Nintendo Goes To War With YouTubers Right Before New ‘Zelda’ Release

from the the-hand-that-feeds-you dept

It’s no secret that Nintendo is extremely draconian when it comes to all things intellectual property concerning its assets. You can simply follow that backlink for a list of tons and tons of posts on Nintendo doing Nintendo things, which mostly amount to shutting down any use of its property, no matter how small, no matter whether fair use applies.

But did you know that Nintendo is not merely draconian when it comes to all things IP, but quite capricious, too? That certainly seems to be the case with Nintendo, on the eve of the release of the Zelda game Tears of the Kingdom, going around and demonitizing a whole bunch of YouTuber content for the Zelda franchise. Including some content that has been around for quite some time.

It started with Eric “PointCrow” Morino, a YouTuber who does speedruns of games. Morino also apparently commissioned a mod for Breath of the Wild to make the game multiplayer and put out some videos of it in action. Then, well…

YouTuber and speedrunner Eric “PointCrow” Morino released a brand new multiplayer mod for The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild on April 4. It basically transforms the hit 2017 Switch game into a modern open-world version of the beloved co-op Zelda spin-off Four Swords Adventures. A couple of days later, Morino says Nintendo hit him with copyright infringement claims that led some of his biggest YouTube videos to be demonetized.

“Incredibly disappointed that Nintendo of America has decided to block my videos on Breath of the Wild,” he tweeted on April 6. “It’s the love for the community and the innovation that we bring to it that has kept it alive & brought new people to love the Zelda series. I hope you reverse your decision soon.” Morino also shared a screencap of several of his YouTube videos, including ones featuring gameplay footage from the multiplayer mod, showing they’d been flagged for copyright issues.

Most publishers don’t bother with this sort of thing. At worst, they don’t see it as worth the trouble to go after streamers who are merely showing off a game’s gameplay. At best, publishers understand that these types of videos actually work to promote and sell the games they feature… and for free! Plenty of folks, myself included, will go hunt down some let’s plays in order to see a game in action before deciding to plunk down the money for it themselves. I can assure you that in 99% of cases, these let’s play videos do not serve as a replacement for enjoying and playing the game yourself.

Nintendo is not most publishers. Still, many people figured it was the use of the mod that landed Morino in Nintendo’s crosshairs.

In response to Morino’s post, several other big content creators chimed in. “Not good for them considering they’re releasing a new game soon and many content creators will popularize it even more and may choose not to create videos around it,” wrote Kittyplays. “Nintendo detected fans having fun and they can’t have that,” wrote LostPause. “This is sad given how much love and effort you given them and botw.”

It turns out that Nintendo, instead of reversing course over the public backlash, has instead decided to double down on its stance and go after even more YouTubers streaming Zelda content. Morino had basically begged Nintendo to rescind the copyright claims on his videos. Instead, they fired off even more.

He now says Nintendo has done the opposite, proceeding to copyright claim over 20 additional videos spanning his entire content making career. While most of them included the word “mod” in the title, at least one contained just vanilla gameplay with commentary. “These takedowns may have started with modded content, but they’ve spiraled into something else entirely,” Morino said in his latest video.

But he is no longer the only one.

On April 13, another Zelda Youtuber, Croton, said 10 of their streams and two of their videos were “nuked” from the platform. “No answers, no context, just a copyright removal,” they tweeted. “And one of these videos has literally nothing to do with mods and was simply a Zelda challenge run.”

Again, it’s important to keep in mind that all of this is happening just as Nintendo is about to release its Tears of the Kingdom game in the Zelda franchise. Doing this is completely tone-deaf. It’s like Nintendo walking into its own marketing department and telling them to stop working, except that marketing department is entirely unpaid and was only working for Nintendo out of love for the company.

Not exactly the smartest plan ahead of a new AAA release!

