Nintendo targets fan-made videos

[Secura]

 

This isn't really brand new information but I find it sickening:

 

 

 

Nintendo's approach here seems to be extremely confusing, they seem to think that all the big "YouTubers" will continue to showcase and play their games, even though they aren't getting paid for it. I've heard some people talk about Nintendo placing time constraints on some videos that showcase (in their opinion, not the video creators') too much of their games.

 

To be honest I can't tell if Nintendo's being stupid here or sadistic and moronic. Regardless, if they think that this is going to be beneficial for them it isn't. With the Wii U failing and hype for the next generation consoles building this is quite possibly one of the stupidest marketing moves I've ever seen made, it's crucial that in the time period we're currently in Nintendo try to garner as much attention as it possibly can but going about that in this way's pathetic.

 

I know that to some people making a living off of YouTube isn't a proper job, but it still doesn't detract from that fact that Nintendo are sabotaging people's livelihoods and that's something I just can't deal with. If this is a bit hard to grasp I can understand this; for example let's say that you worked in an office and you were going to make and deliver a PowerPoint presentation to another group of people, but before this two massive adverts showed up that show cased Microsoft's Xbox or Windows 8.

 

You see just because someone creates something doesn't mean that they own everything about it, in some cases it clearly does but in videogames and gaming in general (board games, card games, et cetera) it simply doesn't. You cannot claim ownership of what someone else has done, if someone bowls a strike in a bowling ally but you own the ally that doesn't make their strike yours, Nintendo on the other hand seems to think that it does and I can only foresee this turning out badly for them in the long term.

[Bobbin100]

Nintendo:

 

''We continually want our fans to enjoy sharing Nintendo content on YouTube, and that is why, unlike other entertainment companies, we have chosen not to block people using our intellectual property."

 

 

Unlike other entertainment companies? Are they talking about movies and music?

 

Which other gaming company blocks people using their intellectual property? Or put ads on fan videos? It's only Nintendo.

 

I think Nintendo have gotten to the point where they are even more money hungry.

[Secura]

I think Nintendo have gotten to the point where they are even more money hungry.

The fact that the Wii U's not really doing much for them isn't helping their hunger for cash, regardless their down right stupid business practices will catch up with them eventually.

[The Pizza Delivery Guy]

I have never liked nintendo I knew that they would do something that would anger their consumer base.

 

There are too many people who have started to make a living off of gaming on YouTube. This is like being a traveling salesman and the product your selling's owner takes all of your revenue and gives you nothing back. That takes the entire point of that job, and you'd stop doing it. So Nintendo is being hypocritical by not blocking the videos outright to let the gamers keep their stuff up, because the reason the gamers are posting has already been taken away from them.

 

This news a couple of hours before I find out Nintendo bought exclusivity of Sonic. That basically means nearly half of my subscriptions aren't going to be playing Sonic on their channels anymore.

Edited May 20, 2013 by The Pizza Delivery Guy

[Flight180Victm]

I actually just watched a rant video of one of my favorite Let's Play gamers and it really made me realize how greedy Nintendo really is.

So Nintendo, F*ck you!

 

Actually let me put the video on here for anybody that doesn't really understand what Nintendo is doing. It's long though, but it's hilarious! He rants about other things before he gets to the Nintendo issue, so just skip to 38:50. He knows business very well and he just explains it very well.

 

[Adler]

As much as I love Nintendo, this is irredeemable. YouTubers do not produce content for the sole benefit of Nintendo, they are not paid workers of Nintendo, and Nintendo should not receive money from fan-made content. This is idiocy. Why would they injure their reputation like this? Why would they remove the incentive for people to produce content about their products, and consequently, remove the free publicity that they receive from fan-made videos? Foolishness.

[Secura]

Adler I completely agree, the question that I've got to ask is what do Nintendo think they're going to get from this? Surely they realise that YouTubers don't make videos for them to make money, they provide free advertising and entertainment and Nintendo still want more. I can't see this ending well and when it comes to the legality of such an issue where does Nintendo stand? Are they really allowed to plaster their advertisements and earn money off of another person's content, I for one doubt it and wouldn't be surprised to hear about a few court cases involving Nintendo in the near future.

[na89340qv0n34b09q340]

I'm going to try to bring an opposing opinion in here, and then get hornswoggled by everyone else.

 

In my opinion, LPers aren't (and never were) content creators. They play and speak over games made by companies, and sometimes put on a nice show, but without companies like Nintendo there would be no LP. Nintendo owns the backbone of the LPs they're targeting, and as such they have a right to say "hey, please don't use our material that way" just as much as bowling alleys have a right to say "hey, don't bowl on our lanes."

 

But the funny thing is they're not even taking the videos down, just not letting people make money off of their intellectual property.

 

I think if you really love the games you're LPing it shouldn't matter whether you're making money from your videos or not. People who are relying on LP as a source of income are the only ones who are going to lose anything here, and frankly I think they deserve it for being so stupid and not considering the job security they have with youtube let's plays.

