Topic: Nintendo Putting Content ID Claims on 'Let's Play' and Game Coverage Videos on YouTube

[CurtDogg]

YouTube's copyright policy defaults ad revenue to Nintendo, and not content creators.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/34204

Nintendo started to issue ID Claims on various videos on YouTube that include footage from their games, including popular "Let's Play" videos, as well as produced game coverage.

Since YouTube does not have a system in place for dual revenue sharing, companies that claim copyright can collect the ad revenue made from the video in question, instead of the content creator. This is different from copyright claims where Nintendo could just delist videos containing video from their games.

"As part of our on-going push to ensure Nintendo content is shared across social media channels in an appropriate and safe way, we became a YouTube partner and as such in February 2013 we registered our copyright content in the YouTube database." says a Nintendo representative, speaking to GameFront. "For most fan videos this will not result in any changes, however, for those videos featuring Nintendo-owned content, such as images or audio of a certain length, adverts will now appear at the beginning, next to or at the end of the clips. 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."

Nintendo has yet to comment on the situation involving ad revenue no longer going to the content creators.

[broodwars]

While I would prefer that Nintendo leave the Let's Play folks alone, this seems a pretty decent compromise to me. They're not taking down the Let's Plays, and they're not suing the Let's Play creators. They're simply demanding the ad revenue generated by folks streaming their copywritten content while the LP folks go about their business. That seems pretty fair to me, especially compared to when Sega went after the Shining Force fans a while back.

[paleselan]

This is MUCH better than taking down the videos alltogether, but we're altering content as Let's Players. We add commentary, and we present a changed product. Furthermore, I hate the 30 second ads before videos. This only turns off viewers.

[azeke]

I wish i could play games all day and get paid.

And then get to complain i don't get paid enough.

[broodwars]

I wish i could play games all day and get paid.

And then get to complain i don't get paid enough.

As a former video game QA tester, I resent that remark. 

[Enner]

The move has added more bad press on Nintendo in a time when they should hold on to any sliver of good will they can. Makes me wonder how the discussion went or if this decision was quick, messy middle ground (from Nintendo's point of view).

I don't care much as I don't watch LPs frequently and I block ads on YouTube. Still, I don't like the decision; it adds more to the notion that Nintendo is ignorant of the internet and their fans.

[SonofMrPeanut]

I imagine Sony will be much stricter about footage that isn't captured using their official PS4 streaming function.  If it amounts to "records footage and audio from player(s), immediately posts on YouTube," that could be problematic.  I could see there being a dispute over use of that clip outside the initial posting.  Too, developers can choose to not have part of a game be streamable, and that screws with the structure of an LP.

Compared to that, allowing the whole content to be posted with revenue going to Nintendo instead of the person posting is a fair compromise.  Too, Nintendo at this point only seems to be exercising this practice on YouTube (being that's where they're a partner), so if that's really a problem for someone they could post the video on another site like TwitchTV (at least for now).


Post-Thought:  I suppose Fair Use could protect the featuring of official clips outside of the initial post, particularly if the video is a "transformative work" like a Game Grumps or VGA style show.

[azeke]

I think they said PS4 streaming will be restricted by length.

[SonofMrPeanut]

I think they said PS4 streaming will be restricted by length.

Which would lead PS4 LPs to be broken into clips of whatever the max length is.  And again, according to Yoshida in an interview w/ a Japanese publication, “There will be parts of a game that the maker does not want people to be able to see...The creator may not want to make video of the final boss sharable, for instance."  To the best of our knowledge Nintendo has no such system in place.

[Oblivion]

So basically the guys that rely on LP's being their job don't get money from playing the Nintendo games? Bummer.

[S-U-P-E-R]

It kind of seems like on okay comprimise, except not really. Nintendo is gradually getting worse and worse at cultivating good relationships with their fans and understanding modern video game culture, and I think that will ultimately hurt them more than not getting whatever pittance Youtube is paying out.

[Jet Pilot]

Keep in mind that these videos are essentially free advertising for Nintendo's games.  Now that Nintendo has taken this action, people will no longer make these videos for Nintendo's first-party games as there is no incentive to do so.  Instead, these video creators will focus their efforts on games from less hostile publishers that appreciate the free publicity.  Nintendo will no longer benefit from this free advertising.

This is a classic case of stepping over a dollar to pick up a penny.  With the dismal state of the Wii U, Nintendo should be encouraging people to spread the word about their games and their hardware, not stifling it.

I've seen several people around the web try and compare this to people that post music videos. However that is comparing apples and elephants.  When someone posts a music video, they have posted the entire entertainment experience.  One could substitute a music video for an iTunes purchase and then experience would be identical and complete.  A 30-minute let's play video of a 20 hour game is but a fraction of the total experience.  Even a full playthrough doesn't provide anything near the total experience that you get from playing the game on your own.  It is but a sampling...an encouragement to go purchase the game yourself if you enjoy the video.

