Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
"ON LET'S PLAYS" - DEV EXPRESSES PLIGHT OVER HOW LP'S HAVE IMPACTED HIS GAME'S SALES
Posts
kentona
View playlists
Close
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
author=kentona
every LP view is a lost sale
WRONG!
Every LP view is a lost sail; it represents a poor soul who has lost all direction in life and cannot navigate to the game buying harbor.
As you sail through life, take a moment to say a prayer for those lost at sea, only capable of experiencing video games from a YouTube personality's perspective.
author=SoozWell, it is. If you read r/gamedev or any other forum with many Steam developers on it, you'll learn quickly that the piracy rate on PC is upwards of 95%, no matter how big or small your game is.author=KindredzHonestly, I don't think piracy is nearly as rampant as people believe.
If that wasn't the case then game piracy wouldn't be as big as it is.
And before someone interjects with "but piracy isn't a loss sale," that's true - it's worse than a lost sale. By and large, when someone contacts you needing support, you don't know whether they were a pirate or not, but given that 95+% of people who play your game stole it, that means the majority of the (unpaid) time you spend fielding technical support issues, you're giving free help to someone who stole your game.
Worse still, pirated copies of games often suffer from technical problems that the original didn't (due to a sloppy job cracking it or because pirates don't have the most up-to-date version of the game) and they flood your support forums with complaints about the game being buggy, which not only adds to the unpaid labor you have to do helping them (because you can't call them out publicly for pirating it as they'll accuse you of lying and make you look like the bad guy), but also it creates an image to the casual user that the game is buggy.
So no, a pirated copy isn't a lost sale, because you actually lose time (= money) to piracy.
While I won't try to say that piracy isn't a big deal or anything I will say like I said previously is that if I like something I'll buy it and then I'll get others to buy it too.
I dunno, I believe more people buy than they do pirate(obviously, right?) it's still shitty behaviour, anyways.
But i'll say for myself at least, that I don't pirate indie games. Never have. It's more often games that cost a pretty penny that I would like to TRY. Not WATCH.
Hell, I don't even really play PC games, so my point is a bit moot. (I still play Diablo 2 and shit like Age of Empires, so I'm out of the loop.)
edit:
@Sail- The sad part is that's probably why free to play games but you have to spend money to win is such a viable and attractive option these days. While cheating and shit like that can still happen, I'm sure, it's probably a good route to go to avoid piracy.
I dunno, I believe more people buy than they do pirate(obviously, right?) it's still shitty behaviour, anyways.
But i'll say for myself at least, that I don't pirate indie games. Never have. It's more often games that cost a pretty penny that I would like to TRY. Not WATCH.
Hell, I don't even really play PC games, so my point is a bit moot. (I still play Diablo 2 and shit like Age of Empires, so I'm out of the loop.)
edit:
@Sail- The sad part is that's probably why free to play games but you have to spend money to win is such a viable and attractive option these days. While cheating and shit like that can still happen, I'm sure, it's probably a good route to go to avoid piracy.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
author=Sailerius
Well, it is. If you read r/gamedev or any other forum with many Steam developers on it, you'll learn quickly that the piracy rate on PC is upwards of 95%, no matter how big or small your game is.
I'm gonna need some actual citation on this. (I mean, for one, how would you even be able to measure that?)
author=SoozMost devs launch games with silent telemetry so they can get stats on bugs, crashes, etc. That way you know how many people are playing your game, and since you obviously know how many people have bought it, it's very easy to determine the exact piracy rate for your game with simple division.author=SaileriusI'm gonna need some actual citation on this. (I mean, for one, how would you even be able to measure that?)
Well, it is. If you read r/gamedev or any other forum with many Steam developers on it, you'll learn quickly that the piracy rate on PC is upwards of 95%, no matter how big or small your game is.
