Take a stand against Bill S.978

Feature by Stew Chyou on 5th July 2011

Without a doubt, if it wasn’t for the internet, YouTube, and general streaming capabilities, the video game community would not be where it’s at today. And well, the same could be said about today’s issues with copyright infringements regarding movies, music and television. In a desperate attempt to truly outlaw the latter, the United States Senate has begun considering Bill S.978. Whoever does their proof-reading evidently is ignorant about today’s tech culture, nor do they understand that they’re brewing a disastrous storm.

S.978 was entered into the Senate on May 12, 2011, and has recently been placed in the initial phases of its evaluation. As mentioned, this bill details the legal repercussions that would ensue from the unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material via internet. However, there’s a big problem. As detailed in the bill:

“the offense consists of 10 or more public performances by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works”

screenshot

Because of the vague use of “public performances by electronic means”, this has unwittingly placed video games in the danger zone. Meaning, if you recorded yourself playing a video game and then uploaded it onto YouTube, you could be punished. Should you insist to post said video, without getting penalized, you would have to contact the publisher of the game to obtain permission, plus, you would need to employ the services of a lawyer. With the amount of work and money involved, this would promptly destroy whatever motivation you had in doing something so simple.

Now a lot of you may already be apathetic given the common misconception that developers, publishers, and copyright holders would be presumed to accommodate the community in getting around this. Unfortunately, this is not true as it isn’t a provision for civil law guidelines. This is a bill, meant to be engraved in criminal law guidelines. If passed, this provides the government the freedom to press charges on anyone for infringement, regardless if the copyright holder has a problem with it or not. But granted, not everyone is willing to spend time broadcasting themselves with video games, so the urgency of this matter still falls short in being unanimously heard. To those of you within this demographic, allow me to tune you in on how this can affect us all.

screenshot

The first, and foremost, is communication. Before the possibility of videos being integrated onto computers, then internet, gamers relied on GameFAQs for guidance. Unfortunately, the written word isn’t always perfect when it comes to communicating involving concepts. Not everyone has a talent for writing, and then there’s that subject of typos. If you’ve looked up FAQs on Grand Theft Auto, you’ll know what I mean. Some guides are clear cut in providing directions and instructions. Others, just add frustration, i.e. someone mistakenly writing “left” instead of “right” when giving tips on how to escape a maze. This is where videos bridge the gap. When it comes to videos, a lot of subject matter is covered in one sweep. You can have footage of someone not only beating a boss, but doing it in the quickest time possible while also taking no damage. At the same time, this indirectly encourages viewers to join in if they feel they could do better. All in all, it certainly beats having to spend hours reading text to invoke such revelations versus spending maybe 5-10 minutes watching a vid. This has evolved to the uploading of complete playthroughs and an advent of social networking.

Going further, a lot of competitive genres today have gained their dominance from the use of videos. This includes FPS, RTS, and, especially, fighting games. As a long time fighting gamer, I have to give credit to the fact that if it wasn’t for tournament and combo videos, I would’ve already quit. When someone talks, or writes to you, about a fighting game, be it strategy, combos, tier explanation, or bugs, unless you have the game right in front of you for visual reference, you can only retain so much. Videos have undoubtedly helped competitive gamers further their quest in maintaining their respective communities and scenes, while at the same time helping players of varying experience to learn and grow as one. And above all else, nothing beats witnessing, from home, the wonder of gamers worldwide demonstrating their skill and prowess while their focus is placed in the hot seat. To those within these communities, just think, if S.978 is passed it could mean the end of Tragic’s fantastic combo guides, the end of Tom Brady’s insightful videos, no more CrossCounterTv, and no more live tournament streams from iPLAYWINNER and Team Sp00ky.

screenshot

Branching off from this is expression. It’s understandable that not everyone enjoys reading up on a review or a preview, where visual stimuli could be used. Organizations such as IGN and Gamespot have their bases covered, but there are average joes who don’t mind piecing together footage to convey their opinion. While not everyone has writing prowess, there are a number who demonstrate a talent for video editing and communicate best when speaking. Being able to communicate through any medium about any passion is a right that we’re all entitled to; it is the foundation of independent game journalism. But if S.978 passes as is, could this mean that large events, such as E3, might enforce restrictions on whom they allow inside? Could indie journalists and non-represented bloggers/vloggers expect a future of entry hassles, or complete denial of access? Would the voices of many be heavily filtered by the mere representation of the select few? I shudder to think…

Videos also maintain our gamer timeline. Not everyone still has an NES, SNES, Genesis, or a computer that can run old school DOS games. When I want to remember a long lost title such as King’s Quest, Doom, or Super Mario Bros., watching mainstream footage that only lasts 5 seconds does not do it justice. If anything, YouTube has unwittingly conceived a museum showcasing a part of our world history through games.

screenshot

Last, but certainly not least, video games and videos have birthed a new entertainment medium: Machinima, and its respective site. While the lamer would dismiss it as fan labor, machinima has created a new point of entry for independent filmmakers and graphic designers. Many may know of Rooster Teeth’s Red Vs. Blue, and today we have more filmmakers utilizing the potentials of, to name a few, Grand Theft Auto and Minecraft like Yeardly Diamond and Sanity Not Included. Then there are those who just want to give us a good laugh with their playthroughs like How To Annoy Black Ops and Two Best Friends Play. Restriction of comedy within our community is, to put it lightly, abominable.

When you factor all of the above, what it all boils down to is a healthy supplement that has kept the gaming industry vibrant and alive. Streams and videos have promoted scores of titles with positive results. Gamers are given more than enough to help them gauge whether or not to purchase a product and the companies are benefited in return. The video medium is the definite cause of today’s larger attention to video games, with the industry’s thriving development being nothing short of miraculous in today’s economy. Two to three decades prior, not many were willing to take it seriously as it was a behind-closed-doors hobby that the masses regarded in the same light as bottle-ship building.

screenshot

Though the government’s only intention was to eliminate the unauthorized streaming and uploading of TV shows, music, and movies onto the net, the choice of wording (proofread twice as detailed on the bill) is unacceptable. If you don’t care about how this is affecting video games, reread the quoted line above. Just think, a YouTube video of your 5 year old niece singing a Beyonce song could be used as evidence against your family in federal court. Then comes the possibility of five years jail time. How ridiculous is that? Take a stand, write to your local congressman or petition here. Vote no or let it be known that the bill must be reworded. Remember, we’ve all come so far and there is a reason why we celebrate Independence Day.

Please be sure to also read the follow up, for all your clarification needs.

Spread the word

About the author

Stew Chyou is a Staff Writer at Thunderbolt, having joined in August 2010. Stew also writes for Denkiphile. Get in touch on Twitter @S_Chyou.

Comments

ljagodz
5th July 2011

It’s pretty crap for all those big gaming youtubers out there. Just a question to anyone, does this apply in Canada?
Chibby
5th July 2011

As this is a US Bill, this should only affect the US.
However, it’s not unthinkable that, should this pass, other nations will duplicate it…
anon_blue
5th July 2011

@Chibby, the problem is that it DOES affect all of us too! Most commentators, game reviewers or tournament players come from the US.

