TotalBiscuit Takedown Notice

[Mangod]

So... Total Biscuit/Cynical Brit/John Bain posted two videos on YouTube not too long ago, a first impressions-video for Guise of the Wolf, and a recording of the research stream for the same game. Guess which videos have been hit by takedown notices?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ask3Dn1ocIQ

... this is just unbelievable; do these people seriously not see how this kind of attempted censorship harms their product and reputation? And this isn't the first time, either; TB got hit with a takedown notice for his video on Day One: Garry's Incident as well when he blasted that game for being, pardon the language, utter garbage.

I can't wait to see how FUN Creators (yes, that's their name. FUN. I beg to differ) try to justify this, because I can't imagine this going over particularly well.

Captcha: third degree...

Well, I reckon FUN are gonna get burned by this.

Edit:

Sooo... one, it is now fairly obvious that FUN, despite statements to the contrary, are the people behind the takedown notice, and two, the company is run by six year olds.

Spoiler: image is very large so spoilers

And the lunacy just keeps on coming.

 

[Weaver]

lmao, when Wild Games Studio didn't it basically destroy the companies image and cease all sales of the game and cause the steam forums to flood with insults, threats, and general outrage?

Seems like a great way to ruin your company.

 

[Elfgore]

Idiots. This is only going to come back and bite them in the ass, just like it did for Wild Games Studios. This game already had a bad rep, now it's only going to get worse. These developers need to realize that censoring a video you don't like, doesn't make their problems go away.

 

[Aerosteam]

What the hell? Really? TB predicted this would happen on the actual video that got taken down!

 

[Erttheking]

And funnily enough, for some reason you can only post in the Steam forums if you own the game. Like the dev team is trying to keep all of TB's fans from raging at them. Classy.

 

[Reed Spacer]

Well, comedy is as comedy does, I suppose.

Anyone want me to order a pizza while we watch the fireworks from this latest youtube cluster-fuck?

 

[Altorin]

yeah, the Gary's Incident incident showcased exactly how smart it is to tangle with TB.

They've taken down a bit of bad press that will eventually be up because the Law, and added onto it heaping tablespoons of bad press.

Smart.

 

[Reed Spacer]

Anyone want to hit me with the 'Cliff's Notes' version of what the 'Gary Incident' is?

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well someone just buried their company... then again I don't imagine they had much life left, funny thing is now TB can make 2-3x as much money on their game as he would normally.

They will learn some day, but until they do we get sweet sweet carnage to watch.
Also a perfect showcase of how Google removes content with absolutely no legal oversight, if Youtube wasn't their privately owned site people could take them to court for absurd amounts of money.

 

[Mangod]

Anyone want to hit me with the 'Cliff's Notes' version of what the 'Gary Incident' is?

Essentially, this video:


Got hit with a takedown notice for saying that the game was shit. Please note that their argument was that TB had no right to monetize and use their game for this purpose, despite TB having documentation proving that he had been given permission to do a first impressions video, permission to monetize the video, and having been given a review copy of the game by Wild Games Studio.

Th fallout of that little decision essentially destroyed Wild Games' public image and reputation.

And now FUN are doing the same thing.

 

[Reed Spacer]

Anyone want to hit me with the 'Cliff's Notes' version of what the 'Gary Incident' is?

Essentially, this video:


Got hit with a takedown notice for saying that the game was shit. Please note that their argument was that TB had no right to monetize and use their game for this purpose, despite TB having documentation proving that he had been given permission to do a first impressions video, permission to monetize the video, and having been given a review copy of the game by Wild Games Studio.

Th fallout of that little decision essentially destroyed Wild Games' public image and reputation.

And now FUN are doing the same thing.

So nothing of value was lost, then.

 

[krazykidd]

So... Total Biscuit/Cynical Brit/John Bain posted two videos on YouTube not too long ago, a first impressions-video for Guise of the Wolf, and a recording of the research stream for the same game. Guess which videos have been hit by takedown notices?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ask3Dn1ocIQ

... this is just unbelievable; do these people seriously not see how this kind of attempted censorship harms their product and reputation? And this isn't the first time, either; TB got hit with a takedown notice for his video on Day One: Garry's Incident as well when he blasted that game for being, pardon the language, utter garbage.

I can't wait to see how FUN Creators (yes, that's their name. FUN. I beg to differ) try to justify this, because I can't imagine this going over particularly well.

Captcha: third degree...

Well, I reckon FUN are gonna get burned by this.

Actually you know what ? I get it. Why would i want a bunch of randomers talking about my games. Especially if it's a bad game or they are known to say bad things about their games. Sure it's free publicity, but only if the reviewer liked it. If the reviewer hated it, and is a popular figure, then it's bad for business. Yes it's a way to control information about their games , but i do believe only certain people should be allowed to " review" games not every tom, dick and harry with a camera ( i'm not saying that's what total biscuit is).


