they don't own the music but can play it and talk about it, and get paid for it without music artists complaining. Same thing when people do covers (sing a known song word for word but with their own voice) , I'm pretty sure they make money depending on how many views they get.
If I buy your product, I can do whatever I please with it as long as it's legal. This so called copyright infringement that Joe commited is nonsense. He bought (or was donated) the game, it's available to everyone, and he did what he and almost the entire gaming industry does, he streamed. Just because he had a nice chunk of money coming his way, you think it's yours because it contains your content? Wtf?
So if I'm wearing a name brand hat and mention how much I like the hat in my video, that name brand makes money off of my video if it gains ad revenue?
Sorry if I'm not making sense, it's early and I'm on mobile.
I love Nintendo, but this is a dick move. Btw I'm not defending Joe, I'm just generally speaking.
EatinOlives
Member
I wonder how different this thread would be if it was EA or Ubisoft doing the exact same thing...
……forgetit
Member
My response:
I didn't know Joe uploaded all of Mario Party 10 and we could play it, what an asshole.
See where I'm going here? There's a difference between providing commentary and straight up stealling someone else's content.
Going by how rifftraxs are only allowed to sell the individual mp3 file but not the movie, I'd guess Joe would have the right to take it down.
OmegaDL50
Member
And youtube content partners such as Polaris (Game Station) for example don't have the same agreements like IGN does?
There's no argument on either fence because, very clearly, Nintendo's promotional team is not of the opinion that all publicity is good publicity. Now, it's like two individuals shouting past each other without comprehending a single thing the other is saying.
There can be an argument surrounding why that policy isn't sound, but that policy and the origins of it must be understood first.
And it's all because of Youtubers.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Isn't the whole problem for Nintendo, that they are only selling to their established fanbase?
I understand that Nintendo have the rights to do what they do, just saying is stupid, because the proof of Youtubers being beneficial, are there.
And because every other company understands the benefits of it and aren't cockblocking it and getting unnecessary negative press about it.
If people financially supported me getting that project, and if 'choosing' it amounted to little more than recording myself passively experiencing it, sure?
If the project was involved and laborious? If I had no inherent passion for it, no.
CouchMaster
Member
If you record something that is happening around you, does this mean you own the content? After all you did nothing to make it happen, all you did is press the record button. The people being filmed have the right to deny their footage being shown on the news, its just that if you have a product that you want more people to know about without actually paying to advertise it, you should have a common sense of not denying the free press.
PirateKing
Junior Member
I used to do casual editing part time before and it can get tough sometimes with what you get thrown at you. I can't even imagine how hard it is to entertain people on a 20mins videos, create a comoelling persona, be able to keep the quality of said work and follow up on everything that's happening around you. It's a tough work I'd love to be able to have. After all, who wouldn't want to get paid by usig our hobbies?
TheSlySoul
Member
I was not saying that.
It is due to all the bad decisions Nintendo has made.
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
Because Angry Josh was constructive as fuck here.
How did you come to the conclusion that Youtubers aren't beneficial to big publishers from those slides?
Joe works independent there is a difference. Even if he is a partner with polaris they do not do anything for marketing he is a youtube affiliate.
Haha, my idiotic Twitter comment is the most quoted post in this entire thread and has sparked some interesting debate on both sides, so I'd say that it was worth it. I'm pretty embarrassing and stupid, so the rest of the comments are valid, too!
I used to do casual editing part time before and it can get tough sometimes with what you get thrown at you. I can't even imagine how hard it is to entertain people on a 20mins videos, create a comoelling persona, be able to keep the quality of said work and follow up on everything that's happening around you. It's a tough work I'd love to be able to have. After all, who wouldn't want to get paid by usig our hobbies?
The more I read about professional YouTubers / Streamers, the more unappealing it sounds. It definitely beats sitting in a cubicle all day, but trying to get popular and get a steady income sounds very exhausting, especially with the fickle surroundings of all this monetization stuff.
Auto-Reply
Member
I wonder what agreement James Rolfe has with Nintendo as he regulary puts out Nintendo stuff... anyone know?
Of course Joe would have the right to take it down, the question is whether he'd be enough of a hypocrite to do it.
This. Nintendo? Who cares!
This is something some people refuse to see and accept because it makes their arguments when it comes to Nintendo fall apart.
Edit: I'm not saying there isn't some benefit but no where near what some are claiming about indies. The impact they make on true indie games/studios are vastly different then any impact they could have on Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft. That is my issue.