He he, they linked to JarlFrank's very first post on the Codex. How young and innocent he sounded then.
I don't have any sympathy for AJ, but there are plenty of hobbyists (LPers for example) out there who make videos for fun, and also get affected by this.
I don't have any sympathy for AJ, but there are plenty of hobbyists (LPers for example) out there who make videos for fun, and also get affected by this.
You can still watch the videos, but you can't earn money off them, so if you're doing this for fun, how does it affect you? Nintendo are dicks so they'll take down your LPs, but a lot of publishers won't
The videos get flagged, with a request to take them down under threat of shutting down the channel or even further steps. I have heard a few LPers talk about it, and this was because of Lps of games like Civ4.
He he, they linked to JarlFrank's very first post on the Codex. How young and innocent he sounded then.
Oh lol. Well, I still was young and naive back then, and not half as jaded as nowadays.
I've been on the Elder Scrolls forums for quite some time (...) creting a thread there which compares Oblivion to Dark Messiah of Might and Magic... in Roleplaying terms!
[I'm the evil pillow thrower mwahaha!]
No, I'm not a furry Jasede
Cheers!
~Qwynn
The videos get flagged, with a request to take them down under threat of shutting down the channel or even further steps. I have heard a few LPers talk about it, and this was because of Lps of games like Civ4.
As I understand it, a video being flagged doesn't mean a takedown request, it's just that it's under review during which you can't monetize it. That's what the major butthurt seems to be about
When you submit a dispute for a Content ID removal, the copyright owner has three options: (1) let it slide, leaving your video up; (2) sue you; or (3) send a DMCA takedown notice. For copyright owners who object to your video, and want to keep it down, the third path is generally the easiest. By sending a formal DMCA takedown notice to YouTube, the copyright owner can get your video removed again almost immediately, at which point you'll need to decide whether to counter-notice (see below). The takedown notice will also count as a "strike" on your account — after three strikes, YouTube will cancel all of your YouTube accounts and remove all of your videos. This probably explains why DMCA takedown notices are much more common on YouTube than lawsuits against uploaders — they are cheaper and faster for the copyright owner.
To sum up, if your video was removed by the Content ID tool, and you decide to dispute the removal, you will have tweaked the copyright owner's tail. Sometimes the copyright owner will decide that your video wasn't the kind of thing it meant to remove, and just leave the video alone. If, on the other hand, the copyright owner really wants the video to stay down, the easiest and cheapest way to accomplish that is to send a DMCA takedown notice. (Of course, the copyight owner always retains the option of suing you.)
More like the French Foreign Legion, taking rejects, malcontents and renegades from all over.everyone here is an exile of some sort it seems, gathering like a Free (insert nation-name-here) Army.
Who the hell needs money for anything, right? Doesn't everybody live in their mommy's basement?if they really loved what they were doing so much they could continue doing it, they don't *need* to monetize their videos after all.
So, you're basically suggesting that Angry Joe join IGN? You think that would somehow result in better content?If people like Angry Joe were smart they would do the youtube thing as a hobby, not an income, and build their name and content to the point where they can then get hired for actual companies doing actual quasi-journalism with an actual paycheck.
Who the hell needs money for anything, right? Doesn't everybody live in their mommy's basement?if they really loved what they were doing so much they could continue doing it, they don't *need* to monetize their videos after all.
So, you're basically suggesting that Angry Joe join IGN? You think that would somehow result in better content?
As if there's something wrong with being self-employed.
Oh FFS, talk about framing an argument in a weird fucking way. The point is job security, making it a career. Youtube uploading is not career, if for no other reason than Youtube terms of service control your life and can ruin you out of nowhere for minor reasons.
Who the hell needs money for anything, right? Doesn't everybody live in their mommy's basement?if they really loved what they were doing so much they could continue doing it, they don't *need* to monetize their videos after all.
They could consider learning a real trade and getting an actual job that would produce anything, fucking ANYTHING of value to society (and let's be honest here, cleaning toilets produces more value than making vidyagame reviews for retards on youtube). A novel concept, I know.
Oh FFS, talk about framing an argument in a weird fucking way. The point is job security, making it a career. Youtube uploading is not career, if for no other reason than Youtube terms of service control your life and can ruin you out of nowhere for minor reasons.
You can still watch the videos, but you can't earn money off them, so if you're doing this for fun, how does it affect you? Nintendo are dicks so they'll take down your LPs, but a lot of publishers won't
The bottom line is it isn’t their prerogative, YouTube isn’t their website and if it was they would be able to decide what they do with the content on it or how they monetize it.Whether we think their work is valuable or stable or whatever is beside the point, we're not their parents. The point is that making that stuff takes time and money, resources they could be using in activities that get them more money. The fact I'm doing something for fun doesn't necessarily mean I'll be okay with losing money for doing it.
And how is that different than any job?
He he, they linked to JarlFrank's very first post on the Codex. How young and innocent he sounded then.
Wait, you're from the ESF? Let me test a theory.
QUICK!
Who would you rather spend time with, you girlfriend or your large dog?
So you're not zoophile.
Okay, next question for you. Would your girlfriend be more attractive to you if she was a female bipedal fox? I am just making sure to keep track of what kind of ESFites we get, no offense intended. The choices range from kid (Azzy) to idiot (Azzy) to furry (Azzy). Don't make me start a new category because of you.
No, I don't think so. In fact, it's extremely stupid to attract furries to anything because they will scare the normal people away and are mostly idiots. If I was a developer, I would keep far away from anything catlike, wolflike, foxlike, or dragonlike and stick to humans.
Except when you do, and people do quite often. Hello litigation.And how is that different than any job?
Who knows, but when you get fired from your job you don't tend to claim your boss shouldn't be allowed to do so.
There's a shortage of jobs nowadays. Besides that, judging by Spoony, it seems to be a sort of last resort source of income for people who are too mentally ill to keep a job or study consistently.They could consider learning a real trade and getting an actual job that would produce anything, fucking ANYTHING of value to society (and let's be honest here, cleaning toilets produces more value than making vidyagame reviews for retards on youtube). A novel concept, I know.
So media has no value.They could consider learning a real trade and getting an actual job that would produce anything, fucking ANYTHING of value to society (and let's be honest here, cleaning toilets produces more value than making vidyagame reviews for retards on youtube). A novel concept, I know.