Nintendo Responds to YouTube vs Gamers Controversy: “We Want to Protect Against Infringement”

With a change in the copyright claim policies coming from YouTube, publishers have been on the warpath again, using the tools to claim copyright on let’s play videos and similar content, which could severely affect many of those that make a living by creating this kind of video content. Apparently one of the corps on the forefront of the copyright war is Nintendo and today a representative responded on the issue.

[KonsoruMasuta]

To the people who are only going to read the title of the article, Nintendo said that they aren't against fair use. They are just using Content ID to protect themselves against real cases of copy right infringement.

They do seem to be a little more strict about what crosses the line though.

[Beetey]

The article actually specifies that Nintendo is not against fair use.

[Abriael]

Twice.

[KonsoruMasuta]

I know that. I actually meant to say "title of the article". It was an error in my comment.

[SilentNegotiator]

Actions speak louder than words, and blind content ID scans aren't exactly fair-use's friend.

[President]

I hope Nintendo flags every video from channels that try to make money off of Nintendo games. Sony and MS should do it too. Many times those channels all play the same games, try to be funny using the same stupid jokes, scream at the microphone... Its better if they just disappeared and didnt make money out of someone else's IP.

[PurpHerbison]

Idk about you guys but Youtube has been ass since 2012.

[HammadTheBeast]

K later Nintendo. I kind of felt bad after the whole Wii U flop, but I guess there's a reason that no one on Youtube gives a s*** about making videos for the Wii U.

[ShinMaster]

They can say they're ok with Fair Use all they want, but by using Content ID like this they're screwing everyone, fair use or otherwise.

Is anyone on YouTube actually infringing Nintendo's copyright?
Is some taking credit for Nintendo's work and Nintendo losing somehow losing money even a believable scenario?

[Visiblemarc]

Fair use is not protected by/for anyone but the big fish. You can provide lip service about how you support fair use, but take my word, in practice small content providers get drowned in this BS with no protection whatsoever.

[rainslacker]

Doesn't matter if they were or not. It's fair use, so they can't do jack squat to prevent it.

The problem is that YouTube's system is not distinguishing between fair use and copyright infringement. Even Let's Play videos could theoretically fall under fair use, as they have added commentary most of the time, but I feel that would be an issue for the courts to decide since it is more than just clips in most cases.

I think most people don't have a problem with YouTube stopping copyright infringement. In fact they probably have an obligation to given their size to protect themselves against lawsuits from publishers.

This whole thing turned into a mess. YouTube, and the original copyright holders, don't want to take responsibility for figuring out what is fair use, and what is copyright infringement, leaving many content providers(YouTube posters) to clean up the mess. Given the huge number of automatically flagged videos, it's going to take a very long time to figure out.

[guitarded77]

SilentNegotiator - Exactly

Nintendo can say whatever they want, but their actions have shown otherwise. How ignorant does one have to be to believe the PR BS?

It's akin to politic speak. They say what you want to hear, and do the exact opposite.

[snipes101]

I don't see how any publishers could possibly consider LP'S a danger to their products. No one is stealing their game. People are watching footage of their game, which can only really be a good thing, when you think about it. Like other posters here, I've made purchasing decisions based off of LP's before.

Even though those that post LP's are technically making money off someone else's IP, the copyright holder is not losing out on any money. Unless, for example, Nintendo had its own video channel where it streamed game play footage, and these LP'S were costing them audience members, they are losing nothing on these LP's. Publishers are such Nazis about things like this.

[-Foxtrot]

The problem is it hasn't been hurting them or anyone before so why bother going through with all this now

It just seems pointless in my opinion and a middle finger to fans who have bought the game but like doing walk through videos or what not for their Youtube Channels.

[JessiePinkmanYo]

I actually see YouTube as a free advertisement to a game and have made purchases based on the footage of other REAL consumers put up. Not some orchestrated demo you may see at E3 of a game possibly running on a PC.

