I was curious

[histgamer]

What is Matrix/Slitherine's stance on the Senate Bill S-978. It has the potential to put hundreds of you tubers out of jobs but more than that I was wondering what the take of a gaming company for something like this is. It makes sense for movie and tv producers but for game developers streaming of content basically provides free advertisements and games like Minecraft have certainly seen a benefit in sales due to exposure because of online streaming and commentary, I know I never would have seen or heard of Minecraft if it wasn't for Youtube.

Further even for Movies and TV shows it does raise dubious concerns for those who make legitimate reviews of content. What then is considered creative commons and what isn't will be another big concern.

S-978

[IainMcNeil]

No position whatsoever - I've never heard of it but streaming videos is not of any importance to us at all.

[Perturabo]

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

What is Matrix/Slitherine's stance on the Senate Bill S-978. It has the potential to put hundreds of you tubers out of jobs but more than that I was wondering what the take of a gaming company for something like this is. It makes sense for movie and tv producers but for game developers streaming of content basically provides free advertisements and games like Minecraft have certainly seen a benefit in sales due to exposure because of online streaming and commentary, I know I never would have seen or heard of Minecraft if it wasn't for Youtube.

Further even for Movies and TV shows it does raise dubious concerns for those who make legitimate reviews of content. What then is considered creative commons and what isn't will be another big concern.

S-978

Why watch a gameplay video when you can read a magazine review (mandatory 9,5) paid by the publisher and written by a person who doesn't even have journalist education?

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

No position whatsoever - I've never heard of it but streaming videos is not of any importance to us at all.

Well, technically, people showing off the stupidity of mainstream games is undermining your competition[:D]. Some wargamer could want to buy some mainstream game and then watch a video that would expose all the fake hype and then decide to spend money on some wargame that he wasn't waiting for instead.

[PipFromSlitherine]

I can see the potential problems if it ends up being as vague as some internet laws tend to end up being. It would need to err on the side of free use to prevent possible abuse as you posit.

Given how we make our living we're all anti-piracy, but I'm not sure that governments should be in the business of making felonies out of copyright infringement...

Hopefully in a few years we'll have more politicians across the global who actually understand the internet a little beyond it being a series of pipes [;)].

Cheers

Pip

[histgamer]

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

No position whatsoever - I've never heard of it but streaming videos is not of any importance to us at all.

This makes sense to me. If anything streaming game plays or at the very least reviews is more likely to gain independent games more exposure than they otherwise would and it's not like steaming a game play somehow costs a developer revenue it doesn't, and I am willing to bet that developers don't have a lot of time to stream game play themselves so its not like its costing them potential views and ad revenue when gamers do throw up game play and commentaries.

The thing that worries me about this law is it makes anyone who uploads anything that's considered copy write a felon. Because it's a criminal and no longer a civil issue even if game companies wanted to let them occur unless they change their license agreements the government would be obliged to try these individuals as felons even if the studio didn't want them too. I can't imagine thousands of gamers being arrested but still technically that's how the law would read.

I am totally against piracy but a broad reaching bill like this will have vast unintended consequences and potentially a lot of innocent people would get hurt. Furthermore it makes creative commons much more dangerous to play with because you might think your making a creative work of your own but the government might disagree. For example playing a cover of a song in a bar can get you paid, paying that same cover online could get you arrested.

[JennyCheng]

[:D][:D]I AM VERY INTERESTED IN THIS MOVIE.I WILL WATCH IT SOMEDAY!CAN NOT WAIT1

[wodin]

I love how the US thinks it can police the whole internet..makes me laugh. Like they own it or something.

[Jamm]

Governments of all stripes are getting their tentacles into the internet.
Freedom of thought threatens their status quo.

[Anthropoid]

Yeah, no doubt. If "THE U.S." is culpable of a false sense of efficacy at 'controling' the internet, then China must be positively megalomaniacal on the matter [:D]

http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/ind ... xgames.com

ORIGINAL: Jamm

Governments of all stripes are getting their tentacles into the internet.
Freedom of thought threatens their status quo.

[parusski]

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

No position whatsoever - I've never heard of it but streaming videos is not of any importance to us at all.

Correct Iain. The issue is important, but not here...we play soldiers.