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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Angry Joe's Top 10 Games of E3 2016

Nuvendil on 19 June 2016
Veknoid_Outcast said:
Nuvendil said:

Actually, no, what he just described is NOT how it went down at all.  Not even close.

First off, the content creators program was not announced and set up until AFTER Joe bought the Wii U and planned to do some streams and post highlights to YouTube.  It sjowed up at the end of January 2015, Joe did his streams and had his run in with them at the start of and middle of January 2015.

Second, Joe's fanbase never DEMANDED he do Nintendo content.  I should know, I've followed him for years.  In fact, a sizable chunk of his fanbase didn't care about or actively disliked the Nintendo.  

Third, while yes, he used donation mkney to get a Wii U, three things must be remembered:  one, it was one fan who donated it; two, that fan did not demand Wii U reviews; and three, he Lways uses the money from twitch streams and donations to buy new equipment.  Youtube revenue primarily goes to general cost of living and running the Angry Joe Show, he has said this numerous times.  And FYI, I was watching the stream where these donations were made, I know this first hand.

Third, Joe was completely not in the loop about Nintendo before his issues.  He hadn't owned a Wii, it had been ages since he had any Nintendo products and had never done any Nintendo coverage.  He conducted himself exactly in line with what essentially every other company allows for let's players and streamers.

Now, having corrected all that noise, yoir questions:

Nintendo is NOTORIOUS for claiming videos for petty reasons.  The Co-optional Podcast had a 30 second clip of the Pokémon Black 2 and White 2 trailer in their 3 hour show and Nintendo claimed the whole video and took all the revenue.  It is very tricky to do.  ProJared used to get around it by lowering the sound but had mulfiple claims last year.  He has reviewed no Nintendo published product since.

Your second question, only if it is a game Nintendo has on their list of permitted games and only if Nintendo gets 40% of the revenue, an absolutely absurd cut.  And before you ask, no, I have no idea how GameXplain gets by.  But essentially, unless you are a big enough entity to intimidate Nintendo or fight back, they will screw you.  And Joe and Jared and Jim and TotalBiscuit have every right to call them on it, it's a violation of fair use.  

Edit: oh, and joe has spoken very positively of the New 3DS and Wii U on social media.  And he got that 3DS after the run in with Nintendo.  Yeah, clearly he hates them.

OK, thanks.

So I get Nintendo wanting to crack down on Let's Players, but how does the company get away with claiming ownership of reviews, for example? As long as those only use a small portion of the copyrighted material, they should fall under the fair use umbrella, no?

Because YouTube doesn't do anything to protect anyone.  They provide copyright strikes and content ID for copyright holders to use.  Nintendo loves content ID, which just either prevents monetization or takes the revenue or forces monetization AND takes the regenue.  The problem is while you can eventually get a Copyright Strike taken care of most of ghe time, Content ID has no mediation of any kind and the claimant has final say.  So you have to appeal to the person who is screwing you to stop.  And best part?  Most companies don't even read the appeals they are sent. Cause content ID is all automated.  They just set and forget the content ID syste.

And yes, all reviews, extensive commentary, journalism, and minor uses of illustrative footage fall under Fair Use.  But Fair Use is a courtroom defense.  Which means that since YouTube and Google do **** all to protect content creators, the creators' only option is to actually SUE NINTENDO.  And Nintendo knows most can't and they use that to get away with it which is a major dick move.  So yeah, the whole situation is bullocks.