As for the exorbitant piracy rate for games, feel free to google it to get a citation from a source of your choice, but it's not exactly a secret:
http://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-has-around-a-93-95-per-cent-piracy-rate-claims-ubisoft-ceo/
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2016/01/the-witness-is-getting-pirated-to-hell-and-back/
http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/13/world-of-goo-has-90-piracy-rate/
http://hammerware.blogspot.com/2012/05/fruits-of-labour.html
Those were just the first results off the top of the stack. Feel free to google a postmortem on a game of your choice and you'll probably see similar numbers.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
author=Sailerius
As for the exorbitant piracy rate for games, feel free to google it to get a citation from a source of your choice,
Hey mang, you were the one making the claim.
but it's not exactly a secret:
http://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-has-around-a-93-95-per-cent-piracy-rate-claims-ubisoft-ceo/
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2016/01/the-witness-is-getting-pirated-to-hell-and-back/
http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/13/world-of-goo-has-90-piracy-rate/
http://hammerware.blogspot.com/2012/05/fruits-of-labour.html
Those were just the first results off the top of the stack. Feel free to google a postmortem on a game of your choice and you'll probably see similar numbers.
Welp, of the results...
author=First article
It would be very interesting to learn where Guillemot has taken the "93-95 per cent" figure from
author=Second article
Blow added that Braid was also heavily pirated on PC, with a piracy rate of “probably 90%”. He didn’t provide any attribution or verification for that figure, however.
Not so helpful, since they're just repeating the claim without any actual verification.
Number three has a similar lack of backup, though it kind of puts lie to the "PIRACY IS KILLING THE INDUSTRY!!!" crap:
Carmel informs us that he's seen torrent sites with "500 seeders and 300 leechers" and has received emails from people who initially stole the game but ended up buying the full product; unsurprisingly, they make up a "very small percentage." He concludes, "We're doing ok, though. We're getting good sales through WiiWare, Steam, and our website. Not going bankrupt just yet!"
The fourth one seems to imply that a lot of the rampant piracy is coming from places like Russia and Asia, which doesn't strike me as being a huge loss for the publishers, since my impression is that those areas tend to be less able to afford a healthy video game market.
So, what this tells me: Piracy is a big thing, but may or may not actually be a thing in the prime market areas, and, importantly, piracy doesn't seem to have that big an impact on sales. (In fact, the final link implies that the piracy was helpful, as it served as a kind of marketing.)
I THINK this has not been said, but for LPs I find a LOT of people don't look out for specific GAMES, but rather follow youtubers whose content they generally enjoy and come across games this way. It's my case for sure, and it's thanks to them that I decided "Hey that looks cool. Imma get it too."
I don't count LPs as a loss of sales. As I see it (and I could be wrong)there are multiple outcomes to seeing a LP:
>You decide it's not your thing and stop watching, and it ends there.
>You decide it's neat and keep watching.
->Early in the LP or at the end you decide that sounds really fun and go get the game yourself.
->You watch the LP but don't get the game because:
-->You don't feel like you'd enjoy actually playing it or just wanted to spend more time with the particular youtuber's commentary.
-->You want but can't get the game (for money or avaliability reasons).
None of those are harmful to the developer, and I don't buy into the argument at all much. The most extreme cases of linear games with low interactivity could be a problem, but we enter the tricky part of "maybe don't make it a GAME then?" it's hard to judge.
The thing I feel is the most mismatched here is thinking that people SEEK OUT the game rather than come across it BECAUSE someone I already followed decided to play it. I can count the times I've seeked a specific game's LP with the fingers on one hand. I usually just check out what my subscriptions put out.
And yes, I ABSOLUTELY have watched LPs ONLY because I wanted to hear the commentary and had no real interest myself in the game. Hell, it's the most common case as I don't follow many youtubers who do longplays or ANY LPs of RPGS.
tl;dr I can't see LPs as harmful and a handful of tricky cases don't make me want to change the system as it is.
