By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Shinobi-san said:
DonFerrari said:


Why shouldn't be legal for the IP owner to retain control from it's IP??? He bought a license to play no to profit on it.


Nintendo still has full control over their IP. A game is not like a movie or a song...the primary enjoyment received from a game is through playing it not watching it. So i dont see how this infringes on their IP.

Something key to note here is that people dont simply watch any random lets play video, the game and the IP is pretty much irrelevant in most cases, moreso in pewdiepie's case. These guys are famous for their personalities, humour, commentary etc.

Other youtubers are popular because of speed runs, being the best, world records etc. Others are popuular because they aim to teach others how to play games, through tutorials and how to vids.

So yeah im struggling to see why a gaming publisher would feel entitled to the ad revenue of a video of a gamer playing their game, which they have already purchased, for reasons other than greed.

If this was a matter of principle and IP protection they would have reacted a long time ago, its only because some of these youtubers have gotten really popular that they now want a piece of the pie.

This goes for all game publishers trying to do this not just Nintendo. Clamping down on movies and music however, makes complete sense from a publisher point of view but not games.

So since the primary point of a game is playing and them watching the games being played wouldn't infringe the IP... should we then allow other people to make plushies, boardgames and other things based on Nintendo IPs since they don't conflict with the original purpouse of Nintys games?

Well if the game is irrelevant, them he (and others) could just do it without any game involved, let's see how that would work.

You know those people purchased the right to play not to profit from it. That is why its legal what Nintendo is doing. And speedruns or tutorials have very little to do with LP when they don't show the entirety of the game. And Nintendo isn't even forbiding anyone from doing showing it, they are asking for a share.

They wouldn't need to react if it wasn't big enough.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."