The Jimquisition is an ad free series. He doesn't monetize them.

Jim makes a fair living from his Patreon. The Jimquisition is by far his most popular video series and he doesn't monetize it at all. I don't think he is dependant on a tiny bit more ad revenue from Nintendo videos. That's the case for all popular streamers or youtubers that have criticized Nintendo for this in the past.

It's so easy to dismiss this case by saying they're doing it for the money but try to think about the valid points he and others have made and decide if Nintendo is that innocent.

You're right. But he monetizes is Let's Plays though I think. And Nintendo Let's Plays would probably do well for him. And covering Nintendo more would make him more popular and lead to more Patreon money probably. 

I'm saying that what you or someone else do, does not justify me abandoning my morals, above all else. If you think it's morally wrong to pirate, then you wouldn't do it period. If pirating doesn't bother you, then there is no moral justification needed. Anyone who can so easily drop or change their morals over something so trivial has a weak ass sense of character, I'll say that much.

And directly answering your question, no, Nintendo doesn't have morals (but they do in the eyes of the law which is probably why rarely an individual is ever held accountable for corporate schemes. You might see someone get fired. They don't usually have to undo their damage though).

You're probably right, I'm mostly reacting to the outrageous title.

I do think people taking this at face value are misunderstanding (based on the tl;dr at least). Seems to me like he doesn't actually think it's okay to pirate Nintendo, he's just making an argument as to why Nintendo's handling of YouTube videos is so despicable.

Or am I mistaken?

I live by the rule that if the game you want to play is not currently available first hand via the publisher in digital or physical form (used copies sold online or at retailers do not count), or if you already own an original copy of said game, then emulation is not an issue.

" Examples of fair use in United States copyright law include commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting, research, and scholarship." I don't see let's play and monetization falling under any of these categories.

Also, didn't wanted angry joe to sue Nintendo? I would love to see him fail by justifying making money on Nintendo's content via Let's play videos. He would only have a chance on reviews, because that falls under criticism.

Do you actually support this twisted logic or are you using it for fun, vivster?

Meh, my moral compass stopped becoming a thing since the day I pirated my first song on Kazaa. After that, the only thing that prevents me from pirating is whether or not I feel like giving money to a certain company. For example, if company A censores bewbs in the west *cough* SMT x FE *cough*, I will yar teh game or skip it if it's not yarrable. But if company A keeps bewbs and spreads it throughout the plot, then I might buy it.