Its not that i necessarily agree with the reasons for taking down/flagging videos. It's just that i understand where they are coming from.

 

[Reed Spacer]

So... Total Biscuit/Cynical Brit/John Bain posted two videos on YouTube not too long ago, a first impressions-video for Guise of the Wolf, and a recording of the research stream for the same game. Guess which videos have been hit by takedown notices?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ask3Dn1ocIQ

... this is just unbelievable; do these people seriously not see how this kind of attempted censorship harms their product and reputation? And this isn't the first time, either; TB got hit with a takedown notice for his video on Day One: Garry's Incident as well when he blasted that game for being, pardon the language, utter garbage.

I can't wait to see how FUN Creators (yes, that's their name. FUN. I beg to differ) try to justify this, because I can't imagine this going over particularly well.

Captcha: third degree...

Well, I reckon FUN are gonna get burned by this.

Actually you know what ? I get it. Why would i want a bunch of randomers talking about my games. Especially if it's a bad game or they are known to say bad things about their games. Sure it's free publicity, but only if the reviewer liked it. If the reviewer hated it, and is a popular figure, then it's bad for business. Yes it's a way to control information about their games , but i do believe only certain people should be allowed to " review" games not every tom, dick and harry with a camera ( i'm not saying that's what total biscuit is).


Its not that i necessarily agree with the reasons for taking down/flagging videos. It's just that i understand where they are coming from.

Yeah.

Um, this might just be crazy talk, but the point of reviewing a game is to let others know whether a game is good or bad.

That's kind of the primary purpose.

And 'randomers' are the people who actually play the game, as opposed to being paid to say nice things about it..

 

[schrodinger]

ooooh, those stupid developers don't know what they've just unleashed. Surely they had seen the garry's incident fiasco?
Regardless, this developer should be ashamed of themselves for releasing such a piss poor game. I've seen other walkthroughs and god lord is it bad; the ending is not even animated! it's just a bunch of drawings (EDIT: sorry, there was some quite music). FUN, take your terrible game down and try again.


welp, only one thing left to do:
prepare my seat for the show

Another EDIT: there's conflicting reports that say FUN did not file the copyright claim, but some do. Gah, how confusing.

 

[teqrevisited]

I'm really looking forward to what he's going to do. They're going to get torn to pieces and they're going to deserve it.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

And 'randomers' are the people who actually play the game, as opposed to being paid to say nice things about it..

There is an inherent conflict at the heart of the problem when one's pay is directly linked to what they say about games. Simply reviewing a game on the internet without profiting in any way avoids any ethical dilemma (having nothing to gain or lose is great for demonstrating at least some attempt at fairness) as well as any legal dilemma (fair use is nebulously defined after all).

This dilemma is why you (likely) find it difficult to trust the position of a person who's site is supported by a game that the site reviewed. It is a fundamental problem with game's press - regardless of a site or reviewer's personal ethics, getting paid by the people who's product you are reviewing absolutely undermines any claim of impartiality you might try and make. Worse still is the fact that the position of enthusiast press relies entirely on a cordial relationship between site and publisher because this relationship is what gives the enthusiast site their access.

In virtually any other profession, such grievous conflicts of interest would be damning and yet the enthusiast press literally could not operate for pay or profit without relying upon it. All told, it is why it is so easy for many to dismiss their claim of being journalists and why it is so easy to dismiss any claim you do not agree with as being the result of malfeasance of some sort.

 

[shrekfan246]

Simply reviewing a game on the internet without profiting in any way avoids any ethical dilemma (having nothing to gain or lose is great for demonstrating at least some attempt at fairness) as well as any legal dilemma (fair use is nebulously defined after all).

Of course, on the other hand, since I'm not being paid to do it as a job then were I to review Final Fantasy XIII I would have no reason to give readers any reasons why they might like it when I didn't. I'm not a professional, why should I look at the pros and cons when I would personally not recommend the game?

Its not that i necessarily agree with the reasons for taking down/flagging videos. It's just that i understand where they are coming from.

I understand the reasoning too, but that doesn't make it right. Fair use may be nebulous as Eclectic Dreck mentioned, but it is supposed to cover review and criticism of products, which is most certainly what people like TotalBiscuit do. Removing (extremely valid) criticism of your game from the view of the public is shady at best, downright deception at worst. Consumers deserve to be able to research something before they purchase it, for good or bad.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Of course, on the other hand, since I'm not being paid to do it as a job then were I to review Final Fantasy XIII I would have no reason to give readers any reasons why they might like it when I didn't. I'm not a professional, why should I look at the pros and cons when I would personally not recommend the game?

