• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

AngryJoe receives a Nintendo copyright claim. Hope they enjoyed the ad revenue; Done

MYeager said:
Somehow this doesn't seem like a great way to either be taken seriously by the company or affect policy change.
Click to expand...
It isn't. The whole Twitter and Youtube ranting is useless most of the time. Sometimes companies will reach out and fix things, but to me it just looks unprofessional and stupid. Have a problem with a company? Call them up and work it out. If they refuse, make a video about something else.
 
Hubble said:
Nintendo's mindshare with the young people of this generation will continue to suffer because of actions like these, especially as popular personalities that are part of today's generation share this unpopular opinion. A lot of young people are less aware and less fond of Nintendo than older people today.
Click to expand...

What do you think their mobile strategy is?
People discovering and knowing Nintendo because their games are good, not because a youtuber screamed without understanding how a game actually works.
 
Scrooged said:
Joe isn't stupid. He knew the law and the fact that Nintendo is more strict about copyright and protecting their IP. He's going to get paid for that rant video. He makes a living off of this stuff.

'For the gamers' is nice and all, and it's true to an extent, but don't be naive and think he's not doing it for the money too. It's ironic in this case since he's accusing Nintendo of being greedy.
Click to expand...

Which if true I really have lost a large amount of respect for him. To manipulate the public to create an outcry that makes you look good is just pathetic.
 
I won't agree with Joe because he should have known the stupid policy in place.
I was mostly saying the policy pretty much kills anyone trying to make a living off of it. Of course channels like GameXplain have better splits and such making them able to work.
 
It's their copyright, and their policy is pretty clear. Why do people have such a hard time understanding this.

Also, lol free ad revenue.
 
phanphare said:
I'm just saying that your phrasing is pretty much objectively false. AJ cannot be more "for the gamers" than Nintendo because he doesn't make gaming hardware or games that run on that hardware. it's not a chicken and egg scenario. the video games came first.
Click to expand...

...? So your definition of 'for the gamers' is whether the object being judged makes vidya games? So only the game companies can be for the gamers, following your logic right?

.....Ok then, good for you. It seems that you're arguing something else.
 
Starchasing said:
Who do you think is going to be still as relevant as today, NIntendo or AngyJoe? Because if we are talking exposure both are getting it and only one will be relevant in the next 5 years.
Click to expand...

I don't know

Because as a Nintendo fan, to the general gaming public.Anything non handheld Nintendo related isn't relevant to jack shit anyone right now. Or are we pretending it is?

Video game companies aren't gods, they companies, they run off money.
Nintendo isn't doing so hot right now.

Maybe trying to work with the people who man the main way people seem to consume video games, that isn't playing video games. Which for some odd reason is millions upon millions of people, epically kids. Might be a good idea.

I don't know,its almost as if other people can help draw attention to your product, its almost as if they got beat over the head with that recently
 
Eolz said:
What do you think their mobile strategy is?
People discovering and knowing Nintendo because their games are good, not because a youtuber screamed without understanding how a game actually works.
Click to expand...

I'd wager nintendo aren't relevant to today's/tomorrow's generation of gamer.
 
blankempathy said:
Of course he took it down. Because if he can't make all the money then Nintendo gets no free press. Obviously its Nintendo's fault even though hes basically countering nintendos "my way or no way attitutude" with "No its my way or nothing".
Click to expand...
That's stupid. When the argument is "now you're taking videos away from my viewers!" that doesn't work when the whole reason he took it down is because he wasn't making money. The video is already made!

Honestly, the first time I saw this response I thought you were referring to Joe's "No its my way or nothing" (weird emphasis lol) attitude with taking this video down.
 
blankempathy said:
Which if true I really have lost a large amount of respect for him. To manipulate the public to create an outcry that makes you look good is just pathetic.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say pathetic, I'd say it's a fairly straightforward, low-ish effort way to cut his losses on the video that got ContentID matched. Like Scrooged said, Joe is a smart guy and he's using a particular narrative to continue making money on YouTube, which is what he does to make ends meet. It is what it is.
 
Jobbs said:
I was wondering why he would post a Mario 10 video, since he already is very well aware of Nintendo's policies, and now I think I know why.. To post a big rant video afterwards. That's the only explanation.
Click to expand...
He actually explains why.
He wanted to see if they still were claiming videos before he did a review video and had that claimed for no reason.
 
BreezyLimbo said:
...? So your definition of 'for the gamers' is whether the object being judged makes vidya games? So only the game companies can be for the gamers, following your logic right?

.....Ok then, good for you. It seems that you're arguing something else.
Click to expand...

ummm.....no?

your words: "AJ is more 'for gamers' than Nintendo is, if that's what you're wondering."


the key word being: "more"
 
BreezyLimbo said:
...? So your definition of 'for the gamers' is whether the object being judged makes vidya games? So only the game companies can be for the gamers, following your logic right?