(So I jsut realized I posted in a topic FOUR MONTHS OLD. GEE THANKS FOR LINKING ME TO A DEAD TOPIC YOU GUYS XD)
I don't count LPs as a loss of sales. As I see it (and I could be wrong)there are multiple outcomes to seeing a LP:
>You decide it's not your thing and stop watching, and it ends there.
>You decide it's neat and keep watching.
->Early in the LP or at the end you decide that sounds really fun and go get the game yourself.
->You watch the LP but don't get the game because:
-->You don't feel like you'd enjoy actually playing it or just wanted to spend more time with the particular youtuber's commentary.
-->You want but can't get the game (for money or avaliability reasons).
None of those are harmful to the developer, and I don't buy into the argument at all much. The most extreme cases of linear games with low interactivity could be a problem, but we enter the tricky part of "maybe don't make it a GAME then?" it's hard to judge.
The thing I feel is the most mismatched here is thinking that people SEEK OUT the game rather than come across it BECAUSE someone I already followed decided to play it. I can count the times I've seeked a specific game's LP with the fingers on one hand. I usually just check out what my subscriptions put out.
And yes, I ABSOLUTELY have watched LPs ONLY because I wanted to hear the commentary and had no real interest myself in the game. Hell, it's the most common case as I don't follow many youtubers who do longplays or ANY LPs of RPGS.
tl;dr I can't see LPs as harmful and a handful of tricky cases don't make me want to change the system as it is.
(So I jsut realized I posted in a topic FOUR MONTHS OLD. GEE THANKS FOR LINKING ME TO A DEAD TOPIC YOU GUYS XD)
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
HAVE FUN BEING A NECROMANCER, ASSHOLE! :V
Actually, you raise a really good point, though. I've looked for specific game LPs only for games I already own and want to see other people's opinions on/want to re-experience the game without having to devote the time to play it again. Personally I've never looked up an LP for a game outside of that - just experienced them through various LPers who I follow.
MOST of the time, I like to watch LPs of games I've already played and want to see them again.
Another reason I use them is if I'm in the middle of some RPG and I totally forgot what the hell I'm doing, or what the story is.
Occasionally, though I do watch LP's of games I will never be able to play.
I love LP's probably more than most people and make use of them a lot for several reasons. I just know that they are violations of copyright. I really,really hate to have to admit that, but it's just the truth.
There are a lot of benefits and a few downsides to allowing LPs to continue unmolested.
Plenty of LPs have encouraged me to go out and buy a game. I don't think one has convinced me not to... But I'm sure it harms more narrative heavy games. Especially games with very little replay value. But it's free advertising, and the fans really like them. Fans will really really dislike having them taken down. Taking ALL video revenue for LPs will discourage most LPers. Taking some video revenue will discourage many as well.
So far, thankfully, LPs still seem to be in that limbo of illegal but accepted, like art of copyrighted characters you can buy at a convention. For most companies, chasing the violators is more trouble than it's worth. It's the smaller, less stable, less experienced companies which will probably suffer the most.
Another reason I use them is if I'm in the middle of some RPG and I totally forgot what the hell I'm doing, or what the story is.
Occasionally, though I do watch LP's of games I will never be able to play.
I love LP's probably more than most people and make use of them a lot for several reasons. I just know that they are violations of copyright. I really,really hate to have to admit that, but it's just the truth.
There are a lot of benefits and a few downsides to allowing LPs to continue unmolested.
Plenty of LPs have encouraged me to go out and buy a game. I don't think one has convinced me not to... But I'm sure it harms more narrative heavy games. Especially games with very little replay value. But it's free advertising, and the fans really like them. Fans will really really dislike having them taken down. Taking ALL video revenue for LPs will discourage most LPers. Taking some video revenue will discourage many as well.
So far, thankfully, LPs still seem to be in that limbo of illegal but accepted, like art of copyrighted characters you can buy at a convention. For most companies, chasing the violators is more trouble than it's worth. It's the smaller, less stable, less experienced companies which will probably suffer the most.
