Angry Joe deletes Mario Party 10 video due to YouTube policy

[XtremelyBaneful]

The details are not clear to me, but it seems as though nintendo did not straight up force him to delete it but he decide to do it himself, more of a "i'm forced to do this because of what's happening" type of deal.

http://www.polygon.com/2015/4/4/8344341/angry-joe-nintendo-takedown-mario-party

 

[Sithborg]

He knows the deal with the Nintendo program. Yet, he went ahead anyway. This seems merely a way to keep up the controversy of Nintendo's youtube program. Agree or disagree with the program, I don't think anyone should feel sorry for someone who knew what was going to happen.

 

[Destructus86]

Nintendo is idiotic.
I'm glad he's standing up to them.

 

[Tron Bonne]

What actually happened is that Nintendo flagged the video, so therefore part of the ad revenue generated from the video would go to them (40% goes to Nintendo, 60% to the YouTuber in question).

But as Sith said, this is something that's been known for a long time. I'm not sure why this Angry Joe thought he'd be the exception to this rule for some reason, unless he was just trying to make some kind of statement, but this was a pretty poor way to go about it.

 

[Sithborg]

Making a statement and/or trying to get some attention/clicks.

 

[Matt Mortem]

Really getting tired of Youtuber's rage over Nintendo's video policy. It's kinda dumb, sure, but these guys are pissed because they don't get more money for posting videos of them playing video games? Don't like it, don't post Nintendo stuff. In the end it's nothing to get pissed over. That you make any money for simply playing games and posting videos about it is a ****ing miracle.

 

[Loden Greatstorm]

Eh, rules are rules.

Really getting tired of Youtuber's rage over Nintendo's video policy. It's kinda dumb, sure, but these guys are pissed because they don't get more money for posting videos of them playing video games? Don't like it, don't post Nintendo stuff. In the end it's nothing to get pissed over. That you make any money for simply playing games and posting videos about it is a ****ing miracle.

Could not agree more!

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Making a statement and/or trying to get some attention/clicks.

he doesn't have to try to get attention/clicks, he's got over a million subscribers and all of his reviews get over a million views.

Really getting tired of Youtuber's rage over Nintendo's video policy. It's kinda dumb, sure, but these guys are pissed because they don't get more money for posting videos of them playing video games? Don't like it, don't post Nintendo stuff. In the end it's nothing to get pissed over. That you make any money for simply playing games and posting videos about it is a ****ing miracle.

i don't think it's just about receiving more money, I heard to join the program you also have to delete any non-nintendo material already on your channel, which is pretty stupid.

 

[Tron Bonne]

i don't think it's just about receiving more money, I heard to join the program you also have to delete any non-nintendo material already on your channel, which is pretty stupid.

I think this only applies if you're wanting to get 100% of the ad revenue stream. If you don't have a dedicated Nintendo stream, you are still free to post Nintendo videos, but Nintendo will flag them, which equates to them taking a 40% cut of that ad revenue.

I'm not 100% certain of this, but this is how it's been explained to me. I think this Angry Joe guys issue was that Nintendo wasn't letting him have the entire ad revenue stream, like most other companies do with these types of videos. That's why he says in the original tweet, "enjoy the ad money" or something like that.

Now, I understand having issues with that policy, since most companies do not do anything similar. The thing is, though, this has been a known policy for months. As an (apparent) well known YouTuber, it's very unlikely that he didn't know this. So, I'm assuming this is some type of agenda to put attention on that. Personally, I think it's a rather childish one, but I guess people pay more attention to tantrums than if he'd written a blog discussing why he's against the policy.

 

[Sithborg]

I would be shocked if Sony/Microsoft didn't have some sort of plan in the wings once the whole streaming income hits a critical mass. So, for once, Nintendo is ahead of the competition...

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I think this only applies if you're wanting to get 100% of the ad revenue stream. If you don't have a dedicated Nintendo stream, you are still free to post Nintendo videos, but Nintendo will flag them, which equates to them taking a 40% cut of that ad revenue.

I'm not 100% certain of this, but this is how it's been explained to me. I think this Angry Joe guys issue was that Nintendo wasn't letting him have the entire ad revenue stream, like most other companies do with these types of videos. That's why he says in the original tweet, "enjoy the ad money" or something like that.

Now, I understand having issues with that policy, since most companies do not do anything similar. The thing is, though, this has been a known policy for months. As an (apparent) well known YouTuber, it's very unlikely that he didn't know this. So, I'm assuming this is some type of agenda to put attention on that. Personally, I think it's a rather childish one, but I guess people pay more attention to tantrums than if he'd written a blog discussing why he's against the policy.

but youtubers never get 100% of the ad revenue system. it's always a 50% split with youtube themselves, and the rest they keep. the thing with nintendo is that they take another 40% from the 50% you were left with. and apparently this is a thing for the 70% deal


and yeah, I guess it's strange that angry joe did not see this coming but i also don't blame him for wanting to put on a rant video about it. i mean, none of this personally affects me but I can understand a youtuber and a big fan of nintendo getting pissed off about this. if they're all saying similar things then it's telling of how nintendo's practices while legally appropriate isn't exactly fair.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Well, yeah, I assume it was implied in my statement that YouTube got their cut. I didn't feel I needed to specify I was taking about the revenue going to the YouTuber.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Well, yeah, I assume it was implied in my statement that YouTube got their cut. I didn't feel I needed to specify I was taking about the revenue going to the YouTuber.

it wasn't said in the thread so i didn't know you meant that

 

[Tron Bonne]

Yeah, I can see how I wasn't clear, so my bad.

