[ SECRET POST #2872 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2872 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.



__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 019 secrets from Secret Submission Post #410.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I honestly don't understand why people get so huffy over her using LPer footage. It's literally just someone recording a game, which they likely didn't make. There's no reason to be so protective of it...?

[(Anonymous)]

For starters she claimed that she used her own footage.

[(Anonymous)]

ia tbh. Unless there's implication that she hasn't actually played the game herself, I don't see what the big deal is. I mean, yeah, it's "stealing" but the LP footage is pretty much just decoration. She could be talking in front of a wall. Her words are the point of the video, not the gaming footage.

[(Anonymous)]

One thing I do recall her claiming in the kickstarter was that she or others under her direction would play games and record the footage. To use "Let's Play" footage is a cheap escape hatch and smacks of running scams for money.

[(Anonymous)]

Because it's not her footage and she should ask permission to use it. Which she didn't.

Also her knowledge of the games she's reviewing isn't accurate.

[(Anonymous)]

But those are separate points. She could be right or wrong without using her own footage, because the footage doesn't actually matter. It's not like she's stealing art.

[(Anonymous)]

Let's say you played a great game of, say, soccer, in which you made great passes and goals, and you went off the field feeling great about yourself.

A few weeks later you find out that someone else has taken the replay of your soccer game and passed it off as their own, in order to get credit, attention, and even money.

How would you feel?

[(Anonymous)]

Just fine, actually. Because footage isn't worth shit.

[(Anonymous)]

not the same anon

i'm glad you're okay with it but not everyone is.

[(Anonymous)]

that doesn't work at all as an analogy, though, mostly because it doesn't make any sense itself (how would someone pretend that they played a soccer game someone else played? do they look alike? or are they just claiming to have made the footage? if so, did i make the footage or did someone else????) but also because it's not really the same situation at all. anita didn't claim to have finished game achievements or anything noteworthy at all with the games, she literally just used the footage that someone else recorded of the game.

[(Anonymous)]

after she lied about playing the games.

not only did she steal someone's content (the person's gameplay) but she also lied - which is an important issue. it IS a big deal that she lied because you need to be professional and, really, need to cover your bases before anyone can take her so-called professional opinion seriously.

[(Anonymous)]

Except, its more like you did that awesome game, and then found out that someone was using it to illustrate the concept of, say, a penalty kick, or crappy defense.

While I can get the actual LPers being put out by her use, she wasn't getting attention or money for playing the games. She was getting it for the commentary about what the games were showing - things which do not change no matter who actually played the game.

I mean, if the worst indictment most people can make about her points is that she didn't use her own footage (which isn't actually an indictment of her points) or that she's wrong because there *reasons* in the individual games (a point which she addresses early on - that each game has an excuse for the trope does not negate the preponderance of the use of that trope), it really does make me eye-roll at the sheer vitrol.

[(Anonymous)]

Also the LPers who she took from wanted her to take it down and she didn't. So she isn't just taking without any credit, but with LPers who really emphatically didn't want her using their work at all.

[bio_obscura]

Why should she need the permission of people who post LPs? Those people don't ask permission from the game companies to post footage of their game.

[(Anonymous)]

Because she used to make it a point of how she was a real true gamer and how she actually did play these games look her vidoes even had footage of the games in the background. Kind of suggesting that this was HER footage of HER playing the game, or at the very least just demo/ad footage from the game company that she was using freely.

And of course LPers are protective of their footage. For many of them, making LPs is a JOB that they get PAID for, and they work insanely long hours trying to build up a viewer base, coming up with interesting commentary, etc.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, they also tend not to disclose whether their job is getting paid by ads/their own means somehow or by the companies whose games they're introducing, nor are the terms of those payments generally clear (i.e. if they're prevented from saying something negative).

LPers really do not have a bloody leg to stand on as far as their footage goes.

[insanenoodlyguy]

Um... yes they do. If you make a work, and somebody else uses your work without permission, they have done something wrong and you have been wronged. The quality of the work, even the integrity of the work, or lack thereof, doesn't change that in the slightest.

Unless those LP'rs have used footage without permission themselves, they do in fact have a valid leg to stand on.

[(Anonymous)]

All LPs except officially endorsed reviews use footage without permission.

That's literally what they are.

[(Anonymous)]

So stealing someone's fanart and selling it is totally okay because the artist who drew the fanart infringed on the original artwork's copyright. Right.

[(Anonymous)]

LP's don't "use" footage, they create footage.

A lot of games explicitly give permission for people to record their own gameplay and monetize the video that they create.

[(Anonymous)]

They bought the game. The general thin with LPers and why they don't get videos taken down for copyright is that it serves as free advertising and since they bought the game they own the copy they're using for the LP. Which is what makes it legal and what makes most game companies okay with it.

[(Anonymous)]

Also there's lots of LPs for free games, and plenty of developers encourage it. I mean, Markiplier got the Five Nights At Freddy 2 demo before anyone else did because the dev knew it would be a good advertisement.

[(Anonymous)]

It doesn't make it legal, it just makes it an unenforced grey zone.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh my God did you actually just say a "true gamer"? STUPID. People who play games are true gamers. Anyone who plays a game is a true gamer. Get the fuck over yourself. What a stupid, fuckingGEEKY, everyoneexcludedussoletsexcludeeveryoneelseespeciallythoseGIRLS mentality.

[(Anonymous)]

she's the one who said that...?