My problem now is that the communication is one directional. This is important for some people, and he is not making a effort to learn from the subject from people that know more than him.
Political cartoonist are way worse
Fuck this guy… He should lose every single sponsorship.
I like that the quote takes issue with the money and not the language.
He should absolutely lose sponsorships, but that doesn’t make it OK to DMCA his videos. Streaming gameplay should be considered fair use.
Despite his behavior, 27 is not a child.
Very popular youtubers are SUPER ANGRY that Sean said Pewdiepie makes money off his content and not the other way around even though Seas specifically says:
Yes both sides profited. Still doesn’t make DMCA abuse OK.
Maybe it should, but it isn’t.
Has that been tested in court?
This. I am sure Sean feels like he is doing the right thing here, and PewDiePie makes an easy target due to a combination of doing some dumb things and being annoying as fuck, but as a gamer, stuff like this is a huge negative.
We really need to fight any kind of DMCA abuse when it comes to twitch/youtube as we’ve seen a lot of it. The morally correct thing is for his sponsors/subscribers to abandon him if they feel either his person or his online persona are counter to their ethics.
With that said, i kind of feel bad for PewDiePie here. People, myself included, can get REALLY pissed off in online games like this. What he said was wrong, but I think we all have said extremely offensive stuff out loud in anger while playing video games (if not exactly what he said). Although this isn’t exactly his first time doing something like this, and most streamers manage to stream for years without saying the N word… So maybe i don’t feel that sorry for him. Plus, he is hecka annoying.
People in public positions often manage to go an entire career without being overtly racist. I wouldn’t feel that sorry for him.
Just playing devil’s advocate here, but why? Beyond review purposes, why can’t a game company disallow third-parties posting videos of gameplay footage for commercial purposes?
Sure, but not all of us bear the responsibility that comes with a 48M subscriber list, whether or not he wants to acknowledge that it is a responsibility. With great power…
It would go to court. It’s not been established that you can stream.
The situation is basically that companies realize they benefit form streaming so they are granting rights rather than enforcing them. But nobody challenged Nintendo in court when they took away streaming rights.
Tricky issue, but I am uncomfortable with a company being able to claim copyright over what comes down to being my experience of their product. A video game (or a board game) by being interactive, is part their product and part my experience of their product. Sure, you can say that films and music are based on my experience of that product as well, but simply showing the film or playing the music doesn’t include that - you are just displaying the product. I feel like I should be able to share my experience that is part of the game. It’s tricky, like I said above, but I agree that Let’s Plays should be protected as fair use. If that means that awful people play them, well then, awful people play them. Don’t watch the awful people. But don’t try to regulate whose experience you value by using copyright claims.
I don’t know the guy from Adam, but it says a lot about a person if the word “nigger” slips out of his mouth when he’s angry.
-Tom
Does it matter? If the algorithm that runs Youtube takes down your video game stream, what recourse do you have realistically? Ask them to reconsider. And if they won’t, take them to court? Not likely, when the value of your video is somewhere between jack and shit, statistically speaking…and there’s a very good chance you’ll lose anyway.
You only have the rights you’re willing to defend, and who wants to pay to defend a bunch of low-effort junk like the vast majority of videogame streams anyway?
If someone is making $4M streaming games, you can bet at some point it will become financially reasonable for someone to challenge this very idea. It may not happen this week, or this year, but it will happen. Someone just has to have enough of a stake in it. Maybe Peter Thiel gets bored …
There are ways to fight it with youtube, but that isn’t really the point. You said streaming wasn’t covered by fair use, but that isn’t accurate, as it has not been tested one way or the other.
It’s already the case that “fair use” is vastly weaker in practice/court than it is usually assumed. Lots of other things you probably think are fair use would not hold up if someone bothered to take it to court.
Probably it should be considered fair use to stream games, but it’s by no means clear that it is now.