as a multibusiness owner, i'm standing with the corporations on this one. if these leeches (you tubers) are going to be making money off of their content, they deserve a slice of the pie. it's their content and they have every right to do what they like with it even if it means taking your videos down. when you buy a mario game, you don't own mario. you own that disc and your opinion, but not the content on the disc. if you want to be a cnn or a sportscenter by posting footage of the games and what not with the intent of trying to make money then pony up the cash to get the rights to show the content like they do. these are bums trying to make a living off of someone else's work without giving anything back in return.
The Great CT - Community Thread
- Thread starter mattavelle1
- Start date
do you capitalize on the IP of others for profit at TVE, or no? don't bother answering. you do, and you know it. own it. you do the same thing as a let's play, only you write instead of speak, and you post screenshots of IP you don't own instead of video of IP you don't own. you essentially do a "let's watch".
you don't provide the show to watch, just like a let's play doesn't give you the game to play. you're both taking someone else's intellectual property and finding a way to make money off it by adding your own input. how about instead of labeling me xyz, just label yourself a hypocrite and move on. when you stop shunning the very common practice of capitalizing on the work of others then you'll have room to talk smack about it. until then, i see very little if any ethical difference between you posting hundreds of screenshots and dozens upon dozens of articles based on someone else's work and a youtuber doing the same thing in video format.
you can pretend you just support the content you cover, but really you support yourself. you have no moral high ground, bud.
you don't provide the show to watch, just like a let's play doesn't give you the game to play. you're both taking someone else's intellectual property and finding a way to make money off it by adding your own input. how about instead of labeling me xyz, just label yourself a hypocrite and move on. when you stop shunning the very common practice of capitalizing on the work of others then you'll have room to talk smack about it. until then, i see very little if any ethical difference between you posting hundreds of screenshots and dozens upon dozens of articles based on someone else's work and a youtuber doing the same thing in video format.
you can pretend you just support the content you cover, but really you support yourself. you have no moral high ground, bud.
TNE doesn't own mario, but you see it plastered all over the site 
doesn't nintendo deserve a piece of the revenue TNE brings in? after all, nintendo IP is the main drive behind the site. "if these leeches (TNE staff) are going to be making money off of their content, they deserve a slice of the pie."
when watching a youtube video turns into playing the game, or reading TVE turns into watching the tv show, i'll have a problem with it. until then, i think what youtubers create in regards to let's plays etc. fails to compete directly with the products they display and shouldn't be taken down on that basis. i think there should be a case-by-case avenue for corps to go down (if there isn't already) to protect their IP, but the broad strokes they use when deleting content from the web is ham fisted and serves no one.
doesn't nintendo deserve a piece of the revenue TNE brings in? after all, nintendo IP is the main drive behind the site. "if these leeches (TNE staff) are going to be making money off of their content, they deserve a slice of the pie."
when watching a youtube video turns into playing the game, or reading TVE turns into watching the tv show, i'll have a problem with it. until then, i think what youtubers create in regards to let's plays etc. fails to compete directly with the products they display and shouldn't be taken down on that basis. i think there should be a case-by-case avenue for corps to go down (if there isn't already) to protect their IP, but the broad strokes they use when deleting content from the web is ham fisted and serves no one.
nope. this article - http://tventhusiast.com/article/doctor-who-season-nine-premiere-reaction/
if you guys spoke that article over a clip of the show instead of writing and stealing images, you'd have the same basic shit you're hating on. TVE is profiting off of IP they don't own, and you endorse it. i'd love to see where the people over at Dr. Who came to TVEnthusiast asking you to do that. they could be dick heads and ask you to take it down, and you would comply because you know it's not really yours.
but they would still be the dick heads, and you still tried to profit off their work.
if you guys spoke that article over a clip of the show instead of writing and stealing images, you'd have the same basic shit you're hating on. TVE is profiting off of IP they don't own, and you endorse it. i'd love to see where the people over at Dr. Who came to TVEnthusiast asking you to do that. they could be dick heads and ask you to take it down, and you would comply because you know it's not really yours.
but they would still be the dick heads, and you still tried to profit off their work.
