Fair use is also not extremely liberal. Including an entire song or close to an entire song does not fall under fair use. Stop pretending like it does.

If you have an extended Let's Play or video review that includes half or more of a song, that'd likely be judged copyright infringement in a court of law. Youtube is…

It's been released on DS, iOS and Android over here.

Your gamer credentials are hereby revoked. Forever!

Looks like a new move to me. Unless she has a new taunt where she randomly points at you and yells, there's no existing Zelda move where she does that animation. So either that's a new move or she's doing a new taunt.

Derivative is not the same thing as "Limited amount of". I'd suggest you Googling the word "derivative".

Besides, let's plays and lenghty reviews tend to have more than just a few seconds of footage, the amount that's usually permitted. Heck, you know how whenever they show a movie trailer during a talk show, they have…

As a fighting game? No. Horrible balanacing, horrible system. Spam, camping, only guessing game system is "attack or grab". OP top tier that shit on everyone else.

As a braindead timekiller? It's OK. It's pretty.

1) A very small fraction of the videos involved here were "100% legal". The majority of them were tagged for using music and/or in-game sounds from games/song they did not hold the copyright to. Now it might seem to you like people should be allowed to use any song or game's background music/sound effect/etc. in their…

See, news people get sued for a lot of money if they use copyrighted material, which is why they CLEAR THEIR MATERIAL before using it.

I'm not going to shed any tears over people not being able to make money off copyrighted material they do not own.

It only gets "stolen" and unfairly handed to someone else if their copyright claim is not legit. If you're using footage that contains copyrighted material someone else owns, you might experience this "injustice". If someone files a bogus claim, it will evetually be removed.

Big. Deal.

Youtube cannot give you Carte Blanche. If a copyright holder steps in a files a notice, Youtube cannot waive that notice. Show me a source of your claim.

And how horrible for you. You're unable to make money off a video that's using footage of copyrighted material that the copyright holder doesn't want you to use, at…

Being in EVO does not automatically mean you're pro-level or can play perfect or near-perfect games, at least when it comes to the technical aspects of the game. Games like Super Street Fighter IV do not have infinite or near-infinite combos. It is literally impossible to perform them in those games. Neither do King…

I was not referring to the obviously fraudulent ones. And the video heavily implies that a lot of, if not a majority, of the claims are legit. They're just not from the people you'd expect to be the ones to flag videos.

The Grand Theft Auto V example is perfect. It uses music that Rockstar licensed from outside…

I didn't know that having a partnered channel allowed you to use any footage ever without having to worry about copyright.

Some of these people are no doubt getting fradulent copyright notices, as Capcom notices. But people in general having to wade through notifications that their copyright infringing videos are under…

I have absolutely no problems with this. Oh no, some people using copyrighted material in order to make money are being forced to wade through a bunch of messages in their inbox. How horrible of them!

Their videos remain up, they aren't being penalized and they're free to continue to upload more videos like it.

So those players I'm watching in the Evo Top 8 aren't actually good? Because I see plenty of infinites or at least super-long combos that shave off 75% of someone's lifebar.

I have no idea how that can be considered one of the best fighting games of the past generation. Everyone has infinites or near infinites? Great game!

Injustice is horrible. Horrible, horrible, horrible.

Riot didn't give specifics, Riot specifically said there have been attempts to buy their players and their original response was not to ban players from accepting sponsorship from rival companies but to ban them from streaming rival games, period.

Not the appropriate answer.

What does the current contract have to do…

Yeah, let's invent random scenarios that never happened to justify shitty business practices. Their original contracts barred them from streaming games even just for fun. That's not the same thing as a competitor offering them money.

Have fun lying.

It's still their spare time on their own private channels. And, wow, showing that games other than LoL exist hurts LoL? I guess there's nothing LoL can do about that, like, say, make the game better. Instead, it's better and more "common sense" to ban all of their sponsored players from streaming any competiting…