Don't even expect this to happen in the foreseeable future.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Twitch banning Age of Calamity streamers (game is out in JPN/AUS)
- Thread starter Soulflarz
- Start date
The streamer themselves claimed it was Nintendo, at least, and some news sites reported it being done by NoA.
Sounds like someone got a little bit too trigger happy because the game leaked early a few days ago. So dumb.
Nintendo being extremely restrictive when it comes to keeping content (especially "surprises") under wraps before release isn't anything out of the ordinary with them.
Nintendo being extremely restrictive when it comes to keeping content (especially "surprises") under wraps before release isn't anything out of the ordinary with them.
I was on my way to steal the rights to Zelda from Nintendo but due to them protecting their IP today I'm afraid my dastardly plan has been unceremoniously foiled.
I realize it's out in other places. And this doesn't normally happen so it feels automated to me based on how Twitch's dumb system and hard rules regarding this works.
No.
1) If it breaks Twitch rule, Twitch is just enforcing ToS.
2) If it doesn't break a Twitch rule, NoA is free to issue a DMCA takedown for a stream as it is legally their IP (just like a movie or play).
The only exception to #2 would be something like a review, for which a DMCA takedown would not apply.
They mad at us because of the Joy Cons, this is their revenge. Just making sure we have a real inconvenience on our hands.
KT publishes the game in Japan, but this thread says Nintendo made the claim.
Nintendo is one of those company I want to love but they just make so many bad decisions that I can't help but not like them.
Just why do they keep doing this type of shit?
Just why do they keep doing this type of shit?
Every week here the 'screw you Nintendo' sentiment crops up in at least one dedicated thread.
When it's deserved but gets buried just the same as the others, it's a little strange.
This is a forum problem and not a 'hater' or 'defender' problem though.
When it's deserved but gets buried just the same as the others, it's a little strange.
This is a forum problem and not a 'hater' or 'defender' problem though.
OP
OP
Stopping back here to say that courts intentionally avoided saying whether or not any normal streaming is transformative the only time it's ever gone to court, so nintendo is definitely fighting in a gray area here - h3h3 lawsuit made that very clear if memory serves me correctly.
Twitch runs an automated report system for games being played before release and it's usually not a problem. Something screwed up here and it isn't recognizing the timezones. You will often get banned if you play a game before release on Twitch, and it's why for those that have an early release copy will stream to YouTube, rather than their Twitch account.
you can't just call me out for being illiterate like thisThe Nintendo fandom after reading your comment.
Honestly I can't remember, I only heard about it after the fact but I'm pretty sure I read that it was an American branch that caused the takedown.
I don't understand how these ban systems work but is it not just an automated system scanning the platform for a copyright infringement that has been supplied as "not allowed to be played until xxx day xxx time"? And then if someone does play it before that the Twitch ban is automatic?
In that case this might just be a technical error since Twitch runs on US time.
I may be wrong and these are manually triggered bans ofc, but I almost can't imagine Nintendo would put the manpower into observing this so closely.
In that case this might just be a technical error since Twitch runs on US time.
I may be wrong and these are manually triggered bans ofc, but I almost can't imagine Nintendo would put the manpower into observing this so closely.
Anyway I can understand this no? Well not the bans, but taking it down at least.
I mean over half the people who will play this game can't get it yet, I don't think it's crazy to prevent people from freely putting it out there for thousands of people before the game is out, who in turn will take screen caps and videos and post them to twitter or whatever hours before people in the US can even play the game.
ERA is pretty spoilerphobic so I'm surprised this has you all riled up.
Straight up Banning is dumb though
I mean over half the people who will play this game can't get it yet, I don't think it's crazy to prevent people from freely putting it out there for thousands of people before the game is out, who in turn will take screen caps and videos and post them to twitter or whatever hours before people in the US can even play the game.
ERA is pretty spoilerphobic so I'm surprised this has you all riled up.
