By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - My Defense to Nintendo's Youtube Policy

KLXVER on 07 April 2015
ToraTiger said: I never got the point of letting gamers make millions using other people's products to make commentary and reactions on them.


Millions? 99.9% of Lets Players probably just scrapes by or have a real job as well...



Around the Network
Goodnightmoon on 07 April 2015
Wagram said:
Goodnightmoon said:

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.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7938333/nintendo-youtube-affiliate-program

Nintendo has just launched a beta for what it's calling its "Creators Program," an affiliate program for sharing advertising money with YouTube content creators. Essentially, anyone who is part of the program can create YouTube videos featuring footage of Nintendo games and split the advertising money with Nintendo — users will get 60 percent of the revenue on individual videos, but can also register dedicated Nintendo channels to earn 70 percent. 

But for people like Angry Joe this is not enough.



Wagram on 07 April 2015
ToraTiger said:
Wagram said:

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.


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


Nothing about this situation has been in Nintendo's favor. This has been a shitstorm in PR and has done absolutely nothing to help increase sales for the Wii U.



Wagram on 07 April 2015
Goodnightmoon said:
Wagram said:


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

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7938333/nintendo-youtube-affiliate-program

Nintendo has just launched a beta for what it's calling its "Creators Program," an affiliate program for sharing advertising money with YouTube content creators. Essentially, anyone who is part of the program can create YouTube videos featuring footage of Nintendo games and split the advertising money with Nintendo — users will get 60 percent of the revenue on individual videos, but can also register dedicated Nintendo channels to earn 70 percent. 

But for people like Angry Joe this is not enough.


This language does not support what you posted. Where does it specifically say that Nintendo and Google share that 40%?



ToraTiger on 07 April 2015
KLXVER said:
ToraTiger said: I never got the point of letting gamers make millions using other people's products to make commentary and reactions on them.


Millions? 99.9% of Lets Players probably just scrapes by or have a real job as well...


Plenty of Youtubers are millions, and even larger number of them make more than enough money to get by just with ad money of someone else's game.  Google takes a lot of the money too, but I thats a problem for another debate



3DS I.D : 3282-2755-4646

I make bad threads.  

SSB really went downhill after Melee....

Manlet Crew

Around the Network
ToraTiger on 07 April 2015
Wagram said:
ToraTiger said:


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


Nothing about this situation has been in Nintendo's favor. This has been a shitstorm in PR and has done absolutely nothing to help increase sales for the Wii U.

Unless Nintendo decided to pay people to play their games on Youtube, that is literally the only way they would get enough publicty to increase their quarter profits by more than 1 percent



3DS I.D : 3282-2755-4646

I make bad threads.  

SSB really went downhill after Melee....

Manlet Crew

impertinence on 07 April 2015
rolltide101x said:

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

And people watching your Angry Joe tribute videos can convince people to watch Angry Joe videos. There is no difference, the only difference is that people are more likely to give business to Nintendo than Angry Joe because the source material is of higher quality and more universal appeal. Obviously not good reasons to let people just use your work for their own profit as they see fit.



KLXVER on 07 April 2015
ToraTiger said:
KLXVER said:


Millions? 99.9% of Lets Players probably just scrapes by or have a real job as well...


Plenty of Youtubers are millions, and even larger number of them make more than enough money to get by just with ad money of someone else's game.  Google takes a lot of the money too, but I thats a problem for another debate


I can think of one. Pewdiepie...



Mythmaker1 on 07 April 2015
ToraTiger said:
Nuvendil said:
Whether you get the point or not is irrelevant. Commentary is one of the things covered under fair use doctrine. Let's Plays are further shored up by nature of being inherently transformative (LPs are videos, not video games). Appropriately edited let's plays with an emphasis on player commentary and interactions are textbook fair use. It's not the same as a movie being aired on television. That is neither transformative nor falls under fair use. But if I were to do a documentary or analytical commentary making use of large clips of that film and aired it on TV, I would not have to worry at all about copyrighted content as those fall under fair use. I may have to navigate some trademark issues, but even that is unlikely due to the very specific nature of trademark law. Nintendo is in the wrong here, definitely in Joe's case. Now if a guy uploads a video with no commentary that is literally the core content/main story of a story driven game from start to finish, then you have an argument. But Joe's vids weren't that, not even remotely close. He followed all the guidelines of fair use and clearly did not use the content in such a manner as to have his vids constitute a substitute for the actual games. In short, Nintendo is in the wrong, not Joe.


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.

Probably going to regret this, but that really is not how it works, at least in the US.



I believe in honesty, civility, generosity, practicality, and impartiality.

Wagram on 07 April 2015
Goodnightmoon said:
Wagram said:

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. 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.

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,

Having done a little more research you have this slightly backwards. Youtube takes a flat 40%, Nintendo takes 18% (which is roughly 40% of the remaining 60% that the CC obtains) and the CC gets 42%. Which like I said before, why consider Nintendo videos when you don't have to put up with the 18% crap from any other studio?