Except it's not, because it is, by law, a transformative piece (at least if the LPers have talk over the top of them). They fall under the fair use laws for reviews, educational, promotional, entertainment and parody materials, which is lawfully allowed. So... yeah.
Red_Nova
Sir Redd of Novus: He who made Prayer of the Faithless that one time, and that was pretty dang rad! :D
9192
*Rises from the dead. Thanks NecroIndra!*
Gonna play Devil's Advocate for a second here:
Based on some of the Fair Use controversies I've seen and the big name Youtubers citing said exemption for their defense, I feel like there's a lot of legal nuance that you just skimmed over here. So if I uploaded a full LP of That Dragon: Cancer and just kept repeating, "Wow. This is good. I like this," over and over again, then that constitutes enough talk to call it a transformative piece by law?
Because I would say that sort of commentary doesn't fit one of the Fair Use clauses: "the changes made to the original work are significant enough to provide a change in meaning." If I was summoned to Jury duty in a case like this, that's what I would think about.
(I'm going somewhere with this, I promise!)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, Devil's Advocate over.
General question to Lpers/anyone who uses video editing software: How much work is it realistically to cut out the dead parts of your videos? By dead parts, I mean not only moments where you don't talk at all, but also moments where you talk about nothing in order to cover up for the lack of any insightful commentary. Politician talk, if you will.
I'm really frustrated because, personal thoughts and feelings aside, I get where everyone on both sides of this argument is coming from. Uploading a playthrough in its entirety can discourage people from buying the full game, especially if it's a silent LP of a very linear game. On the other hand, LPs are absolutely a transformative work, and have a right to exist for many reasons that have been laid out in this thread.
I think it's wrong to take down videos providing strong commentary, such as their thoughts/interpretations of events happening in the game. At the same time, I think shoddy LPs whose only commentary is just variations of, "Wow," "I like this," or "this was well done!" do more harm than good. I haven't seen the video in question that sparked the article linked in the OP, but if it was the latter type of LP, it would really make me understand Ryan's thought process. If it was the former, then I can't.
Going back to my earlier question: For a linear game, would it really be too much to ask to edit out some segments of a video where LPers provide absolutely no valuable commentary? Viewers would be more inclined to buy the full game, the entire experience isn't spoiled for anyone, and the grey area (the size of which being a case-by-case basis) of Fair Use gets that much smaller.
EDIT: I want to stress again that I haven't seen the LP that Ryan took down myself. For all I know it was a totally silent LP and I'm just talking out of my ass here. But I got the feeling that the conversation stopped being about That Dragon: Cancer even before it was revived, so I'm just making points that I hope can contribute here in some way!
Gonna play Devil's Advocate for a second here:
author=Liberty
Except it's not, because it is, by law, a transformative piece (at least if the LPers have talk over the top of them). They fall under the fair use laws for reviews, educational, promotional, entertainment and parody materials, which is lawfully allowed. So... yeah.
Based on some of the Fair Use controversies I've seen and the big name Youtubers citing said exemption for their defense, I feel like there's a lot of legal nuance that you just skimmed over here. So if I uploaded a full LP of That Dragon: Cancer and just kept repeating, "Wow. This is good. I like this," over and over again, then that constitutes enough talk to call it a transformative piece by law?
Because I would say that sort of commentary doesn't fit one of the Fair Use clauses: "the changes made to the original work are significant enough to provide a change in meaning." If I was summoned to Jury duty in a case like this, that's what I would think about.
(I'm going somewhere with this, I promise!)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, Devil's Advocate over.
General question to Lpers/anyone who uses video editing software: How much work is it realistically to cut out the dead parts of your videos? By dead parts, I mean not only moments where you don't talk at all, but also moments where you talk about nothing in order to cover up for the lack of any insightful commentary. Politician talk, if you will.
