Nintendo to profit from YouTube videos

[Dog-amoto]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22552756

 

Nintendo will profit from videos uploaded by fans that feature its games, the company has confirmed.

 

Clips posted to YouTube will now display advertising, with income going directly to the Japanese gaming giant.

 

Some fans have reacted angrily, saying they would no longer play the Nintendo titles, nor upload more clips.

 

In a statement, the firm said the move was part of an "on-going push to ensure Nintendo content is shared across social media".

 

"We continually want our fans to enjoy sharing Nintendo content on YouTube," the company added.

 

"That is why, unlike other entertainment companies, we have chosen not to block people using our intellectual property."

 

Many games fans enjoy uploading footage of themselves playing popular titles.

 

Often, these clips - referred to as "Let's Play" (LP) - show how to complete difficult sections, or show off the advanced skills of the gamer.

 

'Audiovisual experience'

One popular LP-er, Zack Scott, discovered that Nintendo was issuing what is known as a "content ID match" claim on footage he uploaded of Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon.

 

Continue reading the main story

“

Start Quote

 

Until their claims are straightened out, I won't be playing their games”

 

Zack Scott

YouTube user and Nintendo fan

A content ID match allows rights holders to place advertising within videos in order to profit from views.

 

Importantly, a content ID match means the uploader of the clip - in this case Zack Scott - cannot themselves make money from the advertising.

 

"I think filing claims against LP-ers is backwards," Mr Scott said in a message posted to Facebook.

 

"Video games aren't like movies or TV. Each play-through is a unique audiovisual experience."

 

He argued that viewing footage of games can tempt people to buy it.

 

"Until their claims are straightened out, I won't be playing their games," he continued.

 

"I won't because it jeopardises my channel's copyright standing and the livelihood of all LP-ers."

 

Nintendo defended the move, adding that only clips showing games footage of a certain length would be affected.

 

"Adverts will now appear at the beginning, next to or at the end of the clips," the company said.

[Diageo]

This is highly, highly annoying.

[Ashley]

Well, if its that or they get taken down...

 

Will the adverts be related?

[Serebii]

Other publishers do this, why are people acting like Nintendo are the first to do it?

 

Also, from seeing comments around the web, people are assuming they're taking videos down

[D_prOdigy]

I don't really have much sympathy for 'LP-ers' who see the primary purpose of streaming other peoples work as making money.

 

EDIT: I misunderstood this bit - I originally thought this would only affect the accounts which tried to make their own money through adverts. The below still applies though:

 

This is such a non-story anyway. Nobody would care if they did what many other companies did and just filed a copyright claim ordering the removal of the videos.

Edited May 16, 2013 by D_prOdigy

[Jonnas]

Ever since coming to Germany, the frequency at which I see video ads have increased tenfold. If the companies I support (because if I'm watching their videos with their content , it's reasonable to assume I support them) benefit from this, and it still doesn't cost me a penny (only a minute or so of my time), I see no reason to complain.

[Ville]

Well, they own the content, so legally they have the right to monetize it. I mean Youtube is full of stuff where people infringe on others' copyrights, but either the companies don't realise it or don't care. So in a way I'm glad Nintendo is taking a stand and exercising their property rights, because YT is such a mess of Wild West copyright practices that people have no idea anymore what they can or can't do legally there.

[Helmsly]

Are Nintendo taking 100% of the ad revenue from these videos now or will it be shared with the creator of the video?

[Serebii]

Thing is, people on GAF, and Lets Players who do only do it for the money, are complaining that they own the rights to it, not Nintendo, and that Nintendo are backwards for doing this

[Josh64]

A lot of the comments I've seen on this have been ridiculous. It's like, how dare Nintendo make money on something they created. They're not taking it down so what's the problem? If anything, this is the best solution they could have come up with.

[Daft]

What a lovely way to reward people who love your product and are giving you free advertising.

 

And for what? The revenue this will generate this will be absolutely miniscule.

 

I wonder if Sony and Microsoft will follow suit. It will be tragic if they do.