Filed Under: , , , , ,
Companies: nintendo

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Nintendo Goes To War With YouTubers Right Before New ‘Zelda’ Release”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
73 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

i seriously doubt it’s going to impact sales of the game. no nintendo fan would be willing to boycott nintendo for principles. just dangle another art piece of ganon in front of them and watch the pre-order numbers fly.

but yeah, japanese companies can get weird about copyright enforcement. the major exceptions are games that generally have big esports followings, and even then it’s not always guaranteed–especially if it’s showing off modded content.

unfortunately, the kid poked the bear. hope he can pivot to fortnite videos.

tati says:

Re:

i don’t think it’ll be enough people to make a difference, but the combination of the new Zelda being bumped up to 70$ (+ dlc of course), the insulting quality of the past couple of Pokemon games and Smash Bros networking all drove me to decide to stop giving nintendo money.

Modchips are way cheaper than the new Zelda, by the way!

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Yes and no. Some people will boycott based on principles, but the average Nintendo fan will not be remotely aware of these issues, let alone have it affect their purchasing decisions. The people not buying the new Zelda because of this stuff and a tiny minority compared to the people who never read such articles, and/or don’t even play any other videogames other than the main Nintendo franchises.

Crafty Coyote says:

Can’t believe that this happened on the fifteenth anniversary of the fans-lation of Mother 3. The people who translated did so pseudonymous so that the authorities haven’t tracked them down. Nintendo can only do so much to stop the games they won’t release or haven’t been released yet from being played. As long as people are willing to risk criminal charges to save games, preservation can win. These video game loving “pirates” are doing a better job of historianship than any college professor or museum docent could.

Crafty Coyote says:

Re: Re:

So he did reveal his name and offered to help? But that won’t change the fact that Nintendo could have him arrested.

But if the threat of being burned at the stake didn’t stop Tyndale from publishing an English Bible, Nintendo and anyone else will learn that the threat of prison won’t stop their works from being made available, should they abdicate from their work.

Thad (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

So he did reveal his name and offered to help? But that won’t change the fact that Nintendo could have him arrested.

I’m not aware of anyone ever being arrested for releasing a translation patch, but it sounds like you’re invested in a narrative and you’re not going to let minor details like every single thing you said being wrong get in the way of it.

terop (profile) says:

At best, publishers understand that these types of videos actually work to promote and sell the games they feature… and for free!

This could be the reason why they need to do it. Global brands that are distributed all over the planet are struggling to keep up with legimate demand and their organisation is finetuned so that there isn’t much margin in the sales organisation’s ability to handle customer demand. But if customers make their own versions and derivative works without the company’s permission, the finetuned sales organisation might need to stretch themselves beyond what can be expected from employees.

From legal point of view, preparing derived works that are not allowed by the company is as evil as copying the content to a pirate site.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re:

The only limit to online sales is how fast your system can process payments and handle the downloads.

This isn’t the burdensome part. Every 10 payment processing stuff, there will be 2 customers who have problems filling in all the required details and they’ll send email, complain on social media and hack your web server, play with the prompts, inputs bullshit to your server urls, tests your security, tries to login with invalid login info, etc and handling all those cases correctly takes significant amount of effort.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:6

If you don’t know how to collect money from customers

For this ability, you either need to study business side of things, or you need to get your living from the streets and be hungry enough to steal. I don’t do that, so I don’t know how to collect money. People just keep refusing to give any money even though I have awesome product to hand over as a replacement. But this is why there’s separate marketing/email spam/sales people who are trained to lie to customers.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:6

Good, in that case you have no reason to collect money from customers for Meshpage.

Since you’re very interested in how I’m going to collect money from customers, here’s another video: https://tpgames.org/True3dView.avi

That’s where you can see the actual purpose of the sites is being hidden from customers, and generic marketing bullshit that has nothing to do with actual useful features of the technology is being prepared for marketing purposes.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

We don’t even know what the business process is all about

I mean… that much was obvious from Day 1. I don’t think anyone here ever thought that you had any idea what you were doing.

The hordes of customers handing out money simply didn’t appear to our doorsteps

Because nobody pays out money based solely on one bus ad in London, which doesn’t even advertise what your software is capable of beyond generating shitty 3D graphics that makes TRON from 1982 look like Avatar: The Way of Water by comparison.

