What did everyone think of the latest Jimquisition?

[Silence]

He might hope for an official response from Nintendo by making this as ... clear as possible.
That's what I would think. Usually he does not condone piracy, right?

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

I believe Jim is completely in the wrong in this and a fool.

And Nintendo is in the right to do what they think is right.

I don't believe the whole "interactive nature of games" makes a difference.

In some cases watching LPs is no different from listening to whole albums of music.

Especially if the game is so linear, so one path, that watching it is no different from playing it.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Not entirely certain it was meant as a serious advocation there, more like highlighting how Nintendo picks and chooses what part of copyright law to enforce by turning it around using the exaggerated emotional character that has been part of his shtick for a while now. Am sure it's more than hinted at throughout the show, but had a feeling it would get a lot of people focusing on the wrong part, no matter how ridiculous. Poe is a tricksy mistress it would seem.
Am past caring with piracy anyhow. Always to be feared and intensly policed more by the largest of publishers with little to lose instead of independent artists. Another boundless desire for control from large business within the creative mediums. And that FAQ of Nintendo's is a bit weird.

 

[McElroy]

It's kind of sad really if you consider the writers, artists, everyone who placed their heart and soul into the makings of a game for a company that's grieving everyone. Nintendo (both the Japanese and American studios) are going out of their way to screw people over and for the most part, we want revenge. However I always keep in mind we'd also be hurting their employees and those who're the sole reason games like Legend of Zelda, Mario, ect. are so incredible if not memorable. It pains me greatly, but if we're to strike at Nintendo we're taking down everyone on the ship as well.

But if the reputations of the other employees are spotless, why would they have trouble finding new jobs should Nintendo take a dip?

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

I don't understand about this whole Anti Youtube stance with Nintendo, I mean if all the Youtubers don't like Nintendo because of the whole Youtube policy, why the fuck am I still seeing Nintendo videos from different Youtubers.

 

[The Lunatic]

Jim is basically making himself look like an idiot.

You can invoke "Freedom of review!" and so on, however many times you like. But, he's forgotten one pretty major thing.

Legally, his videos have never been removed. The only time anyone attempted, it got dismissed and laughed at.

Youtube has removed them. This is because Youtube does not give one little shit about "Freedom of review", "Freedom of Critique" or anything like that. Youtube says "No, fuck you, we're siding with Nintendo, go fuck yourself". And that's entirely on Youtube.

So, Jim is complaining about Nintendo, when in reality, if Youtube just said "Nah", there's nothing really Nintendo could do, legally speaking.

He's entirely welcome to use another platform. But, as a company, Youtube (Well, google.) is free to do basically whatever they want when it comes to hosting videos on their platform.

 

[loa]

2 wrongs don't make a right but a right and wrong don't make a right either.
Ideally, nintendo and google would finally feel the hammer of the law they are abusing/are allowing to be abused and get their act together but apparently that is not in the stars any time soon and apparently perverse solutions like jims copyright deadlock are less of a wakeup call that leads to shit being fixed and more of a permanent "solution".

The mule got complacent standing there being pushed so now it came to kicks.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Jim is basically making himself look like an idiot.

You can invoke "Freedom of review!" and so on, however many times you like. But, he's forgotten one pretty major thing.

Legally, his videos have never been removed. The only time anyone attempted, it got dismissed and laughed at.

Youtube has removed them. This is because Youtube does not give one little shit about "Freedom of review", "Freedom of Critique" or anything like that. Youtube says "No, fuck you, we're siding with Nintendo, go fuck yourself". And that's entirely on Youtube.

So, Jim is complaining about Nintendo, when in reality, if Youtube just said "Nah", there's nothing really Nintendo could do, legally speaking.

He's entirely welcome to use another platform. But, as a company, Youtube (Well, google.) is free to do basically whatever they want when it comes to hosting videos on their platform.

I bet the samething happened with the whole Sega debacle with them flagging lets plays of Phantasy Star 3.

