Darth Marsden

Greetings from the Telltale Games forums!

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Noname215 said:

Kinda makes me wonder why no one has ever gone after idubbbz. 

Probably because he didn't use it as a blatant insult like PDP did. IMO it's the intent behind PDP's use of the word that made it so bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, MusicallyInspired said:

Not the first time he's said it, yet only now is it blowing up in the media. Typical.

It's actually not the first time that PewDiePie's racism is being reported by the media.

Disney dropped him from his MakerStudios contract due to his anti-semetic and racist jokes.

His YouTube Red Series was cancelled due to the racist and anti-semetic content.

He was also removed him from the Google Preferred Ads program due to racist and anti-semetic content.

Pewdiepie has a long, long history of racism and I'm not surprised at all that companies don't want to participate in monetizing his videos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pewdiepie is not racist. That WSJ article was way overblown and used video footage of him making fun of the media using footage of him making Nazi jokes as if it were serious to prove that the media will use anything. They PROVED his point. The Fiver thing wasn't even a thing as far as I'm concerned. All of YouTube pretty well had his back on that. WSJ just wanted clicks and screwed over all YouTube content creators to get it. Next.

And you don't get to decide who consumes your content. You make your product and that's the end of it on your part. You can't get mad when someone streams it especially when you have a disclaimer on your website saying that anyone can stream and make money off of it. You also don't get to abuse the DMCA system because someone did something in a stream you didn't like that WASN'T EVEN A STREAM OF YOUR GAME.

Edited by MusicallyInspired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with abusing the DMCA system.  Those are very dangerous waters.  What's next?  Getting people whom can't afford to fight to shut down because you disagree with their opinion?

Regardless, the dude is a real POS.  I have never.  NEVER.  Said that word in anger.  There is no excuse.  None.  That word should not even be in his vocabulary.  He HAS done this before and it wasn't a joke, it wasn't a witch hunt, it was him being a loser playing a CoD game and then trying to justify it by saying that it was a "cultural difference".  He's just an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Johro said:

Regardless, the dude is a real POS.  I have never.  NEVER.  Said that word in anger.  There is no excuse.  None.  That word should not even be in his vocabulary.  He HAS done this before and it wasn't a joke, it wasn't a witch hunt, it was him being a loser playing a CoD game and then trying to justify it by saying that it was a "cultural difference".  He's just an idiot.

At least he has admitted exactly all of this himself in his recent statement video.

Edited by MusicallyInspired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Johro said:

I disagree with abusing the DMCA system.  Those are very dangerous waters.  What's next?  Getting people whom can't afford to fight to shut down because you disagree with their opinion?

This isn't abusing the DMCA laws at all.  Campo Santo owns their game material, they can claim to take anything down they feel misrepresents their game and their brand.   They don't want him to profit from their game, and they don't want to profit from his video commentary of their game.  They are perfectly within their rights to do that.

PewDiePie owns the audio commentary in his Lets Play, but Campo Santo owns the game footage.  It's akin to RiffTrax's audio commentary of films.  They don't release their audio commentary on video, but instead release it via digital audio formats, unless they get the rights to use the film footage, or it is in the public domain.

If PewDiePie were releasing audio to be synced with game footage, like RiffTrax, then, yeah Campo Santo would be abusing the DMCA laws. As it stands though, they're just doing what they feel they need to do to maintain the credibility of their game and their company, which is well within their rights to do so.

1 hour ago, Johro said:

Regardless, the dude is a real POS.  I have never.  NEVER.  Said that word in anger.  There is no excuse.  None.  That word should not even be in his vocabulary.  He HAS done this before and it wasn't a joke, it wasn't a witch hunt, it was him being a loser playing a CoD game and then trying to justify it by saying that it was a "cultural difference".  He's just an idiot.

Right. The problem is how easily the word came out of his mouth.  Only a racist would ever use that word, period.  It wouldn't even be in the vocabulary of someone who isn't a racist.  The same goes with his jokes about killing Jews, in particular his skit that contained the "death to Jews" sign.  That skit wasn't satire, it was just made for the shock value. No one who is not anti-Semitic would ever use a people who had been murdered in the millions as shock humor, especially not within the lifetimes of Jewish people who lived through that horror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DMCA system doesn't just take down the video though.  A few strikes and you're done.  Gone.  It would be like you, not only losing your job, but being told you can no longer even work in your profession.  Furthermore, in the statement, they also encouraged others to do the same.  While I don't care if this happens to a guy like him,  where's the line?  Where does it stop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's YouTube's takedown system, not the DMCA laws.  They are within their rights as a United States company to require another company that operates within the United States to remove a video that contains a video playthrough of their content on a channel that they feel misrepresents their game and their brand.