There is no business process. That should be the starting point.

The funny part about all this is that a few years ago you insisted that not having any marketing or business plan beyond that one bus ad was all the genius business plan you needed. You insisted that all of us were wrong and eventually copyright would magically make you rich beyond your wildest dreams, never mind that you include the maximum “life + 70 years” as your timeline for a payout (and in all likelihood, any money made from Meshpage is really only going to come in after you’ve kicked the bucket). And yet here you still are, thinking that trolling everyone else on a nobody website is how you’re going to make bank.

Copyright is not going to save your shitty business, Tero. Not now, not ever.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:6

Unless you’re working in film, animation, art, etc., copyright very likely has nothing to do with your job.

They always give tasks which I have not yet done. So when I created a game in 1994, the next step was university and creating symbian phones. After that finished, I returned to gaming, but instead of 1 game, there was 100 of them. Now that meshpage is finished and I’ve seen everything needed in frontend coding, their next step is backend coding.

This is all done because of copyright. The companies simply do not have permission to use my previous projects, so they need to avoid the stuff that I have already done.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:7

Nobody’s losing any sleep over having to dance around the “games” you make. Whatever you made with Meshpage has over a thousand variations on the game mechanics that anyone can find if they did a cursory search on Newgrounds or itch.io. Because game mechanics can’t be copyrighted.

The truth is, if a company did do something that you had the urge to sue, you’d burn all your resources trying to get them to stop. Which, if nothing else, would at least be entertaining to watch.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

preparing derived works that are not allowed by the company is as evil as copying the content to a pirate site

Yes or no: Do you genuinely believe that someone making a mod for a Zelda game that doesn’t distribute the original game in any way is commiting a moral atrocity equal to, or possibly worse than, the act of illegally distributing the game itself?

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Do you genuinely believe that someone making a mod for a Zelda game that doesn’t distribute the original game in any way is commiting a moral atrocity

Yes, it’s explicitly mentioned in copyright law:
1) PUBLICLY PERFORMING
2) REPRODUCE & COPYING
3) DISTRIBUTE COPIES
4) PUBLICLY DISPLAYING
5) PREPARING DERIVED WORKS <– this one here
6) MODIFYING COPYRIGHT NOTICES

This kind of stuff are exclusive operations reserved for copyright owners. preparing derived works is as illegal operation as distributing copies around the world.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Just so we’re clear, please answer only with yes or no:

Do you sincerely and genuinely believe that someone who makes a mod for a Zelda game but doesn’t actually distribute the original game in any way is commiting a legitimate moral atrocity in addition to an actual criminal act that should be handled by criminal courts rather than civil courts?

Because if you say “yes”, you’re literally arguing that the people who made the various randomizers for games like Super Metroid are no better than actual illegal videogame distributors and⁠—under the principles of copyright enforcement that YOU AND YOU ALONE believe should be the standard in every country of this world⁠—must be arrested, tried, convicted, and put to death for daring to do something that even Nintendo itself has not (yet) chosen to shut down.

I really want to hope that you don’t think “they made a Mega Man 2 randomizer without Capcom’s permission” is reason enough to justify killing someone. I really do.

But you make that so hard to do.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

It’s a crime to illegally distribute stuff in Singapore and even then, the criminal record alone would be more than enough to ensure you can’t work anywhere in Singapore.

And the Singapore government doesn’t believe in the death sentence for that.

But this is the Shame of Finland we’re talking about here. He’d personally murder anyone who illegally distributes his software, assuming people actually thought his outdated, non-functional piece of shit was actually worth illegally distributing.

Again, he couldn’t even pay ME to use his software. I’d rather buy a Microsoft product.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

you’re literally arguing that the people who made the various randomizers for games like Super Metroid are no better than actual illegal videogame distributors

I have no idea what a game randomizer is, but i wouldnt be suprised if the author is in legal trouble given that he listens messages from internet. Relying on information obtained from internet has always been legally dubious/dangerous.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

i wouldnt be suprised if the author is in legal trouble given that he listens messages from internet. Relying on information obtained from internet has always been legally dubious/dangerous.

