YouTube Copyright Policy Threatens Game Critics' Livelihood?

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If I understand this correctly, people that have been making money off YouTube videos are mad that recent changes to the company's copyright policy is hindering their ability to make money. Well, here's an easy solution...buy your own servers, host your own content, sell your own ads and let your lawyers deal with all the copyright claims. Seriously, If you make a living hanging on the YouTube tit, don't get mad when the milk dries up.

Vargas, who has 1.1 million subscribers and more than 400 videos on the service, fulminated about YouTube, video game publishers and other copyright holders in an 18-minute rant (above), saying YouTube's recent crackdown threatens the livelihood he built from nothing back in 2009.
Click to expand...
 
I'm not saying YouTube is right or wrong, I am simply saying that if these guys don't like it....do as I suggested: Buy your own servers, host your own content, sell your own ads and let your lawyers deal with all the copyright claims. PROBLEM SOLVED, no more interference from YouTube.
 
+1. It's hard to complain when you are making money off of a free service. And trying makes you seem, well, a little silly.
 
Down host your shit in the US. Problem solved and american lawyers can kiss your ass.

To be honest, Google is going full retard. Fuck them and their "free" services.
 
Modred189 said:
+1. It's hard to complain when you are making money off of a free service. And trying makes you seem, well, a little silly.
Click to expand...

Yeah because having a contract with Google in which you supply content and they pay you for it is silly.

Overall I don't think this is going to effect YouTube much, but the reviewers and let's play people need to find a better place to host their videos if YouTube wants to let companies abuse the content I'd system
 
The stupidity of companies hating free advertising and exposure is truly amazing
 
Headpunter said:
Yeah because having a contract with Google in which you supply content and they pay you for it is silly.
Click to expand...

It is sorta silly to do that when their automated content analysis system can shut down your content without warning or recourse and you being paid is also invalidated by proxy.
 
Steve said:
I'm not saying YouTube is right or wrong, I am simply saying that if these guys don't like it....do as I suggested: Buy your own servers, host your own content, sell your own ads and let your lawyers deal with all the copyright claims. PROBLEM SOLVED, no more interference from YouTube.
Click to expand...
Which is the whole point, they know they can't do this. Its like telling truck drivers that if they don't like idiotic draconian laws that all they need to do is go to their own island, pave their own roads, populate it with people, and then buy their own trucks to drive around.

The biggest problem with telling these guys to just go somewhere else is that Youtube's format isn't what matters, anyone can create that and better, but the population of users that "live" on Youtube. You have to supply your content to the herd, and Google purchased that herd and then repeatedly milked them for all they were worth with update after update that harm the user experience. Again the problem is, who wants to be the first cattle to wander off on their own? Its a chicken and egg problem and Google knows it.

And its not like these content providers are using some free service for which Google gets nothing, they are the creators of content that make Google money. And considering how much money Google makes, I would say that they aren't very well compensated for their time as it is.
 
Ducman69 said:
Which is the whole point, they know they can't do this. Its like telling truck drivers that if they don't like idiotic draconian laws that all they need to do is go to their own island, pave their own roads, populate it with people, and then buy their own trucks to drive around.
Click to expand...


No, it's exactly like a I said. Don't like YouTube...don't use YouTube. Period.

Got a million followers? Post a link to your new site and call it good. Buy your own hardware, host your own content, and fend for yourself.

That's exactly how it's done. Problem solved.
 
Steve said:
No, it's exactly like a I said. Don't like YouTube...don't use YouTube. Period.

Got a million followers? Post a link to your new site and call it good. Buy your own hardware, host your own content, and fend for yourself.

That's exactly how it's done. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. They never agreed to this shit. Google benefits from them as much as these guys benefit from the service. It'll bite them soon enough. You'll see.
 
Steve said:
Got a million followers? Post a link to your new site and call it good. Buy your own hardware, host your own content, and fend for yourself.
Click to expand...
Oh of course, they are going to raise all this capital overnight, and develop the know-how to setup a youtube competitor.

And their entire million followers are going to follow them, leave youtube that manages all the other subscriptions they have, and have those users add a new shortcut on their iPad desktop and the like all just for one person. Nope! What would happen is that he'd lose probably all but 10% max that would be willing to give up the youtube community to just join that one person because that one subscription means so much to them.

Often these are the people that BUILT the Youtube that users care about. They care about the content, not the laggy servers that keep interrupting and buffering your video regardless of how fast your connection is and bombardment of ads and forced use of Google+ commenting system.

Fact is, Youtube was great, Google bought that greatness and has crapped on it. Sadly, if it finally reaches the tipping point where we have a mass exodus of users, Google will just end up buying that start-up too.
 
We'll see. If YouTube is wrong then the service'll migrate elsewhere and if there's no legal issue it'll just work.

Copyright claims and deals are getting a bit weird.. try selling Time Warner DVD releases on Amazon if you don't believe me. I gotta say.. I can understand why YouTube would just throw in the towel, say screw it, and just blanket stop hosting the content just to make the pain stop.
 
Do you guys remember what happened to Stage6? Despite their content, they did something amazing with technology back in 2006. Now it's 2013 and we've got G+tube. Just saying.
 
Steve said:
I'm not saying YouTube is right or wrong, I am simply saying that if these guys don't like it....do as I suggested: Buy your own servers, host your own content, sell your own ads and let your lawyers deal with all the copyright claims. PROBLEM SOLVED, no more interference from YouTube.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the easies thing for the average person to bootstrap. Good idea.
 
Steve said:
No, it's exactly like a I said. Don't like YouTube...don't use YouTube. Period.

Got a million followers? Post a link to your new site and call it good. Buy your own hardware, host your own content, and fend for yourself.

That's exactly how it's done. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

tumblr_m09ovkV8901r3jsrko1_400.jpg
 
Don't care. I use YouTube for movie trailers and other official, professionally produced content. An exodus of these asshats who sit in their pajamas and think their bedroom makes for a good backdrop is a good thing.
 
Ducman69 said:
The biggest problem with telling these guys to just go somewhere else is that Youtube's format isn't what matters, anyone can create that and better, but the population of users that "live" on Youtube. You have to supply your content to the herd, and Google purchased that herd and then repeatedly milked them for all they were worth with update after update that harm the user experience. Again the problem is, who wants to be the first cattle to wander off on their own? Its a chicken and egg problem and Google knows it.
Click to expand...
It's a word of mouth problem. You'd be surprised how many people I follow on YouTube that I've found just by looking at other videos. Nowadays if I find something I like, I tend to subscribe to Facebook and twitter to watch for new content. So if people leave YouTube, the people that subscribed to them won't have a problem keeping up with them. It's finding new followers that will be the problem.
And its not like these content providers are using some free service for which Google gets nothing, they are the creators of content that make Google money. And considering how much money Google makes, I would say that they aren't very well compensated for their time as it is.
Click to expand...
It's not a free service. YouTube makes money from advertisements, and the more people that watch your videos, the more money they make. And they even pay you, which is great incentive for people to put more effort in their videos.

YouTube is too powerful right now, and this will be a good thing in the long run. This will create a competitor who will allow these videos to exist. Who will it be I'm not sure yet.
 
I actually agree with the YouTubers. YouTube is out of line with its bot identifications of content that clearly is not infringing. And YT is putting itself at risk, because if YouTube doesn't shape up, the content-makers will move to other services, like Twitch.
 
Steve said:
No, it's exactly like a I said. Don't like YouTube...don't use YouTube. Period.

Got a million followers? Post a link to your new site and call it good. Buy your own hardware, host your own content, and fend for yourself.

That's exactly how it's done. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

Yikes, going to have to completely disagree with you on this one Steve. Google bought youtube with the sole purpose of monetizing it. They did just that.. Unfortunately as the saying goes "Too big to fail" is basically what's going on here. They turned youtube into a monolith and now have gotten so lazy that they decided to just completely automate the entire system and cut staff out of the equation. In doing this they completely screwed up some of the largest content providers on youtube and causing them major grief. It's as if suddenly the FAA said "Only green planes can fly in our airspace." then a year later "Only green planes with black wings can fly in our airspace." and then "Only green planes with black wings and a golden crucifix blessed by the pope attached." Eventually it becomes unreasonable and irritates the people who make them money. It isn't as if google does this for free, they benefit just as much as the users who make money off youtube.
 
Can't they just use a different service like Vimeo or the other stuff out there? I don't know if the other services pay for views like YouTube does though.
 
angry joe is ridiculous. there was a video of him where he ranted 20 minutes about how geoff keighley didn't give a shit about him on the vga 2011 (i think 2011).

the copyright issues on youtube make let's plays and reviews a pain in the ass. i made a channel for let's plays and related things for retro games and even then you get copyright violation notices up the ass. none of my videos was even monetized. waste of time.
 
cortexodus said:
...on top of someone else's service...which he's never paid anything to use...:confused:
Click to expand...

Why not, corporations do the same thing. They want to use public roads and public services, and don't want to pay any taxes that keep those things going.

So I guess they've learned from the best! :D


But there is also another issue, it's not like YouTube doesn't make money from the monetization, they take their cut off the top, so in a sense, they are paying.

People also seem to be under the impression all there is to this is people sitting on their ass playing games and such--- when that's probably only about 30% of it.. Editing and uploading videos is a lot more a part of it than anything... I wouldn't say that's not work.

I don't even edit my videos, I just compress and upload them and it's a pain in the butt that takes a long time.
 
Quite a few of these youtube people are making hundreds of thousands and even millions. There are apparently many thousands of socially deprived people who cling to these streamers as a kind of social outlet. Some will even watch a popular stream for hours on end. It's creepy.

Given what they do (i.e. playing games, giving rants with their 2 cents worth, etc) they shouldn't be making that kind of money and I hope the cash flow's balls get chopped off from under them or shut down alltogether.
 
Steve said:
No, it's exactly like a I said. Don't like YouTube...don't use YouTube. Period.

Got a million followers? Post a link to your new site and call it good. Buy your own hardware, host your own content, and fend for yourself.

That's exactly how it's done. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

YouTube is where it's at today because of these type of people. Cutting off incentives for them to continue to produce content hurts Google as much as it does them. It's ridiculous to suggest they go and build their own infrastructure. If it was so easy, Hard|OCP would be on par with The Verge.
 
Well that sucks... however if it's you're "livelihood", I question the wisdom of making a living which is 100% reliant on the whim of a single 3rd part company.

Google is their own company, they can do whatever the fuck they want. It could be good for them, it could be bad for them, it could suck balls for the consumer, but it's their business so they can do what they want if they feel they want to distance themselves from copyright issues.
 
Google is going full retard here. He has a point. Youtube wanted content creators early on. They provided the service at no charge...from the get go. Why? To sell ads and make money. They also allowed people to subscribe to this stuff, and profit off the ads as well.

These people created the stuff, and apparently made a profit from it. Changing the rules later on sucks for them. I can understand his anger. I don't necessarily agree with his ranting about it, but I can understand it.

His gripes about fair use are accurate. You can use content from games, etc. when doing reviews.
 
The guy behind HowToBasic deserves every penny he makes from his youtube videos.

The guy who picks up a game on release, plays it badly and puts it all up on youtube, does not. No matter if he edits and comments on it. It's not allowed in the rules of monetizing videos, too.

The fine folks who don't monetize but still upload interesting, helpful videos that happen to cover games, are fine respectable chaps. You know, the ones who don't beg for subscribes and likes and upvotes but continue providing good content. Damn good people who happen to have it in them to have more than one source of income.

And this is captain stay-at-home-cripple speaking, my life is staying at the computer or in bed until they figure out exactly what to inject into a part of my brain and cure the fibro, I if anybody would benefit from making money of youtube, logic would dictate that, but no - I'm still sending out demos to studios and stations seeing if I can work with my voice or my brain for (gasp) a real job.


But then again, I'm pretty freaking special.
 
Sorry, but Google is right.

1. They have to use automated systems to detect copyright violations. Too much content gets uploaded for them to review it manually. If they don't make a good faith effort to detect and resolve such potential violations, they'll be opening themselves up to big judgments.

2. They cannot continue paying money to uploaders for content they detect is copyrighted and was uploaded by someone other than the copyright holder. If they do, again, they're going to get screwed in court.

3. Steve's right. You provide your content exclusively to a third party, you take your chances. There are all kinds of sites where people go on the Internet that are not YouTube or even Google. If it takes more work to see a profit elsewhere, tough shit.

