Youtube and Copyright

Well... I'm watching a video on Youtube about the copyright issues. Apparently now Youtube is closing videos that just have clips of a copyright material. Ie: Music, games, movies, etc...

The reviewer I'm watching right now: Angry Joe. Note: If you watch the video, there's a ton of swearing in it. Has had over fifty videos, 62 videos from the time he made it, removed. Over four years of his work, and note: He makes a living off these videos, and saying that he might stop doing this because he can't earn any money. Including one from "Tomb Raider" for his interview WITH the executives of Tomb Raider. It sounds like it's a bot, but there's also people who's also flagging the videos.

I honestly am pretty shocked, this hurts a lot of people. Not just Angry Joe, not just famous gamer reviews, but a lot of different other reviewers. I knew for a long time that people depend on these reviews for money for their living. I know this is the reason why SOPA was shot down, but it sounds like they're making a loophole. I understand when it's full movies and music, but just clips of a game, or a movie, or music, shouldn't be hit like this.

So, thoughts?

EDIT: One of the linked videos has a title of: Over a 100 videos blocked from another member.

EDIT #2: Here's a petition link:

http://www.change.org/petitions/goo...utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition

 

Honnestly I' m surprised it took them so long to catch up, that' s what the law always said to begin with, SOPA or not. It only qualifies as free speech if you don' t make money out of it, otherwise it does qualify as copyright infringement. I mean SE just cannot use Disney characters any way they want just because "dude, free speech", that' s not how it works.

Back when I was studying CG all the teachers warned us against using copyrighted material in non-personnal projects, if its rightful owner sees it and complains you' re screwed.

 

Dude...

A: Video games don't have that big of an infringement on them, especially when it comes to the U.S.

B: This is just clips. Whole movies, yes, I understand. But post a FMV with music in it and video, even your own, and it can be banned. A video got banned of a girl practicing her violin.

Angry Joe's video of him interviewing Tomb Raider execs got banned by "tomb raider" for content. Also, KH-vids does have videos that would be banned due to this. And yes, I contacted Misty about this, including a trailer for KHIII they posted.

 

The situation has gotten way out of hand. YouTube's copyright policies are terrible and they need to be updated to better fit the term "fair use."

The worst part about it is that Google/YouTube is a faceless entity in bed with large corporations so they will essentially do whatever they want without explaining themselves. When you're making 5.6 billion off of advertisements in a single year, that needs to change, especially when the people making you this money are the people you're screwing over and all they want is to talk it out.

 

Yeah. Again, that' s no loophole, like it or not (I sure don' t), that' s what the law always said. Whether you make big or little money out of it is quite irrelevant. As I understand it youtube won' t take down videos using copyrighted material if their uploaders aren' t making any money out of it; and they won' t take down reviews that do make money but don' t show the game/movie at all.

Sure, in practice most copyright holders just let it go, but what if they didn' t and sued ? They' d win. If I was a big youtube name I' d rather play it safe than risk a hypothetical lawsuit I' d have zero chance to win. Never heard of such a lawsuit but it' s bound to happen sooner or later, if it hasn' t already. Youtube itself might be targeted by such a lawsuit, I' m not sure, but maybe that' s why they' re getting cautious.

 

I think it's non-paid members, too...

Like I said, there's ones that have a girl practicing her violin that got banned which I am pretty sure wasn't being paid for, there's ones that the person makes their own music and videos, banned... That's not copyright laws, that's banning videos because they feel like it.The people talking about this has comments filled to the brim of people talking about their stories.

I do have to agree, I think it's partly because Youtube is now owned by Google who has already totally changed the comment section. *another slew of complaints there, though I don't mind it once you get used to it* And they just want to earn more money. The other issue is that Youtube is practically a monopoly in itself with videos being posted online next to Blip and a few others.

EDIT: And Xbox One and PS4 live video recordings are getting banned. AFTER both companies made it part of their system to do so.

Also, 99% of the time, if I'm uncertain about a game, I check it out on Youtube. I see what it's like. If I like it, I buy it... Hence the reason I have an Xbox 360 and PS3 because I saw some great video games from Youtube. Assassin's Creed, Portal... Games like that, I found interesting because of videos on Youtube showing how great they were.

 

Let's Plays and Reviews would fall under fair use, be they for profit or otherwise.

 

Thanks burn... =3

And that's what a lot of people are posting about, too... Hell, some of them are just reviewers who add clips to prove a point about a game. Like: "The AI is atrocious". And they show a clip of the game where a soldier is standing there getting riddled with bullets. Angry Joe does that a lot of the time to have people understand why he doesn't like or likes a game. He says that it really helps him make the message clearer to his fans.

