but Nintendo also claims news/review videos that only show parts of trailers, which Nintendo released to the press themselves (open for monetization)

have to say that i'm glad these youtubers have made their views clear. i work in the industry and it's a terrible move.

so tv shows that discuss movies while showing clips from them is not content? or game reviewers reviewing a game? 

Nobody wants to take it to court because if it ends up getting ruled the wrong way, we could end up with a situation where a court rules that let's plays do not fall under fair use. Overall it's a can of worms that nobody wants to open, right now it's a very large grey area and I think overall everyone wants to keep it this way.

The issue is the money. These folks are doing what they enjoy and have a chance to share it with others, we're all in agreement up to that point (for instance, i would oppose any game maker deleting a let's-play due to a DMCA takedown notice), but fair use is the part where you don't make money off of the thing in question. I'm all for fanart, fan fiction, fan commentary.

What you're equivocating is like somebody rebroadcasting themselves watching an NFL game and armchair-commenting, then deciding that they're going to make a living off of that. Legally specious and certainly not correct.

That's exactly what I'm walking about. They might not want the "free advertizing" without the control. They may find it beneficial to have more control over their IP.

Last year when Nintendo outright flagged their content, which is worse than what they're doing now for Youtubers, people bitched about it for about a week, then they stopped talking about it and people stopped caring. That "bad press" was, is, and will be fleeting, and what they get from it long term may seem beneficial to them.

It's not like the Wii U or 3DS would have been revolutionary sucesses if Nintendo didn't do these things. The "free advertizement," wether people like to admit it or not, results in insignificantly incremental tangeble sales benefits, and Nintendo might not feel like less control over their IP is worth it.

It's not like this effects many important big Nintendo channels anyway. Gamexplain and the like were uneffected by what happened last year, and their output will likely remain the same in this case as well. It's not like there is even close to any shortage of Nintendo game coverage on Youtube with these policies in place.

Nintendo still got tons of "free advertizing" with even stricter policies last year. No, they instead got tons of lucrative advertizing in spite of it. There were still thousands of thousands of videos, reviews, let's plays, and the like of new releases like Mario Kart 8, Smash 4, Pokemon ORAS, etc when Nintendo was even more strict with claiming videos, and they were still making money off of many of them. The Luigi Death Stare became viral enough to appear on national television in spite of it.

These Youtubers can cry all they want, but they won't effect anything. They'll whine about it for a week, and maybe they'll even stop using Nintendo's content on their channels, but that's a tear drop in the well of the many thousands of Nintendo videos that will still be made. Nintendo doesn't need anyone who is complaining about this. There will still be thousands of reviews, commentary, and let's plays of Majora's Mask 3D, Xenoblade Chronicles X, Zelda U, Splatoon etc. without them, just like there were before.

The fact is, these guys feel helpless, because they are. They hold no power or influence over the content they want to use, and they want to feel like they hold more weight then they really do.

I'll put it to you in terms that are easy for you and other YT entitled can understand no in fact Khan has done that for me.

ArchangelMadzz

 This is what it comes down to don't like it then tough luck, people are arguing on YT being free marketing well that marketing isn't Helping the U much now is it. Want to use someone elses content and material then abide by their terms or don't use it that's the world we live in love it or hate it.

That is objectionable, because you're not talking about the product itself but a promotion of it.

Im going to take my video camera into the latest movie and record it while i give "funny" comments over the top.

Im sure the movie companies will be grateful for the free advertising im giving them when i put the entire movie on youtube.

.. And if they're not - well, They're wrong, and i'll post lots of videos saying how evil they are.

It's funny so many pro-Nintendo guys argue it from a movie perspective, when Nintendo games are at the same time seen as the least cinematic and the most interactive. So do your controller inputs not matter after all? Are speed runners for example not worth watching?