Not only that, this law would pull down YouTube, Machinima or any other international website- an approach where we exclude America just wouldn’t do.
S978 Truth
5th July 2011

Speaking of ignorance in the first paragraph…

You took the amendment in the bill completely out of context. That bill amends an already existing portion of the law, namely s.2319 (b), which is about punishments for those who infringe under s.506 (a)(1)(A), which specifically and exclusively deals with copyright infringement “for the purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain” (quoted from the law itself).
So… if you record yourself playing a video game and pop it up on youtube because you think it’s neat and not because you want to make money off it? The bill doesn’t affect you. At all. Because it’s only affecting a specific a specific law that deals with those who ARE doing it for financial gain.

Should probably do full research next time, bro.
Jordan
5th July 2011

FIRST OFF THIS HAS GOT TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IT GOES AGAINST FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS…. The govt only cares about control. Rest assured it will pass our govt isnt interested in protecting your freedoms and rights. The collateral damage that will follow will be huge. The govt will hide behind national security and bragg about preventing a “terrorist” act by passing this bill.
Concerned
5th July 2011

It only affects the U.S., but it affects Canada and other countries in a way that they can’t upload to U.S. websites like Youtube. :(
Jakeiiii
5th July 2011

What day/when will the bill be passed/rejected? Because I want to see something happen, but I have no idea of what day to look forward to.
Guymar Dudikoff
5th July 2011

At the risk of adding nothing useful to the conversation, I never get tired of 60 + year old farts who still think the kids are all out playing Pong deciding how currently technology should be legally used. Isn’t this the same political body who gave us the DMCA?
stickmansam
5th July 2011

what the hell is the point of this? whoever thought of this idea is a complete handicap and have to be the worlds biggest killjoy/dickhead its a stupid idea and nobody gains anything from it
I-Sac
5th July 2011

To answer your question ijagodz, this WILL apply in Canada, because even though the law is in the U.S., Youtube runs in the United States and would be liable for anything uploaded in Canada, therefore taking it down and fining and/or arresting the uploader. So ya, screw you congress…
Jeff
5th July 2011

This won’t pass. If PROTECT IP didn’t pass, no way this would. Someone will stop it.
Nihil
5th July 2011

This is one of the most unconstitutional bills ever! It takes away the freedom of speech on the internet!
Jacob Blomquist
5th July 2011

This bill is crap, i live in the US and Tobuscus is my cousin. This bill would RUIN him!!!! He makes a living through game commentary and if this bill passes he would lose all sponsorships and income. What they don’t realize is that the publicity with youtube help games grow, without this publicity video game companies would dramaticaly lose sales.
Stew
5th July 2011

@S978 Truth

“Meaning, if you recorded yourself playing a video game and then uploaded it onto YouTube, you could be punished”

Notice I used the word “could”. This is the part where you whip out the dictionary if you’re not sure what that word means.

You’re forgetting, or simply don’t know, that YouTube vids are weighed in popularity based on replays; goes viral. A vid of someone simply playing a video game has gone viral before, either they keep saying something that makes people crack up or incorporate clever special effects to make it into an insightful art piece.

Even if it’s not the intention of the user, economic value is still procured in the form of ‘revenue’ (this word is also included in the dictionary btw). How else does YouTube stay afloat?

With that said, if not placed behind bars, or being fined, it’s not uncommon today when YouTube goes out of its way to issue its own punishment, without the need of the legal stick, by either removing videos, shutting down accounts, or just banning someone from ever coming back to the site. For a lot of people out there, that’s already a big deal.

Then there are those who like to include a favorite song in the background. Or maybe two songs, or it could be footage of someone playing two games or more. That’d be multiple counts of “public performances by electronic means”. If the vid goes viral, well, you figure it out.

I’ve done more than enough of my research brother, you’ve yet to complete your’s on the english language and expansive concepts. Good day to you.
Stew
5th July 2011

Btw, I wanna thank everyone else for taking the time to read this piece. Please don’t forget to petition/voice your opinion here:

http://act.demandprogress.org/letter/ten_strikes?akid=700.450896.5hVZPC&rd=1&t=1
wii_diddy
5th July 2011

the bill will completely affect all companies based in the U.S. so if you want to know if you tube is screwed for Canada too, then yes, we are.
The Canadian dude
5th July 2011

I really don’ understand what congress is doing, this just creates problems. As an active gamer, i subscribe to many video game channels, this basically provides most of my entertainment. Also i know many people who make a living on their Minecraft and call of duty videos. If this bill was passed, their main source of income is lost and must get another job, I thought America was supposed to be creating jobs, not removing them. In conclusion this is probably THE MOST STUPID LAW EVER, the “no cutting your hair on sunday” law makes more sense them this bill. I’m really starting to wonder if this is what congress does daily.
Slayer82396
5th July 2011

I make videos on games!!! What a rip-off!!!
Garrett
5th July 2011

This is what Congress thought of?

Oh let’s not try to solve way more important issues on the internet like cyber-bullying, and identity theft.

No, why don’t we “save” money by passing a law that can get a perfectly normal person thrown in jail (ruining his/her life) just because he/she put a song/gaming footage in a video that didn’t even ask for money and they just wanted to state an opinion. And say that it’s to stop “copyrights”.

This is a lose-lose situation for everyone. It violates the 1st Amendment, it prevents advertisements of games and songs on the internet, and it ruins job opportunities.

This is a disgrace of a bill.
Person
5th July 2011

If Congress passes this, I will lose a life. Poor chuggaaconroy.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

You say that gaming has gotten bigger recently? Sure it has, due to the increase in younger gamers playing mature rated video games. Honestly, if this bill was reworded and attacked the gaming industry to make it hard on the younger gamers to enjoy mature rated video games, I would be exceedingly overjoyed that there was finally a stand against this as kids SHOULD NOT BE playing games they are not old enough for. People can use every excuse in the book but it’s not right and it ruins and demeans the youth’s innocence and vibrant soul. My child will NEVER play games she is NOT old enough for. As a parent, I have more damn common sense, respect and love for my child then that.
Stew
5th July 2011

@Mature Gamer

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/06/27/supreme-court-strikes-down-violent-game-banning-california-law/#continued

‘Nuff said.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Good for you, Stew. It’s always nice to see a fool endorsing more foolish garbage by politicians who can’t even run their own lives nor run a country properly. And also giving stupid parents an excuse for being incompetent. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Stew
5th July 2011

You can rant and rave and get worked up all you want (and you really are), but what’s done is done. As you said, it’s the stupid parents that are incompetent. ESRB has existed for decades but it’s the choice of parents and consumers to ignore the ratings and not get involved with what their kids do on their free time, nor take the time to understand them. As outlined in that article, further action upon that would be stepping on the First Amendment. To not understand something as simple as that is something you should be ashamed of. This subject is now a moot point. We’re moving on.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

And by the way, Dantes Inferno, Godfather 2, etc. are games that helping give way to nudity in video games, therein, constituting the future establishment of pornography in video games. Good luck with your blind ambition.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

The First Amendment has been abused and taken advantage of for asinine purposes. Apparently you seem to think because you write for some nonexistence (I nor anyone I’ve ever know has ever heard of this place) website, you might have some better “patronizing” understanding then I do. You don’t know what you think you do.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Getting worked up? Or passionate about something with a level head? Is that your way of telling me I’m wrong? I have yet to get worked up. You just don’t seem to agree with me and this is your way of expressing it. By telling me I’m getting “worked up”. Congrats, Asian.
Stew
5th July 2011

Or you could just not buy those games for your kids, or return them if you find out they were purchased or borrowed behind your back. And why just video games? Movies today incorporate nudity, and net porn is incredibly easy to access nowadays.