As for the laws, they most likely differ from France. I don't know, but it's different for different parts of the world. Though there should probably be international laws to fix these problems, I doubt it will happen due to culture differences, and restrictions in different countries. (ie: China)

Joe does this because he enjoys it, yes... But this makes him not get any time really to go on a vacation or any personal time, he said in his video about all his deletions that he spends 60-70 hours a week making these videos. He's also going out and getting interviews and traveling to different conventions. That eats up a lot of time, hell, a comic book reviewer who makes his own series (Linkara) has this as his full time job. Someone who reviews comics, he makes storylines also, granted, but he does it when he has time to, not every week. He makes other videos, but only when he has time. Most of his time is eaten up by making these videos. This is something that people can't put down as "something you can do once a week and do a job" kind of thing.

 

Like Sara pointed out (thanks) those laws might slightly change between countries. And I' m certainly not a lawyer.

I' d argue let' s plays or walkthroughs showing you the whole game can hurt the product (they ensure I won' t touch "games" like, say, Beyond Two Souls with a ten foot pole).

Also, the law explanation you posted doesn' t bother drawing a clear line between fair and unfair on many of its finer points, it is left blurry and entirely to the judge' s appreciation. Which I' d wager is the reason my teachers gave me "don' t even, or hide it well" as a rule of thumb. It' s the safe route.

I think the rise of the internet does call for clear cut definitions of what' s fair and what isn' t, the current laws are obviously outdated, but unfortunately every such attempt so far tried to screw us in the same breath.

 

It's a two sided coin in my opinion...

When I was a kid, a lot of the games went by word of mouth. You didn't KNOW a game was bad until you bought it and brought it home. Lets say: Batman Forever, which a family member bought for me. It was terrible, but I didn't know that, neither did he because there was no real way to know unless you A: Had a friend warn you. B: Spend all your money on video game magazines. C: The store you buy it from would be honest with you and tell you. It's a lot like what parents go through buying games for their children, even with a family friendly system like Wii around, it's hard to tell what your child would enjoy and not enjoy without them there. I helped families in the past chose different games for their children that were appropriate.This is one of the reasons why gaming companies like: LJN and other such companies did so well. They made terrible, but at the time, very popular games based on movies and other such things, a trend that continues today, and made a fortune because no one knew how bad a game was.

Now with the Internet, people can check out a game and see how good or bad it is. People can make their own judgements and decide on their own. Yes, there are games that suffer from this, ie: Duke Nukem Forever. (An Internet gaming group got it early and played it live that night without trying it and said afterwards themselves not to buy the game, and to cancel your pre-order or not get it.) But there are games that benefit at the same time. Braid is a sleeper that a ton of people found out from Youtube and forums. Portal is a HUGE sleeper that people found out by the Internet and Youtube. Assassin's Creed for me was a game I never would've touched based on the mere title if it wasn't for someone posting a video about Ezio's journey through his life in a top ten list. I bought these games because I saw it on Youtube and was interested. A lot of people do the same thing, one guy said that a huge part of his gaming collection was simply watching the game on Youtube first.

And yes, I know there's Gamefaqs. But companies are actually using it to their advantage now, too. Look at Meta Critic when a game comes out and see how many people rate a game a "10" and "game of the year" when it's shoddily made and/or buggy as hell and see how many reviews just have 1 review listed on their profile. Companies are wising up to the Internet trend and are using Meta Critic and other sites to go and make their game the best seller of the century when it's one of the worst games ever made. Hell, I rarely go to Gamefaqs anymore because of how many people give biased reviews. At least on Youtube you're usually watching some guy who has a webcam and a 2 dollar capture card recording himself playing the game.

The reason why there's no laws is because people keep on trying to make it illegal for anything to be posted at all. With lobbies and corporations putting pressure on the government to stop any video that hurts them at any point being made, I don't see any time soon a bill where it's clear cut and to the point due to this, there are some good games out there, but at the same time, a lot of people depend on Youtube to find the information and the companies don't like it because most of the time, they're either getting people who are just watching it on Youtube and not buying their product. And/or they get negative feedback which damages not only their game, but their reputation and it costs them money.

 

Yes, sadly I don' t see it happening anytime soon. Besides, youtube is a private place, not part of the public sphere. Ultimately they can kick out any user or content they wish without having to justify it in any shape or form. Same as KHV. Same as my house. I heard Dailymotion and every other alternative platform behaves just like youtube.

 

I figured out what was fully going on via comments on a banned video:

The video STAYS up, but there's no money given to the person who makes the video. The MONEY goes to the corporation who originally made the content. So the video about the interview with the Tomb Raider executive is going to the company that made Tomb Raider instead of the person who MADE the video and did the interview.

So yeah, it's still pretty bad, and I still pretty much upset they're doing this. That and now companies can find excuses to make more money off this by "flagging" any video they think is "copyright violation", and it screws a ton of people doing so. Including Angry Joe, who did the interview with the Tomb Raiders executives. Or the person who did the Lets Play, etc...

 

Yup, and they automatically add ads to the vid, whether you want ads on your vids or not.