I'm really frustrated because, personal thoughts and feelings aside, I get where everyone on both sides of this argument is coming from. Uploading a playthrough in its entirety can discourage people from buying the full game, especially if it's a silent LP of a very linear game. On the other hand, LPs are absolutely a transformative work, and have a right to exist for many reasons that have been laid out in this thread.
I think it's wrong to take down videos providing strong commentary, such as their thoughts/interpretations of events happening in the game. At the same time, I think shoddy LPs whose only commentary is just variations of, "Wow," "I like this," or "this was well done!" do more harm than good. I haven't seen the video in question that sparked the article linked in the OP, but if it was the latter type of LP, it would really make me understand Ryan's thought process. If it was the former, then I can't.
Going back to my earlier question: For a linear game, would it really be too much to ask to edit out some segments of a video where LPers provide absolutely no valuable commentary? Viewers would be more inclined to buy the full game, the entire experience isn't spoiled for anyone, and the grey area (the size of which being a case-by-case basis) of Fair Use gets that much smaller.
EDIT: I want to stress again that I haven't seen the LP that Ryan took down myself. For all I know it was a totally silent LP and I'm just talking out of my ass here. But I got the feeling that the conversation stopped being about That Dragon: Cancer even before it was revived, so I'm just making points that I hope can contribute here in some way!
I don't often cut out parts myself, mainly because I could blab on for days about any subject at all if given half the chance. Whether people think that's fun or not is another thing but I've not heard anyone say they wished I'd cut out x or y parts.
If it's an RPG and I'm going to grind or make a huge mistake and go the wrong way I'll usually just either cut-jump or fast forward. Being someone who watches LPs myself, and see the comments of those who watch the same LPs I do, a lot of the comments I've noticed have said that they don't like jump-cuts that much. Personally I don't mind them too much (leaves something for me to want to explore when I play the game myself) but I can see how jumping from one spot to another could be disconcerting for some watchers.
While technically your devil's advocate thing still counts as a proper LP, it wouldn't be one many people would bother watching. If you're going to be that lazy you might as well just do a silent one - it'd get less views than a silent one, that's for sure, and someone who would do an LP like that would be in it for the views (thus more likely to do the silent thing - those who actually want to make LPs do so because they want to give their real opinions, thoughts and reactions to a game.)
Some people cut out a lot of their vids. Some people don't. I like to try to 100% the games I play but that's because I grew up doing that in games and it feels wrong not to try to do a game to completion. The people that -do- cut things out (that I know of) don't do it for the sake of leaving something for people to discover themselves, but do it because there's a lull or nothing happened that was worth showing (or they took a break in the recording for whatever reason).
Also, a lot of people want to see the LPers reactions to the whole game, and will go stupid over cuts on a linear game that they enjoyed if they don't get to see the LPer cut out parts. I've seen this more than a few times in Visual Novel type games where the story is the main deal and the watchers wanted to see how the LPer responded to x or y moment or character, only to have the part they wanted to see cut out. A lot of the time they can get really nasty about it, even go so far as to unsubscribe. It's a sad thing, but understandable - a lot of the time they're people who have played the game and want to see how another person experiences it and their feelings and reactions to it. It's the only reason they're watching, and to have their reason for watching cut out makes it a worthless LP to them.
For the current example of That Dragon, Cancer - there's a fair few LPs out there where the LPers get quiet and introspective or talk about their own experiences with such topics which makes the LP that much more of an experience. If they'd cut out the parts of the game that didn't have that introspection it wouldn't read their emotions quite as clearly because it's a journey you've taken with the LPer through the game, sharing it with them. With linear games you can't take out pieces of the story like you can with other games because a lot of the time the linear stories have just the story and that is the main part of that journey.
Which is the issue that TD,C has - it is only story so you want to see how people respond to the full thing for the full experience, especially if you've played it yourself. Games like that which get LP'd are all about the connection of having played it, knowing what's coming, seeing the LPers reactions and sharing the emotions and journey with them retro-actively.