Seriously, get over yourself. How you handle your business with your daughter is one thing, we have no say in that. But please, trying to preach it as a religion, now that’s what I call blind ambition.

I recommend you also read one of our article’s on the subject of games and kids:

http://www.thunderboltgames.com/opinion/article/shoot-from-the-lip-in-defense-of-games-feature-for-all.html

Beyond that, if you got nothing else to contribute on the subject at hand from THIS article, and you just wanna blow off steam, I suggest you do it elsewhere. Final warning.
Stew
5th July 2011

And the “congrats Asian” part. You wanna go there and say that you’re being “level headed”? Choose your next words carefully.
Evo
5th July 2011

@S978 Truth
“So… if you record yourself playing a video game and pop it up on youtube because you think it’s neat and not because you want to make money off it? The bill doesn’t affect you. At all.”

Have you ever heard of the partnership program? No? I assume you haven’t. Certain people on youtube (many do videogame reviews/ let’s plays) get paid real money per view of their videos. That would qualify as someone receiving monetary gain via a copyrighted piece of media. This would then be punishable under criminal law.

The uproar isn’t primarily focused on thirteen year olds not being able to upload 10 second 240p quality videos of them playing their cod4 badly.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Sure, if it can restrict kids getting their hands on them, then yes, I would agree it to be beneficial. People are just afraid of losing their comfort zone or “fun factor” that they are rabid (exaggeration). I’m not a fan of pornography and do my research on the negative affects of it. And yes, the more the media gets loose, the more society is punished. Some people are so desensitized to today’s media outlets that they have no baring nor understanding of what is bad or good. Their lustful nature, which is most of humanity, see nothing wrong with it as it pleasures what they seek to be pleasured.

Preaching it as a religion? You sound like you have a selfish hatred for something and this is your way of expressing it by labeling it “religious preaching”. THAT made me laugh because it was so TYPICAL of a response from someone who “seems” to have a glimmer of common sense then when someone who shares something that is not exactly their idea, then they fight back viciously.

I have no desire to read more and more articles from people with no common sense. Or people that are so desensitized to all types of media to be blind to it’s destructive habits.

And by the way, I’m contributing a discussion and also an opinion on the subject AND your article. You were so big on Freedom of Speech that you’re threatening my opinion? Why? Because YOU don’t agree with it? Or is it both that and the fact I’m still discussing this with you. And you’re being challenged to an intellectual discussion that you don’t want to have anymore so you’re going to be childish, dishonor the constitution you hold up so high and THREATEN me with a warning? Of what? Shut up or get banned?

Congrats, Asian, you help the decline of a great nation or… a country that has potential but decides to throw it all away on porn, violence and stupidity. No wonder Texas and Arizona are wanting to succeed from the United States.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Asian, are you taking that word wrongly? That’s not my problem. I was making a point with your nationality. If that angers you, then you have your own issues that have nothing to do with this article.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Nor this discussion.

For all you know, I’m Asian too.
Evo
5th July 2011

an innocent question here Mature Gamer; are you a christian? you come across as though you enjoy the occasional fox news broadcast.
Garrett
5th July 2011

@Mature Gamer

Wow. Your a hypocrite you know that?
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Thanks for asking.

No, I’m not a Christian.

No, I don’t watch Fox News.
Sam
5th July 2011

I for one think this law is crap and im aginst it…

..and im also wondering why their trying to pass a stupid law like this one when there are much bigger problems going on right now.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Hypocrite at what? Because you don’t agree with me, you’re labeling my opinion as immature based upon the misconstrued user name you saw it as?

It’s a two way street, Garret. One day you’ll understand that.

Just because I have my views on the subject, does not make anything I’ve said immature. Your tunnel vision apparently makes that so based on my experiences in my life.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Sam, welcome to the United States. They don’t know what they want nor know how to run it properly. Not saying I’d do any better because I’m not the type of person that can do this. But I’m the one that has to deal with it and adapt as best as I can. But there is a limit to adaption when it crosses lines.
Stew
5th July 2011

I’m not following how pointing out my ethnicity contributes to how you’re providing an “intellectual” conversation. If you’re implying something where a white person/non-asian has more say than a colored person, and then some “in depth” talk about genetics on that subject, you’re just reaching.

I’m also not trying to dodge anything. I’ve laid out facts, first being that a bill trying to touch upon what you’re saying has been rejected. Nothing you can say will modify or erase that from history. Therefore, the point is moot. Second, optional, an article on kids and games showing I’m not the only one who believes in what I’m saying.

Of course you have freedom of speech, but so do I, and I’m using it to point out how the points you’re trying to make (which I can’t follow along with anymore because you’re trying so hard to demean me lol) is flawed, provided with counter points.

In the end, it’s not so much up to a government to raise our children. Parents should raise their kids while taking the time to get to know and understand them. Government’s already provided a rating system and enforced disclosures on adult sites for entry. Not their fault or anyone else’s if that’s ignored.

I’m sure you’re making your daughter proud.
Garrett
5th July 2011

@Sam

Like cyber bullying and identity theft. Hell even curing the Flu is more important than this crap
Evo
5th July 2011

@Garrett
I’m pretty sure scientific study around the globe isn’t on hold until the US government gives it the go ahead..
Garrett
5th July 2011

@Mature Game

Look at your name. And unless calling someone the following (dumb, asian, immature, etc.) is considered “mature” in this world. Then I was raised wrong

I’m not saying you’re view is wrong. I think that parents should consider what games they buy for their kids. But this law can cause a economic collapse if passed.
Stew
5th July 2011

“Asian, are you taking that word wrongly? That’s not my problem. I was making a point with your nationality. If that angers you, then you have your own issues that have nothing to do with this article. Nor this discussion, for all you know I’m Asian too.”

But what is the point you’re trying to make about my nationality?

And if anything, your anger and your own issues already has nothing to do with this article or this discussion. For all we know, you must’ve done something wrong with your daughter today regarding games, she talked back, you had an epiphany that you’re not doing a great job as a parent, and instead of trying to work that out on your own time, you want to take it out on people over the internet. I mean that alone just displays your capacity as a guardian. Asian or not, that’s truth.
S978 Truth
5th July 2011

@Evo

Read this.
http://www.youtube.com/t/partnerships_benefits#qualifications

Tell me what the second qualification is.

