How ANYONE can monetize gameplay WITHOUT a network: A lesson in Fair Use

[MarkRodriguez2012]

The only issue is the gamer didn't make the game, so and so made it. And if they decide they don't want their game monetized and said gamer does it anyway, I'm afraid the courts will still rule in favor of the so and so company.

 

[TheLightSkinSmurf]

Fair use is so tricky tho and subjective. I want to start putting short clips in my videos again. It makes the video better when you can show the audience exactly what you're talking about. However, idk if I wanna risk getting a copyright strike.

 

[MarkRodriguez2012]

Fair use is so tricky tho and subjective. I want to start putting short clips in my videos again. It makes the video better when you can show the audience exactly what you're talking about. However, idk if I wanna risk getting a copyright strike.

Never worth the risk unless you wanna wait 6 months for those strikes to disappear.

 

[unknown_user00005]

If that were true then YouTube wouldn't be filled with commentary and channels with thousands of subs who make a killing doing these vids.

These are partnered channels clearly? Find me one large gaming channel that is linked to AdSense, wait.. Don't waste your time you won't find one!

As it stands the footage of a game is a very complicated area. The game is made by the developer but the footage is shot by the user.

No, recording a video game is not "footage" by any stretch of definition.. I laughed when I read this!

Regardless of that though, the footage in most cases is considered fair use because of a number of reasons... And I think you'll find that the judge would rule in favor of the user.

This is complete hearsay, "in most cases" .. Have you ever studied fair use? Can you quote ONE fair use case that applies to video footage? Where are you getting your information for your "in most cases" argument? I'm going to suggest you are making it up!

Factually nothing is being copied, stolen or otherwise infringed upon. A game is by definition an interactive experience. By placing it on YouTube the user does not offer that experience for free. He does not offer some alternative to buying and playing the game yourself. If anything, the user is promoting the game. And plenty of game developers realize this all to well, which is why you hardly see any action taken against gamer channels.

We're not talking about the emotional end of things and personal decisions here, that's my point.
You have ZERO experience in this field, you are unqualified to make these assumptions.
Your moral theories have no place in legal discussion.

Also, the legal definition of "video game" is not an "interactive experience" that is YOUR definition.
A video game is a tangible asset that can be patented, trademarked, or copyrighted.

It's like buying a t-shirt and putting a picture of it on Facebook. The design may be copyrighted, but the people looking at the picture can't actually wear the shirt. They may however decide they want the shirt for themselves.

Are you seriously comparing uploading a picture of a tshirt to facebook with copyright infringement?
We are talking about totally different situations and completely different legislation regarding TRADEMARKS. You are clueless!

You learn something new everyday, eh?

PLEASE DO NOT POST YOUR TOUCHY-FEELY OPINIONS ON LEGAL MATTERS, YOU ONLY HARM PEOPLE BY GIVING THEM FALSE INFORMATION.[DOUBLEPOST=1373065558,1373065315][/DOUBLEPOST]Michael I can't believe this thread is stickied.. Blows my mind!

Title states:
"How ANYONE can monetize gameplay WITHOUT a network: A lesson in Fair Use"

AdSense doesn't allow any gameplay footage to be monetized without explicit written permission.. This thread should be sent to the bin. You'll have flammy back here in 3 months asking "How to get rid of copyright strikes" and how to get big on YouTube without jacking search traffic off a copyrighted title.

 

[MarkRodriguez2012]

It's a touchy subject and pretty sucky so many can get away with it while us smaller channels can't. Even networks don't help if the companies put their foot down like sega did recently. Tomorrow the developer of the new deadpool game might suddenly wake up and decide he doesn't want his game monetized and start pressuring YouTube to throw out copyright strikes left and right to anyone that made a vid do far.

I don't know. I just find it as an annoyance really. All I really want is to have a game review show lol.

 

[TigerXtrm]

These are partnered channels clearly? Find me one large gaming channel that is linked to AdSense, wait.. Don't waste your time you won't find one!

Partnership uses Adsense just like any other monetized channel and they are subject to the exact same rules as everyone else. Being with a network doesn't suddenly change the rules for you.

No, recording a video game is not "footage" by any stretch of definition.. I laughed when I read this!

Really? What would you call it?