That was probably Google/Youtube fucking up with the copyright system.

 

[hermes]

Yeah, this was one of the weakest videos from Sterling. He is not making a case for piracy, he is just frustrated at Nintendo, and so he says "since they hurt ME, anything you can do to hurt them, it is ok", which is the epitome of petty and the exact opposite of insightful.

Listen, it is not that I am an apologist of Nintendo, historically they are similar to a mob family run by old people, and now their only strategy is trying to create a nostalgia driven feeling of "your old pals" by sweeping under the rug some of the most bully-like stories. That being said, this is driven exclusively by Jim being personally butthurt. He is not calling attention to something Nintendo does, except when and if it does it to him.

 

[hermes]

I don't understand about this whole Anti Youtube stance with Nintendo, I mean if all the Youtubers don't like Nintendo because of the whole Youtube policy, why the fuck am I still seeing Nintendo videos from different Youtubers.

1- Because youtube is big enough that even companies like Nintendo can't stay on top of all the uploads. A period of a couple days is what I would give them, depending on how interested they are.
2- Because Nintendo has an "official" way to allow youtubers to publish videos with Nintendo's blessings (https://r.ncp.nintendo.net/guide/). If you sign up for it, agree that your video is their copyright, agree that you will only show Nintendo approved content, give them veto powers and control of the proceedings to them, they promise not to unleash the copyright dogs to you and share the revenue you generate (but they administer), after they took their cut (70%). As I said before, classical mob racketeering tactics.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

I don't understand about this whole Anti Youtube stance with Nintendo, I mean if all the Youtubers don't like Nintendo because of the whole Youtube policy, why the fuck am I still seeing Nintendo videos from different Youtubers.

1- Because youtube is big enough that even companies like Nintendo can't stay on top of all the uploads. A period of a couple days is what I would give them, depending on how interested they are.
2- Because Nintendo has an "official" way to allow youtubers to publish videos with Nintendo's blessings (https://r.ncp.nintendo.net/guide/). If you sign up for it, agree that your video is their copyright, agree that you will only show Nintendo approved content, give them veto powers and control of the proceedings to them, they promise not to unleash the copyright dogs to you and share the revenue you generate (but they administer), after they took their cut (70%). As I said before, classical mob racketeering tactics.

But its their product, you can argue and complain all you want but they are in the right, end of story.

And I still think LPs are no different from listening to whole albums of Music in Youtube or watching while movie. And I find the whole "Games are interactive" thing to be weak.

 

[hermes]

I don't understand about this whole Anti Youtube stance with Nintendo, I mean if all the Youtubers don't like Nintendo because of the whole Youtube policy, why the fuck am I still seeing Nintendo videos from different Youtubers.

1- Because youtube is big enough that even companies like Nintendo can't stay on top of all the uploads. A period of a couple days is what I would give them, depending on how interested they are.
2- Because Nintendo has an "official" way to allow youtubers to publish videos with Nintendo's blessings (https://r.ncp.nintendo.net/guide/). If you sign up for it, agree that your video is their copyright, agree that you will only show Nintendo approved content, give them veto powers and control of the proceedings to them, they promise not to unleash the copyright dogs to you and share the revenue you generate (but they administer), after they took their cut (70%). As I said before, classical mob racketeering tactics.

But its their product, you can argue and complain all you want but they are in the right, end of story.

And I still think LPs are no different from listening to whole albums of Music in Youtube or watching while movie. And I find the whole "Games are interactive" thing to be weak.

I am not complaining. If you read my previous post, you will notice I think Jim is being extra petty about the whole situation.