Don’t bother, I’ll tell you.
Qualifications

“To become a YouTube Partner, you must meet these minimum requirements:

You create original videos suitable for online streaming.
**** You own or have express permission to use and monetise all audio and video content that you upload—no exceptions.****
You regularly upload videos that are viewed by thousands of YouTube users, or you publish popular or commercially successful videos in other ways (such as DVDs sold online).”

In order to become a youtube partner and make money off the videos, YOU ALREADY MUST HAVE PERMISSION.

So… again, no, it doesn’t affect them. Because this only covers UNAUTHORIZED uses, while hte partnership program is only for AUTHORIZED uses.

Any more you want to add, bro?
Sean
5th July 2011

@ Sam: They’re trying to pass this because I’m sure congress has been lobbied by the various entertainment industries about the rampant copyright infringement happening on streaming sites, such as YouTube. By making it a felony rather than a civil concern, the government can intervene without the motioning of the copyright holder and a prison sentence of up to five years is a hell of a lot more risk than fines and cease and desist letters.
Garrett
5th July 2011

@Evo

I was stating that this issue isn’t that important right now and making a list of slightly more important issues.
mike
5th July 2011

why would they do this the internet and everything that technology is at and how far it would be in the future would be ruined and hurt the usa.
Evo
5th July 2011

An economic collapse? The amount of fines that would be handed out to innocent people (and corporations like Google for allowing the material on youtube) could no doubt put a rather significant dent in the current 1.21 jiggawatt US deficit :p
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

I brought up what I did as it had a small correlation with the current subject.

No, but it doesn’t mean you have more say then I do either. Asian is a word to categorize your cultural indifference.

I do not need articles to back up what is right. Not one person wants to have what pleasures them taken away. They’ll fight back and use technicalities and excuses to get what they want. Taking advantage of a legal system that doesn’t work when a mother gets proved not guilty by a jury of her peers for murdering her child as well as the same system that let go OJ.

I too am making points and you also are being demeaning, even if you don’t exactly see it. I can see how you would think I’m demeaning you. Because apparently you took the word Asian as racial and how I have more say then you since I may be white. Therein, that is probably more of a racist comment as a suggestion then me just plainly stating, Asian. I know Asians and have called at least one, as a nickname, Asian. Never have they found that demeaning. Since they were level headed and understood it was a way for me to remember them and give that person character.

Stew, whether parents raise their children right or not, the Government will always intrude. But at what cost and why? If parents are not going to take responsibility, what choice is there? Let things go? That hasn’t worked. Minimal intrusion for certain things are an excuse for the government to also enjoy it as well. How many politicians have been linked to porn and many other things? MANY. How many lie? MANY. You take advantage of the stupidity of our nations capital to enjoy certain things. Sure, you may be 18 and have the right to play mature games. But that’s just a point I’m making.

To say everything I say can be countered, well, so can yours. But that’s how Democracy doesn’t work. Giving a fool his pleasures as a right demeans the very culture of humanity and any positive gain for a future that doesn’t involve the destructive habits it now contains. If we are to better ourselves, putting all this garbage in our faces with no idea on how to properly consume it and utilize it will lead to our demise. Whether physical or mental. The choice is simple. Even if others want to make it complicated.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

My child is 2 years old, had you asked instead of assuming.
Garrett
5th July 2011

@evo

I over exaggerated. But think about it.

If people can’t post gameplay/songs/other content then fewer people will get to see it, which leads to not as much advertising, and ultimately not as much buyers.
Mature Gamer
5th July 2011

Garret, I don’t recall calling anyone immature or dumb. Perhaps in general directed at society, perhaps but not towards any one person.

America is already in major debt, what do they care?
S978 Truth
5th July 2011

@Stew

Except you couldn’t be punished any more from the bill. The existing law that’s being amended specifically states “for the purpose of” financial gain. Exact wording.

If the purpose is not financial gain, this bill won’t affect you.

I’m not saying you couldn’t be punished somehow, as even currently any copyright holder has the right to get youtube to remove any copyrighted content, and youtube complies because they don’t want the legal trouble. The bill gives them no more or less power to do this.
I’m saying that the quoted punishment from the bill only applies to infringements “for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain”.
Someone sharing a video because it looks cool is not doing it for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain.

It’s a pretty important detail that you just conveniently happened to leave out, spreading the ignorance that the bill will magically make every youtube video or stream ever illegal.
If you want to play reporter, you should probably put in all the details and make sure you give the full story, bro. Spreading ignorance doesn’t do anyone any good.
Mature Gamer
6th July 2011

S978 Truth, that’s just exactly how America likes to run its country. Through ignorance and manipulation.

Good for you for standing up and saying what needs to be said.
Stew
6th July 2011

This:

“Asian is a word to categorize your cultural indifference.”

Contradicts this:

“I can see how you would think I’m demeaning you. Because apparently you took the word Asian as racial and how I have more say then you since I may be white. Therein, that is probably more of a racist comment as a suggestion then me just plainly stating, Asian. I know Asians and have called at least one, as a nickname, Asian. Never have they found that demeaning. Since they were level headed and understood it was a way for me to remember them and give that person character.”

You really want to have that passed as an excuse? Incredible…

“I can see how you would think I’m demeaning you.”

I said “tried” ;). But even without the comments of my ethnicity, you’ve already resorted to name calling. I didn’t even have to resort to that, just laid out my supports and facts. But, from what I’m understanding, that action alone apparently insulted you. Maybe because you don’t have anything to back up your claims, and you know it.

I’m also not seeing any counter arguments you’re making. The last few comments I’ve been seeing is you constantly accusing me of destroying this nation, and every new “point” you try to bring up, all irrelevant to this subject (OJ, a moms getting sent to prison, politicians and porn, wow…), I either counter or point out how you’re all over the place. And you get more and more upset.

You’re daughter must be proud.
Mature Gamer
6th July 2011

Stew, it is apparent you’re overly sensitive.

My comment on Asian being any bit of racist was in light of how upset you were becoming because you took it as racist, clearly.

If you take my comment of Asian as name calling, then you have your own emotional issues that are interfering with your judgment in this discussion. If you have taken anything I’ve said out of context because you think I was directly assaulting you and I’m out to get you, then you should step back and think about exactly how paranoid you are.

If points made are not clear to you, then again, your judgment is clouded and NOW this all is becoming moot and pointless.

I can search and throw dozens upon dozens of articles and people who share the same opinion as me but what will that gain? A bigger and more pointless discussion of unending debate because you do not wish to yield. I’ve been where you sat and here I am now. Why? I decided to think for myself.

Consider taking some time to think about all I’ve said, do your research. Although, all you should study on would take you a long time since there is much you don’t know because you would rather stay blind because you feel so strongly. There’s a such thing as wanting to be proved wrong and I have yet to read anything to prove what I’m saying wrong. It’s all politics and that will never change because the people who have the power, which is me because the Constitution says so, no longer can use that power. But if you’re blind, you still think you do because it says so. But really, open your eyes, you have little to no power to change anything.