Relying on your claims are certainly legally dubious and dangerous, especially considering that you believe the Russia-Ukraine war was started because Finland didn’t pay you enough money.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4

You believe the Russia-Ukraine war was started because Finland didn’t pay you enough money.

This could even be true statement, with the following assumptions:
1) russia spent their money to build weapons
2) russia got the money from finland
3) finland purchased heating oil from russia instead of giving the money to me
4) all these together and the argument makes perfect sense.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5

So according to your statement, Russia gave Finland money for weapons materials, then got it back from Finland for oil… at what point does that equate to Russia thinking they should give the money to you? You’ve explained nothing in this regard. And why would Ukraine be the one invaded, if Finland is the one who didn’t honor this imaginary agreement in your head?

Holy shit, copyright is brain damage.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:6

at what point does that equate to Russia thinking they should give the money to you?

If the money was given to me, then that money wouldn’t be available to build weapons and the whole ukraine war would have been avoided, since russia would not have capability to rage wars.

Thus easy solution to avoid wars is to give the money to me instead of starting projects that create weapons.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:9

Have you seen the shit that Russia has been using? It’s woefully underequipped. Horrifically out of date. It’s one of the main reasons why Ukraine has been able to put up something of a defense for over a year. Whatever “millions” Russia is spending is mostly getting pissed in the fucking wind.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:10

You’ve said before that you wanted people executed by the government for copyright infringement.

I have obtained ability to jump from virtual world to the real world and back long time ago. Promising that all 1.2 billion web sites get converted from 2d to 3d would be impossible without that ability, and I have https://meshpage.org/article.php adverticement to prove that the feature has been planned well in advance.

There is also the horror side. See CoffeeZilla/pixelmon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6O4xvklv2xU

This is the danger of what could happen.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

preparing derived works is as illegal operation as distributing copies around the world

Except that’s not the case here.

If the derived works were being produced for sale, and money was exchanged over game mods, then sure, you might have an argument about illegal distribution of unauthorized copies. But that’s not what happened. Mod packages are usually free to download, and I’ve never seen anyone who’s charged for them.

If the streamers were using modded ROMs of games they did not purchase but pirated off the Internet, maybe you might have a legal claim. But this is rarely the case especially for prominent streamers. What do they have to gain by lying about their ownership of a copy of a game? It’d be trivially easy for Nintendo to do a check and see if they’re pirating Zelda games.

So no, your claim that “illegal copies are being distributed” doesn’t hold water here.

Space5000 (profile) says:

Re: Some Point

I do understand the reason why there is a restriction on many derivative works is due to the chance a company might make it, but there is usually a strong chance the company might never make it showing that the law really needs to be changed and considering the restriction may stifle so much good creativity. I feel like many free good “sequels” of say many old games really need to be protected. Though this here is more akin of a moral argument and in hopes of a future court ruling in favor and maybe a chance of fair use for it anyway, but I’ll keep this here anyway.

There is a video on YouTube made by a lawyer giving his say on this PointCrow mess, and he seems to argue that any mod is derivative and is copyright infringement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo_AmQgSSqY

But is he entirely right?
What if a mod file itself contains no Copyrighted assets at all? That would probably mean not only it contains no Copyrighted code, but it might be hard to argue that it’s derivative if the file itself clearly doesn’t contain that even though it’s meant to apply to a game (after downloading it for example). I also feel like it’s not as “evil” as flat-out game distribution if the mod in question is very minor, barely mods the game as long as the game is not redistributed, and doesn’t contain anything else that would be evil separately. I would find it kinda similar to taking a single frame snapshot of an entire classic Disney Mickey Mouse movie still Copyrighted.

I also thought fair use might have a chance for some derivative works depending on the nature? If I purchase one of those Copyrighted paintings from a popular store, am I not allowed to paint over it over something I purchase in my own home?

And finally, I thought the whole situation was more akin about his video content rather than the mod by itself? If someone made a “Spongebob” mod of Zelda, streamed it, was parody, review, and doesn’t contain illegal content outside, then wouldn’t the video itself have a bigger chance of fair use even if it’s showcasing a derivative work, assuming fair use can apply to all parts of section 106 of Copyright.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re:

What if a mod file itself contains no Copyrighted assets at all?