And while this is their product, the fact they historically always go to extra lengths to "protect" it makes it look out of touch half the times, and anti-consumer the other half. After all, they are the same that:

- During the 80s and 90s lobbied to have rented games outlawed.
- During the 90s, instead of presenting a united front, they distance themselves from every other game company during the "violence on videogames" court hearings.
- During the early 90s, Nintendo was involved in several complains of anti-monopoly laws.
- Even today, Nintendo has a strong stand against used games sales and any kind of game sales in general, even online or the bargain bin kind for old games, because any reduction in price "reduces the value of their property"

Which takes me to my second point. No matter their messaging, Nintendo is not your friend, it is not your pal, and it is not your cool uncle. Nintendo is an old school zaibatsu style Japanese company, with all the warts that involves.

And just for reference, they are not "in the right". Copyright laws work both ways, and while I will not argue about the value of LP, displaying segments of the marketing material for the propuse of review, commentary, criticism or parody constitutes "fair use".

 

[loa]

But its their product, you can argue and complain all you want but they are in the right, end of story.

Right.
That's why 90% of digital artwork belongs to adobe. It's their content.

 

[BarkBarker]

Seems fine to me, its a sarcastic prod at the logic Nintendo applies by considering it "morally" okay to do it back. Still a thief but its only fair we all play by the same shitty interpretation of the rules yes? It does seem he is genuinely getting annoyed that Nintendo are so up on even a few seconds of highly distorted footage gets the strikes and flags which can only be dealt with on a shitty system, else there's Nintendos creator program which is incredibly insulting....or you could not talk about one of the three industry giants with any reference, sound or footage of their work. I mean that's something that seems reasonable in a fucked up kinda way.

 

[hermes]

But its their product, you can argue and complain all you want but they are in the right, end of story.

Right.
That's why 90% of digital artwork belongs to adobe. It's their content.

Hey, last time I check everything written from my phone is property of Apple Inc.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

I don't understand about this whole Anti Youtube stance with Nintendo, I mean if all the Youtubers don't like Nintendo because of the whole Youtube policy, why the fuck am I still seeing Nintendo videos from different Youtubers.

1- Because youtube is big enough that even companies like Nintendo can't stay on top of all the uploads. A period of a couple days is what I would give them, depending on how interested they are.
2- Because Nintendo has an "official" way to allow youtubers to publish videos with Nintendo's blessings (https://r.ncp.nintendo.net/guide/). If you sign up for it, agree that your video is their copyright, agree that you will only show Nintendo approved content, give them veto powers and control of the proceedings to them, they promise not to unleash the copyright dogs to you and share the revenue you generate (but they administer), after they took their cut (70%). As I said before, classical mob racketeering tactics.

But its their product, you can argue and complain all you want but they are in the right, end of story.

And I still think LPs are no different from listening to whole albums of Music in Youtube or watching while movie. And I find the whole "Games are interactive" thing to be weak.

I am not complaining. If you read my previous post, you will notice I think Jim is being extra petty about the whole situation.

And while this is their product, the fact they historically always go to extra lengths to "protect" it makes it look out of touch half the times, and anti-consumer the other half. After all, they are the same that:

- During the 80s and 90s lobbied to have rented games outlawed.
- During the 90s, instead of presenting a united front, they distance themselves from every other game company during the "violence on videogames" court hearings.
- During the early 90s, Nintendo was involved in several complains of anti-monopoly laws.
- Even today, Nintendo has a strong stand against used games sales and any kind of game sales in general, even online or the bargain bin kind for old games, because any reduction in price "reduces the value of their property"

Which takes me to my second point. No matter their messaging, Nintendo is not your friend, it is not your pal, and it is not your cool uncle. Nintendo is an old school zaibatsu style Japanese company, with all the warts that involves.

This whole thing does make me question Nintendo's financial situation though.

Because if EA outright tolerates this or other companies, why not Nintendo.

I assume is because they can't afford all these things because are no where near is large as EA.

 

[Lightspeaker]

I do have to pick at one thing from the OP:

It's okay to steal because a company does not respect you?