This conversation seems to be upsetting you more then I as I am just stating what is on my mind with NO anger in it at all. Probably because I thought about it first.

All those things I brought up were made as basis of point. But here we are, you seemingly think all I’ve said was pointless. Congrats, throw it all out the window because you seem to think it has nothing to do with this. This subject is just part of it all. And what I brought up is the other parts of it all. Your unwillingness, clearly, to have any understanding but to try to argue “You’re wrong.” each time your reply just makes this a pointless conversation. Pearl before swine but then again, you will take that as highly offensive rather then the principle behind it. Sayings and words are just that, sayings. I don’t use them to demean you. You just take it that way because of how society is today. Thus, you just helped prove how destructive society is becoming. Thank you.
Stew
6th July 2011

@S978 Truth

It’s about possibilities. That’s where the concern is. If you seriously have been catching up on YouTube, a lot of users lately made sure to credit the person whose works they are borrowing.

If you’ve ever heard of DSP, he uploads playthroughs. In the past, he’s had a number of his accounts cancelled out because there are those who reported him for infringement. At the time, he wasn’t a partner, and he wasn’t in it for the money, he did it just because he wanted to. But, he still got warnings and implications of court actions. Luckily, he got all that worked out, but not before going through heaps of unwanted hassle.

DSP, and others like him who also went through those things, they’re concerned because before, it was a subject of civil law. Now it’s meant to be one under criminal law, meaning the government can do whatever they want. Again, it’s a subject of possibilities, and trust issues goes both ways. With that said, I’m not trying to hide anything. I quoted a passage for its vagueness. Not my fault you’re not keeping up.

And now that we’re back into discussing the subject, I see even more how Mature Gamer’s excerpts are so completely off topic lol.
Garrett
6th July 2011

Mature Gamer

No one said it but the way you were talking made it sound like that.

I don’t care what you say. Just next time you start a internet fight, take a look at what your name means.
Mature Gamer
6th July 2011

Garret, different opinions will always seem like a fight is starting. Because people just don’t agree and get upset and attack. I started nothing but stated my feelings on the subject. Other people contributing make it seem I am some bad guy for feeling the way I do. Hey thanks, I feel like a minority! Haha, I’m joking clearly. :P

And there many ways to define Mature, so perhaps brushing up on it from a proper dictionary will help.
Stew
6th July 2011

@Mature Gamer

We’re done. You’re trying to logically point out how you’re not being racist after you wrote this:

“Asian is a word to categorize your cultural indifference.”

It would be less demeaning if you were to just come out and admit it.

And you’re trying to play the blame game of who’s more upset than the other when you already struck with responses like:

“Good for you, Stew. It’s always nice to see a fool endorsing more foolish garbage by politicians who can’t even run their own lives nor run a country properly. And also giving stupid parents an excuse for being incompetent. You should be ashamed of yourself.”

We also have other readers pointing out your behavior and you’ve even gone as far as to attack one of them. Your credibility died way before this even started. In the end, there’s no need for me to prove any of this because your words are written out for the world to read. You wrote your thoughts, I merely provided a link that disproved it, you got upset and called me a fool, I pointed out how it’s silly of you to do that, you went berserk.

However:

“open your eyes, you have little to no power to change anything.”

Practice what you preach. I hope your daughter is spared of seeing you acting like this in person. Good luck to the both of you.

S978 Truth, let’s keep going.
S978 Truth
6th July 2011

@Stew

Like I said, copyright holders already have the right to force removal of copyrighted content and sue you. Whether you make money on it or not. Judging from how many times I’ve looked through old articles on cracked.com and seen youtube videos from them that I can’t watch because they were removed due to copyright claims, it seems to happen a lot.
The bill doesn’t make it any more illegal to put up copyrighted content.

All it does do is put in a specific penalty with a 10-strike rule in 180 days (which, as a side point, means you could wait half a year and the old warnings roll off), but specifically only for things which are being infringed, again, “for the PURPOSE” of financial gain.
A video of someone flipping a car over a building in GTA and then landing it perfectly is not uploaded for the purpose of financial gain.
There may be a side effect of revenue from advertisements, but the key is that it’s not for the purpose of financial gain. It’s just something cool they wanted to share.

If they put it up now, technically the copyright holders already have the right to say “No, we don’t want you to do that.” and have it taken down. If it’s not happening now, what are the odds it’ll happen just because it becomes a criminal offense?
Especially consider the copyright holders’ point of view. Do they really want the publicity of being that company that sent a guy to jail because he wanted to show off a trick he did in GTA?

Again, the problem is that the article leaves out crucial details, in that the first half of the bill, the part you mentioned, only amends a punishment for those who do it for the purpose of financial gain.
People read that, missing that crucial detail, and think “Oh, this applies to everybody!”
Then they spread the word to other people, who believe them because why not?
Then it spreads more, and more, and more.
Soon, you’ve got mobs protesting something that they don’t even understand.
Ignorance doesn’t benefit anybody.
Stew
6th July 2011

S978 Truth, I know what you’re getting at but you’re laying it out under civil law guidelines. As I already detailed, this bill is meant for criminal law guidelines.

I also detailed that because it would be placed under criminal law, EVEN IF copyright holders say they don’t have a problem with their work put out there, and they don’t want to press charges, the government can bypass that and press charges themselves.

As I explained, people like DSP, they were originally people who uploaded vids onto YouTube because they thought it’d be great. Not because they wanted money. A number of these individuals faced close calls. Despite they say they had no intentions to make money off their work at the time, the other side still assumed otherwise. I mean really, how can you prove to someone that you’re not doing it for the money when you do something like that? It’s just naturally assumed.

I wouldn’t doubt that copyright holders may continue to hold their current opinion in regard if the bill was passed. How confident can you say that the government would share the same mentality? Again, this is about what-ifs, and the it’s drawing closer and closer to home.

To believe otherwise, with the government’s track record on their attempts to control the industry, is what’s truly ignorant.
Renaud Lavoie
6th July 2011

If you are in another country than USA, this might still affect you. It applies to posting those videos on a USA company as well. Hopefully, if the bill is passed,

1. We could make our own video system, which would indeed be based somewhere else, or post the videos on our blogs and promote them via Youtube.

2. Some game makers already plan on putting a specific line in the Terms of Service of their games saying that they allow players to publish videos of their games.
s978 Truth
6th July 2011

What does the government stand to gain if they go hunting around youtube for copyright infringements if the copyright holders say “No, it’s cool, man. Let ‘em do it.”?
Heck, apparently Capcom is planning on integrating youtube uploading into some future games and including, by default, licenses to allow it. The government wouldn’t be able to touch those ones, at least. Or any company that may follow suit by giving limited authorization to post the materials for non-profit.

It’s also actually really easy to prove that it isn’t for profit. You do it by not making any money off of it. And like I explained, you don’t need to be making a profit for them to have the right to tell you to stop sharing their stuff. They have the right right now to tell you to not do it, regardless of profit. If someone was told to take down their infringements before now, that doesn’t automatically mean they were assumed to be making money.