If it's an RPG and I'm going to grind or make a huge mistake and go the wrong way I'll usually just either cut-jump or fast forward. Being someone who watches LPs myself, and see the comments of those who watch the same LPs I do, a lot of the comments I've noticed have said that they don't like jump-cuts that much. Personally I don't mind them too much (leaves something for me to want to explore when I play the game myself) but I can see how jumping from one spot to another could be disconcerting for some watchers.
While technically your devil's advocate thing still counts as a proper LP, it wouldn't be one many people would bother watching. If you're going to be that lazy you might as well just do a silent one - it'd get less views than a silent one, that's for sure, and someone who would do an LP like that would be in it for the views (thus more likely to do the silent thing - those who actually want to make LPs do so because they want to give their real opinions, thoughts and reactions to a game.)
Some people cut out a lot of their vids. Some people don't. I like to try to 100% the games I play but that's because I grew up doing that in games and it feels wrong not to try to do a game to completion. The people that -do- cut things out (that I know of) don't do it for the sake of leaving something for people to discover themselves, but do it because there's a lull or nothing happened that was worth showing (or they took a break in the recording for whatever reason).
Also, a lot of people want to see the LPers reactions to the whole game, and will go stupid over cuts on a linear game that they enjoyed if they don't get to see the LPer cut out parts. I've seen this more than a few times in Visual Novel type games where the story is the main deal and the watchers wanted to see how the LPer responded to x or y moment or character, only to have the part they wanted to see cut out. A lot of the time they can get really nasty about it, even go so far as to unsubscribe. It's a sad thing, but understandable - a lot of the time they're people who have played the game and want to see how another person experiences it and their feelings and reactions to it. It's the only reason they're watching, and to have their reason for watching cut out makes it a worthless LP to them.
For the current example of That Dragon, Cancer - there's a fair few LPs out there where the LPers get quiet and introspective or talk about their own experiences with such topics which makes the LP that much more of an experience. If they'd cut out the parts of the game that didn't have that introspection it wouldn't read their emotions quite as clearly because it's a journey you've taken with the LPer through the game, sharing it with them. With linear games you can't take out pieces of the story like you can with other games because a lot of the time the linear stories have just the story and that is the main part of that journey.
Which is the issue that TD,C has - it is only story so you want to see how people respond to the full thing for the full experience, especially if you've played it yourself. Games like that which get LP'd are all about the connection of having played it, knowing what's coming, seeing the LPers reactions and sharing the emotions and journey with them retro-actively.
Toaster_Team
966
Sated brings a good point.
I actually think it'd be fair that games that are LPed should get a portion of the income on the LP videos. At first I was ambivalent about Nintendo's position about LPs but it makes more sense to me now.
Uploading a LP of an adventure game (point n' click style) removes the need to buy the game at all in the first place. You might argue the dev should provide games that offer one than one viable route of course.
I don't like the idea of people using "Fair Use" as an excuse to make money without sharing that money with product they are using.
I actually think it'd be fair that games that are LPed should get a portion of the income on the LP videos. At first I was ambivalent about Nintendo's position about LPs but it makes more sense to me now.
I'm really frustrated because, personal thoughts and feelings aside, I get where everyone on both sides of this argument is coming from. Uploading a playthrough in its entirety can discourage people from buying the full game, especially if it's a silent LP of a very linear game.
Uploading a LP of an adventure game (point n' click style) removes the need to buy the game at all in the first place. You might argue the dev should provide games that offer one than one viable route of course.
I don't like the idea of people using "Fair Use" as an excuse to make money without sharing that money with product they are using.
Yes, Sated hits it on the head. Although, I should say that I love LPs for all the reason you mention, Liberty.