TNE doesn't own mario, but you see it plastered all over the site
doesn't nintendo deserve a piece of the revenue TNE brings in? after all, nintendo IP is the main drive behind the site. "if these leeches (TNE staff) are going to be making money off of their content, they deserve a slice of the pie."
when watching a youtube video turns into playing the game, or reading TVE turns into watching the tv show, i'll have a problem with it. until then, i think what youtubers create in regards to let's plays etc. fails to compete directly with the products they display and shouldn't be taken down on that basis. i think there should be a case-by-case avenue for corps to go down (if there isn't already) to protect their IP, but the broad strokes they use when deleting content from the web is ham fisted and serves no one.
doesn't nintendo deserve a piece of the revenue TNE brings in? after all, nintendo IP is the main drive behind the site. "if these leeches (TNE staff) are going to be making money off of their content, they deserve a slice of the pie."
when watching a youtube video turns into playing the game, or reading TVE turns into watching the tv show, i'll have a problem with it. until then, i think what youtubers create in regards to let's plays etc. fails to compete directly with the products they display and shouldn't be taken down on that basis. i think there should be a case-by-case avenue for corps to go down (if there isn't already) to protect their IP, but the broad strokes they use when deleting content from the web is ham fisted and serves no one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you're right, it writes articles using nintendo's content in order to make money. it's not hard to release an article in video form, and i don't see why the medium is what makes it immoral.
it's possible by looking at how successful the video is. the let's plays with compelling content are the ones getting views, the ones making money, and the ones being taken down. if a youtuber develops a following on his/her let's plays, it's the commentary getting them there. at least that's what my instincts tell me.
it's possible by looking at how successful the video is. the let's plays with compelling content are the ones getting views, the ones making money, and the ones being taken down. if a youtuber develops a following on his/her let's plays, it's the commentary getting them there. at least that's what my instincts tell me.
The medium has nothing to do with it which is why I stated that a similar thing would be making a video voicing your opinion about Nintendo and also stated that there's nothing wrong with that. You can't patent or copyright news or information. So there's nothing to be said about TNE, MyNintendoNews, XboxScene, PSU, stoneage gamer . . .
As for the breakdown of sharing revenue, it's not that simple and you know it. When big bucks are involved you need to get down to every little detail. For example, what would lead a new user to watch a let's play? Most likely the game in question as opposed to the commentator since they don't know him at the point. What keeps them coming back? The games or the commentator? Would you watch a let's play of a game that you don't care about just to listen to commentary? You'd have to answer shit like that with the proper data to back it up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As for the breakdown of sharing revenue, it's not that simple and you know it. When big bucks are involved you need to get down to every little detail. For example, what would lead a new user to watch a let's play? Most likely the game in question as opposed to the commentator since they don't know him at the point. What keeps them coming back? The games or the commentator? Would you watch a let's play of a game that you don't care about just to listen to commentary? You'd have to answer shit like that with the proper data to back it up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
posting a 30 minute clip of a tv show would compete with the actual product. posting a 30 minute clip of a game does not. you can't consume a game though video just like you can't consume a video through screen shots and text.
this is why i'm okay with what you do, just like i'm okay with youtubers. but it's obvious that they both use the IP of others to turn a profit. this is the core of the debate IMO, and if we drew a ven diagram of fan sites and youtube channels, they have that in common.
i agree that there are limits to what should be allowed. i don't think you should be allowed to post someone else's video on your own youtube channel, or copy someone else's article to TVE. but if you create a piece of content that is unique on the web, regardless of the tools you use, i think it should be allowed to exist. again, there should be avenues for corps to protect their IP or collect royalties, but creating bots to indiscriminately take down content goes too far.
this has got me thinking about DJ's and hip hop sampling and how everything worked out when that became an issue. it was handled on a case by case basis and royalties paid instead of clearing the shelves at tower records and censoring material. tom petty took vanilla ice to court - he didn't institute a sweeping deletion of all music using sampled material.
this is why i'm okay with what you do, just like i'm okay with youtubers. but it's obvious that they both use the IP of others to turn a profit. this is the core of the debate IMO, and if we drew a ven diagram of fan sites and youtube channels, they have that in common.