This is complete hearsay, "in most cases" .. Have you ever studied fair use? Can you quote ONE fair use case that applies to video footage? Where are you getting your information for your "in most cases" argument? I'm going to suggest you are making it up!

I have studied Fair Use quite a bit, in fact. Because it is important for the stuff I do on Youtube. I was referring to the general definition of fair use. This site in particular outlines the rules pretty clearly and makes it easy to apply it to video footage. Based on what I know, I think that game footage with commentary is considered fair use. Whether or not a judge will agree I will never know, because not a single Youtuber has ever been taken to court over this exact thing. The only thing we know right now is that, as described by the law, gaming footage in most cases is inclined to be fair use until proven otherwise.

We're not talking about the emotional end of things and personal decisions here, that's my point.
You have ZERO experience in this field, you are unqualified to make these assumptions.
Your moral theories have no place in legal discussion.

And of course you are a seasoned lawyer who deals with high end copyright cases on a daily basis?

Also, the legal definition of "video game" is not an "interactive experience" that is YOUR definition.
A video game is a tangible asset that can be patented, trademarked, or copyrighted.

If you know as much about copyright as you say you do, you'd know that just because something is copyrighted doesn't mean you get 100% say in what can be done with the asset. Fair use is one of those exceptions where the copyright holder can object all they want, but can ultimately not prevent other people from using their asset in one way or another.

You are clueless!

You are arrogant. If you know so much about this then explain to us in detail why this sort of footage would not be considered fair use and why Youtube is filled with footage that is supposedly not only against YouTube's TOS but also against the TOS of every game developer known to man AND apparently against the law? You keep screaming your arrogant little head off about us being wrong without telling us why you are supposedly right.

PLEASE DO NOT POST YOUR TOUCHY-FEELY OPINIONS ON LEGAL MATTERS, YOU ONLY HARM PEOPLE BY GIVING THEM FALSE INFORMATION.

Then give us the right information...

 

[MarkRodriguez2012]

The main issue is YouTube's main rule. Don't upload what you don't own. But that sucks to take literally because then the only thing we'd be allowed to upload would be cat videos...

 

[TheLightSkinSmurf]

The main issue is YouTube's main rule. Don't upload what you don't own. But that sucks to take literally because then the only thing we'd be allowed to upload would be cat videos...

Lol I know right.

 

[TigerXtrm]

The main issue is YouTube's main rule. Don't upload what you don't own. But that sucks to take literally because then the only thing we'd be allowed to upload would be cat videos...

Even that can be stretched to great lengths. If I legally bought the game, I own the game (or at least I own a license for the game). If I play the game and record it, the recording of the game is mine, no-one else's. The commentary is mine, no-one else's. Fair use material IS allowed on YouTube. The 'don't upload what you don't own' rule is more a simple guideline, meant for the masses and general public. The actual legal document that is YouTube's TOS allows fair use footage.

The actual problem is that there is no baseline. If one YouTuber would contest a copyright claim on one of their videos and fight his way past all the court threats to bring this issue in front of a judge, I honestly believe that given all the Fair Use variables that apply to game footage, the judge would rule the footage as Fair Use. This would set a precedent for every single commented gaming video on YouTube, regardless of developer TOS.

However this does bring another issue into the light though. Because while I believe the judge would mark the footage as Fair Use, I also think he would make a side note that people are not allowed to turn a profit on it because they don't actually hold the intellectual property. As it stands right now, being able to make money on game footage is a privilege game developers give us. And some take it away, like 2K claiming all BioShock Infinite videos after the game was released (which is smart on their part, because it means a lot of extra income in the first few months while the hype is active). Others, like Sega, go way overboard and start throwing copyright claims everywhere that no-one has the resources to contest.

 

[MarkRodriguez2012]

The main thing is we might own the game, but we don't own the liscense, the characters, the logo, etc. that's what happened when Capcom released sf x Tekken with on disc Dlc that hackers found. The main argument was that yes you own the disk but not the liscense.

I really hate to say this since it makes me look like a hypocritical since I do a game review where obviously the main draw are the games we review... But we don't own the games and are basically making money off someone else's work. Like that one guy that makes money off of others viral videos and just adding his commentary to it.

That's why the Nintendo claim thing doesn't p**s me off. Might suck for you guys but they have every right to do it. It's THEIR property not ours.