And, as I already explained again, the specific punishment mentioned in the bill is ONLY FOR INFRINGEMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCIAL GAIN. Even the government couldn’t charge you if it’s not for financial gain.
And as I mentioned to Evo before, specifically for youtube, the only people who could make profit off it (Youtube partners) already must have permission to use any and all materials used in their videos, no exceptions.
A random schmoe posting a video on youtube makes the schmoe no money, therefore there’s no reason to consider it for profit. The only ones who would make money, must have permission already. Youtube, at least, is safe.
Stew
6th July 2011

The reason Evo brought up the YouTube partnership is because organizations like Machinima, whose made up of independent filmmakers, will be affected by this. Same will happen for people like DSP. He’s come a long way and already has permission from various publishers to do playthroughs of their games. The point you’re not understanding is that this is meant to be installed into criminal law guidelines, meaning the government will make the decisions, not the copyright holders. Copyright holders can do everything in their power to try and accommodate their consumers, but it’s still left up to the government if they want to do anything about it. If you’re still having a hard time understanding that read this article by UltraDavid (who happens to be an actual lawyer):

http://shoryuken.com/2011/06/29/trolling-the-stream-by-ultradavid/

DSP also:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hytigOSjJxc

If they can’t put up vids, or at least have to go through the hassle of hiring a lawyer to contact each publisher’s legal dept, it would trickle down and affect the average joes.

As to what the government has to gain from all this? Same reason for the case that was attempted as outlined in the joystiq article that I tried showing Mature Gamer. It’s control.

Repeat this to yourself, civil law = copyright holder’s power. Criminal law = government’s power.
S978 Truth
6th July 2011

Except the government can’t actually do anything if the copyright holders do, in fact, allow the use of the materials. The government is not being allowed to bypass the copyright holders’ exclusive rights to authorize the use of the materials.
If a copyright holder says “It’s okay for people to post videos of themselves playing our games”, the government can’t go “Nuh uh, we’re charging them.” Because the copyright holders have the right to authorize any use of their materials that they see fit.

So Capcom saying they’ll include a default license saying it’s okay?
Government can’t ignore that.

And, again, it’s still only going to be affecting people who are doing it for the purpose of financial gain without authorization from the copyright holder. It already stands to reason that if you’re planning on making money off someone else’s work, it’s a very good idea to check with them first. If you’re making money off someone else’s copyrighted work and you didn’t check with them first? You deserve your punishment.
Enburst
6th July 2011

I just checked out this article to find out what the bill was exactly. But this conversation between Stew and Mature Gamer is somewhat interesting. As far as i understand you (mg) want to ban all violent/mature video games because a kid could possibly get their hands on them? To me, videogames are in the same category as rated r movies and books. To believe that they have a negative effect on children is completely reasonable ( i believe that too). To ban them for all citizens is not an option. It is a slippery slope to ban something that one group finds to be unpleasant and/or evil. It is actually our western values that influence the laws that give us the freedom to be -what some would call-immoral. These kinds of things are solely in the hands of the parents and immediate family. If you want to live someplace where the government can edit entertainment then go ahead and move to North Korea (ironically an “Asian” country your implication about asian values is completely false i am afraid).

Just one more point. MG once you mentioned that the government was flawed (no argument there) but you cited the fact that certain criminals have slipped through the system. This is totally off topic but let me explain to you why this can unfortunately happen sometimes. The government looks at the situation statistically. There are 2 possible errors. One is that an innocent person is wrongfully incarcerated/executed. The other is that a guilty person is let free. In our society we feel that the first error is much worse than the second (can you imagine going to jail for something you didnt do!) so we have set up the system in such a way to minimize the first error at the expense of increasing the statistical probability of the second. I hope that enlightens you a little bit about the process.

I wont be checking this website again so please dont bother to reply. Just consider the points
Stew
6th July 2011

Again, repeat this to yourself, civil law = copyright holder’s power. Criminal law = government’s power.

My information was gathered from UltraDavid’s (David P. Graham) writings, a lawyer who specializes in copyright cases. I’ve given you the link to read his findings. You don’t want to, okay, I’m fine with that. You’ve also made your point that you yourself don’t believe this to be a serious issue. I’m okay with that too. But to go back and forth and with you trying to tell me that a lawyer’s information is wrong, and you’ve not shown me your credentials? Ridiculous.

Now this is beginning to be as pointless as the tussle with Mature Gamer. Like I said, if you don’t agree with this article, I’m really okay with that. But now it seems you just wanna kick a dead horse while attempting to dissuade others from reading. As you can see, it’s too late to do that.

We’re done here.
Stew
6th July 2011

Enburst,

I know you said that you won’t be checking the website again, but just letting you know as much as I appreciate your words, trust me, you and everyone else won’t have to worry about Mature Gamer anymore.
S978 Truth
6th July 2011

That’s some real nice appeal to authority fallacy you’ve got there.

I have, in fact, already read that article. In fact, I posted a comment on his followup article.

Problem is, even he continuously uses the word “unauthorized”.

And Title 17, section 106 isn’t being amended, which grants copyright holders exclusive rights to authorize uses of copyrighted materials. If companies do like Capcom is already stated to be planning and include a blanket authorization to allow non-profit uploads to services like Youtube, the government can’t touch that.

The government could try to exercise authority over this, blowing far too much money, time, and manpower trying to shut down people that the copyright holders don’t have any problems with. But if the copyright holders say it’s okay, they can’t bypass that by the copyright holder’s right to allow it.

I also don’t appreciate people throwing out articles from other people to read and yet not explaining the specific sections that apply to the argument at hand. It’s lazy and ignorant.
Nothing in that article proves that the government could ignore authorization from copyright holders, which is what I was stating. If I missed something, man up and point it out. Don’t tell me that it’s there and I’m just lazy for not reading it.
Stew
6th July 2011

“It’s lazy and ignorant.”

Likewise for not wanting to read. Pot and kettle.

Since you said you read UltraDavid’s follow up article, you might’s encountered this passage:

“Another common question: what if I’m streaming for free and not trying to make any money, am I safe then? That depends. The bill would be built into a law that already applies only when an offense is committed “for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain.” But what does that phrase mean?

Obviously people who are trying to make a business are implicated. People who are trying to support their hobby or charity etc by making money are also implicated, since the law doesn’t require profit, only that the purpose of the performance include financial gain of any kind. Even people who don’t necessarily intend to make money might be uploading, streaming, or embedding on a site that has advertisements, and the very presence of those ads could imply that the purpose of the performances is financial.

So here’s a scenario. You’re uploading replays to YouTube and then embedding them on your personal website, which has some small set of ads to help you recoup your expenses without making a profit. Over the course of 180 days you make at least 10 videos, and you make way less than $2,500 on your ads. But the copyright holder for the game you’re using would have been able to charge $5,001 for a license to legally upload the copyrighted audiovisual work in their game. Are you breaking the law? You bet.”

