Nintendo's "Let's Play" Controversy

[burningdoom]

Nintendo Flexing Copyright Clout on YouTube Let’s Play Channels

Nintendo is reportedly issuing “content ID match” claims on Let’s Play videos featuring their game franchises, according to prolific YouTuber Zack Scott, who is currently playing Luigi’s Mansion: Dark Moon.
Scott noted that Nintendo made content ID matches against a number of his videos, thus preventing him from monetizing those videos on YouTube.
In a Facebook post, Scott wrote the following message as an open letter to Nintendo:
I just want to express my feelings on the matter of Nintendo claiming not just my YouTube videos, but from several LPers as well.
I’m a Nintendo fan. I waited in the cold overnight to get a Wii. I’m a 3DS ambassador. I got a Wii U at midnight when I already had one in the mail. I’ve been a Nintendo fan since the NES, and I’ve owned all of their systems.
With that said, I think filing claims against LPers is backwards. Video games aren’t like movies or TV. Each play-through is a unique audiovisual experience. When I see a film that someone else is also watching, I don’t need to see it again. When I see a game that someone else is playing, I want to play that game for myself! Sure, there may be some people who watch games rather than play them, but are those people even gamers?
My viewers watch my gameplay videos for three main reasons: 1. To hear my commentary/review. 2. To learn about the game and how to play certain parts. 3. To see how I handle and react to certain parts of the game.
Since I started my gaming channel, I’ve played a lot of games. I love Nintendo, so I’ve included their games in my line-up. But until their claims are straightened out, I won’t be playing their games. I won’t because it jeopardizes my channel’s copyright standing and the livelihood of all LPers.
So, What the Hell are Content ID Matches, Anyway? Note that content ID matches are different from ‘copyright strikes,’ which YouTube issues a channel after processing a verified request for the full removal of a video by the copyright owner. If a channel receives “three strikes,” YouTube suspends the channel and deletes all of its videos.
Content ID matches are less severe. When a publisher issues a content ID match against a video, it allows them to monetize that video with in-video ads, block it in certain countries, or even block it from playing worldwide. If a video is blocked worldwide as a result of a content ID match, the associated channel can lose its “good standing,” and as as result lose access to certain YouTube features.
Based on Nintendo’s statement to Game Front (below), it would appear they are not opting to block videos from playing outright, but rather monetize videos over a certain length with their own ads.
Widespread Complaints
Scott is not alone in his complaints, which have since been echoed by a number of other YouTubers, as well as Thomas Was Alone creator Mike Bithell.
Nintendo issued Game Front the following statement:
As part of our on-going push to ensure Nintendo content is shared across social media channels in an appropriate and safe way, we became a YouTube partner and as such in February 2013 we registered our copyright content in the YouTube database. For most fan videos this will not result in any changes, however, for those videos featuring Nintendo-owned content, such as images or audio of a certain length, adverts will now appear at the beginning, next to or at the end of the clips. We continually want our fans to enjoy sharing Nintendo content on YouTube, and that is why, unlike other entertainment companies, we have chosen not to block people using our intellectual property.

What do you guys think about all of this?

I think Nintendo is shooting themselves in foot with this decision. Lets Play is no different than a fan tribute, a review, fan-fic, or a song cover. This is fan-interaction that gives Nintendo free publicity.


However to be directly confrontational with those same fans, and slapping on the wrist because they love your product; is just gonna drive away that fanbase.
Legally, they did nothing wrong. But they did make a huge mistake with the fans.

[doctorlaudanum]

Honestly? I think most of these LPers are being very selfish and hypocritical. They're making money off of someone else's product and acting like they're the victims when the creator decides to take what is rightfully theirs. You LP because you want to share a game with the world, for better or for worse. If you're just in it for the money or, God forbid, the popularity, I don't think you should be LPing. I admit, I think Nintendo went about this the wrong way, and this action will drive away quite a few fans, but at least they had the sense not to just delete the videos like so many other companies.

As a side note, Zack Scott's response just reeks of "But what about MEEEE? I'm a TRUE fan!" to me.

[insektmute]

Er... are there LP'ers that are making a dime off making videos? I don't I've ever seen one that was anything more than someone sitting at home with a cheap camera, and plonking it on YouTube.

[doctorlaudanum]

I don't I've ever seen one that was anything more than someone sitting at home with a cheap camera, and plonking it on YouTube.

That's a real shame, because there are LPers out there who put a lot of love and effort into their work. supergreatfriend and The Dark Id immediately come to mind.

[sin2beta]

Er... are there LP'ers that are making a dime off making videos? I don't I've ever seen one that was anything more than someone sitting at home with a cheap camera, and plonking it on YouTube.