But it's the whole "Reaction Video" debacle all over again. It would be one thing if you were say to take snippets of a work and talk about them, react to them - that's basically a review. But the whole Reaction Vid controversy started because people were taking the whole video, playing the whole thing in it's entirety, and having a little window over to the side where you see and hear a person "reacting" to the video.
If you tried to do that with say, Deadpool, right now - play the movie and just kinda talk over it and expect to end the week unmolested you would be very very wrong.
I've looked at fair use laws, and I just do not think LPing an entire game and talking about it is transformative enough to count.
If you take a Good hard look here I think you'll find it's all very explicit about what kinds of things can and can't fall into each specific category of fair use.
Personally, I think it's quite damning.
But it's the whole "Reaction Video" debacle all over again. It would be one thing if you were say to take snippets of a work and talk about them, react to them - that's basically a review. But the whole Reaction Vid controversy started because people were taking the whole video, playing the whole thing in it's entirety, and having a little window over to the side where you see and hear a person "reacting" to the video.
If you tried to do that with say, Deadpool, right now - play the movie and just kinda talk over it and expect to end the week unmolested you would be very very wrong.
I've looked at fair use laws, and I just do not think LPing an entire game and talking about it is transformative enough to count.
If you take a Good hard look here I think you'll find it's all very explicit about what kinds of things can and can't fall into each specific category of fair use.
Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes: Courts look at how the party claiming fair use is using the copyrighted work, and are more likely to find that nonprofit educational and noncommercial uses are fair. This does not mean, however, that all nonprofit education and noncommercial uses are fair and all commercial uses are not fair; instead, courts will balance the purpose and character of the use against the other factors below. Additionally, “transformative” uses are more likely to be considered fair. Transformative uses are those that add something new, with a further purpose or different character, and do not substitute for the original use of the work.
Nature of the copyrighted work: This factor analyzes the degree to which the work that was used relates to copyright’s purpose of encouraging creative expression. Thus, using a more creative or imaginative work (such as a novel, movie, or song) is less likely to support a claim of a fair use than using a factual work (such as a technical article or news item). In addition, use of an unpublished work is less likely to be considered fair.
Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: Under this factor, courts look at both the quantity and quality of the copyrighted material that was used. If the use includes a large portion of the copyrighted work, fair use is less likely to be found; if the use employs only a small amount of copyrighted material, fair use is more likely. That said, some courts have found use of an entire work to be fair under certain circumstances. And in other contexts, using even a small amount of a copyrighted work was determined not to be fair because the selection was an important part—or the “heart”—of the work.
Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: Here, courts review whether, and to what extent, the unlicensed use harms the existing or future market for the copyright owner’s original work. In assessing this factor, courts consider whether the use is hurting the current market for the original work (for example, by displacing sales of the original) and/or whether the use could cause substantial harm if it were to become widespread.
Nature of the copyrighted work: This factor analyzes the degree to which the work that was used relates to copyright’s purpose of encouraging creative expression. Thus, using a more creative or imaginative work (such as a novel, movie, or song) is less likely to support a claim of a fair use than using a factual work (such as a technical article or news item). In addition, use of an unpublished work is less likely to be considered fair.
Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: Under this factor, courts look at both the quantity and quality of the copyrighted material that was used. If the use includes a large portion of the copyrighted work, fair use is less likely to be found; if the use employs only a small amount of copyrighted material, fair use is more likely. That said, some courts have found use of an entire work to be fair under certain circumstances. And in other contexts, using even a small amount of a copyrighted work was determined not to be fair because the selection was an important part—or the “heart”—of the work.
Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: Here, courts review whether, and to what extent, the unlicensed use harms the existing or future market for the copyright owner’s original work. In assessing this factor, courts consider whether the use is hurting the current market for the original work (for example, by displacing sales of the original) and/or whether the use could cause substantial harm if it were to become widespread.
Personally, I think it's quite damning.
Toaster_Team
966
I think movie reviews use fair use well. They'll show excerpt of the movie or the trailer (so about 1 minute of content) and then discuss the actual film.
