YouTube Gaming Videos and Copyright Issues

[HardcoreSadism1]

This might be the final nail in Google+'s coffin, as said before they deserve a loss.

[Edward1]

These videos, in the USA where youtube is hosted, would come down to the DMCA act signed by Bill Clinton in 90s.  The DMCA claims copyright materials can be used in other works if they are "fair use." For example, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart basically depends on "fair use" for its show to exist, because they show many news clips from other shows throughout the broadcast.  However, the process to determine if something is "fair use" is long and complex with many elements.  Ultimately, if the work is fair use probably comes down to how the judge or jury in court feels that day. History has shown that different courts will determine something is "fair use" completely differently.  So therefore, whether these "lets play" videos are technically legal is completely up to interpretation. 

That said, I don't know why any video game company would pick a battle with these Lets play videos, regardless of their legal standing.  These videos are free advertising for their games.   When they get the videos shut down, all they do is eliminating free advertising and anger potential customers.   That means they are basically throwing away money.   Why any company would be stupid enough to do that is beyond me.  Even if the video game companies can prove these videos violate their copyrights (and again that comes down to many complex factors), there is no benefit at all in getting the videos taken down.  So why do video game companies do this?

[Weekend_Warrior1]

I miss the old Youtube... where people used to upload videos for fun rather than to make money. 

[Gentlegamer1]

[QUOTE=Edward]These videos, in the USA where youtube is hosted, would come down to the DMCA act signed by Bill Clinton in 90s.  The DMCA claims copyright materials can be used in other works if they are "fair use." For example, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart basically depends on "fair use" for its show to exist, because they show many news clips from other shows throughout the broadcast.  However, the process to determine if something is "fair use" is long and complex with many elements.  Ultimately, if the work is fair use probably comes down to how the judge or jury in court feels that day. History has shown that different courts will determine something is "fair use" completely differently.  So therefore, whether these "lets play" videos are technically legal is completely up to interpretation. 

That said, I don't know why any video game company would pick a battle with these Lets play videos, regardless of their legal standing.  These videos are free advertising for their games.   When they get the videos shut down, all they do is eliminating free advertising and anger potential customers.   That means they are basically throwing away money.   Why any company would be stupid enough to do that is beyond me.  Even if the video game companies can prove these videos violate their copyrights (and again that comes down to many complex factors), there is no benefit at all in getting the videos taken down.  So why do video game companies do this?[/QUOTE]
They aren't shutting the videos down, they are taking the monetization away from the uploader, and transferring it to themselves. Most of the publishers are fine with Let's Play videos, as long as they are produced for free, and any monetization goes to themselves.

When the monetization is taken away, very few are going to go through the trouble of making them anymore.

[scotland171]

An update - Youtube has reported paying $1 billion in compensation to copyright holders based on contentID.

I remember the angry joe rants at the time, but what was the resolution? Did youtubers like angry joe just pony up? Is this still a battle being waged?

[velcrozombie1]

I'm not really sure what ended up happening. Two Best Friends Play talked about the issue last December on their podcast when it looked like it could be potentially career-threatening, but at a certain point they stopped bringing it up. When someone asked them a question about it a few months later they deferred due to legal reasons. They continue to put up most of their content on Youtube but have also created their own personal website (which does contain a few exclusive videos that were pulled from Youtube for copyright claims). A fan asked them a couple of months ago whether it would financially benefit them more if he watched their content on Youtube or their own website; they said that watching the content on their personal website made them more money. About half a year ago the two part-time members (out of four total) who still worked in the games industry were able to quit their day jobs, so any impact that the copyright claims have had on their career either must be minimal or the amount of money they make from their own website and merchandise has compensated enough to keep them financially secure. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the majority of their audience still watches their content through Youtube, so any sanctions they have to pay must not be overwhelming.