 

I'll post a video I watched last night. The Nintendo stuff comes in at about 13:00, and lasts about an hour. Slowbeef, ProtonJon, and NintendoCapriSun are in the video, so you get to hear the opinions of LPers who have been around for a while.

 

Edited May 21, 2013 by zoo3891

[Secura]

 

I'm going to try to bring an opposing opinion in here, and then get hornswoggled by everyone else.

Alright then, let's see what you've got for us.

 

 

In my opinion, LPers aren't (and never were) content creators. They play and speak over games made by companies, and sometimes  put on a nice show, but without companies like Nintendo there would be no LP.

That's entirely dependent on the game they're playing, how they're playing it and what they say while they're doing it. You see, games aren't like other forms of static non-interactive media, no they're far more open to change and player interaction then anything else on the market today. Once again I ask you take the example I gave in the original post of a person getting a strike or a turkey in a bowling alley, just because you own the alley and all the stuff in it doesn't mean that person's strike or any of their time bowling was yours. That was their strike just as much as it was their game that they were playing and as such you can't claim ownership of such a thing.

 

So to say that the YouTubers who make Let's Plays aren't proper content creators is bullsh*t. The game is entirely dependent on the person playing it, so much so that nothing will happen if the player themselves isn't getting involved in the game, the entire recording is based off of the YouTuber's actions. Everything they do from how many times they die to how many enemies they kill is dependent on them and not the game, unlike a book or a movie a game is an interactive experience and as such shouldn't be viewed in the same light as static media.

 

Not too long ago I came across a video that described exactly what a game was and why we play them so I think you would benefit from first understand what a game is, not just a videogame but any game from card games to board games this explains just how and what a game is:

 

 

 

So now hopefully after viewing that you can understand why games aren't just something someone commentates over, but rather an interactive experience that's solely dependent on whoever's playing it to progress and actually do something. Your first argument is quite fragile in its nature and was clearly one that wasn't thought through enough as its easy to see why you can't own someone's time, no matter what they are doing you do not share in their victories or defeats you are simply a spectator like everyone else.

 

In short just because someone created the world in which you play in does not mean that they have ownership of a recording of how you played it. Everyone's experience with a game will be different, because everyone in the world is at an entirely different skill level when it comes to things like videogames; for example if I were to have my grandfather play a videogame I can guarantee he'd play it differently then I would if only due to things like his age and general inexperience with things like videogames.

 

 

Nintendo owns the backbone of the LPs they're targeting, and as such they have a right to say "hey, please don't use our material that way" just as much as bowling alleys have a right to say "hey, don't bowl on our lanes."

 

 

I think if you really love the games you're LPing it shouldn't matter whether you're making money from your videos or not. People who are relying on LP as a source of income are the only ones who are going to lose anything here, and frankly I think they deserve it for being so stupid and not considering the job security they have with youtube let's plays.

That may be true, but how do they expect to gain anything from this? They know damn well that the big YouTubers will stop putting out any kind of Nintendo related content and their fans evidently won't be pleased with this leading me the obvious conclusion that Nintendo gain nothing from this then infamy and a bad reputation. Then you've also got to consider the legal ramifications of such a matter, do they really deserve the revenue from something that's not there's? That's like saying if you win the world chess championships that the inventor of chess should get paid the entirety of your award, it's stupid and its bating the legal piranhas to get involved in area that's not as developed as it should be.

 

Despite this Nintendo still think that the Wii U's going to sell, are you f*cking kidding me? This isn't the music industry where saying something stupid or controversial gets you hits and fans, far from it in fact it can cause an even larger sales hit since this goes straight against what the consumers want from their favourite gaming companies. The reason it works in other forms of media is because very rare that the person, people or company are directly attacking the consumers but that seems to be just what they're doing here. Yes it technically only affects YouTubers but people like YouTube, it's one of the, if not the largest place of general video entertainment on the internet and that's crazy.

 

Lastly you seem to think that becoming a YouTuber is a stupid career decision. Please tell me who made you judge, jury and executioner? No-one I hear you say, good. The fact remains that YouTube is a very profitable business and it seems to me to be a pretty fun job, you aren't in a position to criticise someone's life choices and even if you were it doesn't necessarily mean that you should. Regardless the point about the bowling alley still stands and the fact that Nintendo would intentionally wish to sabotage their popularity like this is really rather strange, seems like the start of Nintendo going to way of SEGA if you ask me.

 

 

But the funny thing is they're not even taking the videos down, just not letting people make money off of their intellectual property.

 

Is that not worse? How is a video of a Let's Play their property? Once again I will direct you to the example of the chess tournament or the bowling alley, just because you either own the area something was filmed in or created it doesn't mean you're entitled to the profits of every piece of media coverage that takes place in that area. This subject's a bit touchy because the legal system simply isn't as developed as it needs to be to deal with this type of situation, Nintendo surely can't claim the rights to something that they didn't make.

