what Binary Solo said-  thank goodness for writing 

Did anyone remember that time when Fanboys defend Microsoft DRM policy ....?

well...Microsoft was in their right too....

Why you ppl don't go and write a petition in order to get DRM in our games too?...is not fair that you ppl can sell your used games...Why you should make money from something that is not yours?

That's naive. They can reject a negative video because of a technicality and just be more flexible with positive videos.

Despite that, a let's play video is fair use. Nintendo is just doing that because they know that YouTube usually takes any copyright notice, correct or not, seriously and gives one strike to the channel. They aren't even in their own legal right! They are just using the fear of being banned against YouTubers because they want to censor content about their games.

Imagine if everyone did that. Not only game companies, but film companies too. And if they did it with TV reviews too. "Oh, you were kind of harsh with Avengers 2, well your video can't be published because of rule A and B".

Nintendo does not care about its fans, only about their stock holders, Joe should have known, they will never let a penny slip away. What amazes me is how come people defend it so much when they do nothing for their fans.

Steam also puts DRM in all its games so if it goes out of business, you lose thousands of dollars in products. Gabe is not so nice, right?

The problem isn't the share Nintendo wants. Is that Nintendo decides what video is acceptable and what video isn't. That's censorship and they can use it to skew videos towards more favorable opinions about their products.

Despite that, they aren't in their right according to the copyright law. Fair use allows to use parts of a film/game/music to review or create a parody.

I don't care what ninty does as this doesn't affect me at at, but at bolded, no no no, let Ninty sink on that ship by themselves.

It doesn't matter what Nintendo do they will be defended to the death by their fans, but meh let them do it if they want to control their entire video space on YouTube, allowing what can be uploaded and what can't. If Microsoft, Sony, EA, Ubisoft, Activision, Square Enix or Capcom pulled this it would be mayhem. 

Watching a game isn't the same as watching a film, to get the experience you have to play the game. Gaming is about playing not watching so in essence "lets play's" are just advertising the game nothing else.

Just becausethey can, doesn't it will happen. In fact, I can bet you can provide a single instance of Nintendo flagging youtubers on the basis of criticism and opinion. The program is a few months old and there hasn't been a single issue of censorship.

You are using a hypothetical and not a real issue. Even angry joes situation, Nintedo didn't take down the video they took the revenue. Angry joe himself took the video down himself in spite.

I own a knife, I have potential to stab someone with it, it doesn't mean I will. This analogy applies here.

The fair use law contains elements that must be met:

I think it would be hard to argue that let's play videos satisfy condition 3.  The art, sound, and story are lifted verbatim in their entirety from the games being shown.  Those are all owned by the copyright holder.  The only arguement in favor of fair use is that the gameplay is missing.  I'm not sure how well that would hold up in court and I think a lot of people are overly confident that it would be enough.