.....Ok then, good for you. It seems that you're arguing something else.
Click to expand...
What is 'for the gamers' and why do these gamers need some kind of protection against the big evil Nintendo? If the games are good, buy them. If not, don't. It's not that hard. The ability of someone to make a few grand of a video with a Nintendo games does not suddenly make that company terrible.

TheAbsolution said:
He actually explains why.
He wanted to see if they still were claiming videos before he did a review video and had that claimed for no reason.
Click to expand...
If he did some research, he would have known that already. Or if he was wondering he could have called Nintendo's local PR guy and get an answer.

I will not accuse him of getting his video blocked willingly to make that rant and earn more views. But it's not like Nintendo's policy is unknown when it comes to this.
 
ClosingADoor said:
Doesn't seem worth the effort, but that is just me. Nintendo already has made its stance clear on this stuff. But the 'controversy' will probably give him a few more views.
Click to expand...

MYeager said:
Somehow this doesn't seem like a great way to either be taken seriously by the company or affect policy change.
Click to expand...

Making what amounts to a public appeal about the situation makes sense if the hope is for a policy change. That's not to say anyone has to agree with the personality/language/conclusion, but saying that not talking about it makes more sense from his outlook is just being obtuse.
 
Timeaisis said:
It's their copyright, and their policy is pretty clear. Why do people have such a hard time understanding this.

Also, lol free ad revenue.
Click to expand...

No one here is arguing that they don't have the right. I don't think a single person thinks that way.

It's whether or not they should act on it. That's what literally everyone is arguing about. That's pretty clear.
 
It's been known for awhile that Nintendo has been doing this so I don't see why he's going through these hoops now all of a sudden. Then again, he seems likely to forget or still want to do videos of games that some requested of him.

Also, it's pretty laughable to say he isn't speaking from the viewpoint of an end-user. He's called out bad poor industry practices in numerous reviews and rants from lots of shitty DLC, unfinished or unpolished games, and a bunch of other stuff. That is most certainly an end-user perspective. Sure, he often needs to protect his bottom-line but that's to be expected of anyone in business for themselves or even employed by someone else. Besides, the two are not mutually exclusive anyway. You can certainly actively protect your bottom line and still be for end-users whenever possible.
 
AzureTranquility95 said:
Okay, so, being someone who runs a YouTube Channel that hosts a sizeable chunk of Nintendo content, I feel obligated to chime in on this.

This is my most viewed video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rRMZQLinzw

Do you see the amount of views on it? I'm not making a single cent off of it because Nintendo claimed copyright (And before anyone asks, this is also true for the segmented version of the game as well)

Do I let it stop me from continuing to upload Nintendo content? No, because I do videos because I enjoy doing it, first and foremost. The money is nice, yes, but not why I make gaming videos on Youtube.

I can't speak for AngryJoe, but I feel he's making way too big a deal of this. If he makes most of his
income
YouTube Money from non-Nintendo videos, why should he stop making Nintendo videos if those videos would only bring him a couple more dollars at most?

tl;dr Nintendo's copyright BS sucks, but some people are over-reacting.
Click to expand...

So you think the time and work he puts in these videos should go completely uncompensated because he's showing off a Nintendo title?

This is his job, his talent is to rant in such a way that it makes millions of people want to watch his videos every day.
He puts up hours of content on a daily basis (which people seemingly enjoy watching for some reason) and only with Nintendo games he has to either jump through certification hoops or funnel 100% of his video's earnings towards Nintendo.
Nope, that isn't right. Nintendo really isn't in the position to make demands here.

If I got out of bed in the morning to shoot/edit videos all day and cultivated a two-million strong fan-following myself, I would have ditched Nintendo as well. Seemingly all the big youtubers do.

Joe will probably ditch Nintendo and proceed to earn the exact same paycheck by doing another rant video or cover some other game.
His situation will change not one bit by dropping Nintendo from his repertoire. The only losing party here is Nintendo. It might not impact them a lot, it probably won't, but it definitely shows how archaic their stance on this stuff is.
 
Village said:
I don't know

Because as a Nintendo fan, to the general gaming public.Anything non handheld Nintendo related isn't relevant to jack shit anyone right now. Or are we pretending it is?

Video game companies aren't gods, they companies, they run off money.
Nintendo isn't doing so hot right now.

Maybe trying to work with the people who man the main way people seem to consume video games, that isn't playing video games. Which for some odd reason is millions upon millions of people, epically kids. Might be a good idea.

I don't know,its almost as if other people can help draw attention to your product, its almost as if they got beat over the head with that recently
Click to expand...

Nintendo doesn't need the exposure, Nintendo doesn't need youtubers, Nintendo doesn't need a competitive community, Nintendo doesn't need Third Parties.



All Nintendo needs are the fans.