i agree that there are limits to what should be allowed. i don't think you should be allowed to post someone else's video on your own youtube channel, or copy someone else's article to TVE. but if you create a piece of content that is unique on the web, regardless of the tools you use, i think it should be allowed to exist. again, there should be avenues for corps to protect their IP or collect royalties, but creating bots to indiscriminately take down content goes too far.
this has got me thinking about DJ's and hip hop sampling and how everything worked out when that became an issue. it was handled on a case by case basis and royalties paid instead of clearing the shelves at tower records and censoring material. tom petty took vanilla ice to court - he didn't institute a sweeping deletion of all music using sampled material.
i know it's not that simple. web analytics is a huge part of what i do. the fact that there are all these questions to be asked further supports my opinion that these issues should be taken on a case by case basis instead of sweeping content removal. i very highly doubt that anyone at nintendo even watches all the videos they take down.
Here is the thing, what happens with let's plays happened with movies like 20 years ago with MST3K.... The difference was that MST3K both secured the rights AND produced scripted content... So it was never in question. Using some video clips or pics falls in fair use.... Using prolonged clips or full episodes/movies/playthroughs violates fair use... And, unless you have the rights, is unethical.
You say that what tve and tne sites is the same, but not in video form, but you are wrong... There are plenty of youtubers that do what we do in video form... And that is different... Emergency awesome is an example, he does what we do, but in video. Note how careful youtubers like him are about what they use... Which is usually just screens... Despite having video as their format. That is them respecting fair use
You say that what tve and tne sites is the same, but not in video form, but you are wrong... There are plenty of youtubers that do what we do in video form... And that is different... Emergency awesome is an example, he does what we do, but in video. Note how careful youtubers like him are about what they use... Which is usually just screens... Despite having video as their format. That is them respecting fair use
mystery science theater was an awesome thing to bring up here. props.
i still feel like you're ignoring what i said though;
this is where TVE and Let's Plays differ. using other people's IP for profit, most often without the kind of express permission that mst got, is where they are similar.
game streaming is a real thing now - so if youtubers let you play someone else's game for free with their commentary over it, it would be more akin to what MST did. i'd fully support taking that down. but it's pretty far removed. when i can consume forza 6 on youtube, let me know.
in short, if i watch a movie on MST, i've seen the movie. if i watch a game on youtube, i still have not played the game.
i still feel like you're ignoring what i said though;
this is where TVE and Let's Plays differ. using other people's IP for profit, most often without the kind of express permission that mst got, is where they are similar.
game streaming is a real thing now - so if youtubers let you play someone else's game for free with their commentary over it, it would be more akin to what MST did. i'd fully support taking that down. but it's pretty far removed. when i can consume forza 6 on youtube, let me know.
in short, if i watch a movie on MST, i've seen the movie. if i watch a game on youtube, i still have not played the game.
No, but the game has been repurposed as a movie... Even if the game isn't sorry focused, things like level design have a narrative to then as well... And that is wholly exposed by a let's play... When it comes to linear story heavy games it just gets worse. That is the difference between what I do and what they do... I cover an IP, they repurpose it
and this leads to why i think things should be taken case by case. if a youtube vid with every cutscene in mgs comes out, then yeah that's wrong. but a video of someone playing a game doesn't replace the experience of playing a game. saying they repurposed a game into a movie* is no different than saying you repurposed a show into an article - which is to say that it makes no sense. but when you find the hordes of people watching let's play's instead of buying games let me know. i'd wager that the people watching let's plays are buying way more games than those who don't.
*i'm not talking about stuff like red vs blue, which i think is a different but related discussion.
*i'm not talking about stuff like red vs blue, which i think is a different but related discussion.
games are a lot more than narrative. narrative is second to gameplay (something you can't experience though a video) in the vast majority of games. watching a show is literally all there is to it. it's a passive medium that is narrative focused. you posting a 30 minute clip of that show would compete with the show because it's the same experience as buying it. if i watch a 30 minute clip of someone driving a lambo, does that compete with the lambo? no, tyson. it doesn't.
and you're still piggy backing off of someone else's IP because you can't create that compelling content you cover on your own. you just tack on to something that other people are already compelled by. that's exactly what youtubers are doing, and it's okay. again, show me the hordes of gamers who prefer a let's play to actually playing a game. i bet they live down the street from people who prefer your 'coverage' to watching the show you're spotlighting that day. when that scenario is a reality, then you'll have an actual leg to stand on.
and you're still piggy backing off of someone else's IP because you can't create that compelling content you cover on your own. you just tack on to something that other people are already compelled by. that's exactly what youtubers are doing, and it's okay. again, show me the hordes of gamers who prefer a let's play to actually playing a game. i bet they live down the street from people who prefer your 'coverage' to watching the show you're spotlighting that day. when that scenario is a reality, then you'll have an actual leg to stand on.