[Helmsly]

Thing is, people on GAF, and Lets Players who do only do it for the money, are complaining that they own the rights to it, not Nintendo, and that Nintendo are backwards for doing this

 

A lot of the comments I've seen on this have been ridiculous. It's like, how dare Nintendo make money on something they created. They're not taking it down so what's the problem? If anything, this is the best solution they could have come up with.

I think the argument is that the larger followed channels like GameXplain, Wiifolder or Totalbiscuit for example, wouldn't be popular if it wasn't for the way they present their videos and the personalty they bring to it. Its clear that time and effort went into making their content.

 

I mean obviously these videos don't make themselves, it takes time to record and edit them along with the money needed for editing equipment, decent mics and a capture card. Up until now they got ad revenue for the work that went into making them.

Edited May 16, 2013 by Helmsly

[Ashley]

What a lovely way to reward people who love your product and are giving you free advertising.

 

And for what? The revenue this will generate this will be absolutely miniscule.

 

I wonder if Sony and Microsoft will follow suit. It will be tragic if they do.

 

I can't imagine the former will given it's one of the features of the PS4.

[Magnus]

Hahaha, ads on YouTube. *Hugs ABP*

[Mandalore]

So how long before PS4 adverts start appearing before Nintendo fan videos on YouTube?

[Ville]

What a lovely way to reward people who love your product and are giving you free advertising.

 

And for what? The revenue this will generate this will be absolutely miniscule.

 

Well, I also agree with this. Even if they have the legal right to do this, still what's the point? It's probably a lot of hassle and minimal money in return. Plus a lot of bad press. I mean the let's plays are basically just free advertising, they're not hurting the market in any way (except maybe the guide book makers).

 

As for the other companies, I'd say Sony is going the exact opposite route. I mean isn't PS4 going to have some sort of livestreaming / video upload function? Would sound a bit weird if they slapped ads on that...or maybe not? Who knows...

[Agent Gibbs]

i don't really see the issue, its better than some overzealous copyrights holders who just issue threats via solicitors and have video's taken down

The whole situation reminds me of a similar situation in the prop building community in relation to Ghostbusters and MAttel making props

 

you see before 2011 nobody made ghostbusters props (a sony owned IP) and so greedy prop makers made casts of Iona shoe polishers (a company who obviously owned the rights to the said shoe polisher design) they then sold these at an inflated cost, others sold electrical components to add into these cast to make them into replica PKE meters (since the movie prop was based off this)

 

Then along comes big mean Mattel who signed a contract with Sony to make products based off their IP, and thus produced for $60 a replica pke meter with electrics, lights sounds etc and the prop community didn't like it!

How dare the rights holder sell the licence to make these, how dare a company who were licensed to do so under cut these prop makers who sold casts for more than this (at the time a working prop someone made averaged $400)

 

This reminds me of that, How dare Nintendo try and make money off their products, how dare the copyrights holder hold any claim over publications of their works

 

 

*I was a dirty prop caster and i never complained....but then nobody makes proton packs yet so if i want to sell casts of a proton pack i can :p

 

 

EDIT:

I suspect Sony will do this too, i mean every ps4 can stream content, content thats copyrighted....why wouldn't they put ads on content they own (i suspect there will be T+C to say the effect regarding share function)

Edited May 16, 2013 by Agent Gibbs

[Serebii]

I can't imagine the former will given it's one of the features of the PS4.

On the contrary, I'd say that makes it even more likely

[Mokong]

Are people only realising now that this happens?

 

This happens with most every copyrighted content on Youtube now.

 

Music being the main one.

If you use copyrighted music in a video the copyright owner/record label can either take the video down or they will put ads on the video and take the revenue from those ads.

 

 

Using game footage in your videos has never been an exemption to copyright. I remember a few years ago there was some sort of clause that you got use small clips of games if you were using them for educational purposes like showing how to complete something I guess, but that it had to be broken up into clips and the majority of the video had to be of the "presenter" not of the game... something like 90% Presenter footage, 10% game footage... maybe less.

 

 

THERE IS HOWEVER a way for people who make videos with game footage to still earn some revenue if they join a Partner Network like Machinima (they would actually be the main network for Youtubers who specialize in gaming videos).