Straight up Banning is dumb though
Even if it was intentional for that reason it would still be unfair to give people suspensions with no warning.
Agreed on that, but taking down the stream isn't too crazy imo. I'm not sure if people are debating just the ban part or not
That lawsuit passed because it was both critical and a parody, so fell well into fair use.
Simply layering generic commentary over something isn't enough to pass the bar. If it were, MST3K wouldn't need clearance.
Parody, OTOH, is enough to pass the bar, which is why Weird Al does NOT need clearance for any of his work. It's also why porn movies and mockbusters can do their thing.
Most live streaming exists simply because the video game industry is younger and much more permissive (not to mention receptive to its audience) than the music or movie industries. But if it came down to a legal fight, someone who is streaming a heavily modified version of Mario 64, with different levels, and character skins (even a lewd one, where the goal is to sleep w/the Princess instead of saving her), would have a much stronger case ("I was parodying the family friendly nature of Nintendo") than someone who just played the original.
It would all depend on specifics of course, but the former would likely win if constructed well, while the latter would likely loose.
I mean it has to be, they have never done this for other releases
OP
OP
Yep, it's very grey. Even weird al gets official permission, even if he sure as hell doesn't need it.
Yeah this is what I think is happening. Just because the Twitch mail says it is a claim by Nintendo - which, ofc, it is, Nintendo needs to have submitted this game to Twitch as copyrighted material before so the algorithm even recognizes it - doesn't mean someone from Nintendo is actually sitting there manually banning streamers.
Not trying to desperately defend Nintendo here but in this day and age, no company would employ ppl to do that anymore when there are automated systems.
Clearly, someone at Twitch forgot to adjust the system to account for time zones with this title or it's just a simple glitch.
Nintendo does some truly anti-consumer shit sometimes but this is not one of those times imo.
Not being a lawyer of course, but banning someone streaming a game, that is actually released would seem to be to be a breach of the intent of any law or agreement. The game is out. It's not like they obtained illegal copies.
He does, but that's only because he personally likes to be on good terms with everyone in the industry.
He absolutely does NOT need to get it.
Weird Al is a favorite topic of discussion for beginning media law classes, as lots of students will assume he needs to get permission.
It's also difficult, if you're not familiar with the law, to understand why a porn parody of say, A Few Good Men, can be done w/o permission, but a local performance needs to get clearance. The challenge, obviously, is in how much of the original IP is being changed, but also in measuring what is the original IP.
Honestly, if I didn't have so much on my plate, I'd love to spend time being an "anti-troll" for overly litigious companies on Twitch and YouTube. Posting reviews and the like of games likely to get takedowns, for the purpose of pursuing those that clearly move forward in bad faith.
Yeah. People have been banned for streaming No Man's Sky early, and people have been banned for streaming FF7R early (which there was a thread for on this very forum), and there's lots more like that. Twitch enforces this one policy pretty heavily, and there's no way they could keep track of them all without having an automated system when they have millions of people streaming at any given time.
This had to have been an error on the part of Twitch and how they handled the street date information in that system.
People have been streaming and uploading stuff from the game for a few days now. Nintendo probably just hit everyone with takedowns, even those few that maybe were out after their local deadline.
Yeah, this is what I am thinking. This feels more like an error then a deliberate choice by Nintendo.
Gamexplain was streaming the Australian version on YouTube earlier this morning. But only about 2 hours of it.
tbf it's not free, they earned it with almost forty years in the industry
still wish they'd stop with the bullshit tho
Sound strategy. If you want to build up hype for the worldwide release, this is how you go about it.
It all points to Twitch's automated system. Ninendo submits the game, to the DMCA system, it forgets the protocol for other timezones and only accounts for US, it strikes streamers where the game is already released with it saying Nintendo sent the strike.
At least the thread title was changed.
At least the thread title was changed.
Nintendo on a hell of a PR roll today, Jesus Christ. It's almost as if they know very few people would be interested in this game beyond the story elements.