Problem with this argument is that whenever legal stuff is active, you cannot in this way change the facts of the case. Your mod will have those copyrighted assets or not, but you cannot afterwards twist your way out of the rabbit hole simply because you’ve read intenet detective’s guide to copyright lawsuits.

This fact that the facts are not freely twistable like most self-learned internet detectives are jumping from one set of facts to another set of facts on the fly, whenever the current facts don’t seem to produce the result that you want. This kind of jumping from one version of the world to another version of the world is simply unavailable to many of the copyright infringers being sued in the court of law.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

you cannot afterwards twist your way out of the rabbit hole simply because you’ve read intenet detective’s guide to copyright lawsuits.

This makes absolutely no sense. Internet detective or not, if your mod doesn’t contain content that was directly ripped from copyrighted assets, desperately praying that it somehow counts as copyright infringement won’t help you.

whenever the current facts don’t seem to produce the result that you want

Speak for yourself. Many of your copyright ilk have insisted on stricter versions of copyright law that don’t exist in the country they sue in. You copyright madmen will twist the law to suit your needs because the courts don’t let you rape the public hard enough.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

if your mod doesn’t contain content that was directly ripped from copyrighted assets, desperately praying that it somehow counts as copyright infringement won’t help you.

Hell, it’s copyright infringement if they
1) had access to the original (while developing their own solution)
2) didn’t do cleanroom techniques
3) keep staring at the competitor’s products (instead of just glancing) ((and glancing is copyright infringement if there’s direct link to the product they’re developing))

You do not actually need to have any of the source code copied. Even if the products were using completely different technology, it could be copyright infringement for example if the same game is implemented with x86 asm vs amiga asm.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

And thus we’re back to the “shoot at everything and kill everyone” approach to copyright claims, which I can’t say is surprising coming from you.

Even if the products were using completely different technology, it could be copyright infringement for example if the same game is implemented with x86 asm vs amiga asm.

Thanks for admitting that Meshpage copied the Kismet backend for Unreal Editor 3 because they look sufficiently similar. I’m sure you’re going to turn yourself in to the authorities in the name of stricter copyright law.

terop (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4

Thanks for admitting that Meshpage copied the Kismet backend for Unreal Editor 3 because they look sufficiently similar.

The graph data structure in builder tool does have some similarity to the unreal/blender/unity’s similar graph data structure. But this isn’t copyright infringement, simply because programming languages and ultimately cpu’s are limiting the available choices enough that the chosen approach is the only one that can implement the needed “feature disabling” -feature that we want from the graph structure. Real world gets into way of ideals of copyright enforcement.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5

But this isn’t copyright infringement, simply because programming languages and ultimately cpu’s are limiting the available choices enough that the chosen approach is the only one that can implement the needed “feature disabling”

That’s not what you’ve been saying. You’ve always held the position that the real world needs to bend over backwards to avoid copyright infringement. You don’t get a free pass because you think it’s too hard. You’ve demanded that everyone else break their backs to obey copyright. It’s on you to do the same.

Your failure to do so is proof that you’re nothing but a filthy hypocrite who believes in murdering people for your blood money.

Space5000 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

The reason why I mentioned it despite the ‘purpose’ of certain mod files is that I am curious if they can still go after certain Copyright free mod files itself because I am not so sure if Copyright law can suddenly extend to a lawful Copyright free asset file due to the specific purpose. There is also the purpose of those mod files that it’s meant to mod some lawful thing someone own which makes me feel like it could feel like a form of fair use, assuming fair use can extend to that part of 106. If I handed someone a paintbrush to help them add a mustache to a Copyrighted Mickey Mouse painting, is the paintbrush itself copyright infringement?

I find a law limiting the human right to innocently mod your own lawful game unfair, so I shouldn’t ever feel bad for trying to find a legal way around it. If it truly is copyright infringement then I hope the law gets changed for the good then.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...