I hate politics. I try to stray clear of it as much as possible, but there's this one particular bill that's up for vote that could, if passed, kill Youtube and EVERY other form of streaming media on the net that isn't coming directly from copyright holders. Bill S.978 is aimed at enforcing laws that are already in place and to make the punishment for streaming currently in-theater films even harder on those that are caught. That sounds great, right? The problem with the bill is that it's too broad in what it covers. It could potentially, if the feds think you're making a profit in some way, make criminals out of millions of Americans of ALL ages just for uploading videos of themselves playing games, videos of little girls and their friends singing along to the latest pop song- anyone. The senators that put this bill up claim that that is not what the goal of the bill is and that it won't make things that aren't currently illegal, illegal. But the bill could allow the FBI to make a case out of thin air against you if they see fit or want to make an example out of you. These two articles explain it better than I ever could, http://www.thunderboltgames.com/fea...d-against-bill-s978-feature-for-all-none.html http://thunderboltgames.com/feature...l-s978-the-followup-feature-for-all-none.html Yeah- the thought of this thing passing is scary and could make the internet implode upon itself if it gets through. I for one make a hobby out of uploading boss battle videos to Youtube, and this bill aims to make a criminal out of me for doing something I enjoy. It's not like the companies that own the games can't already step forward and tell me to take them down, but they're not going to because it's free advertising. This would surely kill any chances of watching the second season of MLP as I don't get The Hub in my area and have had to rely on Youtube to get my fix. The ECA has provided this page - http://action.theeca.com/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=4444 - for those wanting to contact their local politicians about this bill. It comes with a pre-typed letter so all you have to do is use an email address.
Yes I've heard about this, is it only American based firms/citizens that will be affected? Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
/sigh This again Alright now first off it isn't even passed yet, and there's a high likelihood it won't ever be. But assuming that it does get passed: -The means to fully enforce it are non-existant. No amount of internet policing can possibly remove every single video in existence, so unless you're huge you'd be safe for now -This bill wasn't lobbied the buck out of to get into existence for developers to criminalize people who make it a hobby to upload LPs with no profit and that sort of thing, punishing their own fanbase. This bill was dumped money into existence to prevent people from making money off things like large tournaments and streaming of their games, think Korean starcraft tournaments - like anything else with corperations, this is just another ploy to get more money: [video=youtube;JoYWdHe4tQ4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoYWdHe4tQ4[/video] So basically should anyone want to start a huge competition that'd be shown on TV or streamed all over the internet, they'd have to get permission first, which'd most likely involve some /modest/ royalties fees. -Many game developers, like the minecraft dev team, say that if it does get passed, they'll add to their end user agreement allowing players to upload videos to the internet freely. So yeah, the internet isn't going to implode nor are copyright nazis going to hunt you down, this is just another battle in the war to define ownership in the internet. I'd be more afraid of the trend towards defining what is and isn't ownership in favor of large corperations and businesses, if this sort of thing keeps up they could possibly sometime in the future pull some BS like making you pay to watch streams of copyrighted content and that sort of thing (think paying to listen to music on youtube). We as members of the creative community of the internet should stand up for everyone's rights to make and upload their own content and redefine ownership on the internet and what it truly means to own and play content.
Sorry. =P Well no, of course not. However, my channel is constantly growing and I know a few others that have channels that True, but I've heard/read (possibly overblown) things that have gone as far as saying that if the feds really want to enforce the new law once it's in place, they could go after the lowly Youtuber to make an example out of him. For me, just knowing that that possibility is there would be enough to scare me off. I've read about that. I'd hope that the big Japanese developers/publishers would get in on that if it does come to pass.
I'm optimistic about this, as I don't feel the bill will be as bad as first perceived, and I also doubt it will be passed anyway. However, This.
.... This is still going on? I know a few weeks ago I couldn't go 2 hours without a discussion of this coming up, and I thought they voted on this a while ago. When everyone stopped mentioning it I figured it failed. o.o To make things simple: No, not everything will be affected. In fact not all that much would be affected at all. First of all, as Derpy explained, there's absolutely no way this bill could be successfully enforced. It would take way too much work and would cost the Government even more money it doesn't have. But even then, most people wouldn't be violating the law. I no longer have the copy-paste directly from the bill, but there were 2 things that needed to be true in order for it to be illegal. Everyone knows the first part: 10 offenses of posting content not owned by you. But the second one is that either the person posting the content needs to make $2,500 or the content needs to cost the companies who created the content $2,500. Most people don't make money off things they post on the Internet and I think you'd have to try pretty hard to cause a company to lose $2,500 that they can actually account for. I don't really know how that would be counted up either. (i.e. would advertisements count? Of course they can't really prove that the people who watched what you posted would have watched it on the TV, but meh.) I would also assume that game companies WANT people to stream their games. Unlike music or movies people can't just go to a stream/recording and enjoy it. They can watch someone play a game, but in order to play it themselves they still need to get a copy of it. For video games recordings/streams actually seem like a form of advertisement...
That's what everyone's getting all worked up over; When you embed a video, ads are placed on the sides of the embed. Now like you said, they can't PROVE that you weren't making money off of the gameplay clip/whatever, but being who they are, can easily make it look like you were and that would give them reason enough to bring you in.
See, but you aren't making money off those advertisements. Another company is. And another company isn't either A. You or B. The company that owns the content. So therefore no one can be accused based on what the bill states. Yay loopholes
Supposedly the bill violates the 1st amendment and conflicts with fair use laws. However, I have no confirmation of that. As someone on another forum said: "Dear America, Stop sucking the d**k of companies. Last time I checked the interest you said you'd keep in mind was the people's interest, not the interest of multinational music companies. Sincerely, an American citizen." In all actuality, this bill was urged on much more by music and record companies than by videogame companies. Matter of fact is, many video game companies get more sales if the community for the game acually takes advantage of fair use and posts footage of gameplay on Youtube. It's just the typical retarded multinational money-lusting record firms.
