All I do with YouTube is upload old movies... I get probably 10k views/month (probably less... admittedly, I haven't checked in a while) and I make about $35 each month. So personally, from me if I were a LPer, Nintendo and I would get roughly 16.50 each off my tiny ass viewership. Multiply that by ten YouTubers, that's 165 that Nintendo did not have to work for, and that the Tuber barely worked for. An active LPer should be able to garner a much larger viewership than my dinky little channel. A professional LPer shouldn't have an issue making the rent.
I personally feel like mods are okay to monetize and fit the mold of a creator/consumer economy very well. As long as the original game publisher is okay with monetized mods, so am I. People deserve to be compensated for their time, effort, and talent.
Pretty sure that's what my second paragraph is about?
"Needs to Will Different Things"
Uh, kay? Isn't the point of this conversation to identify the things that are wrong with the system? How does saying "Yeah, but the fatcats will never do it" move things forward?
I personally feel like mods are okay to monetize and fit the mold of a creator/consumer economy very well. As long as the original game publisher is okay with monetized mods, so am I. People deserve to be compensated for their time, effort, and talent.
(03-27-2016, 07:03 PM)DarkGrievous7145 Wrote:(03-27-2016, 12:05 PM)Kriven Wrote: First of all: The concept of copyright is not inherently flawed. Its intention was to protect creators so sleazy third-parties could not repackage and sell their artwork, which was a legitimate problem for authors in the 19th and mid-20th century. If content creators cannot survive, there will be less content created. The continued advancement of culture depends on the existence of copyright law.
All that said, corporations and a handful of personal estates have taken a system designed to protect individuals and bastardized it to suit themselves. This is what is broken and what needs to change.
Just as important as a copyright law is a public domain stipulation... Presently nothing can fall out of copyright in the US, which has created a large void in accessible material. It's causing creators and consumers to become blind to the history of media, due in large part by copyright holders refusing to relinquish their ownership or to reprint old material. This is why material from the 1960s onward is so prohibitively expensive. It just isn't readily available, with exceptions of course. Just look at the thousands of video games officially trapped on old hardware... it is only the efforts of pirates that keep these games publicly consumable.
Second: Development tools aren't marketed for individuals, they are marketed for development studios. "How's a guy expected to afford Adobe?" doesn't work as an argument because a guy isn't expected to afford these programs... a collective is. Particularly where game development suites are concerned.
Yet the very law intended to protect content creation, if not patched, shall cease it.
Yeah, it needs to...but needs to and will be or two entirely different things.
Exactly. This needs to stop.
There are many games tied-down to just about everything. And it is sad a majority of them will be destroyed, and forgotten forever. And it's not necessarily just older hardware or software. I would expect even the "newer" stuff to one day cease to exist if someone doesn't archive it. But it's only the pirates that will do this.
Pretty sure that's what my second paragraph is about?
"Needs to Will Different Things"
Uh, kay? Isn't the point of this conversation to identify the things that are wrong with the system? How does saying "Yeah, but the fatcats will never do it" move things forward?