Mergers, Acquisitions and Takeovers of companies. "Are you getting sick of them? Your take?"
#32 Posted 18 May 2014 - 07:47 PM
Protected by Viper, on 18 May 2014 - 07:26 PM, said:
no jew references?
tsk.
#33 Posted 18 May 2014 - 07:52 PM
#35 Posted 18 May 2014 - 08:56 PM
#36 Posted 18 May 2014 - 09:09 PM
#38 Posted 18 May 2014 - 09:50 PM
MusicallyInspired, on 18 May 2014 - 09:09 PM, said:
I never understood where this idea comes from, no copyright flag has ever damaged any review I have done... Oh, wait, that's right, I refuse to earn ad revenue on principal, but filthy capitalists like AngryJoe can't make an honest dollar so they piss and moan on camera when their little scheme collapses, even earning money off of people dying, gotta get every last cent.
I should add that strangely, very little of anything I have done has ever had a copyright claim against it. Music gets picked up and I'm fine with the label earning money, it's their track and I used it without permission, that seems fair. One thing that did happen is Second Reality got flagged as a techno song that came out 5 years after the demo, I disputed the claim by merely quoting the demo's license (Which states you must not earn money from the distribution of the demo) and it disappeared. So whilst I cannot speak for others, for me the system works.
I hope Google DO buy Twitch, because I can neither watch or stream to Twitch since some update they did last year, we don't all have fiber optic you know! YouTube's streaming, on the other hand, works very well and doesn't shut down just because your connection cannot achieve the bit rate their server wants.
I'm not saying that Google doesn't come without it's own problems however.
This post has been edited by High Treason: 18 May 2014 - 09:51 PM
#39 Posted 18 May 2014 - 10:00 PM
Though I suspect this may be a scheme from YouTube to fuck up copyright holders. "You want us to shut down content under unreasonable copyright violation claims? Let's see how it feels when every single living fans of your get a message saying you raped them."
#40 Posted 18 May 2014 - 10:23 PM
If you are going to earn money from YouTube, it should be with completely original content AND it should be a side thing that you do as well as a real job, anyone and everyone that tries to live from YouTube revenue has and will fail and deserves to fail because they are stupid, the internet is simply too fickle and volatile to be relied upon in this manner.
This post has been edited by High Treason: 18 May 2014 - 10:25 PM
#41 Posted 18 May 2014 - 10:47 PM
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 10:23 PM, said:
Wrong, you do have the legal right.
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 10:23 PM, said:
Please list one work with "completely original content".
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 10:23 PM, said:
Countless people make their living this way. And you should be more carefull about what you write before calling other stupid.
This post has been edited by Fox: 18 May 2014 - 10:47 PM
#42 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:02 PM
Fox, on 18 May 2014 - 10:47 PM, said:
No, if you read the license for most music, films and games you would find a notice stating unauthorized reproduction is prohibited. YouTube's licenses also state that you should not use copyrighted works to which you do not have permission and it reminds you on the upload page.
I was going to sit here and quote UK copyright law (Most other countries are similar, notably the USA) but I'd just recommend reading this and this.
Quote
You are taking it out of context. Fine, Murun Buchstansangur is probably the best I can think of. All ideas come from somewhere but you shouldn't just outright use other people's work and expect to get rich for it, it'd be like you trying to earn money from Duke 64.
Quote
And countless more have been ruined this way. Careful? I'm very close to doing it again. Sorry man, looks like we'll have to agree to disagree because I'm not changing my mind and you're clearly stuck in your delusions.
#43 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:16 PM
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:
Quote
Under fair use rules, it may be possible to use quotations or excerpts, where the work has been made available to the public, (i.e. published). Provided that:
The use is deemed acceptable under the terms of fair dealing.
That the quoted material is justified, and no more than is necessary is included.
That the source of the quoted material is mentioned, along with the name of the author.
http://www.copyright..._work_of_others
Quote
[...]
Criticism or review
Quoting parts of a work for the purpose of criticism or review is permitted provided that:
The work has been made available to the public.
The source of the material is acknowledged.
The material quoted must be accompanied by some actual discussion or assessment (to warrant the criticism or review classification).
The amount of the material quoted is no more than is necessary for the purpose of the review.
#44 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:26 PM
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:
When you record a game play, it is you playing it. How could this possibly be a copyright infringement?
To the best of my knowledge, the only people complaining about it, are those developers who made shitty games, and do not wish their game to be seen in action, let alone be ridiculed by the critics.
#45 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:29 PM
If I review a game and include music or some media that has nothing to do with the review I am still in violation of the law, too many people simply get greedy and think they can do whatever the hell they want. Again, AngryJoe and others would often include music which was not the object of the review and they had no permissions to use it.
Also, at the end of the day, YouTube is a private website, so they are free to do whatever they please with it. There are even a lot of rules I don't agree with myself, but they are there and you can't expect nothing to happen if you break them.
@Hank; So if I record a movie, it's me watching it so this automatically makes it OK? Though, yes, both parties are indeed to blame and many copyright holders abuse their power and act butthurt even if you do use their work in a way that is permitted. In my case I got chased up by the owners of Existenz and the remake of Oldboy which I looked at negatively, my video was subsequently blocked in almost every country.
This post has been edited by High Treason: 18 May 2014 - 11:32 PM
#46 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:33 PM
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:29 PM, said:
Not the same. The movie uploaded is a copy of the DVD, the game play is not a copy of the game only a record of the game play.
#47 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:36 PM
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:
They hold no power.
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:
You was going to quote it, but then you realized that you couldn't because you haven't read it.
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:
Can't you see the difference? Making a review video is different from uploading the entire fucking game.
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:
Just like any "real" job.
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:
I have exposed the facts while you have not provided any proper argument, so I don't think I am the delusional here.
This post has been edited by Fox: 18 May 2014 - 11:40 PM
#48 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:38 PM
@Fox; I could sit here and find a million things wrong with what you have just written, but as I said before... Screw it, I give up, whatever, have a nice day.
-----
Anyway, mergers and acquisitions... Well, I'm sure Apple and Samsung have probably been buying up a tonne of patents again so they can keep up their patent wars.
This post has been edited by High Treason: 18 May 2014 - 11:41 PM
#49 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:41 PM
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:29 PM, said:
True, but nobody questioned YouTube having the power to do so. You claimed that users don't have the [legal] right to make reviews.
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:29 PM, said:
Recording a whole movie is not fair use, showing pieces of it is. Recording a game (or softwares in general) in use is fair use, uploading a working copy of it is not.
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:38 PM, said:
Saying that there is something wrong with my post is not an argument.
And you are not the only one reading this thread.
This post has been edited by Fox: 18 May 2014 - 11:44 PM
#50 Posted 18 May 2014 - 11:47 PM
Fox, on 18 May 2014 - 11:41 PM, said:
1; This works both ways
2;
High Treason, on 18 May 2014 - 11:38 PM, said:
#52 Posted 19 May 2014 - 04:59 AM
blame youtube for being strict so nobody comes after them with frivolous lawsuits and shuts them down - makes more sense than moving the videos to one of the other bazillion media sites
#53 Posted 19 May 2014 - 06:40 AM
The thing with a lot of these review guys, is that you don't really need any special education at all to get into it. If I was more in the mood, I'd probably go into some fancy economics ramble, except my economics lecturer was shit and I haven't done the subject for 2 years. I recall something about market saturation and how it isn't good to be providing a service which you don't have a unique advantage in.
#54 Posted 19 May 2014 - 07:58 AM
Mickey C, on 19 May 2014 - 06:40 AM, said:
life is full of risks.
will this old condom hold?
is that hooker really a dude?
if i eat around the green sections of this lunchmeat, will i get sick?
Mickey C, on 19 May 2014 - 06:40 AM, said:
porn
#55 Posted 19 May 2014 - 11:37 AM
This is especially evil when the creator goes through a lot of trouble with props, green screens, post visual fx, custom sound and music creation, and hours and hours of editing for the purpose of entertainment. That's THEIR work. You're watching the video for THEIR work and THEIR unique personality not for the 10-second trailer clips. They should be paid for their hard work. It's completely unethical.
This post has been edited by MusicallyInspired: 19 May 2014 - 11:39 AM
#56 Posted 19 May 2014 - 01:26 PM
#57 Posted 19 May 2014 - 02:04 PM
I would not post many or any rules, I would just shut down videos based on whatever I wanted. That way I could use "Judgement" rather than dealing with a bazillion complaints about what is or is not a rule violation. That would be awesome. (To me)
"The only rule of MrBlackCatTube is that I decide the rules and when they will be enforced. The rules are guaranteed to change at any time... or not... see how it works? If you are not comfortable with the Rule or lack of rules please GTHO!"
I realize this is not exactly the issue that was discussed, but still... I understand that it is their site and they are not bound to follow even their own posted rules if they so choose, and I have no issue with that. To pretend that having a non-original show on YouTube is a real job (like Game Reviews) is pretty much beyond reason. I think they should charge the poster for YouTube and then deduct from said charge down to $0 maybe, but revenue? No way.
I am still waiting for the majority of F'n morons to get over the concept of "Free" on the internet anyway... free is the most expensive, most damaging concept I have ever witnessed occur. Things like mobile games and applications as well as sites like YouTube, free-to-play games and on-Line services and communities like Playstation Home etc. They have to make money some how, and the majority of this is going to be advertisements which the vast majority do not want to deal with. Much like Healthcare in the US... Free is going to be the most expensive healthcare ever seen.
/rant off
MrBlackCat
This post has been edited by MrBlackCat: 19 May 2014 - 02:06 PM
#58 Posted 19 May 2014 - 04:29 PM
There's also the argument that these people are providing an extremely valuable service by reviewing said games. It's not just the entertainment but the information. A lot of these people have varying opinions and when compared they give you a good objective view of what the game's all about. Then there's some reviewers who hold similar opinions to your own and you can trust their review as being competent and accurate to your own tastes. Of course nothing is like playing it yourself, but you at least know what to expect before making up your own mind. Copyright holders would seek to destroy this valuable source of information so that people have no way of knowing what a game's all about short of watching their trailers, reading (unreliable) reviews on gaming websites like IGN, and their own (lying) mouths (Gearbox, for instance).
I know there are some people out there who just play a game and expect to be paid for it, I'm not talking about those people. I'm not talking about laziness. I'm talking about the people who put in the hard work that everyone else does in the world to earn their keep.
And don't even get me started on universal healthcare (I'm Canadian)...
#59 Posted 19 May 2014 - 05:15 PM
MusicallyInspired, on 19 May 2014 - 04:29 PM, said:
I'm sorry.
sorry 'boot the health care too.
..."you have cancer and maybe four months to live. Not to worry though, we put in a referral for a life saving treatment. Should get approved in six to eight months."
This post has been edited by Forge: 19 May 2014 - 05:22 PM