 

Just saying that they didn't take the video down isn't a good thing, you're taking the money from someone else who worked to get that video out there and depends on it succeeding for them to be able to pay the bills and live comfortably; do they really think that doing this will work out in their favour? Because if they do I think they too deserve to go the way of so many companies before them. These people are not making these videos for you to earn their money, they're making them for their fan base to enjoy and as a direct result of that it gives you free advertising.

 

What makes them think that the video creator won't just take it down? Even more so do they still think that YouTube's content creators are going to want to focus even slightly on Nintendo after this, since it's highly unlikely that they're doing this as a labour of love and that's one of the many things Nintendo seems to be way out of the loop in. The only thing Nintendo will get from this is less publicity, an increase in their marketing and advertising spending and inevitably a large amount of fans lashing back and either boycotting or not creating content for Nintendo.

[gta_king]

I've been talking about this quite a bit with a few journo's I know about it, most are wondering just why Nintendo are doing this. A few indie developers have came out as well and questioned it, the creator of Thomas Was Alone has been quoted as saying that were it not for Lets Play videos his title might not have sold so much, Notch the guy behind Minecraft has also said Let's Play has benefitted them tenfold. Even Cliffy B has came out in defense of Let's Play saying that the option was given to them by lawyers to do the same as Nintendo but he fought for it to not happen because he knew it'd cause a negative backlash and anything they would make would be fairly inconsequential.

 

It seems very strange for Nintendo to do this, especially at a time when they need some positive press, the Wii U is suffering from negative press and developers not supporting it, yes the 3DS is doing wonderfully but Nintendo need to create a positive image. They must have known that by doing this, and maybe they are entitled to do so, not debating that one little bit but they must have known it'd cause more negativity then good for them. It just seems incredibly out of touch.

Edited May 21, 2013 by gta_king

[na89340qv0n34b09q340]

edit: Hohoho, killed your thread!

 

I'm going to stick with your bowling alley analogy. Imagine you own a bowling alley, and you spiff the place up all nice and tidy and have a quality joint running for thirty years with no problems. Then one day this guy comes in and starts holding his own bowling tournaments with all his friends. You're okay with it because it brings some more fun into your place, and people hear about the tournaments and flock to the bowling alley to join in. You're even making a little extra cash! After about a year or two of this a few more people start holding tournaments at your lane, usually without your permission, but they're still paying the entry fee, and still attracting more customers. After a while of this a company that films amateur sports competitions come into your bowling alley and start filming the tournaments. This company is giving all of the money made from the films to the bowlers and tournament hosts, and you're still only making money from the entry fee.

 

I suppose I did exaggerate when I said they weren't content creators. They own their voice, faces, actions, reactions, comedy, etc. and that's what makes a good portion of the LP, but from Nintendo's perspective these guys are using content put there by Nintendo to entertain the viewers, usually without Nintendo's permission.

 

And I don't think that LPs are entirely dependent on the person playing it. When I was ten I watched every damn Pokemon LP I could find, because I wanted to watch people play Pokemon. You could argue that I watched so many people because I wanted to see how different people played Pokemon differently, but I wasn't searching for terms like "masterchiefgamer11011 Pokemon speed run", I was searching for terms like "let's play pokemon emerald", so not all LPs, and not all LP audiences are based on the individual playing the game, some people actually want to watch certain games played, not caring who plays them.

 

I agree that the individual playing the game is important to the experience. The content they are creating when commenting over a game is a recognizable form of entertainment, but without the games made by companies like Nintendo they couldn't deliver that experience that they do. LPers don't deserve 100% of the money they're making from LP, and I suppose neither does Nintendo. So I guess you've changed my mind a little bit. I don't think Nintendo should be getting all of the profit from LPs of their games.

 

 

Lastly you seem to think that becoming a YouTuber is a stupid career decision. Please tell me who made you judge, jury and executioner? No-one I hear you say, good. The fact remains that YouTube is a very profitable business and it seems to me to be a pretty fun job, you aren't in a position to criticise someone's life choices and even if you were it doesn't necessarily mean that you should. Regardless the point about the bowling alley still stands and the fact that Nintendo would intentionally wish to sabotage their popularity like this is really rather strange, seems like the start of Nintendo going to way of SEGA if you ask me.

I quoted this because it pissed me off. Youtube is a stupid career decision. As far as I understand Youtube can cut you off from the partnership program at any time, and if someone false-flags your videos enough you can kiss your money goodbye (I've seen multiple channels that have had problems with that particular dilemma.) Nobody made me the judge of anything, but I'm on the internet, on a forum, where I'm allowed and physically able to criticize anything I want to, I didn't take away LPers jobs just by saying they didn't deserve them. And Youtube is eight years old now, eight years on the internet isn't a very long time, and youtube could easily fade out of popularity in the next five years (in fact, I bet you ten e-dollars that it will). My point is that there's no job security, especially with something as risky as let's play, so any partnered youtubers that aren't recieving ad revenue shouldn't be crying about how their source of income has disappeared, that plate's been on the edge of the table since the beginning.

Edited May 29, 2013 by zoo3891