You don't try to acquire the rights to filming furniture; urm, at least the kinds of furniture I'm aware of. No one gets penalised for that, but then again it's completely different from media-based content; but the important thing is, the viewers of that film isn't getting any benefits from watching those furniture be featured. While I'm a bit painfully neutral to who deserves what since I think no one deserves anything and are just being entitled bastards on things based entirely on morality (throws the legal system out the window), videogames are a mixed bag in contrast to non-interactive, viewable media.
A movie can only be watched and heard, and the audible bits usually have their own copyright laws attached to them, so there's not much to debating whether they should get credited or not since any form of feature will be sharing its content (shovels up the legal system back inside)
Now streaming video-game content in the form of Let's-plays or Walkthroughs are a bit different. After all, it could be argued that they're re-purposing content and you'll be right, but that's also debatable. After all, they're not selling the interaction, which makes a videogame by its definition a "videogame", but rather the audible and viewable contents as well as their own work either by playing the game or putting on a show.
Some people watch Let's Plays for the videogames, but most people actually watch Let's Plays for the reactions and effort the streamer produces. Because videogames are a bunch of other forms of media combined, I don't believe a one-size-fits-all form of copyright law is the right way to go, which suggests the problem lies with the laws themselves and videogames are rather a bunch of copyright laws than just a single entity. There are so many grey areas it hurts, and you know what, at least lawyers have something to play with.
Also if feel Youtube, in their quest of having people make money off their content and efforts should have a means of allowing their users easy-access to request permission for any form of media. But this also doesn't seem like an easy thing to do.
A movie can only be watched and heard, and the audible bits usually have their own copyright laws attached to them, so there's not much to debating whether they should get credited or not since any form of feature will be sharing its content (shovels up the legal system back inside)
Now streaming video-game content in the form of Let's-plays or Walkthroughs are a bit different. After all, it could be argued that they're re-purposing content and you'll be right, but that's also debatable. After all, they're not selling the interaction, which makes a videogame by its definition a "videogame", but rather the audible and viewable contents as well as their own work either by playing the game or putting on a show.
Some people watch Let's Plays for the videogames, but most people actually watch Let's Plays for the reactions and effort the streamer produces. Because videogames are a bunch of other forms of media combined, I don't believe a one-size-fits-all form of copyright law is the right way to go, which suggests the problem lies with the laws themselves and videogames are rather a bunch of copyright laws than just a single entity. There are so many grey areas it hurts, and you know what, at least lawyers have something to play with.
Also if feel Youtube, in their quest of having people make money off their content and efforts should have a means of allowing their users easy-access to request permission for any form of media. But this also doesn't seem like an easy thing to do.
The human body makes no sense. I was moving furniture around last night to make room for some new Ikea gets, no issues, felt fine. Then I wake up today feeling like someone hit me in the lower back with a hammer.
My back doesn't understand the pain it's about to cause my liver.
My back doesn't understand the pain it's about to cause my liver.
Or you're just lazy all the time, and your muscles are aching in pain from working too hard. One of the two scenarios is likely.
The human body makes no sense. I was moving furniture around last night to make room for some new Ikea gets, no issues, felt fine. Then I wake up today feeling like someone hit me in the lower back with a hammer.
My back doesn't understand the pain it's about to cause my liver.
My back doesn't understand the pain it's about to cause my liver.
So Johnny Carson was a bit before my time. To be honest, so were Abbott and Costello, but the latter of which I am very familar with. The former? Not so much. So imagine my surprise that Carson spoofed the famous Who's on First sketch.
If only a similar sketch existed when Bush was in office, because it would've been almost too perfect.
If only a similar sketch existed when Bush was in office, because it would've been almost too perfect.