 

 

Do these "LP-ers" not know about Network Partnerships? Most if not all of the "big" youtubers that specialise in gaming videos have joined a Network.

 

 

A Network Partnership is different from a direct Youtube Partnership (pretty sure I explained this before in a previous thread). Differences are with a YT Partnership you earn Ad Revenue thourgh Google Adsense, if you are with a Network they put ads on your vids and they pay you... not through adsense but through whatever setup they have themselves.

 

Can't remember the full details but basically if you join a Network like Machinima they would have some contracts with copyright owners including videogame publishers (I assume Nintendo would be included) if you used footage of a videogame the ad revenue earned from it would get split between you, machinima and the copyright owner. It's prolly done on percentages and I think the video makers percentage would be the smallest.

 

Also joining a Network involves signing a contract which can basically give the Network copyright ownership of your channel and vids I think.

 

I wonder if Sony and Microsoft will follow suit. It will be tragic if they do.

 

They probably do already

I know for a fact other publishers have been doing it for years, EA, Ubisoft, Activision, THQ I know for fact have been doing it so I wouldn't be surprised if Sony and MS were too.

 

I'm actually surprised Nintendo only started doing it now, would have thought they were doing it from the start.

 

EDIT:

 

Here is a video that gives proper details on Network Partnerships for gamers

 

Edited May 16, 2013 by Mokong
Automerged Doublepost

[Dcubed]

It's standard industry practice. Nintendo are actually being quite lenient here and are allowing these videos to carry on being uploaded (which they rightly pointed out is uncommon amongst VG Publishers as the likes of Microsoft, Arc System Works and SEGA have had videos removed at their own discretion).

 

Making derivative works that utilise copyrighted assets and products is one thing, profiting off them without the permission of the copyright holder is another thing entirely. The only reason why people are making a big deal about this is because Nintendo is an easy target (and a whipping boy within the industry by and large).

 

And as has been pointed out before, it's perfectly possible for LPs to still earn ad revenue so long as they to through the proper channels, rather than subverting Youtube's rules.

Edited May 16, 2013 by Dcubed

[Mokong]

I've just left a message on Zachs facebook saying pretty much what I said in the previous post and linking him to the same video... I suspect he had a YT partnership and didn't know about Network Partnerships.

 

It's even in YTs Terms & Conditions on YT Partnership and you are not allowed to use video game footage unless you have a license to do so from the publisher

 

Well, I also agree with this. Even if they have the legal right to do this, still what's the point? It's probably a lot of hassle and minimal money in return. Plus a lot of bad press. I mean the let's plays are basically just free advertising, they're not hurting the market in any way (except maybe the guide book makers).

 

small amounts from LOTS of vids, It would all ad up eventually.

 

As for the other companies, I'd say Sony is going the exact opposite route. I mean isn't PS4 going to have some sort of livestreaming / video upload function? Would sound a bit weird if they slapped ads on that...or maybe not? Who knows...

 

That is prolly their intention with that feature on the PS4, get people to upload game footage then wait for the content ID matches to start rolling in for anyone who is not already witha Network like Machinima

[Cube]

That is prolly their intention with that feature on the PS4, get people to upload game footage then wait for the content ID matches to start rolling in for anyone who is not already witha Network like Machinima

 

Sony haven't even said if the PS4 will upload to YouTube yet.

[Ashley]

Aside from Vimeo, what other video sites are there?

[Cube]

Aside from Vimeo, what other video sites are there?

 

Facebook, apparently.

 

Needless to say, many people are unlikely to use the feature without YouTube, so it almost certainly will be there.

[Diageo]

The problem is most other companies DO NOT remove content from let's plays or TAKE the ad revenue. Most companies see it as wonderful free advertising and homaging and allow it to happen, as well as saying so on their websites. The fact that Nintendo is pretending that most other companies do this is ridiculous.

 

Let's plays are a great way for both the company and the uploader to benefit and I suspect a few of my favourite channels will just stop playing Nintendo games from now on.