Oh btw, another section from the same article:

“The major issue for more reasonable people who want to stream or upload other kinds of copyrighted works is the uncertainty.”

and

“The major issue for more reasonable people who want to stream or upload other kinds of copyrighted works is the uncertainty. Are you willing to risk jail time on the off chance that your Ocarina of Time walkthroughs draw the ire of the federal government? I mean, I’d definitely think twice. And as for more popular streamers, casters, and uploaders, are you still willing to try to make a business out of this or support your hobby? Would any sponsors be willing to back a streaming organization that at any time could (probably not, but could) get shut down for illegality? I think this bill could lead to a massive chilling effect at both the smaller individual levels and the larger more popular levels. Again, I would hate to see that happen.”

There, I was nice enough cater to your chosen handicap. Oh one more thing, yes, it was there and you were just lazy for not reading it.

I’m sorry, who needs to man up again? lol…SMH
Stew
6th July 2011

For those who would like to see the actual follow up article itself, from UltraDavid, you can find it here:

http://shoryuken.com/2011/06/30/tolling-the-stream-follow-up-ultradavid-responds/
s978 Truth
6th July 2011

So…. what part of those said that the government could bypass the authorization of the copyright holders to allow you to post videos of their material for non-profit?

Y’know, the thing I was just talking about?

It’s okay, I know you’re new at this research thing, but you’re actually supposed to look up things relevant to the current subject matter.
Stew
6th July 2011

First you want me to point out the exact passages. I did. But now you don’t want to read them? Lol.

This has gone on long enough dude. Not only have you not shown any credibility or any support for what you’re trying to convey, meanwhile I did, and I didn’t have to, but you’re no better than Mature Gamer. The types that say that they don’t need “technical stuff” to support their opinions. You do, if you want to bridge them as facts.

I’ve done all I can. Everyone can see that. Meanwhile, I’m not sure if you realized it, but you’ve only demonstrated yourself as a broken record. But by all means, say your final words, go out on a limb to discredit me and my ability to research. But none of that will change how you’ve already discredited yourself as someone lacking the basic capacity to read in the first place.

SMH
Viktor
6th July 2011

This bill is absolutely ridiculous. The effects on the gaming industry would be catastrophic at best, seeing as over half of their effective advertisement would be made illegal, and the discretion handed straight over to the government. This isn’t the only issue with this, but it also greatly inhibits public rights to expression, AS WELL as discriminatory rights removal from the entire gaming industry.
NO
6th July 2011

As some of you already know, it is already illeagal to upload copyrighted material to youtube, whether or not you are making a profit from it. (although if you arent youre less likely to get in trouble)
However if you upload copyrighted material for the purposes of education, comment, or parody as stated under the Fair use act, you dont even nessesariy need permission.

check out this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j57sFprvSeI
Jesus
6th July 2011

What are these fat fucks in the senate thinking?? Why the hell are they doing this?? and Now of all times?
Stew
6th July 2011

@NO: Very insightful. I’m gonna pass the vid along to UltraDavid, see what he says.
Viktor
6th July 2011

@NO That was actually very clarifying to the issue at hand, though I will set aside some time to read through the bill and all affiliated works to see what conclusion I draw from it myself. Thanks for bringing up this point, it should certainly help settle certain confusions about this bill. I think the main crux of this argument is the simple vagueness of the statements (well at least without definite clarification) provided.
Stew
6th July 2011

@Viktor

Indeed. The vagueness of that sentence alone is uneasy as is the uncertainty that surrounds it. Also evident in the arguments here with SOME people here lol. If the bill gets rewritten and clarified, that’s what counts, and there’s a lot to be accounted for.
Viktor
6th July 2011

@Stew What I think would definitely put this argument to rest is an outline of PRECISELY this bill will do, as well as the terms it alludes to. Cutting out the vagueness, and essentially putting everything straight in easy to follow dialect, which anyone could follow.
From there, it’s up to the individual person to agree with it or not, instead of arguing on about what they think it means, and so forth.
Stew
6th July 2011

Exactly! And people wonder why this has become such a big deal lol.
Chris
6th July 2011

Even though this is a US law it will effect youtube because I’m pretty sure youtube is a US company and they could add it to there terms and conditions and take down all videos that contain video games
SystemXRG
6th July 2011

Question: I am station here in Okinawa, Japan because my dad’s in the Military. Do I count in this also?
That one guy
6th July 2011

surely this will not pass because its pointless,it goes against freedom of speech,no one will benefit from it.If this were to pass it probably wouldn’t be effective for long.
Ryan
6th July 2011

@mature gamer
if you want Rated m games to be banned then lets also ban:
All rated r movies
Any book that describes sex,war,or drugs/alcohol
and just the internet in general
zdragonmasher
6th July 2011

so would that mean that movie review stuff on the intenter would be taken down as well?
Stew
6th July 2011

I’m not exactly sure how indie movie critic material would fall under this but I doubt it. The subject of movies have already been laid out clearly in Titles 17 and 18.

But given the vagueness of this bill, the term “performance” can be used to identify a number of different thing. Uncertainty is killer, that’s the big concern.
Evo
6th July 2011

DSP released an update video with more information about the bill:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9ARHuWIuAc&feature=feedu
Domon Kasshu
6th July 2011

Wow stew you’re such a baby. Deleting articles you don’t agree with,and not pointing out where the one you were debating with was wrong and just go. (lol u shud read) Atleast Truth didn’t resort to such petty actions and read the bill. I want truth back.
Evo
6th July 2011

@Domon
“and not pointing out where the one you were debating with was wrong ”

You mustn’t have read his responses. Seriously, can you not read? Or does that above sentence translate into something wholly different in the downs-dictionary?
Domon Kasshu
6th July 2011

@Evo
I did and he did not address the issue at all. All he did was post a line from someone else’s article(Which is pretty much a copy past of his) that didn’t explain things at all. Seriously, are you people really going to keep using ‘can’t you read excuse” instead of proving yourselves right? Talk about pathetic. “Oh i am superior to you I am never wrong. Oh what i proved myself right can’t you read hurr durr?” Pathetic the lot of you.
S.Gecko
6th July 2011

This has been said earlier in the thread, but it’s important to note that the text of the bill is all dependent on Sections 107 - 122 of Title 17 of the US Code: the fair use clauses.

It’s always been illegal to claim someone else’s work as your own. It’s always been okay to post derivative works (ie, commentary, reviews, snipes, snarks, sarcastic rants) using someone else’s work as the fodder. YouTube reviews of a game as a professional journalist will still be allowed because it’s not infringing the rights of the creator to profit from the game.

It’s a big scary world out there. I know. Don’t make it any scarier by jumping to conclusions. Fair use will always be allowed, and as soon as it smells like it won’t, then you should take a stand. This is not that time, however.
Briantehgamer
6th July 2011

Man i can’t believe that this bill is even being CONSIDERED.

I agree that they should ban movies and tv shows from being illegally uploaded.

But it’s upsetting to do this to video games.

This is violation of the first ammendment, everyone will just be pissed and protests and riots will start.

In the end just think of it this way:

Your solving a problem but causing more problems. No logic in that lol.