So it's my birthday in just under two weeks time. I can't remember the last time I did anything for it. Probably since I was still in high school. Should I change that this year? Apart of me feels like I should, but I just don't care about it. I'm honestly way more excited for the Halloween party the crew is having.
Also watched Drive tonight for that movie club. It helps I've seen it before, but idk, I might fuck off from the club.
Also watched Drive tonight for that movie club. It helps I've seen it before, but idk, I might fuck off from the club.
@CitizenOfVerona
I still love my birthday. I don't do thing same things for a party that I used to when I was younger.
But I do always make plans to do something, even if it's no bigger than goin out to eat.
I still love my birthday. I don't do thing same things for a party that I used to when I was younger.
But I do always make plans to do something, even if it's no bigger than goin out to eat.
birthdays get a little sad as you get older, but you should still do something for yourself... if there isn't anything youw ant to do, then justc reate a tradition,,, maybe donate blood, or somethign else that you cna look back on with a little pride... or maybe stand on your roof and pee on to your neighbor's dog.. whatever floats your boat
Oh hell no. They didn't talk and fuck about while 'watching' Drive, did they? There's no way I could afford a plane ticket to Canada for EGLX, but to slap some bitches in the face who talk over Drive, I'll empty my savings. 
Also, I got Laserlife after but haven't played it yet. I got some stuff to do the next few days, but I'll definitely let you know how it is eventually
https://www.shirtpunch.com/designs/details/goddess-of-the-sun
Tempted. Not many Okami shirts out there.
There comes a time when it's not worth waking up in a fetid pool of regret and loathing the morning after your birthday. Eventually, it's not worth blowing money on toothless Chip 'n Dales and prostitutes of indeterminate species.
What I'm saying is you should probably do a lot of cocaine instead.
Tempted. Not many Okami shirts out there.
There comes a time when it's not worth waking up in a fetid pool of regret and loathing the morning after your birthday. Eventually, it's not worth blowing money on toothless Chip 'n Dales and prostitutes of indeterminate species.
What I'm saying is you should probably do a lot of cocaine instead.
Last edited:
Behold the smart device gaming world
that one that will kill consoles:
Monster Hunter Freedom Unite
Bioshock
that one that will kill consoles:
Monster Hunter Freedom Unite
"This application is not compatible with iOS 9 (including the Beta). There are currently no plans to update this application in the future. Please keep this in mind when updating your OS."
http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/iPad/Monster+Hunter+Freedom+Unite/news.asp?c=67622
http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/iPad/Monster+Hunter+Freedom+Unite/news.asp?c=67622
Bioshock
An eagle-eyed member of the TouchArcade forums recently noticed that Bioshock is now not only unavailable to buy, but not even existing owners can re-download the title via their purchase histories, as with most pulled apps. Naturally, we reached out to just about every 2K contact we know to get some kind of explanation, but as of the time of this writing, none have gotten back to us.
http://toucharcade.com/2015/09/23/bioshock-delisted-from-the-app-store/
http://toucharcade.com/2015/09/23/bioshock-delisted-from-the-app-store/
Man that's a nice shirt, I own this one from redbubble myself:
http://www.redbubble.com/people/uztok32/works/9444344-okami?grid_pos=23&p=t-shirt
It didn't come out the clearest but I still love it.
http://www.redbubble.com/people/uztok32/works/9444344-okami?grid_pos=23&p=t-shirt
It didn't come out the clearest but I still love it.
I don't have a lot of time to wade into this (that's probably for the best), but a few sketches of thoughts and comments:
- DMCA is the USA's importation into its national legal system of an interpretation of its obligations (with respect to copyright law specifically) under some international treaties relating to intellectual property. As such, it is not the law of the entire world. While jurisdiction for civil litigation is getting murkier and murkier in an internet connected world, this is something to keep in mind.
- The Youtube takedown system is not a mechanism of legal arbitration. It is a largely automated internal company response system to DMCA takedown notices, of no effect in law, designed to cover Youtube's ass from any subsequent copyright litigation (or regulatory obligations). Those notices are simply one-sided demands, claims. They may be valid in law, they may not. For the most part we'll never find out because youtube isn't going to want to deal with litigation in relation to any particular video. This is why companies that hold significant copyright assets wanted the leverage and ease of demand (ultimately they don't want to litigate en masse either). They don't have to be on the side of the law, they simply have to have the threat of deep pockets and the knowledge each individual matter will not be worth it for the other party. Certainly there has been abuse of the Youtube system on the part of those claiming copyright violation.
