Nintendo being anti-consumer again, Deletes all MAPS/STARS/MEDALS of Popular Speed Runner:

@aigis: And if you read what you just posted youd see it all depends on the portion you expose, etc. Exposing full original content in games, movies, music, etc violates the fair use law. Now if they only exposed small sample portions, it would fall under fair use. Replays, highlights, reviews, screenshots, etc all this falls under fair use and is protected by law.

@iandizion713: If you read it it states that lets plays are transformative and therefore should fall under fair use

@aigis: Again, thats opinion, not law. The law is clear. Nintendo is in the right, Lets Plays expose full portions and therefore violate the fair use law. Its clear as day mate. Read the law. Until the law is updated, Nintendo can do as they please.

And trust me, when the law is updated, your not gonna like what you see. It will all get regulated.

@iandizion713: The law says that it should be transformative, which it is. Its not a question of law right now (If that were the case, Nintendo would be suing streamers if they were in the right) its a questions of Googles dumb copyright systems and Nintendo's abuse of it.

@aigis: Again mate.

"Fair use[edit]

Additionally, the fair use defense to copyright infringement was codified for the first time in section 107 of the 1976 Act. Fair use was not a novel proposition in 1976, however, as federal courts had been using a common law form of the doctrine since the 1840s (an English version of fair use appeared much earlier). The Act codified this common law doctrine with little modification. Under section 107, the fair use of a copyrighted work is not copyright infringement, even if such use technically violates section 106. While fair use explicitly applies to use of copyrighted work for criticism, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research purposes, the defense is not limited to these areas. The Act gives four factors to be considered to determine whether a particular use is a fair use:

1. the purpose and character of the use (commercial or educational, transformative or reproductive);

2. the nature of the copyrighted work (fictional or factual, the degree of creativity);

3. the amount and substantiality of the portion of the original work used; and

4. the effect of the use upon the market (or potential market) for the original work.[5]

The Act was later amended to extend the fair use defense to unpublished works. [6]"

@aigis:

How are they going over the line? They are taking protective measures, essentially calling out the grey legal system YouTube has in play. It's an all or none deal. They are probably fine with some of the content, but it is not their responsibility to control YouTube conduct--thats on Google.

@Heirren: Its on Google to fix the system, its on Nintendo not to be a patent troll

@iandizion713: Campbell v. Acuff-Rose

@aigis:

Nintendo is just protecting themselves.

@Heirren: They go over protecting themselves though. Its literally a big corporation bullying independents

@aigis: Whats your statement? Im not sure what your getting at with this link.

@aigis:

No, it really isn't. You need to inform yourself on the situation .

@iandizion713: Its a supreme court ruling that a fully blow out parody song did not infringe on the copyright of the original song because of its transformative nature

I feel like you should though...

@aigis: What about it though? I can rule in their favor too. The remix of the song falls under this,

2. the nature of the copyrighted work (fictional or factual, the degree of creativity).

Now whats this got to do with

3. the amount and substantiality of the portion of the original work used.

@iandizion713: The ruling was that it was transformative enough to be fair use even though it takes the rhythms of the original to a degree where they would seem related

@aigis: True, which would fall under the degree of creativity and the portion used.

@iandizion713: So we agree transformative works fall under fair use?

@aigis: It depends on the degree of creativity and the amount and substantiality of the portion of the original work used. Im not sure whats so hard to understand.

Lets Plays expose the full original content, this is a clear violation of the fair use law. Until the law is changed, Nintendo is free to do as they please until the law deems otherwise.

Almost the same thing happened in the movie industry where they would commentary old movies and show them. They deemed it a clear violation of the fair use law and then forbid it. If Angry Joe wants to take Nintendo to court, tell him to bring it. He will just get further embarrassed.

@iandizion713: Its a matter of the degree in which you can substitute one for another and lets plays and games are not interchangeable, I dont get why thats so hard to understand

Damn, that's cold brah.

@aigis: Sue them mate, its clear your not following. Go get you a petition to take Nintendo to court over what you think they are doing. Good luck.