Copyrighted content isn't free for people to use at will. Like it, lump it, or fight for change. Blaming Google/YouTube for the environment in which they have to operate is dumb.
 
NeoGohan said:
Can't they just use a different service like Vimeo or the other stuff out there? I don't know if the other services pay for views like YouTube does though.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, but the problem is how are you going to reach the herd?

Google has invested unbelievable amount of time, energy, and money to get people to use a facebook competitor, but its not enough to get the entire herd to abandon facebook and if everyone is on facebook and its not horribly broken then no one is going to use the competitor. So yes, move to Vimeo and lose 90% of your subscribers and be noticed by an audience a fraction of the size.

Its all about communities. These content creators are what attracted that community that Google purchased to feed advertisements to, but Youtube has become such a massive entity that Google is experimenting with how much milking the community will tolerate before a mass exodus. Great for padding the bottom line and making some wealthy people at Google even wealthier, but sure does suck for us.
 
FordFanboy said:
Quite a few of these youtube people are making hundreds of thousands and even millions. There are apparently many thousands of socially deprived people who cling to these streamers as a kind of social outlet. Some will even watch a popular stream for hours on end. It's creepy.

Given what they do (i.e. playing games, giving rants with their 2 cents worth, etc) they shouldn't be making that kind of money and I hope the cash flow's balls get chopped off from under them or shut down alltogether.
Click to expand...

Wow, jealous much?

I don't follow many people on Youtube, and none that I watch everything they put out, but there overall I enjoy many of Nerdcubed videos more then most anything that passes for TV entertainment these days.

I'm not sure why anyone would view the big names on Youtube any different then music artists, tv/movie stars or sports figures all of which are paid largely for their ability to basically put butts in seats, just as Totalbiscuit and others on Youtube are paid a small portion of billions in advertising revenue they help bring Youtube each year.
 
Babbster said:
Sorry, but Google is right.

1. They have to use automated systems to detect copyright violations. Too much content gets uploaded for them to review it manually. If they don't make a good faith effort to detect and resolve such potential violations, they'll be opening themselves up to big judgments.

2. They cannot continue paying money to uploaders for content they detect is copyrighted and was uploaded by someone other than the copyright holder. If they do, again, they're going to get screwed in court.

3. Steve's right. You provide your content exclusively to a third party, you take your chances. There are all kinds of sites where people go on the Internet that are not YouTube or even Google. If it takes more work to see a profit elsewhere, tough shit.

Copyrighted content isn't free for people to use at will. Like it, lump it, or fight for change. Blaming Google/YouTube for the environment in which they have to operate is dumb.
Click to expand...

There are two main problems with what you say, yes they need some sort of automated system, but they also shouldn't treat their content creators as second class citizens and make it easier to dispute cases where a question of copyright infringement is raised.

It's ironic to see so many people, Steve included, backing Youtube but let the RIAA try to enforce copyrights and these same people will scream bloody murder.
 
MrLonghair said:
The guy behind HowToBasic deserves every penny he makes from his youtube videos.

The guy who picks up a game on release, plays it badly and puts it all up on youtube, does not. No matter if he edits and comments on it. It's not allowed in the rules of monetizing videos, too.

The fine folks who don't monetize but still upload interesting, helpful videos that happen to cover games, are fine respectable chaps. You know, the ones who don't beg for subscribes and likes and upvotes but continue providing good content. Damn good people who happen to have it in them to have more than one source of income.
Click to expand...
The fact that people subscribe to these videos, shows that people are interested in what they have to say. Whether or not they play it badly or not is irrelevant, cause if the people like it then that's what they like. Look at GameGrumps, which is just two guys playing video games badly, but people love them.

The problem I think is that the more critical reviewers are more popular, and that's not going well for companies. Angry Joe, Angry Video Game Nerd, Francis, and so many others are just gamers angry at their games. I follow these guys cause in terms of game reviews they do a better unbiased job then most websites. It does effect my decision on what games to buy.

What I see is Google being lazy about catching the real violators. Then there's the companies who hide these reviews of these games, cause they didn't have any influence on these reviewers.
 
It's my understanding that YT takes 45% of all revenue people make from ads. Does the loss in revenue from this make up for the money they save from not having to deal with copyright claims?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top