- Even under US law - is there specific statutory reference to "Let's Plays" or video game related video media content? Is there specific case law settling this? Because if there is not, then this is all just, like, your opinions man. Until that point, it wouldn't be clear what the legal status of these are, nor any tests for parsing their content. That won't stop companies from issuing takedown notices - they'll still assert their interpretation of their copyright entitlements - but that doesn't make it "the law". I would think that there is certainly a strong case to be made that Let's Plays, or in the alternative, at least certain kinds of Let's Plays, do not in fact infringe on the publisher's copyright. It is also possible that different national systems of law could arrive at different conclusions on this particular matter.
- DMCA is the USA's importation into its national legal system of an interpretation of its obligations (with respect to copyright law specifically) under some international treaties relating to intellectual property. As such, it is not the law of the entire world. While jurisdiction for civil litigation is getting murkier and murkier in an internet connected world, this is something to keep in mind.
- The Youtube takedown system is not a mechanism of legal arbitration. It is a largely automated internal company response system to DMCA takedown notices, of no effect in law, designed to cover Youtube's ass from any subsequent copyright litigation (or regulatory obligations). Those notices are simply one-sided demands, claims. They may be valid in law, they may not. For the most part we'll never find out because youtube isn't going to want to deal with litigation in relation to any particular video. This is why companies that hold significant copyright assets wanted the leverage and ease of demand (ultimately they don't want to litigate en masse either). They don't have to be on the side of the law, they simply have to have the threat of deep pockets and the knowledge each individual matter will not be worth it for the other party. Certainly there has been abuse of the Youtube system on the part of those claiming copyright violation.
- Even under US law - is there specific statutory reference to "Let's Plays" or video game related video media content? Is there specific case law settling this? Because if there is not, then this is all just, like, your opinions man. Until that point, it wouldn't be clear what the legal status of these are, nor any tests for parsing their content. That won't stop companies from issuing takedown notices - they'll still assert their interpretation of their copyright entitlements - but that doesn't make it "the law". I would think that there is certainly a strong case to be made that Let's Plays, or in the alternative, at least certain kinds of Let's Plays, do not in fact infringe on the publisher's copyright. It is also possible that different national systems of law could arrive at different conclusions on this particular matter.
Last edited:
As far as I'm concerned, like you said, it's all in such a grey area, that it comes down to the values of the individual person and what he or she believes is right vs what they believe to be wrong....
So personal opinion....
I never tried to say that what I believe is the law or is the gospel for everyone, just for me....
I assume most of these other guys that added to the convo feel much the same way....
Even though based on their beliefs, they could feel that some of these guys are violating the law....
It's based on perspective really....
Like the only that people ever get caught up in something like this are the ones who are having the vids taken down....
Some of them are trying to fight it out by bad mouthing Nintendo for taking control over something they have every right to....
So far, I haven't seen any real case involving a youtuber vs a company with which the youtuber is using said assets....
So until we do, and get a rulling, we all have nothing but our own personal beliefs to guide us through this very iffy part of the internet landscape....
Until then, do what you do....
But don't be surprised if one of these companies comes a knockin someday....
I fully expect that it will one day happen to me, on some level or another....
So personal opinion....
I never tried to say that what I believe is the law or is the gospel for everyone, just for me....
I assume most of these other guys that added to the convo feel much the same way....
Even though based on their beliefs, they could feel that some of these guys are violating the law....
It's based on perspective really....
Like the only that people ever get caught up in something like this are the ones who are having the vids taken down....
Some of them are trying to fight it out by bad mouthing Nintendo for taking control over something they have every right to....
So far, I haven't seen any real case involving a youtuber vs a company with which the youtuber is using said assets....
So until we do, and get a rulling, we all have nothing but our own personal beliefs to guide us through this very iffy part of the internet landscape....
Until then, do what you do....
But don't be surprised if one of these companies comes a knockin someday....
I fully expect that it will one day happen to me, on some level or another....
Last edited:
