Re: SDM2: There may or may not be touhou involved
Posted: 31 Mar 2011, 19:37
(Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice)
This is a myriad of problems, really. Copyright laws for three different countries could get involved (Canada, Japan, and the United States), and in the one that I even get close to understanding (US), this is anything but clear cut. (Also, YouTube being based in the US, it is probably the most relevant)
Basically, there are two legal ways that you can use material that you don't have the copyright to:
1) Explicit permission from the copyright holder
2) Fair Use Doctrine
Problem is, the first is definitely not the case here (raocow doesn't have explicit permission from Nintendo or anyone else who owns anything in this hack), and the second is a real pain in the ass and anything but clear and consistent, being extremely subjective.
There are four factors (not all of which need to be met, but more is better):
1) Purpose of the work
2) Nature of the work
3) Amount and substance
4) Effect upon value
Basically, the first comes down to "Does it do anything new with the work?". The second has to do with whether or not the work has already been published. The third is "How much of the work has been used?", and the final is "Does this affect the value of the original?"
As for raocow's LPs, he does do something other than just show himself playing the game (commentary counts for something), though I don't know if he could use the usual excuse for LPs (educational value), he definitely does something different with them. The second is obvious; yes, the game has been published, which is a strike against fair use. The third is really weird, as SMW is barely present in its original form in his works, so I have no idea what to do with it. As for does it affect the value of the original, I don't really think it would, as he's not really playing Super Mario World, but I think with the recent arrival of the virtual console, it's possible that Nintendo could claim (kind of stupidly) some loss.
Not explicitly in there is the profit motive -- if you're making money off of it, it suddenly becomes a lot more thorny, as its the copyright holder's right to make money off of it, and somebody making money off of it without their permission really starts to piss them off, and the legal monkeys might start to attack -- hence the reason that it's actually an issue right now.
Let's not even get into the fact that not everything in these games is owned by Nintendo...
I think he'll be fine (really, Chuggaaconroy, NintendoCapriSun, and ProtonJon, all of whom are much more popular and also partners, haven't gone down (there may be more LPers who are partners, but those are the ones that I watch)), but it'll be a real pain in the ass before it gets there.
...Wow, that turned out to be a lot longer than I'd expected, and I haven't even gotten into any other country's copyright laws...
This is a myriad of problems, really. Copyright laws for three different countries could get involved (Canada, Japan, and the United States), and in the one that I even get close to understanding (US), this is anything but clear cut. (Also, YouTube being based in the US, it is probably the most relevant)
Basically, there are two legal ways that you can use material that you don't have the copyright to:
1) Explicit permission from the copyright holder
2) Fair Use Doctrine
Problem is, the first is definitely not the case here (raocow doesn't have explicit permission from Nintendo or anyone else who owns anything in this hack), and the second is a real pain in the ass and anything but clear and consistent, being extremely subjective.
There are four factors (not all of which need to be met, but more is better):
1) Purpose of the work
2) Nature of the work
3) Amount and substance
4) Effect upon value
Basically, the first comes down to "Does it do anything new with the work?". The second has to do with whether or not the work has already been published. The third is "How much of the work has been used?", and the final is "Does this affect the value of the original?"
As for raocow's LPs, he does do something other than just show himself playing the game (commentary counts for something), though I don't know if he could use the usual excuse for LPs (educational value), he definitely does something different with them. The second is obvious; yes, the game has been published, which is a strike against fair use. The third is really weird, as SMW is barely present in its original form in his works, so I have no idea what to do with it. As for does it affect the value of the original, I don't really think it would, as he's not really playing Super Mario World, but I think with the recent arrival of the virtual console, it's possible that Nintendo could claim (kind of stupidly) some loss.
Not explicitly in there is the profit motive -- if you're making money off of it, it suddenly becomes a lot more thorny, as its the copyright holder's right to make money off of it, and somebody making money off of it without their permission really starts to piss them off, and the legal monkeys might start to attack -- hence the reason that it's actually an issue right now.
Let's not even get into the fact that not everything in these games is owned by Nintendo...
I think he'll be fine (really, Chuggaaconroy, NintendoCapriSun, and ProtonJon, all of whom are much more popular and also partners, haven't gone down (there may be more LPers who are partners, but those are the ones that I watch)), but it'll be a real pain in the ass before it gets there.
...Wow, that turned out to be a lot longer than I'd expected, and I haven't even gotten into any other country's copyright laws...