Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

kotaku.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 88 posts

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#31

Post by erikswn »

skrebbel wrote: post #12

Note: I don't know anything about games or livestreaming. This is a genuine question about something that confuses me. Can someone explain why livestreamers can claim their stream as their own original content, but reuploaders can't? I mean, someone who livestreams a game is primarily showing off the artwork and level design and everything put in by the game company. There's like 90% derived content plus 10% original…

In most european countries (except Britan I guess), there exist nothing like the copyright where the content is protected by ownership.

In these countries like germany, the personality in the product (in the stream) is protected as a kind of artwork. I think this point of view might be helpful to understand these dynamics.

Did the game designer have their personality in their game? Shurely, however since they are employed the company automatically gets access to these rights and can (as economical instrument) allow streamers to use them.

The streamers itself put their personality as well in the product since this is the reason people are watching it.

However it is hard to argue that a cut of a video entails enough personality to be protected by itself. Therefore according to this law it is a copyright violation.

TLDR: Cutting and reuploading entails no creative process of the creator.

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#32

Post by acollins1331 »

flafla2 wrote: post #13
skrebbel wrote: post #12

Note: I don't know anything about games or livestreaming. This is a genuine question about something that confuses me. Can someone explain why livestreamers can claim their stream as their own original content, but reuploaders can't? I mean, someone who livestreams a game is primarily showing off the artwork and level design and everything put in by the game company. There's like 90% derived content plus 10% original…

People don’t watch live streamers for the game, they watch them for the streamer. On the contrary, 90% of the value of the stream comes from the personality playing the game and 10% comes from the game itself. It is common for streamers to jump around many games because it was never about which game was being played. A good example of this is DayZ, a game that was very buggy and had a lot of negative criticism, and y…

That's only for extremely popular streamers. For 99% of them they can only play the one game that made them get viewers in the first place. They didn't get popular because someone googled "Ninja" they got popular because they were playing Fortnite and people wanted to watch fortnite get played. .1% of those guys get big enough they can switch games.

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#33

Post by solarkraft »

skrebbel wrote: post #12

Note: I don't know anything about games or livestreaming. This is a genuine question about something that confuses me. Can someone explain why livestreamers can claim their stream as their own original content, but reuploaders can't? I mean, someone who livestreams a game is primarily showing off the artwork and level design and everything put in by the game company. There's like 90% derived content plus 10% original…

> and a livestreamer likes reuploaders because it helps market their stream

Maybe this is true on one side, but on the other the people who reupload the content will also get revenue from people watching. Since it's the most popular parts, relatively many people will watch it, often completely skipping the stream itself. This means that the original streamer (who creates the value of commentary) has quite a bit to lose from people reuploading their stream.

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#34

Post by yNeolh »

fuu_dev wrote: post #30
flafla2 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don’t watch live streamers for the game, they watch them for the streamer. On the contrary, 90% of the value of the stream comes from the personality playing the game and 10% comes from the game itself. It is common for streamers to jump around many games because it was never about which game was being played. A good example of this is DayZ, a game that was very buggy and had a lot of negative criticism, and y…

There are hundreds of examples for popular streamers that tried to change games but needed to go back to keep their viewer base what makes the statement that its 90% the streamer not sustainable. This does not make your statement wrong, but there are several other dependencies that do not allow this to be generalized.

No, what happens there is that some streamers are more linked to a specific game because maybe they are better or funnier, but that's it. If you go to Twitch and scroll down in Fornite you will see hundreds of people with less than 100 viewers which also confirms that the game means almost nothing.

Minecraft is linked to the growth of many Youtubers because its the most open game you can find and thus giving creators the biggest canvas to their imagination. It's like saying that 90% of a piece of art is the used material... It just doesn't make sense.

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#35

Post by ehnto »

skrebbel wrote: post #12

Note: I don't know anything about games or livestreaming. This is a genuine question about something that confuses me. Can someone explain why livestreamers can claim their stream as their own original content, but reuploaders can't? I mean, someone who livestreams a game is primarily showing off the artwork and level design and everything put in by the game company. There's like 90% derived content plus 10% original…

It's a similar problem space as architecture photography. On one hand, the photograph requires a technical skill, can involve some creativity and the photograph definitely wouldn't exist without the photograph. On the other hand, the art inside the photograph is primarily by the architect. A picture of a beautiful building is only beautiful because the photographer correctly captured the existing art that is the building.

I love architecture and photography, and this has been a thought that comes up a lot.

Ultimately streamers are performers, and it's their performance of the game that's being streamed. That includes their commentary and their performance in the game, both are inarguably unique. So you could say that is what the revenue is paying for.

