BIG~ mistake SE. Mighty big. (Materials Usage License)

[AngelicBeing]

You must meet these minimum requirements in order to monetize your videos:

Your content is advertiser-friendly.
You created the content or have permission to use it commercially.
You are able to provide documentation proving you own commercial rights to all audio and video content.
Your content complies with YouTube’s Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. YouTube reserves the right to disable monetization for accounts that do not follow our guidelines.

So WTF are you whining about? You want SE to sign away all their rights to game footage so you can make money off it?
SE's said nothing about not being able to make and post videos. They just said not to do it for your own profit... which is already Youtube's policy anyway.

[indira]

SE owns FFXIV so you need to pay to use that copyright. not hard to understand that. if they use FFXIV in a video SE can tell youtube then they will take it down or SE will get every cent off that video.

there a reason people, companys get copyrights so that way they own & control it.

[Huginn]

Did I say people can't make videos? No. I quoted exactly what the issue is.

perhaps you do not understand what intellectual property is, or what private property rights are. or what constitutes fair use and right of parody, but that i gather only from conjecture based on your statements. this is not soviet russia governing the rules.

[Raymeo]

Honest questions here:

I understand that I don't own SE's intellectual property. However, if I don't claim to own it, and I instead cite my credits where they're due, then how can there still be an issue? For that matter, if I alter their content enough for it to be considered original content -- doesn't that have a truckload of lawful legal precedent already? Don't we also have something (in America at least) called freedom of the press? Or are you saying that news sites like GameBreaker.tv, or television programs about tech news, shouldn't be allowed to talk about this game either? I mean... I understand them wanting to draw a line somewhere, but isn't a line of this magnitude at least a little unreasonable?

[Gardthorne]

Unfortunately, a lot of game developers haven't picked up on the fact that youtube content creators are boon to them rather than the leeches they seem to think they are. Japanese developers in particular are wary of this because frankly they're not on youtube as much as they are on niconico, and nico culture just isn't the same as yt. It's gonna take some time.

[Xaphire]

I don't think its really fair to call youtubers an asset. Most of the time I watch lets play videos because I don't want to spend the money on a game so it's pretty much the opposite effect for me.

[Kiroh]

Aww, you can't make money from other people's work so now you're upset about it?

[gyugotsugo]

Monetize doesn't mean posting. It means using their product for you to make money somehow. AdSense or whatever like that I'm sure.

[Veillette]

perhaps you do not understand what intellectual property is, or what private property rights are. or what constitutes fair use and right of parody, but that i gather only from conjecture based on your statements. this is not soviet russia governing the rules.

In Soviet Russia, videos monetize you.

Anyway, I don't think it's going to be a big deal, if any. I mean, just don't monetize off it and people will still watch if it's really worth it. Hobbyists will still create good videos if they do enjoy making them. If you're in it for the money or even live off monetization, then I think there are better sources of income you should look into. Personally I think the reason of this is that monetization has the same connotation as RMT. You gain from their assets. (also in the you're working off playing a game sense)

I suppose that software tutorials should be outlawed too? And that English teachers should use only novels that they've written themselves if they want to teach their students about books... or at least, if they want to get paid for what they do?

I'm not sure, but I think most have a "For educational purpose" or stuff like that (for teachers / tutorials).

[Raymeo]

Aww, you can't make money from other people's work so now you're upset about it?

I suppose that software tutorials should be outlawed too? And that English teachers should use only novels that they've written themselves if they want to teach their students about books... or at least, if they want to get paid for what they do?

How about this: If you'd like to contribute to the conversation, try explaining your own opinion -- or in your case, even stating one -- instead of just pointing and laughing like a trolling/spamming fool. It's people like you who make it a chore to find anything worth reading on here.