There are. Although not too many. I remember a youtube panel with the group "Video Games are Awesome" on the youtube channel farfromsubtle. They actually run a full time let's play supporting more than one person. This is definitely rare though.

My take is that Nintendo is not doing anything wrong. But I don't think it is a good move for Nintendo. They are already losing some street cred and this just makes it a little worse. AlphaOmegaSin sums it up better than I could.

[doctorlaudanum]

Thanks for sharing the video. AlphaOmegaSin has been after my heart subscription for quite a while, despite looking like the unholy lovechild of Marilyn Manson and Geddy Lee. But this seals it. He has another subscription.

[htimreimer]

it could've been worse, nintendo could've of taken down all LP'er videos like all of the other companies

[sin2beta]

it could've been worse, nintendo could've of taken down all LP'er videos like all of the other companies

Yeah, SEGA did something like this. Or more appropriately, one director of the Shining Force series did that after getting into some drama with fans doing a translation. But I do have to give SEGA props on fixing it and helping anyone whose channel was taken down do to copyright flags.

[insektmute]

Personally, while Nintendo's perfectly within their rights, it just strikes me as kind of a douchebag move. They're certainly not alone in that, so I wouldn't single them out for it, but it does make me wish this kind of thing were the exception rather than the rule.

[slothingXPIG]

so you can't express your self?? I don't know I mean yeah nothing illegal but it's still wrong.... in all honesty... I saw  AlphaOmegaSin's videos for the first time only about 3 days ago(I despise youtube and nearly never watch youtube videos) and honestly he looks like a little person/midget in some of his videos... Not being harsh or anything the guy has good points and has a sweet collections but is he?? I only saw two of his videos...
                                                                                                                                                                                 ^^^seriously

[sin2beta]

so you can't express your self?? I don't know I mean yeah nothing illegal but it's still wrong.... in all honesty... I saw  AlphaOmegaSin's videos for the first time only about 3 days ago(I despise youtube and nearly never watch youtube videos) and honestly he looks like a little person/midget in some of his videos... Not being harsh or anything the guy has good points and has a sweet collections but is he?? I only saw two of his videos...
                                                                                                                                                                                 ^^^seriously

I never saw that. Probably just the camera angle.

[hexen]

95% of LP videos are complete garbage. The 5% that aren't don't really deserve to be payed for it, either. I thought you couldn't be a YouTube partner if you had any copyrighted stuff at all... I remember Brentalfloss mentioning something like that and his stuff is more original then 'game play footage with some awkward guy's voice over it'.

It's an odd move by Nintendo, still. If LPers want to make money off their videos they should have something somewhat unique that is their BRAND. Like how Game Grumps sells Game Grumps shirts that say Game Grumps and don't allude to any copyrighted material...

[burningdoom]

95% of LP videos are complete garbage. The 5% that aren't don't really deserve to be payed for it, either. I thought you couldn't be a YouTube partner if you had any copyrighted stuff at all... I remember Brentalfloss mentioning something like that and his stuff is more original then 'game play footage with some awkward guy's voice over it'.

It's an odd move by Nintendo, still. If LPers want to make money off their videos they should have something somewhat unique that is their BRAND. Like how Game Grumps sells Game Grumps shirts that say Game Grumps and don't allude to any copyrighted material...

I'd be willing to bet both The Angry Video Game Nerd and Classic Game Room are YouTube partners, and they have copyrighted stuff in their videos every single episode.

[ffxik]

It's not so much copyrighted material as it is product placement. That's why the Nerds Rolling Rock is sans label.  I have a feeling Youtube is just covering their backsides from potential lawsuits.  I mean there is a butt load of people on the tubes I wouldn't want to be affiliated with any products of mine.

That and there more than likely is a clause that makes Youtube pay a licensing fee for any products appearing in a video that is monetized. 

As far as Nintendo is concerned.  Douche move, yes.  Do I care, no.  These guys sit in their houses and play these games at their leisure.  Youtube reviewers are the same.  I don't consider this work, period.  I realize paid network reviewers on a deadline are very different.  I mean having to crash through, say an 80hr game in just a couple of days is a pain in the ass.  At this point it becomes laborious. 

I fairly sure most, if any LPer's don't actually have the rights to the games they are putting up for display to the public.  So they might as well get used to that knot in their panties.  Whether it be man panties or woman panties.   

[disgaeniac]

How, exactly, are they getting paid for their LP's?

Do you have to pay up front in order to start viewing it -or- is it more like when some of the FAQ writers on G*Faqs mention where you can send donations...IF YOU WISH.

They DON'T demand (or even ask for it); just give you the info...this has never bothered me.

Just wondering...