EDIT: /s
 
joshaube said:
My response:

Screen_Shot_2015_04_04_at_6_44_51_AM.png
Click to expand...

What?
 
tim.mbp said:
Here's the video for when he got a Wii U.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koX-Ny6zHdM

He said people donated money with the specific purpose for him to buy a Wii U. So I take it the system wasn't donated, but the money was earmarked towards buying a Wii U.
Click to expand...

So wait, the system was mostly donated, he got a video claimed before and made a rant saying basically fuck you to Nintendo, made another Nintendo video, got claimed and keeps complaining that Nintendo is not helping him?
 
BreezyLimbo said:
...? So your definition of 'for the gamers' is whether the object being judged makes vidya games? So only the game companies can be for the gamers, following your logic right?

.....Ok then, good for you. It seems that you're arguing something else.
Click to expand...

By his reasoning no game company can ever have anti-consumer aspects.

You could have essential game patches as price gouging DLC and it would be okay because if the company didn't make the game there wouldn't be a game to complain about.
 
Jobbs said:
doesn't everyone know by now that your Nintendo videos will be taken down if you're not part of the Nintendo partnership thing? I thought this was well known. Why would you then post a Mario Party 10 video?
Click to expand...

The video wasn't taken down, it just had its monetization disabled so he couldn't make money off of it. So he took it down.

In all honesty if everything here about how he got the Wii U is true it seems like he did it just so he could avoid having to do what those fans wanted and push the blame onto Nintendo. Now he could sell off the stuff he bought with the money they donated for that express purpose and act like they can't complain because he made all of one video and took it down after he didn't even try to avoid the problem by either signing up for Nintendo's content creator program or even negotiate with Nintendo directly if he truly believes he's that big.
 
Orayn said:
Fuck, I think this is the first Scrooged post I've ever agreed with.
Click to expand...

Well apparently I made a lasting impression at least. lol

But don't get me wrong, it's not like I enjoy defending huge corporations. It's just that videogames are kinda in the wild west when it comes to copyright and video. The partnership option seems like a fair middleground at the moment and it's weird how Joe is so against that. The best defense is 'nobody else is requiring it'.
 
tearsintherain said:
Nintendo's Youtube policies are a bit... odd, for those who think this is AJ being an idiot.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/...e-program-bogged-down-with-delayed-approvals/

If you get on their creator partner program the revenue split is 60/40 (Nintendo/you), but they must approve every single video and apparently its taking weeks sometimes for them to issue the approval. If you are NOT on their creator partner program the split is 100/0 (Nintendo/you). Thats fair, right?

Oh, but you can just instead get on their channel approval, where your entire channel is pre-approved so no wait times. The split then is 70/30. One catch, 100% of your videos must be about Nintendo then. And 70% of all ad revenue goes to Nintendo. Oh, also there is a whitelist of games that are only available to cover, and the list hasn't been updated in a year.
https://r.ncp.nintendo.net/whitelist/

While losing a few youtube personalities will not hurt Nintendo at all, its again the problem that the entire world is moving in a direction Nintendo is fighting tooth and nail against. My kids are literally straight out of that south park episode, they will sit around in a room watching some retard on youtube play a video game rather than the play the game themselves. I don't get it, I will never get it, but at least I can recognize thats what they do.
Click to expand...

No wonder you will never see any nintendo video appear on youtube because of this. There working so backwards that hurts them more than they cannot think off.
 
TheAbsolution said:
He actually explains why.
He wanted to see if they still were claiming videos before he did a review video and had that claimed for no reason.
Click to expand...

There's never a "reason" for ContentID matches, it's an automated system based on whether or not there's a match for video or audio content in YouTube's database. Joe knows this, but it's to his benefit to spin it as some Nintendo lawyer personally flagging his videos because that riles people up more.
 
So, people are genuinely upset because some random YouTube user thinks he should be able to profit off of Nintendo's IP without the company's permission?

Can someone explain why I should feel sorry for this guy?
 
Einbroch said:
No one here is arguing that they don't have the right. I don't think a single person thinks that way.

It's whether or not they should act on it. That's what literally everyone is arguing about. That's pretty clear.
Click to expand...

If they have the right, why not act on it? They have the right to.
 
Scrooged said:
'For the gamers' is nice and all, and it's true to an extent, but don't be naive and think he's not doing it for the money too. It's ironic in this case since he's accusing Nintendo of being greedy.
Click to expand...

The difference is Joe was a REGULAR Joe working full-time at Dell, and yes, fortunately, he has been able to make a living off Youtube but that is DIFFICULT. At the end of the day, he is an average every day person like you and me, who has made it successful. Nintendo is a mufti-million dollar corporation whose actions do not align with other corporations, making them completely greedy and anti-consumer. Nintendo is the big boy shitting on little ole 'Angry Joe', a fuckin guy who makes money off of YOUTUBE not as some executive big whig.
 
