(07-03-2011, 06:19 PM)Kriven Wrote: [ -> ]They already have a formal course of action, seeing as the material is already illegal. However, the bill is stating that the federal court can arrest people without charges being pressed by the company. That's what the big deal is about. It's about the federal government arresting people for something the individual companies really don't give two shits about.
And where's the guarantee that even the federal government care enough to chase up the most egregious examples?
I fuckin' love LPs, but amusingly, all I can think of is this getting rid of the shitty Youtube Camcorder LPs. Which would improve the state of the Internet by measures. Though, it's good that you recognise/accept that LPs and the like are already illegal; I'm getting a lot of noise of people complaining that their rights are being impinged by this but... they never really had any rights in the first place.
(07-04-2011, 02:03 AM)GrooveMan.exe Wrote: [ -> ] (07-03-2011, 06:19 PM)Kriven Wrote: [ -> ]They already have a formal course of action, seeing as the material is already illegal. However, the bill is stating that the federal court can arrest people without charges being pressed by the company. That's what the big deal is about. It's about the federal government arresting people for something the individual companies really don't give two shits about.
And where's the guarantee that even the federal government care enough to chase up the most egregious examples?
I fuckin' love LPs, but amusingly, all I can think of is this getting rid of the shitty Youtube Camcorder LPs. Which would improve the state of the Internet by measures. Though, it's good that you recognise/accept that LPs and the like are already illegal; I'm getting a lot of noise of people complaining that their rights are being impinged by this but... they never really had any rights in the first place.
The fact of the matter is that they have the power to do so after this bill passes, and they will sure enforce and exorcise it to make people think twice about posting up this material on Youtube.
LP's and streams are practically free advertisement, I can understand if entire websites like are devoted to posting entire episodes of copyrighted material, becuase that is just wrong. They need to reword this bill. Gaming isn't even the main focus, it's the side effect.
P.S. They might as well name the the "Youtube killer" because crap like this is practically what it thrives off of.
Sooooo your argument is that LPs as a general concept are free advertising? While there are people dedicated to reviewing obscure or underrated games; the vast majority of online videogame footage is pretty much just shit. To the degree where there's a lot of high-quality content mocking the low-quality content. That's... not really great advertising.
Exposure is the key thing here, so no matter the quality of the lp it still has a chance of exposing the audience to a game that they have never seen before. That's all that really matters. Nice quality and commentary are just a personal bonus for people that want to be entertained.
(07-04-2011, 06:28 PM)GrooveMan.exe Wrote: [ -> ]Sooooo your argument is that LPs as a general concept are free advertising? While there are people dedicated to reviewing obscure or underrated games; the vast majority of online videogame footage is pretty much just shit. To the degree where there's a lot of high-quality content mocking the low-quality content. That's... not really great advertising.
This basically takes away peoples right to do things though. Why would you want a law that basically prohibits "normies" from posting video game footage. Becuase you don't like them and you would take that right away from all americans? Bullshit. This is exorcising communism. It's a little offensive that you are actually in favor of a bill that limits rights. What the crap is that.
P.S. No beef.
(07-04-2011, 10:22 PM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote: [ -> ]This is exorcising communism.
Communism is protecting a game company's rights?
Or is communism ensuring people don't freely stream another artist's music?
Either I'm all for communism or you're taking something you dislike and calling it communism.
I think people are taking this too far too heart cause this a forum based around video games. Please don't think this Bill was created to stop gaming streams and LP's, it wasn't. I'm not even American, I HATE knowing ANYTHING about Law, because if I can't get caught and it's minor I break it(Piracy please come try and stop me.), and even I know this is just Hollywood and Music Artists trying to protect their shit. Not that they've been producing much that requires them needing it protected, but whatever.
(07-04-2011, 10:31 PM)Sengir Wrote: [ -> ] (07-04-2011, 10:22 PM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote: [ -> ]This is exorcising communism.
Communism is protecting a game company's rights?
Or is communism ensuring people don't freely stream another artist's music?
Either I'm all for communism or you're taking something you dislike and calling it communism.
Like i already said, gaming videos aren't a focus, they are a side affect. I may have been too angry when I mentioned communism, but the bill is just so lazily written that it can affect MANY things. I won't support it unless changes are made.
P.S. I do not support priracy, I will however miss Animeseason and Dubhappy. Good by sweet playground of japenese Anime. Back to crappy ones that aren't ever on T.V. in my area.
(07-04-2011, 10:22 PM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote: [ -> ]This basically takes away peoples right to do things though. Why would you want a law that basically prohibits "normies" from posting video game footage. Becuase you don't like them and you would take that right away from all americans? Bullshit. This is exorcising communism. It's a little offensive that you are actually in favor of a bill that limits rights. What the crap is that.
