This was almost physically painful to read. Comparing invading other countries for nebulous reasons, resulting in 100's of thousands of deaths, with preventing people from streaming OTHER PEOPLE'S WORKS online?let said:~Snipped~
You should really specify who you're speaking to, and backing up what you say with at least some kind of reasoning other than "you are an idiot", it just makes you look like a twerp.normalguycap said:You are an idiot that doesn't really understand the implications this has. Please rethink your stance or look up more info.
And I thought I was getting a lot of flak for saying people need to chill out...Sober Thal said:You need to quote me BEFORE you start calling me names, or else how am I to know you are talking about me : Pnormalguycap said:You are an idiot that doesn't really understand the implications this has. Please rethink your stance or look up more info.
Yeah, but we're talking about videogames here, watching someone else play a game isn't using the creator's work for free, in fact, it's beneficial to the company as it'll probably encourage you to buy it.Sober Thal said:I don't care about people being able to lip synch and post a video on youtube.orangeban said:You watched the video, so what do you thing about that thing where in, say, a kareoke party occurs where your friends sang, and you thought it was funny and put it on Youtube, suddenly putting that video up is a federal offence. How is that fair?Sober Thal said:Didn't sign, don't plan to. Copyright holders should have the right to decide if they want people to stream their products.
Here is your video anyways:
What people need to realize, is that if a company wants to allow you to make your 'Lets Play' and what not, they can easily give permission to stream their content. They don't have to do so on an individual bases like this video implies.
I realize most people don't care about copyright, this should open your eyes. The blood sweat and tears people put into a product should be respected. If the creator wants people to use their work for free, they can allow it.
THAT is fair.
Also, consider how much content on the internet is a product of people living in America, because that stuff would go, that is how it directly affects you.daydreamerdeluxe said:Regarding the whole "I'm not American, so it doesn't affect me" stance:
"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me." - Pastor Martin Niemöller
There have also been various other takes on it since, but what that boils down to is pretty obvious. Saying "I'm not a [insert adjective here], so I'll do nothing" only works for so long...
Well, okay what about reviews? Suddenly video reviews can only be made of films/games/anything copyrighted if they put up the disclaimer saying you can. Surely people deserve to be informed about such stuff?Sober Thal said:Then, if the company deems it as a plus, they will allow you to use their product to stream it.orangeban said:Yeah, but we're talking about videogames here, watching someone else play a game isn't using the creator's work for free, in fact, it's beneficial to the company as it'll probably encourage you to buy it.Sober Thal said:I don't care about people being able to lip synch and post a video on youtube.
I realize most people don't care about copyright, this should open your eyes. The blood sweat and tears people put into a product should be respected. If the creator wants people to use their work for free, they can allow it.
THAT is fair.
It should be their choice tho.