Absolutely correct. The entire issue at hand is profit.

European courts are clear on that, you can handle your purchases in any way you want, as long as you are not doing it for profit.

You can buy a game, gift it to your friends, invite people over, broadcast it over the Internet, even make torrents to share, as long as you don't ask for payment in return. If you plan to make a profit, you need to reach an agreement with the content creator, and find a way to compensate them. Simple enough.

Using someone else's IP solely for your own profit is piracy.

I'm all for fair use of copyrighted content, say if you're going to do a joke, a parody, a remix, a guide on a specific level/quest or a review.

But if you're going to do a playthrough of the whole game and make money off of it, it seems fair that some of it's revenue it attributed by the streaming platform to the owner of the content

I'm fine with people doing "Let's Plays" or even submitting videos to youtube, lets not get that mistaken, however having adverts on those videos to make money from them is the questionable bit.

Yes. No court ruling. So both sides aren't wrong. But you can't be bashing pewpie because of this. Since there's no definative decision.

Fish is an embarrassment to developers (especially to other idies), I and about 99% of other developers love seeing people post lets plays and walk throughs even if its an SP only game, because it gives the game popularity and most people who look up LPs are usually interested in the game to the point that they will buy it themselves. Then you have the self righteous Phil Fish and his ignorance.

I can bash who I want, even the people I like to watch, I'll bash them for the same thing. If the money is there and people are letting them take it, well done to them for doing that, that doesn't mean I don't think it wrong. Those who made the original game are essentially missing out on a completely new form of revenue stream, one that I'm sure they didn't even expect. 

I'm presuming there is no court ruling because games developers are not pushing the issue, unlike TV companies, who have and do push the issue. Nintendo did push once, but for some reason stopped. Probably because they thought they were alienating fans or something. Yet their idea was a good one, you can if you want upload "Let's Play" videos, just don't claim ads and therefore money on them.

I wish Nintendo did continue their fight, maybe then other developers would have followed. I'd be a dang sight happier watching gameplay videos without the adverts.

I think he might be on to something here. I mean why should we stop at games. Why shouldn't clothing manufacturers (though this may not apply to pr0n), and furniture makers and the makers of anything shown within a video be further compensated after the initial purchase of their items when they are shown on video and the wearer/owner gets paid. Of course the video camera manufacturer wouldn't get paid since it is not shown in the video (unless there are multiple cameras, but then the video maker would only be responsible for those actually in the shot) and neither would the sound equipment manufacturer, except when the boom mic falls into view.

This is such nonsense. Video Games are an interactive product meaning the idea is to play them. Streaming your play through of a game you legally purchased is not stealing. It is fair trade. I know a lot of sympathetic gamers love their favorite developers etc. and want to see them get paid but this whole idea that game developers somehow deserve to further reap profits from something they already sold is just silly.

This whole knee jerk reaction from some in the development community to try to double dip into their game sales is just going to back fire on them. Don't support this type of anti-consumer bullshit. Phil Fish is a talented game designer but when it comes to treating his consumer base with respect (gamers) he is a talentless hack.

I kind of agree with him that they are profiting of his product, and perhaps a small % of money made of his game should go to him, even if it's only 10%

LOL you actually think these let's plays will continue without the adverts? No they will go away or they will probably get even more adverts for those who decide to cave and enter into revenue sharing partnerships with the developers. This is a cash grab plain and simple.

You think some people are so obsessed with money that they wouldn't bother doing "Let's Plays" for nothing more than fun?