P.S. No beef.
You seem to be missing the point where
they never had that right in the first place. They were already breaking copyright laws. The footage they're uploading was never 'theirs'. Purchasing a game gives you the right for the purachaser to play said game and not much else. In theory the average use of most games
would be breaking some kind of ToS, but the fact of the matter is that for the most part, the companies didn't act on it. It wasn't worth spending the resources to chase down shitty camcoder LPs.
What's changed now is that apparently the US government has the ability to chase down shitty camcorder LPs. But that's still going to cost time and money, something that they might not be so willing to spend, when the previous status quo was to leave most of it be, with the most flaunted examples excepting.
My more positive take on it is that with the US internetnet users somewhat more aware that LPs would be breaking the law, they either take greater steps in protecting what they're doing, or stop. And judging by the average quality of content; that's p. sweet.
I will admit that with the US not being the center of my universe, I am less 'moved' as it were by what this might do to my internet use, but all this cry about a 'loss of freedom' that wasn't actually even there is laughable.
Edit: I think this is the 3rd time I've said this. Deja Vu.
(07-05-2011, 02:21 AM)GrooveMan.exe Wrote: [ -> ] (07-04-2011, 10:22 PM)Negative-Zer0 Wrote: [ -> ]This basically takes away peoples right to do things though. Why would you want a law that basically prohibits "normies" from posting video game footage. Becuase you don't like them and you would take that right away from all americans? Bullshit. This is exorcising communism. It's a little offensive that you are actually in favor of a bill that limits rights. What the crap is that.
P.S. No beef.
You seem to be missing the point where they never had that right in the first place. They were already breaking copyright laws. The footage they're uploading was never 'theirs'. Purchasing a game gives you the right for the purachaser to play said game and not much else. In theory the average use of most games would be breaking some kind of ToS, but the fact of the matter is that for the most part, the companies didn't act on it. It wasn't worth spending the resources to chase down shitty camcoder LPs.
This is becuase video games have to be played. It doesn't hurt as much as it helps. Leaks can be a blow to a company, but other than that, there is now way you can get the same experience playing a game by watching a video other than buying it. ( i know the other illegal alternative)
What's changed now is that apparently the US government has the ability to chase down shitty camcorder LPs. But that's still going to cost time and money, something that they might not be so willing to spend, when the previous status quo was to leave most of it be, with the most flaunted examples excepting.
I don't see why they would waste money passing a bill like this with the other shit we have to deal with anyway.
My more positive take on it is that with the US internet [Minor spelling fix 
] users somewhat more aware that LPs would be breaking the law, they either take greater steps in protecting what they're doing, or stop. And judging by the average quality of content; that's p. sweet.
This is sugar coating a bad situation. I can also say " Loss of freedom of speech? At least those conspiracy theorist will shut the fuck up." [Keep in mind that this is an example not a direct comparative with the situation]
The bad, in laws like this, will ALWAYS outweigh the good if this is how you truly see it.
I will admit that with the US not being the center of my universe, I am less 'moved' as it were by what this might do to my internet use, but all this cry about a 'loss of freedom' that wasn't actually even there is laughable.
Loss of freedom of you doing an active activity. Gaming videos change every time you play them, no two are the same unless you copy the video. They are interactive with the user so it won't damage gaming companies in any way. It would help expose their game, seeing a game for free isn't as bad as seeing a movie becuase you have to pay to see a movie. You don't have to pay to see a game, you have to pay to play it. It should be re-written becuase I don't support piracy either.
Edit: I think this is the 3rd time I've said this. Deja Vu.
These are my views on the matter.
Hey, just curious: Does this bill also make covers of songs illegal?
Not all laws are enforced anyway. In the Netherlands, soft-drugs like marihuana technically still isn't legal, or at least it wasn't for a very long time, although the law was never enforced for such drugs.
I see it more as a waste of tax money that could have been spent in a better way.
I think as long as you create the baking tracks and what have you, instead of just singing over a recording of the song you are covering, it'd still be legal. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
(07-05-2011, 04:59 PM)GaryCXJk Wrote: [ -> ]Not all laws are enforced anyway.
This is the RIAA though. They're notoriously aggressive.
(07-03-2011, 04:52 PM)Zac Wrote: [ -> ]jeeze I just recently started doing let's plays
that's depressing
actually I could probably finish at least one game before this bill passes
Don't worry. I don't think it's going to pass. Either way you can get company permission to do one you just have to send an email to them and ask. Believe it or not most game companies are pretty cool with stuff like that.