DonFerrari said:
Shinobi-san said:
sc94597 said:
Shinobi-san said:
1. 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.
2. 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.
|
1. They aren't demanding full compensation. There can still be IP damage, and that might be Nintendo's reasoning.
2. They DID react a long time ago by removing videos that made profit. People disputed this, and now their new policy is to only take a share of the profits.
If somebody makes a song and has little portions of another song in it, they usually need to credit the original song owner with royalities (unless the other owner says they can do it for free.) Or if somebody has a cartoon character in their cartoon the same is true.
It's funny, I came into this thread disagreeing with Nintendo, and slowly I am defending them more and more.
|
1. Yes well aware of that. I still feel that they are not entitled to any of the revenue.
2. When i say long ago...i mean well before any youtuber was bringing in significant revenue. I can assure that had these youtubers been earning peanuts, Nintendo would not care.
Songs and Movies are different entertainments mediums to games, i think ive exaplined this in my previous post. Also, i know i make this seem like a black and white topic but really theres two sides here...and its a very grey subject. In my opinion though i dont feel its right for gaming publishers to claim revenue from the lets players, but i can understand how others would feel they should.
|
2. That is exactly the reason why Nintendo and others should do it... have you ever saw any songmaker or record company trying to pass law or hunt down people who sing and perform on street??? Nope... but if you use someones song in a venue then you have to pay... so if you are using the share function a console offer to exchange experience with your friends none will care, but if you are making good money out of it them you should pay..
Are we all comunists in here to think Nintendo and the other companies aren't allowed the money generated by their IPs?
|
You cant compare it with singing though because you cant commentate and have the song playing at the same time.
Secondly, music is created with the purpose of the end consumer 'listening' to it, whereas the purpose of video games is to be played.
A fairer comparison would be cars. Every youtuber who reviews their car doesnt pay the manufacturer because they only money they are entitled to is the money they get when they sold the car. Yes the manufacturer may not consider it a large amount to bother, but if they did, they still wouldnt have a chance at getting that money because the video is not their 'content', even though their car is in the video.
Try uploading raw gameplay, youtube wont give you a dime for it because nintendo's raw gameplay is worth nothing. Youtubers get paid ad revenue for original content like commentaries, how to's and other stuff.