[Oblivion]

I guess video game reviews should be banned too!

[azeke]

people will no longer make these videos for Nintendo's first-party games as there is no incentive to do so.

because let's play didn't exist until youtube started paying people for videos.

I guess video game reviews should be banned too!

Of courshe!

Evil Nintedo even banned dancing, did you know?

Thanks Iwata!

[Fatty The Hutt]

Evil Nintedo even banned dancing, did you know?

Thanks Iwata!

Your recent spate of "Thanks Iwata" posts have had me in stitches, sir. Well Done!

[ShyGuy]

TJ Spyke approves this action.

[Fjurbanski]

Not the best idea right now because it's just bad press. But still, no one should really be mad about this.


Honestly, should some random kid get paid to sit around and go through and entire playthrough of a game, with little to no original content?


There are some people who put in the proper work that they shouldn't be affected by this, reviewers and such. But LPers ultimately use Nintendo's material to make money.

[KeyBilly]

Youtube is so quick to take down things randomly, or incorrectly label them as copyrighted with no recourse, that I've been surprised that LPs have gotten this far.  For Nintendo to dissuade them in any way seems illogical.  When people watch them, including all the retro Nintendo games, the reaction is often to want to play them.  Some people put a ton of effort and time into them, which they can only do if they are getting paid for it.

I hope that Nintendo backs off on this.  In contrast, it is becoming increasingly popular for companies to send early games or demos to Youtubers for publicity.  This won't hurt Youtubers much, whether LPers or those that make other forms of content with extended clips.  They will just move to non-Nintendo games.  This will only hurt Nintendo.

[Miyamoto]

The Nintendo apologists on this site never fail to amaze me. This is the latest in a series of poor moves by Nintendo and the widespread negative publicity is greatly deserved.  I don't know what needs to happen for Nintendo to pull out of this nose dive but I hope it happens soon.

[UncleBob]

I have no issue with Nintendo doing it - but, really, was poor timing on their part.

With that said, the entire Copyright system on YouTube needs to go.  I had four videos of my wife singing the National Anthem, at home, no background music that was posted and unlisted, as the links were only sent out to a few friends.  Some bull-**** company made claims on them.  THAT is the **** YouTube needs to be looking at.

[NWR_insanolord]

I think this is a bad idea from a PR perspective but I think it's baffling that people are so worked up about making sure these people have the right to profit off of other people's copyrighted work.

[pokepal148]

I think this is a bad idea from a PR perspective but I think it's baffling that people are so worked up about making sure these people have the right to profit off of other people's copyrighted work.

Lets Players however do deserve some cut for their part in the way that work is presented in videos imo.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Most other types of media also seek to profit from the use of their content, so it's not that surprising that video game companies should wish to do the same. Having said that, I feel this is bad decision, because these 'Let's Play' videos bring in more revenue simply by advertising the games than Nintendo is ever likely to get from skimming off the top of said videos.

[S-U-P-E-R]

I wonder if anyone has gotten the idea to separate the audio track to get revenue off that. Too much work?

[oohhboy]

Bad move on Nintendo's part. This was the very anti-gamer, suits behavior I was hoping Iwata/Nintendo would pull away from. If Nintendo wants to improve their position, they need to put their feet in the gamer's shoe once in a while. This is the idiotic stuff they teach in business school to "Maximize" short term profits at the expense of long term profit in order to pump the stock price up. I was hoping by now Iwata had found his own identity as a CEO, but he for all intents and purposes appear to be playing from the same play book as everyone else, but just a lot more slowly.

I really shouldn't have expected otherwise when they had overpriced the 3DS on launch and region locked it for vague technical reasons. Region locking serves no real purpose other than artificially limiting trade. You can't sell what you aren't selling or afford and a sale is a sale no matter where it is.

I think this is a bad idea from a PR perspective but I think it's baffling that people are so worked up about making sure these people have the right to profit off of other people's copyrighted work.

LP's would fall under fair use and derivative works. The work has been transformed where the LP has their own copyright on the resulting work. In essence it is now Nintendo profiting off other peoples copyrighted work.

I wonder if anyone has gotten the idea to separate the audio track to get revenue off that. Too much work?

It isn't just the audio, there is the editing of the videos and subtitles. There there is the performance art aspect of the video where a player of great skill is demonstrated. An LP is the complete whole, not just what one can strip off into different tracks.

Here is a link that looks into the legal side of things. It doesn't call it either way, but it offers great insight into possible outcomes and motivators behind Nintendo's actions. It's recommend reading.