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

81–88 of 88 posts

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

#81

Post by skrebbel »

gpm wrote: post #55
andreareina wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The general rule for derivative works is that you own the changes, but you still need the original copyright holder's permission to distribute the changed version. Thus the reuploader owns the sequence of play(stream, start, end) instructions that make up the edited version, but the streamer still owns the stream itself. So the publishers own the game, the streamer owns the performance, and the reuploader owns the ed…

> In theory each requires permission from the previous Up to fair use. There's a good argument that streaming a game is fair use. It's highly transformative, not a market substitute, contains criticism/critique/commentary on the original, and contains only a fraction of the game. That's hitting all four of the factors considered to at least some extent [0]. Reuploading someones stream exactly, no way in hell is that…

This was the insight I was looking for, thanks!

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

#82

Post by wolfgke »

gpm wrote: post #55
andreareina wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The general rule for derivative works is that you own the changes, but you still need the original copyright holder's permission to distribute the changed version. Thus the reuploader owns the sequence of play(stream, start, end) instructions that make up the edited version, but the streamer still owns the stream itself. So the publishers own the game, the streamer owns the performance, and the reuploader owns the ed…

> In theory each requires permission from the previous Up to fair use. There's a good argument that streaming a game is fair use. It's highly transformative, not a market substitute, contains criticism/critique/commentary on the original, and contains only a fraction of the game. That's hitting all four of the factors considered to at least some extent [0]. Reuploading someones stream exactly, no way in hell is that…

> Up to fair use. There's a good argument that streaming a game is fair use.

This is a very US-centric perspective. For example, in Germany's Urheberrecht, there exists no concept of fair use.

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

#84

Post by dleslie »

ivanhoe wrote: post #79
dleslie wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic painters often mixed their own paints; or had a team of understudies who would do it. They didn't simply pop on down to the general store and buy some paint. As to your argument; the re-uploaders create additional value of their own, and it's no less derivative or valid than the work of a streamer.

OK, imprecision on my side, under "any classic painting" (note "classic", not "classical") I really meant just "a painting" in a usual sense of it, not some post-modern "thing" or performance or whatever... however for my point it really doesn't matter who painted it, let's presume it was my grandma, who just finished watching some Bob Ross videos on youtube, popped down to the general store to buy some paints and br…

Streamers are also creating derivative works; few would be as popular if their streams could not feature gameplay footage, and their use of such stretches well beyond short clips for review or parody.

Re-uploaders pare down lengthy streams, edit multiple streams together, and engage in other content modifying behaviour. Their work, though derivative, should be tolerated if we're going to tolerate the behaviour of streamers. Streamers argued for this tolerance, after all.

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

#85

Post by dec0dedab0de »

dleslie wrote: post #74
dec0dedab0de wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would louisville slugger get to claim any rights for a baseball game? What about the designer of a fancy chess set? The game itself is usually meaningless. It's the personality, skill, and strategy of the players that matters.

If one were to use the Louisville brand without license to do so then you could bet on a lawsuit.

IANAL but I don't think that is how trademark works. I believe you're allowed to use any trademark as long as it is being used to describe the thing that it is registered for, you don't infer that you're associated.

For example I'm pretty sure anyone could recreate the Pepsi challenge without asking Pepsi or Coke for permission, as long as it was actually Pepsi and Coke in the cans, and they made it clear that they are not affiliated.

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

#86

Post by dleslie »

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #85
dleslie wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If one were to use the Louisville brand without license to do so then you could bet on a lawsuit.

IANAL but I don't think that is how trademark works. I believe you're allowed to use any trademark as long as it is being used to describe the thing that it is registered for, you don't infer that you're associated. For example I'm pretty sure anyone could recreate the Pepsi challenge without asking Pepsi or Coke for permission, as long as it was actually Pepsi and Coke in the cans, and they made it clear that they a…

Right, but if I were to make baseballs and use their trademark to brand the balls, or start a league named after the trademark...

Just using their bats with their name visible isn't the problem, of course.

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

#87

Post by stale2002 »

meerita wrote: post #78
stale2002 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Asmongold made a good move. No, the actual good move would have been for him to pay someone, or a company, a percentage of the revenue to make high quality videos for him, at the very begining. The fact that he didn't do this, in the first place, means that he left hundreds of thousands of dollars on the table, which he could have captured if he had put a bit of effort into paying someone to make his youtube channe…

You're assuming that move would give him more money. And he can do that anytime. But how do you know people will love to see his stream highlights without expending all that money, well, you let your community do that.

> without expending all that money

You are assuming that this is some large amount of money for a streamer. It is not.

It is possible to outsource your entire YouTube presence to a company, that will merely take a cut of the profits. So there would be no risk, if you give a company a percentage of the revenue.

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

#88

Post by eru »

Mirioron wrote: post #51
eru wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in most cases these days the games company gives (at least implicit) approval.

It makes sense to do so, because games and streams do not compete with one another as much. Edits of someone's stream probably competes more with the stream itself.

Yes, it makes sense for the game company. The stream is more of an advertisement than competition.

I can see that if you organized game-streaming as an entertainment provided by a company, that company would most likely want to hire an editor to provide a best-of version.

(That's essentially how all those reality TV shows like Big Brother worked. Plus some extra dramatization, of course.)

There's economic value to consumers in getting the best-of version, so I am hoping that the participants will find a way to share the larger cake.

Post reply on HN