An answer to this, Nintendo, MS and Sony could launch their own video upload channel and give YouTube the middle finger. They can monitor and implement the policies that they see fit. It'll also give us gamers a channel to view games without sifting through the tons of horse shit on YouTube

[cell989]

I think what "hurts" them is the fact thata lot of people were making serious money by using footage from their intellectual properties. Anytime someone is making money off of your stuff, that you created for the purpose of making money its bound to raise some eyebrows. Now if these people are only using the footage as a hobby without any monetary gain, I dont see the problem, as someone else pointed out, its free advertisement.

[travelguy2k]

The money these people may be making is not money that would have been going to the publisher anyway.

Also, if they are successful at making videos people are willing to pay money to watch, then that is great advertising for that game that the developer is not paying for.

I'm not sure if there are any victims in this and can only see it as being mutually beneficial. Unless the videos are degrading the product, then i can see the publisher/developer getting mad. Do the sue critics for copyright infringement if there is a picture of their IP in a poor review. I'm rambling now....

[Visiblemarc]

-Foxtrot, this is just further evidence of how out of touch Nintendo is right now. This whole story has been a PR nightmare from the beginning, yet they haven't fixed their part of it. To me, it shows how far Nintendo ventured into "casual gamer" territory, in their minds. It's to a point now, where PR arises that is poison to them with core gamers and they do little-to-nothing about it.

[rainslacker]

That's really what I don't get. Nintendo makes quality games. They make games that while you may want to watch the game play before buying, still mean more by actually playing them. I'd imagine 99% of the people who sit through an entire lets play video probably have the game already and want to see how to get past a certain point. Others are already interested in the game, and just want to see if the game play appeals to them.

Reviews using just a few clips fall under fair use, so can't do anything about those.

I really don't see why Nintendo feels the need to make a big deal about these videos. Sega as well.

If the people happen to make some money providing these videos, then I don't see why Nintendo has a problem with it. They give free crap to big magazine website publishers all the time to do pretty much the same thing.

@Monkey below
Good reviewers won't put spoilers up in their reviews. Yahtzee does occasionally, but usually as a joke, and it's never what it seems. Bad reviewers who spoil things won't be around very long either way.

[wheresmymonkey]

they are very particular about what you can and can't show when you're doing vieo reviews as well. Most of the rules seem to be more to stop people spoiling the game though. which is nice.

[Visiblemarc]

For strict game reviews that's fine...reviews with spoilers are the worst. However, other game exploration videos should have no issues.

This to me is ridiculous. If you're posting a vid on youtube of a movie, then someone can be said to have seen the movie if they watch that vid. Copyright claim valid. A videogame is interactive. Without interactivity, you haven't 'used' it.

I compare it to a remote control helicopter. Do you think any company that makes those would ever try to get videos of them being flown taken off youtube or make attempts to strip the video poster of their meager "profits" from the effort of making, editing and posting, what amounts to, their free commercials? No, of course not...the viewer still has to buy the product to experience it.

[TheEvilWithin]

Nintendo is just evil... /s

[Abriael]

Edit: lol nice ninja edit

[just-joe]

How dare you read the article, it's obvious this article is meant to single out one company even though Sony and Microsoft are having this happen trouble too with videos featuring Last of Us and Halo, Nintendo is the only one saying anything. But pay no attention to the man behind that mirror.

[harrisk954]

They CAN'T be against fair use. Fair use is a legal exception to copyright infringement.

[FantasyStar]

When you're making money: everything changes.

[solid_snake3656]

@FantasyStar Cuz we all know Nintendo sure as hell ain't making any.

[miyamoto]

"* Intellectual property loses its value if it is not defended. Hence, we chose to use Content ID."

In other words Nintendo themselves are responsible for putting these restriction inside YT's system.

Its their doing.

They are the ones who used these content IDs.

No need to manage Nintendo's reputation or control the damage.

