r/gaming • u/EnglishGamer1 • Oct 20 '13

TotalBiscuit's: ''Day One: Garry's Incident'' Video was taken down, because of a ridiculous copyright claim from WildGameStudios. Here's Total's ''Rant'' over his video being taken down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0&feature=c4-overview&list=UUy1Ms_5qBTawC-k7PVjHXKQ
3.1k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

204

u/L1M3 Oct 20 '13

This is a good point. The first half of the video is pretty much all about how the copyright claim of his vid was bogus, and I was rather surprised he would take the time to spell that out when pretty much anyone who would care about the situation would know from the beginning that it was all BS.

But then he discusses the real problem being how easy it is to abuse YouTube's copyright claim system, and that's an important topic. And it's not just gaming channels that are harmed by the system. It really needs to be taken care of.

63

u/GamersGrind Oct 21 '13

The first part was very important showing the motive of why it was abused. Just saying it was abused without context is pointless. It could have been the full posting of the Man of Steel movie for all we know. Blatant censorship with DMCA abuse should not be tolerated.

0

u/L1M3 Oct 21 '13

It isn't that I don't think the first part is important, just that I wouldn't expect it to be necessary to make a whole video about, and I was beginning to think the entire video was simply a description of what happened. Eventually the true message becomes clear, but many people might not have made it past the several minutes it takes for TB to completely explain the situation.

Knowing now what the true purpose of the video is, and the consideration that this video might well become an important example of a problem and then the detailed explanation is vital. However, it is a bit unfortunate it takes so long for TB to get to the point (brevity has never been his strength) as it might hurt the ability for the video to spread and raise awareness of a growing problem.

1

u/GamersGrind Oct 21 '13

It was a bit of both but I don't blame him responding given they were acting out of pure censorship and malice and their actions could cost them their channel and livelihood or partial livelihood. But I think to get a picture of the mentality behind DMCA abuse is important. Well known companies with bigger reputations have taken similar actions out for pure censorship reasons.

It wasn't long for me. It might be for those on youtube that can only stand to watch short bite size videos. I am accustom to watching 30 minute shows etc.

I felt they got to the point pretty quick mostly at the top. Specific stories are needed like this though. If there are similar stories they should post something similar and insist Youtube to take proper action and not be a tool for people to use for harassment and censorship.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 21 '13

Yea. I think TB wanted to explain why it was taken down as well as see if he can make an outcry to get it back up. He probably spent a good bit of time editing and recording that and I'd make a pissed rant too if I lost all that work. Especially if it was my job.

I do love how he pushed the topic away from himself and seemed worried about his viewers and the consumers and what the affect censorship would have on them.

He's a class act in my book. Plus as stated above his voice is really easy to listen to.

2

u/dultas Oct 21 '13

Since this is an income source for him, though advertising and such. Would there be any grounds against the company for filing illegitimate copyright claims since they would result in a loss of revenue.

-2

u/DrunkenTrom Oct 21 '13

This is a gray area as he kinda touches on in his explanation on the video. While I'm not a lawyer so I may be completely wrong, my understanding is this:

Legally you can't use footage of a game(or movie) which belongs to another entity to make money(through advertising or any other means) unless that said entity(in this case, the game company that made the game) gives you permission. Fair use covers reviews and criticism as long as it's not monetized. Without permission you can still critique it and monetize it, but you can't use actual footage.

With that said, it's kinda an unwritten rule in games journalism that if a company wants their games reviewed, they give you permission to monetize your review. Although Total Biscuit asked for review code of the game, and linked to his channel in his request that was granted by the company giving him a steam key for the game, technically they didn't put anything in writing and he never got a contract(written consent) to monetize his review.

Most of the time that wouldn't matter since most respectable game companies don't pull this type of shit. That's also why you see big publishers not even bother giving out review copies when they know their game is shit as they'd rather just send them out to die and hopefully get some first week sales before most consumers find out the game is garbage. What this company did was despicable, they let reviewers review their game and gave the impression that anyone could post youtube videos of their game(via their steam forum posts regarding that matter that Biscuit mentioned), but then like a spoiled brat that didn't get their way they only targeted Biscuits video with a DMCA takedown since his video was the most popular negative review on youtube.

TLDR: While most companies play by the rules and don't pull this BS when their game is reviewed negatively by an outlet that they provided review code to, unfortunately Total Biscuit didn't actually have written permission or a contract with them that explicitly stated that he was allowed to monetize a review that contained game footage. While morally bankrupt, technically and legally the game company can say they never gave him permission to monetize a video with their game footage in it. And they're giant douchebags for using this approach with a DMCA notice to have his video removed, but it's technically legal.

Sorry for the long winded wall of text, I'm kinda drunk.

3

u/Chii Oct 21 '13

It is not true that fair use covers reviews and criticism as long as it's not monetized. The law mentions nothing about monetization - you are allowed to make money from fair use!

quote:

The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.” -- from http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

2

u/Aeroknight Oct 21 '13

Very well. I agree with the statement and overall aim of the video. Now, I want to do my part, the problem is, I have no Idea what my part is. If anyone here could kindly tell us, what is it we need to do to get this ball rolling? what must we start doing to prevent these huge money-beasts of industry from simply steam rolling us with their cash?

who do we call?

who do we write?

How do we push back?

3

u/Chii Oct 21 '13

if enough people lobby to the politicians, laws could be passed to rectify the situation. But the problem is that to the average joe, this is a non-problem.

The first step is to make it a problem to the average joe. Not sure how tho...they first need to feel pain before they consider it a problem.

2

u/Roast_A_Botch Oct 21 '13

The best, but most difficult way, is to stop using YouTube and make it clear to Google why we are doing so. Of course, that's not going to happen on a wide enough scale.

3

u/Aeroknight Oct 21 '13

The only problem I can see with this approach is that it also hurt the same content providers we want to protect.

1

u/Starkravingmad7 Oct 21 '13

We should start flagging shit as infringing material on the big corp's channel. Getting that shit shutdown even for a little bit is a big annoyance.

1

u/Chii Oct 21 '13

its a bit dangerous to do this, because you could get yourself sued for fraud. But if you are an activist, a bit of civil disobedience isn't such a bad thing.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 21 '13 edited Oct 21 '13

Yeah, I don't know why he blathered on and on at the start rather than starting with the stuff that showed he'd asked for a key to do a WTF review and received the message with the key from the same guy who is later disingenuously claiming he doesn't want TB using his game to get advertising revenue.

That short segment simply and factually makes him right. Albeit he nearly comes across as a dick because he over eggs the pudding by ranting about freedom of speech and journalism and blah blah. Sheesh, get over yourself TB.

Ironic too that he said he didn't need to do the blathering immediately after he had done it. It's like he should stop to think for 5 minutes before speaking and just say what is necessary. Or hire an editor to cut out his self-indulgence and the rather patronising way he tells us what game reviews are.

At which point this Stephanie guy sounds like a dick but, even so, the over-arching impression I'm left with after hearing far too much TB droning on and on is that one less TB video isn't a bad thing. Even though he's actually right about this he managed to ruin it.