I was under the impression that publicity was the ONLY thing that gives him money? Does he have some sort of sponsorship deal where he gets paid to have as few subscribers and video views as possible?

I mean if you put his videos on your channel and people watched it, it does no good for Angry Joe.

A Youtuber playing Nintendo games on Youtube can convice people to buy a 3DS/Wii U and games. It happens

The fact of the matter is Nintendo is behind the times. Their official program is ridiculous taking a 40% cut from the content creator on top of what Youtube takes. Why would anyone who looks at this as a form of employment spend their time making Nintendo videos when they can do something else and make far more?

Youtubers edit, create skits, do reviews. Nintendo already has free advertising from exposure of the Youtubers audience which should in theory negate the need to request revenue. People don't watch AJ for Nintendo but they benefit when he creates videos about their games. It's honestly a simple concept that seems to be lost on defenders and Nintendo themselves. When you're in last place and can benefit from exposure it almost seems like a no-brainer but suits in Japan are dumb apparently.

You're showing someone's content, and as such you would have to either a.) Make lets plays without video footage and sound which no one would watch or B.) get approval to use said content.  Only way it would be fair use is if they did not make ad reveune or at least, not pocket it the way that youtubers do.  This is obvious, any one who's taken one law class would know.  Which is why Nintendo will always have the last say in where the profits go and ultimately decides whether or not the video is allowed for that purpose.

So Joe is so not in the wrong, his videos get fairly deleted?  Meaning, end of the day Nintendo has the final say in using their product for money.  Which in a way Joe's videos are a product, since he makes profit from them just like any other product.

It's their games, it's their decisions. I'm fine with them gaining a part of the money.
The only issue I have is that you can only play Nintendo game. Which in my opinion is stupid. THAT is what causes less advertisement. It would be nice for a popular youtuber to play some of Nintendo's games and feature them.. but they won't due to that.

A lot of people is getting this WRONG.

Nintendo and youtube takes a 40% and the youtuber takes the 60%. If you are a Nintendo channel then you have the 70% and the 30% for youtube/Nintendo.

Nintendo takes a 18%. Yes, all that drama for that,

Link me to this information because this is not what I have seen on several big websites.

Nintendo is always behind the times,  but this time it works in their favor.  

Youtubers feel as though they have the right to use other's product to make money, and most companies dont give a fcuk but if they wanted to, they could have every lets play video removed and reviews along with them that  showed prolonged portions of their content.   End of the day, youtube based advertising wouldn't matter much, as Nintendo already has a joint program with Smosh, one of the alltime biggest youtube channels, and I dont see them raking in the dough because of it.  smh

Obviously this could be some advertising for Nintendo, but I like them having the honor to not let their games be sold off as someone else's ad money. 

Would rep if VGchartz had a rep button.  This x1,000,000,000,000,000