Changes in YouTube Policy (Content ID Arrmegeddon)

[Tonkka²]

no, in general, as long as you're not making money off of whatever, you'll be fine. be glad that the fair use laws in the US are as broad as they are. but in all honesty, what is a gameplay video? it's just you playing someone else's game. they made it. if they don't want you to make money off of it, how is that unfair to you?

Its not about it not being fair, its about it being mentally handicapped. Gameplay videos are free advertising for companies. While cutting that out they might as well stab themselves in the foot before running a marathon.

[Ad Bot]

[Tayasaurus]

Yes the companies are at fault.

Yes Youtube changing its policy to allow them to do this more easily makes Youtube also at fault.

[Candy Apple]

yeah, that was just an example. if you made a christmas card, and someone bought it, started making copies, and selling them, wouldn't you be upset?

I mean that it goes farther than YouTube. The TPP is internet-wide and it basically gives ownership of the Web to Corporations.

[Night Fox]

Its not about it not being fair, its about it being mentally handicapped. Gameplay videos are free advertising for companies. While cutting that out they might as well stab themselves in the foot before running a marathon.

sorry but AAA titles don't need "free advertising" so that's a stupid point
in fact, anyone who would make you remove a video doesn't need "free advertising"
doesn't matter how you word it, you're making money off of someone else's work

Yes the companies are at fault.
Yes Youtube changing its policy to allow them to do this more easily makes Youtube also at fault.

youtube is bad for trying to make it easier for them? this way they don't get complaints from the companies, the problem is prevented before that needs to happen

I mean that it goes farther than YouTube. The TPP is internet-wide and it basically gives ownership of the Web to Corporations.

where are you getting that? that's handicapped. it still only relates to copyright infringement, the most it does is give companies the ability to enforce their rights

[Tayasaurus]

sorry but AAA titles don't need "free advertising" so that's a stupid point

It really isn't. If you knew half of what business was about you'd realize that the more your product is seen and advertised the more in popularity it would get. "AAA" doesn't mean they are AAA by default. They do in fact thrive on advertising whether it be free or paid. Thats how Hype trains are made.

Besides that you're pretty much right. They DO have the rights to enforce claim on their properties. What people here are worrying about though is how abusive this can be. Whether it be some song on the radio in the background or a television straying in the shot.

Companies can be good and tend to avoid those tendencies where they are nitpicky about every little thing. However you do get starfishs and THEY do exist.

[DrenDran]

I don't think Night Fox understands very well.
Take people who make a review of a game, for instance.
If they show any footage of the game, they're at risk for having the entire video removed and getting strikes against their account, automatically.

Here's the fair use law we have in the United States:

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

 (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;  

 (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;  

 (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and  

 (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.  

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

Source

Refer to this point specifically:

for purposes such as criticism ... is not an infringement of copyright

Night Fox, even interviews are getting flagged.

[Tonkka²]

sorry but AAA titles don't need "free advertising" so that's a stupid point
in fact, anyone who would make you remove a video doesn't need "free advertising"
doesn't matter how you word it, you're making money off of someone else's work

Are you telling me that from now on, to support your argument, you will completely steer away from IGN, Gamespot, any website that gives video based reviews, non-official gameplay, customer feedback on a video game or anything that mentions any contents of a video game (because that's stealing and spoiling whatever gameplay/plot/experiences that unspecific title has) and will buy games based on official trailers made by the creator of the games, will the trailer be cinematic or not, because those "evil loving starfishs" who are making so much money off of the hard time and slave work those poor developers went trough by spending 2-6 hours writing a review (+ gameplay), 12 hours to make a video review (+ gameplay) or 8-20 hours playing trough a game for a lets play just so that they can earn a little money and bring you trustworthy material to base your choice of purchase on.

[Night Fox]

It really isn't. If you knew half of what business was about you'd realize that the more your product is seen and advertised the more in popularity it would get. "AAA" doesn't mean they are AAA by default. They do in fact thrive on advertising whether it be free or paid. Thats how Hype trains are made.

AAA titles aren't made by small independent companies. they're made by big ones like Bethesda and EA, with plenty of resources for advertising, that don't involve some guy with a youtube channel making money off of videos of their game

I don't think Night Fox understands very well.
Take people who make a review of a game, for instance.
If they show any footage of the game, they're at risk for having the entire video removed and getting strikes against their account, automatically.

that's only what youtube does, it's barely related to the companies who hold the copyrights. but I don't care that they do it because it's just a shortcut for them, and certainly they won't care as long as you're not getting money from the ads, just like it's always been with them

Are you telling me that from now on, to support your argument, you will completely steer away from IGN, Gamespot, any website that gives video based reviews, non-official gameplay, customer feedback on a video game or anything that mentions any contents of a video game (because that's stealing and spoiling whatever gameplay/plot/experiences that unspecific title has) and will buy games based on official trailers made by the creator of the games, will the trailer be cinematic or not, because those "evil loving starfishs" who are making so much money off of the hard time and slave work those poor developers went trough by spending 2-6 hours writing a review (+ gameplay), 12 hours to make a video review (+ gameplay) or 8-20 hours playing trough a game for a lets play just so that they can earn a little money and bring you trustworthy material to base your choice of purchase on.

this whole post is one sentence, and I don't really understand what you're saying/asking

[ShadowsfeaR]

Either my videos haven't been railed yet, or I'm in the clear. :s

[Tayasaurus]

AAA titles aren't made by small independent companies. they're made by big ones like Bethesda and EA, with plenty of

Every large company has spawned from a smaller business so this statement is bullstuff. Mojang is a blatant example. You're speaking ignorantly.

[Night Fox]

Every large company has spawned from a smaller business so this statement is bullstuff. Mojang is a blatant example.

and mojang didn't care about videos of minecraft, so they're not even part of this conversation

[Tayasaurus]

and mojang didn't care about videos of minecraft, so they're not even part of this conversation

They're still a Large company though so it doesn't make your statement any less false.

[Night Fox]

They're still a Large company though so it doesn't make your statement any less false.

the POINT is that big companies, the only people who will actually make you remove the videos or whatever else, don't need that advertising

[Anti-Block]

there goes tobuscus

[Tayasaurus]

the POINT is that big companies, the only people who will actually make you remove the videos or whatever else, don't need that advertising

If they don't need it WHY do so many of them endorse it? Youtube is automatically filing copyright claims that some of them didn't even know about.

Paid advertising alongside public advertising IS needed. I run a business for a living and I know this.