I'm really surprised people are ok with the notion that playing a game and recording it constitutes IPR of the game creator. Let me give you some examples on how, in other contexts, this would be completely ridiculous.
For instance, let's assume that a video of a creation in Minecraft is Mojang's, now Microsoft's, IPR. Even though the creation in the video was made by the player. If this is valid, you could make the same case that recording a video of something you made in Lego would be Lego's IPR, and they could claim royalties for the video.
And by the same line, you could claim that Hugo Boss could claim royalties on a video you created where you wear their clothes. Ford on a video which had one of their cars in it.
The big difference with games as opposed to movies or music is that the players is creating something while playing it, just like if you are recording something while wearing a particular clothing brand. The developer/publisher does not own that creation. Now, we can have a discussion whether or not this includes the cut scenes, but where there's interactivity, there's also player created work.
This, in my opinion, is why Nintendo's Youtube policy is completely crazy. They claim ownership of other people's creation.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