That is the downside of being an amateur - there is no standard to meet. Of course, if you want to build an audience (and not just throw ideas into the wind), you must do something to keep them interested.

And, it could easily be argued that if you did not find something to like in the game then you don't have much basis to write about what some theoretical other person might like. When you start creating such rhetorical creatures, you tend to undermine your own argument because it is easy to envision someone that likes every single thing you hated. And then the problem with subjectivity is such that the relative value of a review is all but nil unless you have fair evidence that the tastes of the reviewer match your own.

As an example, I recall that Justin McElroy had literally nothing but unkind things to say about the game Alpha Protocol going so far as to say the whole game felt "gross". I played the game myself and found that I actually quite liked the game. Had I simply gone with what a professional (who's opinion and work I respect) said, I would have missed out on a great experience. From this comes a lesson: the reviewer only has the duty of relaying their own experience I, as a consumer have the duty to interpret this revelation using my own tastes when it comes to making a judgement.

 

[krazykidd]

So... Total Biscuit/Cynical Brit/John Bain posted two videos on YouTube not too long ago, a first impressions-video for Guise of the Wolf, and a recording of the research stream for the same game. Guess which videos have been hit by takedown notices?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ask3Dn1ocIQ

... this is just unbelievable; do these people seriously not see how this kind of attempted censorship harms their product and reputation? And this isn't the first time, either; TB got hit with a takedown notice for his video on Day One: Garry's Incident as well when he blasted that game for being, pardon the language, utter garbage.

I can't wait to see how FUN Creators (yes, that's their name. FUN. I beg to differ) try to justify this, because I can't imagine this going over particularly well.

Captcha: third degree...

Well, I reckon FUN are gonna get burned by this.

Actually you know what ? I get it. Why would i want a bunch of randomers talking about my games. Especially if it's a bad game or they are known to say bad things about their games. Sure it's free publicity, but only if the reviewer liked it. If the reviewer hated it, and is a popular figure, then it's bad for business. Yes it's a way to control information about their games , but i do believe only certain people should be allowed to " review" games not every tom, dick and harry with a camera ( i'm not saying that's what total biscuit is).


Its not that i necessarily agree with the reasons for taking down/flagging videos. It's just that i understand where they are coming from.

Yeah.

Um, this might just be crazy talk, but the point of reviewing a game is to let others know whether a game is good or bad.

That's kind of the primary purpose.

And 'randomers' are the people who actually play the game, as opposed to being paid to say nice things about it..

That's a pretty big accusation you are making there. Sure it may have happened, but i doubt it's common enough to make a huge condemnation like that. Just like any other thing, there are honest and dishonest people.

So... Total Biscuit/Cynical Brit/John Bain posted two videos on YouTube not too long ago, a first impressions-video for Guise of the Wolf, and a recording of the research stream for the same game. Guess which videos have been hit by takedown notices?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ask3Dn1ocIQ

... this is just unbelievable; do these people seriously not see how this kind of attempted censorship harms their product and reputation? And this isn't the first time, either; TB got hit with a takedown notice for his video on Day One: Garry's Incident as well when he blasted that game for being, pardon the language, utter garbage.

I can't wait to see how FUN Creators (yes, that's their name. FUN. I beg to differ) try to justify this, because I can't imagine this going over particularly well.

Captcha: third degree...

Well, I reckon FUN are gonna get burned by this.

Actually you know what ? I get it. Why would i want a bunch of randomers talking about my games. Especially if it's a bad game or they are known to say bad things about their games. Sure it's free publicity, but only if the reviewer liked it. If the reviewer hated it, and is a popular figure, then it's bad for business. Yes it's a way to control information about their games , but i do believe only certain people should be allowed to " review" games not every tom, dick and harry with a camera ( i'm not saying that's what total biscuit is).


Its not that i necessarily agree with the reasons for taking down/flagging videos. It's just that i understand where they are coming from.

It's dishonest and fraudulent to not inform people about the pros and cons of a product.In fact there are several laws in the US that prevent what you're trying to argue for.

That's not what i'm arguing for. And like i said i don't agree with the action, but i donunderstand it. TB has a very big following, if he says negative things about a game , it could affect sales. Now, because he is an internet personality, his words carry weight. In the eyes of publishers he ( and many LPers) are no names, who became popular on youtube( and other means) that a) make money off their games with their content and b) can directly influence their sales based on what they say. I understand why companies feel threatened by them. That's all i meant. I understand why they take these actions.

Now, IF anyone has permission for the devs or publishers to use gamefootage and review games then it's silly because you can't have your cake and eat it too.