@mature gamer
Look at your name i believe it has the word MATURE in it. If you are truly a mature gamer then you wouldn’t be fighting with not just the site owner but fighting with some people commenting on the website. Instead of fighting go spend time with your daughter it’s time to get off the computer. :)
S978 Truth
6th July 2011

@briantehgamer

It’s already illegal to profit off of someone else’s copyrighted material without authorization.

How does the bill, which only tacks on a criminal punishment to something you already aren’t allowed to do, violate the first amendment?
S978 Truth
6th July 2011

@Evo

Okay, if it’s so obvious, how about YOU point it out for us? It’s easy to accuse others of not reading, but it should be also easy to point out where in the couple paragraphs he linked it had anything to do with the actual point being made.

The material’s right there. You want to back him up? Do the work he couldn’t do. Explain the context of those passages quoted.
gman
6th July 2011

I think in the eyes of the law, player video game footage will be considered much like a performance on a musical instrument. So footage of you doing new and original moves in your own unique context of the game, will pretty much be like you playing your own original song on a trademarked Fender guitar. However, if you replicate someone’s documented game-play move by move, scene by scene (who would do that? Is it possible?) then watch out.
John
6th July 2011

this will apply to every nation due to the fact the youtube is American based. This bill is completely going to far into controlling the rights of the American people.
Stew
6th July 2011

@Domon

It’s obvious you were called upon by S978 Truth. I have nothing to say to anyone who got the house call to come to someone’s rescue on an internet debate (which was very babyish of him). But if it means that much to you, I kept prior comments because S978 was on topic at first and I appreciated that, regardless of his disagreement. Afterwards, it got to the point where he wasn’t. He wanted evidence, I gave it to him. But apparently he didn’t expect that I would do that, and he decided to repeat himself just for the sake of fulfilling some misplaced hate. The only two comments I deleted was him licking his wounds and accusing me of attacking him. Which he could do infront of the mirror at home, not here. Therefore, everything you’re saying isn’t contributing, just adding fuel to the fire. Goodbye.

@S978, that’s your problem if you didn’t think I was arguing my point clearly, it’s also your problem that you didn’t want to read the examples you asked for. Everything I copied and pasted I made sure were on point. I understand however, that because they were rather large paragraphs, that’d intimidate you. I honestly don’t mind if you wanted to keep repeating yourself, but because you resorted to asking someone else to fight your own battles/strike on your own behalf, that’s spamming the site, and I honestly expected better from you. Btw you did see that I linked to the actual bill? Did you check the dictionary recently for the words “could” and “uncertainty”. Wait nvm, I actually don’t care.

@S.Gecko

Yes you’re correct, but the issue here is the uncertainty. It’s one thing if the government doesn’t usually pursue these things on their own, but to slap the five years jail time as a possible penalty, that’s something that not even the little people would want to risk so long as there’s a 1% chance. I believe that’s an agreed conclusion.
joesolo13
6th July 2011

well, as long as the video game publisher says somthing to the effect of “we grant permission for you to make videos of our game as long as its not for profit” wed be fine.
Anything
6th July 2011

Out of all things they could choose to ban, they chose to ban any gameplay of video games being uploaded on video sharing sites?
JACK
7th July 2011

WHY DO WE HAVE TO FIGHT FOR OUR RIGHTS? THATS LIKE BUYING A HOUSE AND FIGHTING TO KEEP IT
jtfta
8th July 2011

well since youtube is stationed in the us all game related video will be taken down we have to get rid of this bill
Neuro
8th July 2011

I show my dissatisfaction towards this bill in the form of an equally unsatisfactory flash game!
Neuro
8th July 2011

http://www.mochigames.com/games/klobber-the-klob/
Bob
11th July 2011

I’m going to laugh so hard when the economy breaks if they pass this bill.
Burr Klover
12th July 2011

wtf this is gay as fuck were not following this fuck the congress
Braden
16th July 2011

this is so stupid, and everyone is gonna ignore it, the chances of getting caught would be low, besides, why bother, who really wants this bill to go through
Andrew
20th July 2011

It won’t get passed not enough support :B
Marcin
21st July 2011

I think its stupid because the only reson i got into gameing is because i saw like hutch or wings play call of duty and i went out and bought a game so i can say a lot of peopel got into gameing because of gameing so the only thign that bill is goig to do is fuck up our economy.
AquaBubble
12th September 2011

Every single video game I own, I found on a youtube walkthrough. I would never have known most these games even existed if I wasn’t able to find a video of them and watch it to see if I’d even like the game before buying it. Hell I probably would only have like, 5 games total if it wasn’t for video walkthroughs.

That said, this wipes out a large abundance of advertising as, even though the videos may break copyright, it bounces back and gives the gaming companies more money because people can see the game before buying it. Possibly even a game they never even knew existed. Every view on these videos is a possible profit for these companies, and I get the feeling if this passes then there will be a lot more problems made and nothing fixed. Especially since most of the GOOD walkthroughs are people with youtube partnerships and its really not that hard to get a partnership without permission from the gaming company to post those videos. Hence why even partnered people still get their videos deleted or their accounts banned.

Not to mention walkthroughs with commontary is like, 50% of my internet entertainment as well as my only source of help if I am stuck in a game. If anything these videos promote the games rather than violate copyrights. If I owned a gaming company I would seriously openly support walkthroughs and machinma and such. My fiance does machinima and is VERY good at it, I’d hate to see his reaction if this passed. It’s his machinima that got him invited into film school and got him into the film festival.

Seriously. Theres so many more important issues that need fixing in this country, something as petty as video games should be dead last on the list.
yamon
28th September 2011

good, I’m so tired of newbies watching YouTube to become good at a game. In my opinion, play the game don’t obsess over it. On the other hand this bill is sooo ridiculous. Sigh, i feel for the newbies this time.
Houston Keene
3rd December 2011

The jackasses in Congress need to look at the internet as it is right now, at the people who purchase the games before making these videos. They own the games, and most of the games used get a ton of free publicity. But NOOOO…. The damn government thinks that this is copyright infringement. In truth, most videos using games give the credit they deserve, but the government assholes decide that we cant do that anymore. The internet is an international service that should not be so restricted. We have a thing called the first amendment that says we have the right to free speech, press, petition, etc. By saying we cannot make videos about stuff we like, they are restricting our free speech. They cannot do this.
Zac
6th January 2012

This is unacceptable. Period. Rooster Teeth would be shut down, Machinima would be gone, YouTube would most likely shut down as well. Hundreds of thousands of people would be placed under arrest and fined. And that would affect te while world. I live in Canada, and if I put a video on YouTube featuring a game, I could be charged because YouTube is American and the game is most likely American. This bill would destroy the gaming industry. Just yesterday, I didn’t know how to do something in a game. I logged on to YouTube, searched it up, watched a video, and five minutes later was doing it myself. This cannot happen. And also, what about those people in Europe or elsewhere? The US government would have to go to their country and arrest them, with expenses going through the roof. Congress must truly think this out ALL THE WAY.