Nintendo isnt in the legal wrong because Google's system allows them to act morally wrong. Google needs to fix their system and Nintendo needs to calm down because they come off like -------- when they pull this kind of stuff. If Nintendo did sue an Angry Joe they would not be in the legal right though

@aigis:

I already explained the stance, which are laws pertaining to trademarks, copyrights, and IP.

@aigis: So take Google to court then. Lots of money in winning that court battle mate, i bet lawyers are lining up to take them on. Beat Google, holy crap, youd be rich for life. Every lawyers dream.

@iandizion713: You cant take google to court cause they have terms and conditions to post the site...

@Heirren: not really...

@aigis: O ok. Whelp, o well.

I find it funny the lengths some people will go to, to justify their image of an infallible corporation

You buying a movie and inviting a few friends to watch it at your house is in no way illegal. Broadcasting that movie over the internet and getting paid from ad revenue, viewer counts, subscriptions and donations is another thing all together

Don't act like all these people are doing is playing a game and having a good time. They are making money. Many of them are making a living. I follow 2 streamers on Twitch and I know they make pretty damn good money. I follow them but have never donated or subscribed. Both channels would do very well on their own without video games because they are great on camera. Both do plenty on their streams without showing gameplay. The two I'm referring to are Serious Gaming and Boogie2988, and both make more money than the average programmer, voice over actor or artist gets paid to make the games they stream. If the developers and publishers of the games shown are OK with them doing it, who am I to complain? But on that same note, if a dev or pub wants the videos removed because it's their work being shown I understand that too.

As for your "CONSERVATIVE" jab, I'm no conservative. Your "do conservative thing by giving less freedom" comment is an oxymoron though. Conservatives want to be able to do whatever they want with no restrictions. It's liberals that want the government to monitor what people see, eat, drink, drive etc. Both sides are out of their damn minds in their own ways. But this is a Video Game board so I will stay on topic.

Ok I just looked into the differences between Conservatives and Liberals in the U.S. vs Europe. While they are different and I can see the confusion. I'm not sure you don't have a fanatical lean though..... "Liberal means freedom" sounds about as level headed of a statement as what we hear from Trump supporters here. And here is another question. How does anyone have LESS freedom than they did decades before? (besides minorities and women of course) Government across the board has more control in our everyday lives than they did before. That in fact means you have LESS freedom than you did before. You pay more taxes, there are more regulations and fines, you have to have health insurance etc. So in a way "Conservatism" and "Tradition" means MORE freedom if you are a white male.

As for your "There is no criminal law in Europe like you put it" statement. There sure as hell is but I'm not gonna waste my time with this anymore. If you don't know politics and common law then that's not my problem and it's not up to me to provide you that information. In my examples you would be help in Breach of Copyright. There are tons of recent cases all over Europe you can read up on. I'm gonna go play some Trackmania Turbo instead.

... The majority of developers and publishers in the industry are anti-consumer if you look how they treat their customers to basically any other industry out there.. This is the only industry in which the game maker can be as deceptive as possible, to out right lie to the consumer, to sell their product.. Most other industries when something like that happens there is massive recalls, investigations, instant refunds etc etc.. Meanwhile this is a industry where something like Alien Colonial Marines happens, with absolutely no real recourse left for the customer outside of warning others...

Man, the NX had better be more powerful than the PS4 at this point because if not, I will go full XBONE haterade levels on it and on Nintendo themselves.

@Shewgenja: I think you have nothing to fear. The Wii U is not that far off. And now that Xbox One and PS4 are releasing weaker conservative consoles, Wii Us next upgrade should be not only more powerful then PS4, but way faster, ergonomic, and sport a highly reduced carbon footprint.

Is this a self entitlement thread? If they don't own the property then I have no sympathy.

Unfortunately, there are also many rumors stating that it's more akin to the XBox in power. I want to be optimistic though. Rumors are rumors.

@Shewgenja: True, and since Wii U is already so close to Xbox One, i find the rumors to be laughable almost.