Nintendo seems to not like free advertisement from their fans.

[calvincrack]

Nintendo: the George Lucas of videogames. #givemebackyourchildhood

[yarbie1000]

This is Ubisoft's Youtube policy. http://forums.ubi.com/showt...

Nintendo and a few other publishers need to take notes

[DarthJay]

Yes. Agree 100% with this. This is EXACTLY the way to handle it.

[cell989]

I like the way Ubi is handling it. Now we know why the PS4 and Xbone do not have a youtube upload app.

[HurstDarkStar]

I like the guidelines but the only part i see thats weird and too broad is the word offensive cause thats too abstract when they have no
homophobic, sexist, and racist right next to it some people will find anything to be offended by and apply what someones talking about and morph it into their reality, For ex: your drunk video
OH HELL NO MY FAMILY MEMBER DIED IN A CAR ACCIDENT AND YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!!!
other than that its great.

[ScamperCamper]

@yarbie, thank you soooo much for that link. It's almost hard to believe, but right now because of that, I just became a MASSIVE Ubisoft supporter. The fact they even say right there that people can monetize the youtube videos? That's a company that I put my support behind. Ubisoft should really communicate just how friendly they are. Wow, they should be a trend setter. Screw Nintendo and the likes.

[xHeavYx]

Meanwhile, good guy Diablo...
https://twitter.com/Diablo/...

[wishingW3L]

now the only question still unanswered is: protect it from what?

[NatureOfLogic]

Free advertisement. The same reason all games don't have a try before you buy demo. They rather for you to buy now, regret later.

This sums it up quite clearly.............

http://i.minus.com/ibcwEzn2...

[solid_snake3656]

*COUGH* BF4

[Armadilo21]

Nintendo makes awesome games but the rest of what Nintendo offers just so backwards thinking company, they don't think about the future their thinking of the past

[-Foxtrot]

Probably because they are stuck in the past...

[thehobbyist]

I guess you could say they're holding onto A Link to The Past

[DanielGearSolid]

Its crazy how corporate America creates issues in their own heads. Then come with solutions that adversly affect everyone but themselves

[CrossingEden]

nintendo isn't american

[RiPPn]

Does anyone actually watch a playthrough an not buy the game though? And in the rare case that does happen, would that person have actually bought it anyway?

Seems silly to kill what is essentially free advertising. I don't know how many times I've known little about a game, go to youtube and watch a couple minutes of play and decided to purchase a game.

[DeadMansHand]

This. I don't usually read reviews because my tastes are so specific that I never agree with a reviewer. I always go to YouTube and watch a middle level of the game being played by a real gamer and listen and watch to them. I know within 5-10 minutes if its my kind of game. If it is I will buy it new and also the season pass.

With the new generation here and next year shaping up to be a monster in terms of game volume I will not buy a game I can't see being played first. Save, the guarantees like infamous, fallout, tlou2, etc.

There are too many options now. If a dev won't let me see their work in action they will not see my 60.00.

[Furesis]

i agree without some of these youtubers i would have never bought devil may cry(not the reboot), metal gear, assassins creed(the first ones), dark souls, silent hill hd and many other games so i have to thank them for that

[FantasyStar]

Yup. I've no need to buy Killzone Shadow Fall because I just watched it out Youtube. When I saw how the game was like: I felt it wasn't worth dropping the money on a PS4 just for that game. I saved a good bit of gold by simply watching it on Youtube. I know I'm not the only one who does that when deciding on purchases.

[rainslacker]

That's a good thing right? For you at least. That's why this whole policy is bad. You may never have seen those things if you hadn't gone to YouTube to watch them, thus may have dropped $60 on it. Or you may have done it if you saw you liked it. So it's a positive for the publishers. If you were on the fence, you could go either way.

I guess there are other outlets for that nowadays. It seems like most of these companies that are OK with this stuff are more against people making money off them. I don't really get it when they seem to be in bed with major publications to provide this same kind of content.