Besides, it's not actually that hard to get a turnaround of the three strikes rule if you contest it with YouTube.  I successfully did so on one of my YouTube channels, and the channel in question was used to post nothing but clips from copyrighted content that I don't own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a big issue with monetizing though.  Trust me on this one.  I'm friends with someone whom does it for a living.  While you can fight the smaller guys, companies like Nintendo and Sony are willing to take it to court, so Youtube ALWAYS takes their side.  They can no longer make money off Nintendo on the Youtube portion of their content and they fought a strike by Sony, only to have Youtube tell them that it is completely up to Sony.

The person I mention doesn't just play the games and stream them.  There's more to it, but it doesn't matter.

Edited by Johro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Johro said:

It is a big issue with monetizing though.  Trust me on this one.  I'm friends with someone whom does it for a living.  While you can fight the smaller guys, companies like Nintendo and Sony are willing to take it to court, so Youtube ALWAYS takes their side.  They can no longer make money off Nintendo on the Youtube portion of their content and they fought a strike by Sony, only to have Youtube tell them that it is completely up to Sony.

To be fair, if the person in question makes Lets Plays or playthroughs of games, then the DMCA was warranted.  In that scenario, it's likely that Sony filed their takedown through the Entertainment Software Association body, which includes both Sony and Nintendo. Lets Plays and Long Plays and Playthroughs have been accepted on YouTube by most game companies, but that's just because either the companies that allow it are super awesome, or because they like the publicity, or both.  These companies are well within their rights to stop Lets Plays and Playthroughs from being uploaded, since they own the video content. The YouTubers who do Lets Plays and Playthroughs can't claim fair use, as they could a review, as reviews only contain snippets of video and/or audio from a game, and Lets Plays and Playthroughs contain footage of the entire game. Commentary is not a significant departure from the game itself.

It's been stated that the bigger companies file requests for YouTube takedowns via DMCA laws to protect their trademarks, which is completely understandable.  Trademark law is a tricky beast.  They could actually lose their trademark if they were to openly allow these videos, as trademark law in the United States requires proof that you continually actively protect your trademark.  The YouTube takedown notices supply the proof.

The best way around this is when monetizing content is to avoid copyright infringement as much as possible.  As my statement above notes, that's the reason RiffTrax supplies audio of their commentary when they don't have permission to sync the audio with the video.  Any Lets Player who supplied audio to be synced with player-supplied video wouldn't have any problem with DMCA takedowns.  Alternatively, they could only post playthroughs from companies that have outright stated that they allow Lets Plays, or get permission from the developers directly.  That's always the best way to go when you want to make money by commenting on someone else's work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit: I removed my post because I decided I don't want to be involved in this conversation anymore.

Edited by MusicallyInspired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh. So this is what you're using the Telltale thread for now. Ouch. :P

The situation is pretty clear though. The privilege to make millions by superimposing your image and voice over footage from games you haven't created is immense. It is not a right. It is not what fair use means. The copyright strike says "this is our material, and we don't want it to be used like that". As such, DMCA takedown wasn't at all "abused" by Campo Santo, they used the youtube function in exactly the way it was meant to. Sean said it best when he tweeted that Kjellberg uses Firewatch to build his own brand. And Kjellberg's brand incorporates distributing and therewith normalizing casual racism and antisemitism to millions of viewers. Why in the world would developers just accept that? Out of fear that Kjellberg's fanbase would react in exactly the same way they did in fact react. With actual abuse. Review bombing, Steam forum spamming, and of course Valve as always doesn't give a runny ship. >:(

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They could have just asked him to remove them. That proves it wasn't all just about protecting their brand. This was a deliberate personal attack. An emotional decision. One might say made "in the heat of the moment."

Edited by MusicallyInspired

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sigh.   I don't disagree with them flagging it themselves.  It was the public spectacle and calling others to do so as well.

Is it right for one person to use their fame and social media to ultimately take away ones career.  It doesn't matter that I hate the guy.  If he wasn't a massive source of ad income, he'd be gone by now.  I don't dispute DMCA rights, I do think Youtube's system is extremely flawed though.  That's all I'm saying on the matter.

(ugh I really wish it was someone else.  I really really hate him and hate that this sounds like I'm defending him)

Edited by Johro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now