Faiblesse Des Sens Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 Because that's expensive and it's easier to just make LPs of different games. *Edit* - And because of the fucked-up way the DMCA is set up, it puts the burden on the supposed transgressor to sue. All Nintendo has to do is issue a takedown notice to Youtube and Youtube has to take the shit down unless the person who put it up starts a lawsuit to challenge it, whereas in the analogy I made above the burden would be on Nintendo to sue the newspaper to try to get them to pay up or stop publishing the stuff. This set up really encourages frivolous/borderline claims, because there's basically no downside. Don't a lot of these people get hired by bigger companies who actually would be able to sue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 The LP itself is a new creation that, while not entirely independent of the original work (the game), is transformative and legally distinct. It's owned by the LPer. If you repost that LP somewhere else then you are in violation of the LPer's copyright, just like you would be in violation of the developer/publisher's copyright if you uploaded the actual game to a torrent site. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 1, 2015 Report Share Posted February 1, 2015 Because that's expensive and it's easier to just make LPs of different games. *Edit* - And because of the fucked-up way the DMCA is set up, it puts the burden on the supposed transgressor to sue. All Nintendo has to do is issue a takedown notice to Youtube and Youtube has to take the shit down unless the person who put it up starts a lawsuit to challenge it, whereas in the analogy I made above the burden would be on Nintendo to sue the newspaper to try to get them to pay up or stop publishing the stuff. This set up really encourages frivolous/borderline claims, because there's basically no downside. Don't a lot of these people get hired by bigger companies who actually would be able to sue? Yes, but it's still easier to just make LPs of different games. I doubt any company sees making LPs of Nintendo games as so critical to its profits that it's worth the expense of a lawsuit about it. I'm sure it will happen eventually, but generally speaking the incentives just aren't there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCP Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 If you're still having a difficult time understanding why this is a bad idea, Jim Sterling, once again, hit the nail on the head: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 A really good point he makes is that people are focusing almost entirely on how this affects LPers (ourselves and myself included in this discussion), but the program actually prevents reviewers from showing gameplay as well. Which is just ridiculous. There's at least some room for argument over whether LPs are actually fair use or not, but reviews certainly are and Nintendo unquestionably has no legal right or authority to block those. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 Club Nintendo put up its last batch of rewards for anyone who still has coins. I'm currently trying to decide between Kid Icarus: Uprising, Star Fox 3D, and that black Majora's Mask messenger bag myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 Is the site back up? Is been down for me all morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 The whole revenue-sharing policy is an artifact of YouTube (and other similar video content hosts') policies that privilege the entity issuing the takedown notice over the poster. This makes sense if the pre-emptive takedowns were of unabashed reproductions or just cold copies of media without any alterations. Nintendo, or any other copyright holder, can bully folks who would be protected under fair use if the issues were litigated.this is especially harmful to new, independent streamers who don't have the money to take legal action against Nintendo or the putative rights holder. I've always thought the burden should remain with the putative rights holder; let the holder prove infringement and then recoup from the infringer for any amounts the infringer was illegally enriched. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 Is it YouTube's policies? I thought it was the DMCA that obligated them to comply with takedown notices and put the burden on the uploader to challenge it in court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 Is the site back up? Is been down for me all morning. It was working last time I checked, though it did take me a couple tries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 I'm still getting a "down for maintenance" page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCP Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Me too. I'm disappointed the original Legend of Zelda wasn't included on Wii U. Edited February 2, 2015 by The Cowboy Poet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 The whole revenue-sharing policy is an artifact of YouTube (and other similar video content hosts') policies that privilege the entity issuing the takedown notice over the poster. This makes sense if the pre-emptive takedowns were of unabashed reproductions or just cold copies of media without any alterations. Nintendo, or any other copyright holder, can bully folks who would be protected under fair use if the issues were litigated.this is especially harmful to new, independent streamers who don't have the money to take legal action against Nintendo or the putative rights holder. I've always thought the burden should remain with the putative rights holder; let the holder prove infringement and then recoup from the infringer for any amounts the infringer was illegally enriched. I think Ethan is right, and that DMCA's presumption of guilt (for want of a more nuanced description) was what empowered the © holders. The alternative still favours copyright holders as, by and large an individual is not going to have the resources to effectively see off a legal challenge from an outfit with as much clout as Nintendo. If you are sued and given the options of 1) Pay a bit (or if you are lucky nothing) and stop now; 2) Pay a lot and stop later (assuming no interim injunctions) or 3) "Only" pay your legal costs and carry on after a protracted legal battle with appeals and what not looming over you. Most people would, I think, choose option 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 If you're still having a difficult time understanding why this is a bad idea, Jim Sterling, once again, hit the nail on the head: I love the EA bit at the front. The revenue grab I'm in two minds about. The approval is where this really troubles me. YouTubers are perceived as being more genuine than traditional paid channels. The idea of a publisher/developer paying a YouTuber *and* having creative control is an anathema. It totally breaches that trust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 If anyone needs just those few extra Club Nintendo coins to get a download, here's a list of demos that give you a few coins each. http://www.reddit.com/r/Club_Nintendo/comments/2uco1l/chart_documenting_free_eshop_games_that_grant/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted February 8, 2015 Report Share Posted February 8, 2015 I don't mean to doublepost, but I wanted to get everyone's input on something. Let's suppose for a moment that I hypothetically knew an algorithm that would let you register a Wii Mini and get an extra 100 coins without actually going out and buying a Wii Mini. Would sharing said algorithm be frowned upon here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFlyingGerbil Posted May 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 "Nintendo and Universal Parks & Resorts today announced plans to bring the world of Nintendo to life at Universal theme parks - creation spectacular, dedicated experiences based on Nintendo's wildly popular games, characters and world," This seems like a fairly safe and positive way for Nintendo to get a bit of money. Speaking of which, "The news comes as Nintendo also announced it had turned its first annual profit in four years. Wii U sales were up 10% over the same quarter a year before." I think I remember reading the exchange rate has helped them to profitability but hopefully they're on the up. Obviously they'll end this generation a distant third, but it would be nice if it ended as a profitable generation for them. Do you think that's a possibility? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Mario-Kart-themed go-karts with augmented reality goggles so you can actually see the shells and bananas and whatnot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted May 20, 2015 Report Share Posted May 20, 2015 Their new Vice President of Sales is Doug Bowser. Can't make that shit up. http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150520005475/en/Nintendo-America-Hires-Bowser-VP-Sales#.VVzAK_lViko At least Nintendo acknowledge it though 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 Just a quick reminder of just for whom, really, Nintendo makes games. http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-mutual-fund-becomes-top-nintendo-shareholder-1432277440 Good buy, though; Ninty stands to make beaucoup bucks from pimping FTP smartphone games and even more amiibo junk. The big money is happy that Ninty will be leveraging its IP and making products that appeal to the idiot masses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baconrath Posted June 10, 2015 Report Share Posted June 10, 2015 Still bummed the new Fire Emblem will be two (three?) games Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted July 7, 2015 Report Share Posted July 7, 2015 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFlyingGerbil Posted July 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 wow, everyone is being very reasonable about the miiverse redesign. I've had a quick look and it seems very usable to me and since people are only saying they hate it and not why, I don't know whether just to put it down to people not liking change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Change is always bad. Especially on the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted July 29, 2015 Report Share Posted July 29, 2015 Anyone have the odds on whether the next Zelda game will be an NX exclusive, or a simultaneous NX/Wii U release? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.