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#36

Post by RenRav »

skrebbel wrote: post #12

Note: I don't know anything about games or livestreaming. This is a genuine question about something that confuses me. Can someone explain why livestreamers can claim their stream as their own original content, but reuploaders can't? I mean, someone who livestreams a game is primarily showing off the artwork and level design and everything put in by the game company. There's like 90% derived content plus 10% original…

I'm not sure. Calling it just 'reuploading' is also kind of insulting because it seems a lot of these people spend serious time editing together clips and highlights to create something fresh from what could have originally been an 8 hour long stream.

People do this for movies, tv episodes, news drama, creating interesting clips without much issue and I don't see a big difference.

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#37

Post by apacheCamel »

yNeolh wrote: post #34
fuu_dev wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are hundreds of examples for popular streamers that tried to change games but needed to go back to keep their viewer base what makes the statement that its 90% the streamer not sustainable. This does not make your statement wrong, but there are several other dependencies that do not allow this to be generalized.

No, what happens there is that some streamers are more linked to a specific game because maybe they are better or funnier, but that's it. If you go to Twitch and scroll down in Fornite you will see hundreds of people with less than 100 viewers which also confirms that the game means almost nothing. Minecraft is linked to the growth of many Youtubers because its the most open game you can find and thus giving creators…

I think it is a little bit of both. IMO, it seems to be along the lines of how big the channel is. The bigger the channel, the more room and flexibility they have to move around games because the fans are more there for their personality than the game. Lower end channels don't have that freedom. It is almost like their fans are there for them, but only playing that specific game (whether it be for their skill in the game or maybe their knowledge of it).

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#38

Post by friendlybus »

skrebbel wrote: post #12

Note: I don't know anything about games or livestreaming. This is a genuine question about something that confuses me. Can someone explain why livestreamers can claim their stream as their own original content, but reuploaders can't? I mean, someone who livestreams a game is primarily showing off the artwork and level design and everything put in by the game company. There's like 90% derived content plus 10% original…

Jim Sterling's small disagreement with an asset flipping nobody game dev over displaying videos of games described the argument for youtuber uploads of gameplay. He said that the argument in court would be that the review or livestreamer playing the game is creating a transformative piece of work by playing it. There are an infinite number of different videos that could come from playing a game so any individual one could be considered transformative, combined with commentary and a face on top. That would fall under fair use. He went on to say the argument had not been tested in a court and he said it to demonstrate how expensive it would be for his opponent to try and control video reviews that were critical of the product via legal means.

I don't know the legal defense, a game developer is specifically trimming out bugs and separate paths through the game world so I personally would argue any experience a player has short of deliberately breaking the game and getting outside the map bounds should be considered the within the bounds of what a game is and therefore not transformative.

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#39

Post by fuu_dev »

yNeolh wrote: post #34
fuu_dev wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are hundreds of examples for popular streamers that tried to change games but needed to go back to keep their viewer base what makes the statement that its 90% the streamer not sustainable. This does not make your statement wrong, but there are several other dependencies that do not allow this to be generalized.

No, what happens there is that some streamers are more linked to a specific game because maybe they are better or funnier, but that's it. If you go to Twitch and scroll down in Fornite you will see hundreds of people with less than 100 viewers which also confirms that the game means almost nothing. Minecraft is linked to the growth of many Youtubers because its the most open game you can find and thus giving creators…

The Game is the layer that very often carries the streamer, if it changes the base connection to the audience changes too. This can easy create a imbalance or conflict in interests. If the viewer can't relate to the specific game they usually leave (change of audience).

So it highly depends on your Audience. If you are a variety streamer, your audience is used to the changing environment. However this does not apply to the vast majority. If changes in audience(game) can cause up to 90+% difference its hard to quantify it as negligible factor.

Re: WoW streamer hires YouTubers who leeched off his stream to run official channel

#40

Post by ivanhoe »

skrebbel wrote: post #12

Note: I don't know anything about games or livestreaming. This is a genuine question about something that confuses me. Can someone explain why livestreamers can claim their stream as their own original content, but reuploaders can't? I mean, someone who livestreams a game is primarily showing off the artwork and level design and everything put in by the game company. There's like 90% derived content plus 10% original…

It sounds a bit like saying that any classic painting was 90% created from materials provided by other companies: canvas, oil colors, various chemicals, and painter just used those, but then took all the credits. The thing is that the value comes from the uniqueness of the final work, and painter and in this case the streamer are the only ones who provide that crucial element. Without them there's nothing, viewers wouldn't watch it, so you can fully argue that streamers are in fact the creators of the original content streamed. Re-uploaders on the other hand create derivative work, and there are strict and well-established rules on that.
Post reply on HN