Gestault said:
Making what amounts to a public appeal about the situation makes sense if the hope is for a policy change. That's not to say anyone has to agree with the personality/language/conclusion, but saying that not talking about it makes more sense from his outlook is just being obtuse.
Click to expand...
Maybe I am looking at it more from a business point of view. He has every right to rant about it, but in that time he could have also just made another video about another game.

Hubble said:
The difference is Joe was a REGULAR Joe working full-time at Dell, and yes, fortunately, he has been able to make a living off Youtube but that is DIFFICULT. At the end of the day, he is an average every day person like you and me, who has made it successful. Nintendo is a mufti-million dollar corporation whose actions do not align with other corporations, making them completely greedy and anti-consumer. Nintendo is the big boy shitting on little ole 'Angry Joe', a fuckin guy who makes money off of YOUTUBE not as some executive big whig.
Click to expand...
Haha. If you truly believe this, go ahead and support that stuff. But please keep in mind that all the deals going on with Youtube guys, people being paid for content and non-transparent advertising deals are all there. Maybe Joe doesn't partake in that, but we don't know. Just because he had a 'regular' job before this (unlike the people at Nintendo?) does not make him some kind of saint who only has the best for gamers in mind. Whatever that is supposed to be.
 
ClosingADoor said:
It isn't. The whole Twitter and Youtube ranting is useless most of the time. Sometimes companies will reach out and fix things, but to me it just looks unprofessional and stupid. Have a problem with a company? Call them up and work it out. If they refuse, make a video about something else.
Click to expand...

You say this, but attention is attention and if any one topic gets a lot of attention it become very hard to ignore. And like it or not, public videos/tweets from prominent individals are freight trains of attention. Allowing this type of new media doesn't gel well with Nintendo's conservative business style, but grabbing a ton of easy PR while your at it certainly sweetens the deal.

Anyways, Nintendo has historically been completely out of touch with the newer, connected demographic. This is just an inevitable continuation of this.
 
Timeaisis said:
It's their copyright, and their policy is pretty clear. Why do people have such a hard time understanding this.

Also, lol free ad revenue.
Click to expand...
Because they are literally the only video game company in the entire planet doing it this way.

The only one.

The. Only. One.

In a billion dollar industry. When their only growing relevance is selling toys, not games, they're choosing to artificially reduce exposure to their titles by making draconian rules about videos featuring their games.

Did you know even if you jump through all their hoops to make an exclusive partnered YouTube channel, you can't show Pokemon games? Because they don't fully own that license.

This is a sad dumb approach and is only working to hurt Nintendo in their greedy money grab while they kill a goose that laid a golden egg.
 
phanphare said:
ummm.....no?

[BreezyLimbo's] words: "AJ is more 'for gamers' than Nintendo is, if that's what you're wondering."

the key word being: "more"
Click to expand...

Well AJ's role is editorial. He's the equivalent to the Fourth Estate in this situation. He's between the public (audiences) and publishers. In that regard, his interests are more in line with game players. That doesn't make him right/wrong though.
 
call_kotaku said:
Nintendo doesn't need the exposure, Nintendo doesn't need youtubers, Nintendo doesn't need a competitive community, Nintendo doesn't need Third Parties.

All Nintendo needs are the fans.
Click to expand...

You won't ever see a company relying only on their fans, a company's goal is to expend their audience to get bigger, ideally.

EDIT: Oh, it was sarcasm, my meter is broke.
 
Nokterian said:
No wonder you will never see any nintendo video appear on youtube because of this. There working so backwards that hurts them more than they cannot think off.
Click to expand...

I don't think Nintendo deserves malice for this, honestly. If you make a product and you don't want people monetizing your product for themselves -- then fine. fair enough. I'm glad that the IP holder has the power to decide if they want to allow other people to monetize their content or not.
 
King_Moc said:
What ad revenue? He was the one making money from their work.
Click to expand...

I hate this logic. It's like saying the camera manufacturers and microphone manufacturers should make money for any video make with their tools.

Nintendo are downright backwards with these stuff. It's free advertising and outreach for their game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Were Nintendo fans actually sincere when they said Nintendo only needed Nintendo games?
2 3
114
911
LordOcidax replied
  • Poll
Would Nintendo games have done better on PC than Sony games did?
2
68
833
FoxMcChief replied
Nintendo Direct was the ‘most watched’ Summer Game Fest presentation, analytics firm claims
Business Event Analysis 
23
278
Woopah replied
In This Cost-Cutting Crisis, The Global Games Market Has Hit $200 Billion Yearly Revenue
2 3
104
528
LiquidMetal14 replied
  • Locked
NVIDIA Removes Gaming Revenue Category From Financial Reports
News Business 
2
248
Orpheus replied
Top Bottom