well they sure arent entitled to enforce their laws on another county’s citizens, unless they conduct business in said country but follow that country’s way of doing things.
Keoki
keoki
You do realize that American “fair use” laws doesn’t allow you to monetize without permission, right? If it’s non-profit, you can get away with it, but Let’s Play, or even commentary while you play over a game for more than a few minutes while running ads for money is a violation of the law. That’s why most review…
the branches of a japanese company like nintendo for example should have toad adhere to the copyright laws that apply to the respective uploader especially if they have branches that operate in that country like nintendo of america.
It has nothing to do with over claiming....Geniuses don’t seem to understand that “fair use” or Copyright are completely different in different countries. Japan doesn’t have or allow for “fair use”
Not really, the current system is that if you claim that a video unlawfully uses your content and monetize it, all the ad revenue for that video goes to the person making the claim. Even if the actual uploader of the video wins the dispute, the money that the video made during that time remains with the guy making the…
Nintendo is a Japanese company. Japan does not have fair use laws. In their eyes, people are violating copyright law the same way that bootlegged American movies are produced legally in other countries.
But do content creators still get a strike if they dispute it and they lose?
fair use is always a grey area, but many countries (Japan for example) don’t allow for fair use exemption from copyright. Vidding, or anything like that, will come down to determining whether or not it’s fair use. Basically, is there a profit, how and much of the new work is their own?
Which companies?
Its still a complete pain when some of my videos gets flagged that is COMPLETELY wrong and is not even close to what its claiming to be. There really needs to be a “Incorrect Flag” dispute option
But unless I misunderstood the article, he is including snippets from works he is not reviewing, criticising or satirising? That seems clearly outside fair use.
This guy is a total idiot to say that he’s actively “trying to ‘infringe copyright’”. Doesn’t he know that the penalties for copyright infringement are much greater than a mere YouTube takedown? He should describe what he’s doing as fair use (no infringement).
According to the author of this very article the video “makes ample use of footage that is completely unrelated to what he actually discusses throughout the video”. I’m pretty sure that’s the definition of infringing behavior.
This is ridiculous. Despite what Mr Fedora may have flagged, Nintendo and other publisher’s copyrights are theirs automatically upon creation of any IP. The law does not look favourably on anyone who would seek to prevent another party from monetising their own intellectual property, especially in such an explicitly…
Speaking about the specific video in question here taking nearly ten minutes of other people’s content, slapping it on to the timeline, muting the original audio, and adding his own voice over, is hardly “transformative” to quote YouTube’s guidelines. That video probably fails on the grounds of the volume of content…
To use Patreon you fill out a w9 and they send out annual 1099s. It’s reported and you will need to pay taxes on it.
Patreon is taxable revenue, it’s not, strictly speaking, a donation service. It’s basically a streamlined method for people to get monthly income from clients without having to run their own collections department. Like how ADP will handle a business’s payroll so they don’t have to hire a payroll department.
No. Netflix negotiates all the contracts for the content that is on the platform they created.
“Thank god for Jim Sterling” - said no one, ever, including Jim’s mother.