[FantasyStar]

Absolutely, publishers are afraid of their 'bad product' showing so they refer to censorship. It's simple: if you have a good product, it'll sell itself. With or without Youtube. It's not a coincidence the most highly rated games sell well and also get a lot of coverage on Youtube as well.

[danny818]

Nintendo is an odd company.

[RiPPn]

I think it's not so much that they are odd as it is they are just mentally stuck in the past. Old thinking in modern times is already hurting their company, and if they don't figure out how to adapt, they are going to eventually be irrelevant.

[danny818]

Yea i heard that its hard for them to produce hd games because the underestimated the development time when other companies can produce them in a heart beat. Maybe they should invest more in modern tech and mordern thinking for more possibilities

[aimforthehead]

Let's just hope they sell Zelda and Metroid so a good company can start making them.

[SilentNegotiator]

They're only still around because the handheld market hasn't changed much in the last couple decades, so they haven't had to adapt; all they've had to do is keep price under the competition and put out a few of their own games on it.

[Legendarytjf11]

@SilentNegotiator

I'd say the handheld market has changed more than any for gaming, especially in recent times. The initial struggle of the 3DS and its resurgence as the top game machine for many consecutive months shows their ability to adapt successfully, even if it is just a good price and great games

[SilentNegotiator]

A price cut isn't a real adaption. All they did was continue the status quo of having the cheapest handheld to compete/succeed.

[rainslacker]

Mobile gaming has been greatly effected by the smartphone/tablet revolution.

I don't know if Nintendo was affected by that as much as Sony, but they have support mainly due to it's huge adoption rate in Japan. Most of the games for the 3DS in the west are from Japanese devs, and most western developed games are shovelware.

I personally wouldn't bother with a 3DS if not for the huge amount of JRPG support it gets. Japan has an extremely diverse library for it as well. Games sell systems. The lower price made it more into an impulse buy for many, thus getting more games to help it sell even better.

[RPG_Lover]

Anyone who says Nintendo is odd is thinking as a fanboy and not as a business. You guys just dont get how serious copyright infringment is.

[Yo Mama]

Apparently even Nintendo executives aren't thinking in terms of a business because they're lucky to still be in business.

[Legendarytjf11]

Yeah, especially since they're the most profitable gaming company each year and have lasted over 100 years

[Dunban67]

Ubisoft and others seem to have figured it or pretty well-

Lets play videos, walk through etc have huge view # s for a reason- My year old has watched video games you tube videos (mostly re Nintendo games) and we base most purchase decisions off his watching the.

Additionally, the walk thus and LP s often help get thru parts of certain games that he otherwise may not have been able to figure out on his own, therefore offering help for him to continue playing and enjoying a game that otherwise may nit be a fit for him- So I m willing to buy games that may be a little more difficult due to the LPs and Walk Thru s being there as "help when and if needed"

When I first started watching these videos w my So I assumed the companies that developed the games were actually paying the producers of the videos because (in most/all situations) the LPers are very positive about the game, they tend to "sell" the game and the advertising is invaluable

If most or all of the videos done by the big Nintendo guys on You tube are pulled or significantly altered and future videos not allowed, it is going to hurt Nintendo directly and indirectly

[RPG_Lover]

Ubisoft said the same thing Nintendo did.

[mrmarx]

i thought it was youtube not the copyright holders.. i told you dumb asses

[Debaitable]

I hate the ones who make money off of the videos and all they're doing is playing with exaggerated screaming. Like the guy who demoed the Dying Light game.

[JackieCruise69]

Oh boy.

[DomceM]

what is publisher/company problem is what i dont get. so what if people make money talking about these games? they are popularizing the game for u and getting u sales.

corporations are the biggest tools ever. And so is their stupid copyright crusade.