But eh, in the end, I've got no horse in this one anyway. I don't follow YouTubers, and none of this has much concern to me.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I would be shocked if Sony/Microsoft didn't have some sort of plan in the wings once the whole streaming income hits a critical mass. So, for once, Nintendo is ahead of the competition...

well if they did, it would've happened by now. their hardware is selling fine, especially sony. and sony's best game's got a full playthrough on the biggest youtube channel. and every single video of the playthrough has over a million views.

so needless to say, mS and sony are fine with the way youtubers make videos with their IPs' footage.

 

[Soapy]

Nintendo is being ******ed as usual.

However, Angry Joe is also being somewhat ******ed.

On one hand I feel for YouTubers having to deal with YouTube's draconian copyright claim system and policies. It seems really unfair if you're making a living doing this, that YouTube can take all of that away from you just because of a a couple of mistakes (on your end OR their end by the way).

On the other hand, if you're trying to make a career out of doing this, then that means that you should probably behave in a professional manner. Part of that would entail respecting the rules, laws, and customs of those you do business with. If you don't like the way YouTube handles things, then there's no reason why you couldn't make videos on Vimeo or Daily Motion instead, or better yet, make your own website where you make the rules and can host whatever videos you want.

Still though, Nintendo and YouTube and giant corporate entities flexing their muscles and Angry Joe is just a dude trying to make some scratch doing what he loves. Back whoever you want in this argument, but the right choice seems pretty clear to me.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Nintendo is being ******ed as usual.

However, Angry Joe is also being somewhat ******ed.

On one hand I feel for YouTubers having to deal with YouTube's draconian copyright claim system and policies. It seems really unfair if you're making a living doing this, that YouTube can take all of that away from you just because of a a couple of mistakes (on your end OR their end by the way).

On the other hand, if you're trying to make a career out of doing this, then that means that you should probably behave in a professional manner. Part of that would entail respecting the rules, laws, and customs of those you do business with. If you don't like the way YouTube handles things, then there's no reason why you couldn't make videos on Vimeo or Daily Motion instead, or better yet, make your own website where you make the rules and can host whatever videos you want.

Still though, Nintendo and YouTube and giant corporate entities flexing their muscles and Angry Joe is just a dude trying to make some scratch doing what he loves. Back whoever you want in this argument, but the right choice seems pretty clear to me.

I agree, I think...

The facts of the matter are,

-youtubers, high profile or everyman are annoyed with nintendo's policies with game footage. and rightfully so, considering the rest of the conglomerates' policies even though nintendo can do this.

-nintendo has had these dumbass policies for a while, but angry joe makes a video about it almost as if he did not see such a thing coming. so one could argue he could be doing this for attention - but the thing is he already gets a lot of it, he doesn't have to try. he's got over a million subscribers and his reviews get millions of views.

-people are calling angry joe out on his reasoning for being angry about this. "i spent $900 on nintendo stuff, I guess that wasn't enough" I don't think his point was entitlement due to purchasing the merchandise, but more so that he bought it, nintendo got his money and there's better ways to handle this youtube dilemma, coz the way its working is making nintendo look really hard ass.

 

[ares834]

Yeah, Nintendo's policy is frankly ridiculous.

 

[Sithborg]

MST3K had to license the movies they showed. Are Let's Plays really that different?

 

[hippie_hunter]

As much as I disagree with Nintendo's policy, Angry Joe is just handling this the worst way possible IMO. He takes the correct position but loses all sympathy from me in the process.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

MST3K had to license the movies they showed. Are Let's Plays really that different?

Yes, yes they are. More importantly, it isn't just Let's Plays.

 

[Matt Mortem]

Aren't these Youtubers wanting to profit off of the intellectual property of other companies without any licensing or permissions? In any other medium if you want to use copyrighted materials for any commercial use you have to license or get permission, right? Don't know why Youtubers think they're exempt from this. If you're making money off the videos its a commercial venture, as I understand it. The copyright holder can enforce their copyright as they see fit.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

All they are doing is playing the game. That is what they are doing. Playing the game. In some cases, reviewing it. They aren't releasing the game to play. All this has ever been is free advertisement.

 

[Matt Mortem]

All they are doing is playing the game. That is what they are doing. Playing the game. In some cases, reviewing it. They aren't releasing the game to play. All this has ever been is free advertisement.

It's not really free advertising though. Sure, they pick and choose what games to play and companies don't come to them (usually) and tell them to play certain games, but in the end the youtubers get a chunk of the advertising revenue generated through the site. It's not an innocent "Oh I just posted a video of my friends and I playing a game." Many of the Youtubers most outraged by this are the ones that run their channel like a business. Pewdiepie, Angry Joe, Boogie 2988 and many others run their page like a brand because that's what it is. Nintendo just wants to protect and maintain control over their IP's and any ad revenue they take in. Is it dickish? Sure, but Nintendo is a business first and foremost and they want to protect their brand and revenue as much as the Youtubers do. Don't like it, don't play ball.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It's not really free advertising though. Sure, they pick and choose what games to play and companies don't come to them (usually) and tell them to play certain games, but in the end the youtubers get a chunk of the advertising revenue generated through the site. It's not an innocent "Oh I just posted a video of my friends and I playing a game." Many of the Youtubers most outraged by this are the ones that run their channel like a business. Pewdiepie, Angry Joe, Boogie 2988 and many others run their page like a brand because that's what it is. Nintendo just wants to protect and maintain control over their IP's and any ad revenue they take in. Is it dickish? Sure, but Nintendo is a business first and foremost and they want to protect their brand and revenue as much as the Youtubers do. Don't like it, don't play ball.

How are they losing control over their IPs through Let's Plays? They have been around for years now. What threat have they shown to their IPs? Are we going to start blocking unboxing videos now for fear of IP infringement?

Nintendo is the one who loses here. They learned nothing from what Sony and Microsoft did at the start of this generation. Being anti consumer is never a good idea.