Is it fair that Nintendo is claiming ad revenue on Let's Play videos or is it a kick to the balls?

If you’re a gamer, you’re probably aware of the controversy that surrounded Nintendo about their latest policy update. While this is 'legal', the question remains: is it fair to Nintendo's fans?

Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
vork772502d ago

its there games and letplayers are making money off of other people games i say its fair

zerocrossing2502d ago

I disagree, certainly not all of them but many LPers put a lot of time and effort into creating informative and entertaining vids, so they deserve the ad revenue IMO.

It's no different from independent film critics that show movie footage and game magazines that show screen shots, I can understand why Nintendo are doing this but I still feel they are in the wrong here, if anything LP's increase the chance of a game being sold because consumers can get a good feel for whether they actually like and will enjoy a game or not.

BullyMangler2502d ago

Lets play Turok Seeds of Evil on youtube is equivalent to; lets watch the Dark Knight on youtube.

_QQ_2502d ago

It isn't called lets review, what Nintendo is doing is fair, when movies want to use certain references they have to pay whoever the IP belongs to, even if it is free advertising.

fattyuk2502d ago

Not Really the same is it?? I couldn't download a video of Turok and enjoy it how it's ment to be....physically played could I?

Panthers2502d ago

It doesnt matter if its fair or not. Nintendo is shooting themselves in the foot with this.

Youtube videos are basically free advertising. These LPers have a fanbase and if they put up a game from Nintendos system, those fans may potentially want to play them. I have some Youtube stars that I trust and if they recommend a game, I will probably try it.

Bimkoblerutso2501d ago (Edited 2501d ago )

I don't think they're necessarily in the WRONG, but I do find it a little ridiculous and greedy of them.

"Let's play" videos are by and large just a means of enjoying and spreading the community of gaming and in many ways they strengthen the fanbase for many franchises. I would be surprised if anyone out there felt like they had fully experienced any of these games after watching a simple video of them.

So Nintendo trying to squeeze a few "legal-action-bucks" out of their fans seems slightly scummy to me.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2501d ago
Moonman2502d ago

It's totally legal for Nintendo to do this. Maybe they see a future that is much more profitable than we anticipate?

matrixman922502d ago

As long as a person adds commentary to it, it should be considered fair is a kick in the sack to the people that make it their own creative work. If it is just raw gameplay with nothing added to it, then Nintendo has every right

rainslacker2501d ago (Edited 2501d ago )

Adding a commentary doesn't make it fall under fair use. The original content is still under the copyright domain of the holder of that copyright. The only thing the commenter has that is theirs is the commentary itself.

By your reasoning, If you took rifftrax, and they put their audio tracks directly onto a stream, they could play that movie over the stream for a small price and people could watch the movie. Since they can't do that because they don't own the content of the film, they just release audio tracks and expect the end user to provide the legally purchased media.

A more appropriate example would be, a person could theoretically add a screen filter to any game and redistribute it for any charge they see fit, giving nothing back to the original creator.

I'm not commenting on the morality or idiocy of Nintendo doing all this, just that it doesn't fall under fair use.

V0LT2502d ago

better than making money off used game sales :P

Rusty5152502d ago (Edited 2502d ago )

I'm not for it or against it. Nintendo does after all have the right to do this...

Show all comments (23)
The story is too old to be commented.