[Shinobi100]

How hard is this to figure out: if you own something, you decide what to do with it. That's it, get over it. If you created something that was hugely popular, but a week after it became popular, other people started making the same product and they had more advertising & production resources so their version of the product sold millions while yours sold hundreds, you'd be pissed off as ****. That is the purpose of copyright. Nintendo feels that showing off key points of a game rob potential buyers of that magical 1st experience while playing it. Any of you pathetic liberal losers who can't grasp these ideas need to kill yourself. You'll be doing Nintendo & the rest of the world a favor since you'll never make a meaningful contribution to humanity anyway

[DragonKnight]

"Nintendo feels that showing off key points of a game rob potential buyers of that magical 1st experience while playing it."

That's a B.S. argument. These are games, not movies. Your personal interaction with them IS the experience and it can't be ruined by simply watching someone else play the game because everyone plays differently and no two experiences are ever the same. Have fun being debubbled for that last bit about people killing themselves by the way.

[rainslacker]

So you feel the only content we should get is that provided by the actual publisher? How well did that work out for Alien: Colonial Marine buyers?

I'm sorry, but a trailer can make anything look good. Bull shots and stylized marketing campaigns aren't the best way to decide if a game is worth purchasing.

Reviews serve a purpose, and while these companies may be the original copyright holder, the fair use laws do allow reviewers to use content from them for the purpose of review.

Let's play videos also fall under fair use, although it's more of a grey area. Adding commentary is only a small part of what constitutes fair use. One may not distribute full copyrighted content with commentary added, which some of these videos do. Technically even short clips(like the ones that become memes) could be considered copyrighted.

For a comparison, Rifftrax(Guys who did MST3K) only produces a commentary, while the user has to provide the copyrighted content(in most cases).

Many Let's play videos are edited, with original content added. I feel that the actual copyright infringements may vary depending on how they're presented. A short "how-to" type video may not be infringing. A full game from start to finish might. Like I said it's a grey area, with no real definition from the courts that I'm aware of.

The problem with this whole issue is that the stuff that falls under fair use is not being distinguished from the stuff that does not.

Why anyone should care if these people make money off it is beyond me. It really does sound like some people are just jealous of other peoples success.

Most of the complaints I've seen from Nintendo in the past on this seems to be more along the lines that they want a piece of the pie, not that they are worried that it will devalue their product.

In the end, it comes down to, is this content really harming Nintendo's bottom line? It's easy to spew hyperbole and assume anecdotal evidence is the norm, but to Nintendo, they believe that there is a direct correlation to these videos and their profitability. Since they haven't really made any quantifiable evidence public, all we can do is go back and forth with assumptions and hyperbole.

[KillrateOmega]

It's free advertisement...FREE! Why are you trying so hard to **** that up for yourselves?!

Honestly, what is the fantasy here? That by doing your best to punish these people that all the money that they have been making off these videos will just magically start flowing into your account? No. That was never money you be making in the first place.

Or is it that your afraid that by watching these videos, people won't buy the product for themselves? That they'll be completely satisfied with just watching the videos? NO! That like saying that people won't watch a movie, because they saw its 2 minute trailer. It's simply preposterous! One of the reasons I love games is because I can directly affect what I see on screens, I have a real impact. Just watching a video will not satisfy me. It will only make me want to experience the game first-hand.

All this free advertisement means that you don't have to spend as much money marketing your product yourselves as you used to have to.

Catch up with the times.

[Garethvk]

It is such garbage. Film and game trailers are sent to us by studios, they tell us to post and share with the readers. We do so, then get a filing on You Tube, have to dispute it, and then offer proof. You would think if your a media account with a history of posting game and movie trailers that should be ok.

[TwilightBites]

Why dont people get that this is youtube wide and not just a nintendo thing? A bunch of different companies are a part of the youtube changes...

[SilentNegotiator]

Nintendo opted into the ID scanning crap. They're equally responsible, if not more so.

[TwilightBites]

No, they are responsible for protecting their properties just like any company. People like you just want more excuses to hate them.