 

Which gives them money too for posting the ads...

I see a lot of people leaving Youtube over this. A lot of people. Especially if I see it going the way I think it is: Executives using this as an excuse to make a ton more money by flagging every video they see that has a hint of something they had on there.[DOUBLEPOST=1387066309][/DOUBLEPOST]I remember when the XboxOne had and still has issues. The first time you use it, right out of the box, you have to download a huge update. A lot of gamers know this, a lot of people on the Internet who keep current with the news like KH-Vids know this.

Some parent getting the system for their child WOULDN'T know this. They wouldn't know this and might buy the system when their Internet has massive restrictions on it, I heard from a gaming show that from where they lived, it was 500 MB per month and cost about 30 dollars a gig after that. I'm not sure, I haven't watched that in a bit. They also require a download of all the games into the system, a small one, but still about a gig of a download. And it won't start without it, they refuse to let you play without it. It took them about 30 minutes for one game. And that's with a high speed Internet, that's with them having unlimited Internet.This is something not a lot of people would know unless they watched the show and saw the massive problems they had with it. It not only helps people get games, but it keeps them informed on what's going on with the systems and warn them if they don't have a good Internet to avoid a $500 paperweight that it would become with a bad Internet.

 

Well the problem with game reviews right now is the fact that the game companies have lockdowns depending on what company it is. Regardless whether or not it is a review. You need to have permission from some companies to use their content, even if you aren't getting paid!

Look at Square Enix for example. I dare you to try and find some trailers or even endings to some of their games without coming across problems these days. And while reviewing IS protected under fair use. Lets Plays are not always protected under copyright law!

Also, there is a section of copyright law not always mentioned that can ban the use of copyrighted material even if it is changed via commentary. Reviews are generally a good portion of original material, while most lets plays are only 10% original (commentary).

So, I am sorry to hear Angry Joe is suffering because of it. I like Angry Joe a lot! But there isn't much we can do now that youtube is getting cracked down about copyright.

 

Yeah, I heard Nintendo is being an ass about copyright... Even games like Super Mario Bros and other such games which were made over 20 years ago are being banned because Nintendo doesn't want a "copyright issue" maybe it's changed... It's pretty shocking. Though I did check KH-Vids and it's still up... I don't know if they found a loophole or not, but they seem fine.

It is weird though that a interview with an executive of Tomb Raider got flagged by "tomb raider" for copyright violations amongst other things. I understand lets plays for new games, games that are still sold mass market. This new gen and old, yes... Older than that I would say is fine. A review, fine... A portion of the game to show what it's like, fine, maybe a half hour or so...

Totally banning every single show made because it might have a five second clip of the game? No, just no...

 

This stuff is definitely bad, but what's worse is that ANYBODY can file a copyright claim for ANYTHING and Google doesn't seem to care. We have completely random companies claiming they own the rights to stuff they had nothing to do with, and thanks to Google they can EASILY claim they own it and make money off of it
It's a farce

 

I'm literally watching Angry Joe's rant about the new copyright system right now.

What disgusting bullshit for Youtube to pull on the people who got them their money.

Angry Joe just said it takes around 16 hours of effort for him to create an original, creative, and analytical sketch-review hybrid that discusses gameplay and story and writing and other things that PEOPLE WHO COULD BUY THESE GAMES OR MOVIES SHOULD BE SEEING, and some unknown asshole can just say "HE DON'T OWN THAT!" and BAM the video's gone.

The fact that one of the most popular sites on the internet, a system created solely for communication, is now oppressing the best reason to show copyrighted or non-copyrighted materials: review, commentary, criticism, and overall human feedback.

Bob Chipman's video about the ordeal is a good watch, and brings up an unexpected, but rather accurate, analogy.

 

Another good analysis... This guy makes great points also...

I understand now why Joe's video of Tomb Raider got flagged if it was a: "Hey, lets make a shitload of money by flagging this, even though that executive worked for us 20 years ago for two weeks."

Also, like when SOPA came up, a lot of the reviewers were thinking of quitting. One of the most famous out there, the Nostalgia Critic said himself: Even if it's just the U.S., if he posted one review people didn't like and were insane enough:

He could get arrested for it. No questions asked. And I can sadly see this happening.

This is honestly unbelievable, and very painful to watch. The person he talks about: Classic Game Room, who BETA'D this for Youtube, is now officially quitting and going to his own website to post reviews due to this. And the biggest kicker:

He does CLASSIC OLD GAMES. (Hence the title.) Mostly. I confess, I just looked at his site and haven't really looked in depth about his stuff. :/

If Youtube doesn't change this and survives, it'll be a miracle.

 

YouTube responded to recent complaints.

http://kotaku.com/heres-what-youtub...m_source=Kotaku_Twitter&utm_medium=Socialflow

Basically it says "**** you, the new system is awesome and you should learn to appreciate the awesome."