No its not. But equally that is absolutely not what Nintendo is doing. Its got absolutely nothing to do with mere respect and absolutely everything to do with Nintendo quite literally stealing a cut of his work. Jim's job involves producing these videos, writing articles, etc. It is how he makes his income. Some of those videos he does not monetise because he views the income from patreon as covering it. That is up to him. Regardless of whether those videos are monetised or not, however, Nintendo has absolutely no rights whatsoever to them and Jim's use of clips in those videos are covered under fair use laws.

TL;DR: Its got absolutely nothing to do with 'respect' and absolutely everything to do with theft of his work by ignoring fair use practices. Jim is pointing out the hypocrisy of them flagrantly stealing other people's work whilst getting angry about others stealing theirs.

I believe Jim is completely in the wrong in this and a fool.

And Nintendo is in the right to do what they think is right.

I don't believe the whole "interactive nature of games" makes a difference.

In some cases watching LPs is no different from listening to whole albums of music.

Especially if the game is so linear, so one path, that watching it is no different from playing it.

Except this doesn't just apply to lets play videos. Nintendo goes after absolutely everything that uses any part of one of its properties at all. Including reviews and critical videos in which gameplay footage is used under fair use policy as a means of critiquing it or supplementing discussion. But because Nintendo is a big powerful corporation and youtubers are comparatively smaller it is very difficult to take them to court over it. If everything was fair then Nintendo would lose a case on this in a heartbeat, but things very much are not fair (especially in the US courts) since Nintendo can afford lots of very expensive lawyers and can drag out the legal process for a very long time.

So, Jim is complaining about Nintendo, when in reality, if Youtube just said "Nah", there's nothing really Nintendo could do, legally speaking.

On the contrary, Nintendo would take them to court and have a very long, nasty and drawn-out legal case which would be a gigantic pain for Google. It would almost certainly result in a loss for Nintendo but even fairly simple big legal cases can go on for years and prove unprofitable for the companies involved (especially Google who would stand to gain relatively little themselves). Consequently it is merely easier for Google to allow Nintendo to continue violating copyright law in terms of fair use practices than it is for Google to say 'no' and have to deal with a massive lawsuit. Especially because there is relatively little chance of any actual Youtubers who are suffering under this getting the resources together to threaten Nintendo or Youtube themselves. Siding with Nintendo is simply taking the path of least resistance but make no mistake...Nintendo is absolutely in violation of fair use. Its just that there's nobody who has both the resources and the 'casus belli', as it were, to call them out on it.


In any case I think Cowabungaa and jklinders pretty much echoed the vast majority of my thoughts on this pretty well above.

 

[Lightspeaker]

This whole thing does make me question Nintendo's financial situation though.

Because if EA outright tolerates this or other companies, why not Nintendo.

I assume is because they can't afford all these things because are no where near is large as EA.

Because Nintendo is holding to extremely insular business practices and always have done. As far as being able to 'afford' these things and not being as big as EA you're talking utter nonsense.

Even a cursory look at the wikipedia page for a big public company lists its recently released financial details. Nintendo's revenue last year was over five hundred billion yen. Which amounts to around 4.4 billion USD. EA's revenue last year was just under 4.4 billion USD. Nintendo's assets are nearly 1.3 trillion yen, 11.4 billion USD. EA's from 2015 were 10 billion USD.

Operating income for Nintendo is admittedly way lower than EA's and in fact they made a loss last year while EA made a profit. I'm guessing because of the disastrous state of the market for the WiiU. But these two companies are absolutely comparable in terms of financial size. Don't make excuses for them.

Edit: Oops, double post. Sorry I assumed someone would post in-between as I was typing this up...

 

[loa]

But its their product, you can argue and complain all you want but they are in the right, end of story.

Right.
That's why 90% of digital artwork belongs to adobe. It's their content.

Hey, last time I check everything written from my phone is property of Apple Inc.

I actually can't tell if this is a joke or not without looking it up like some messed up version of poe's law.
We're fucked.