Jump to content
Banner by ~ Ice Princess Silky

nami438

User
 View Profile  See their content

  • Posts

    192

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by nami438

  1. nami438
    Oh is that so? I didn't look into it too deeply. Thank you for bringing that up
  2. nami438
    That's what I was thinking. A whole lot of people in this fandom are male, and I don't think I'd be exaggerating to say that a lot of them are heterosexual. Wonder what the prospects are like on this site.
  3. nami438
    Did Digibro change recently? I used to watch his videos a couple years back, and they were really cool and he seemed like a nice guy, and he presented his opinions fairly as I could see. Then I watched two from this year, and I see his OC looking crazy and smoking (no offense intended but look at it, I'd be surprised if it wasn't intended to look crazy in the first place), and him cussing and talking about screwing Applejack and Fluttershy? What happened? Eh now that I think about it, maybe his OC redesign is supposed to be a parody of the stereotypical "deep thinker", just smokes and talks a lot without bothering to look presentable.
  4. nami438
    I feel that you should report this to the manager, if you're up to returning to the store. It's completely uncalled for behavior, and her actions have made you feel distressed. That is 100% how not to treat a customer, especially without provocation on your part.
  5. nami438
    Correct, they have not and hopefully will never try to. Hm? I am pretty sure WeLoveFine only sells licensed products. In no way is Hasbro asserting that they own "brony". I don't think Hasbro has any part in this at all, this is all Zazzle. Zazzle is just trying to catch people selling infringing merchandise through their website, not asserting ownership over the word "brony". I thought that King withdrew it voluntarily. Either way, I hope your way would have been what the patent office said to that.
  6. nami438
    (this is not a criticism of you, just general commentary) When someone uses the term "brony" when are they not referring to My Little Pony in some way these days? I'd be surprised to find that even a few of the people tagging their merchandise "brony" on Zazzle were not selling infringing merchandise. Unfortunately now people who want to sell, say, a shirt that just says "brony" will run into trouble. Wonder if there were very many such people on Zazzle to begin with. Hasbro does not own a trademark on the word "brony", nor are they or Zazzle claiming that this is the case. Welovefine has licenses for all of the merchandise they sell, including for My Little Pony. In the USA, you can trademark a word when it is used in relation to your product. Example: King, the developers of Candy Crush Saga, used to own a trademark on the word "candy" when it is used as a title for a video game.
  7. nami438
    The original intent was probably to make her and her sister seem god-like, or that she stands over the other ponies literally. I used to just think she was a horse.
  8. nami438
    Worse to fans of various Hasbro properties, at least some. It would seem like a big bully greedily picking on a little kid, even though it's actually a kid trying to get back the money that was supposed to go to him, but instead went to the other kid.
  9. nami438
    Morally, perhaps, but not legally. Button Mash and Snowdrop both extensively used settings, stories, designs, etc. that belong to Hasbro, without permission to do so.
  10. nami438
    My first mascot exposure was to Spyro. Never could finish the first game though, and now I don't have a memory card to play it all the way through I like Parappa now too. For Sega, it's Sonic hands down. Alex Kidd's last game was way too luck based for me, and I've never played Super Monkey Ball. Not to say that Sonic hasn't had some stinkers For Nintendo, even tho Mario's the official mascot, I'll go for Kirby because he's cute and his games are fun and cutesy
  11. nami438
    Oh man, OP how did I know you were going to bring up waifu stealer extraordinaire, Sir Flash Sentry? I think (some of?) these guys are just having a spot of fun. I used to have a waifu, and I would play with people who claimed her, but we were all kidding, and it never got into a fight.
  12. nami438
    Hm, Twilight is really nice, and smart, I wouldn't mind marrying her. Hopefully it's not arranged or something? And I think she already has a man, this may get awkward... I'm cool with Rainbow too. As long as we're both ponies first (same with marrying anypony else, gotta be same species!) Twixie seems nice too, and she'd be interesting to hang with. I would love to serve Equestria as a guard, it's a noble thing to do.
  13. nami438
    Too often this is how ContentID works. It just flags the slightest bit of material in a video and sends all the money to the owner of the bit, even if the owner doesn't want this to happen. To use ContentID, they have choose to either hit honest people like this, or let them go while letting people trying to monetize entire songs they didn't make as well. I maintain that someone in Hasbro is responsible for this, not ContentID alone. ContentID needs a source video to match Youtube uploads to. Assuming that the video creators have no agreement with Hasbro prior, how could Hasbro possibly have footage of a fan animation before it hits Youtube? Where can this source video come from? Either someone is manually flagging these videos, or someone is downloading them and reuploading them as source video for ContentID to catch. I just can't imagine any other way. Or, ContentID is now smart enough to recognize fan made ponies? Very true that were it not for Hasbro, none of the videos in question would exist at all. I still have a problem with Hasbro getting all of the money from them though, and I'm not sure that Hasbro being ultimately responsible for the videos' existence, necessarily grants them the right to get all of the money, under American law at least. But who am I kidding, we're dealing with Google's Law here, and for once I think I may somewhat agree with it. For animations like Snowdrop, at least. The way Hasbro monetizes reviews that don't have significant copyrighted content is still a no-no for me, it's immoral, and afaik it's not quite legal either.
  14. nami438
    My reaction is, I can't stand the Fine Bros. They do hot button stuff like this all the time, getting fans and haters upset and instigating stuff, and then reap tens of thousands of dollars of profit. Don't fall into their trap. They always win, everyone else loses. These kids are actors, and the footage is edited after the fact to make them say what the Fine Bros want them to say. It's all a ploy to make people talk about these videos.
  15. nami438
    It broke my heart when Pinkie Pie was so mean to Fluttershy in Filli Vanilli! And again when Rainbow Dash cheated to win that race with Applejack, even after they agreed not to But at least Rainbow was shown the error of her ways that time.
  16. nami438
    I would like ContentID to only work if one exceeds a certain amount of time with it, like 5 seconds. Not sure if legal though. But now I know people will try cutting an entire movie into 5 second bites, upload them all to Youtube in a playlist, monetize them all... They are why we can't have nice things.
  17. nami438
    Precisely. imo ContentID has its heart in the right place, and it works great at keeping people from uploading entire episodes, songs, or movies without being checked. It's just extremely outdated now and needs to be updated.
  18. nami438
    That's my feelings, too. I do not believe that Hasbro owns these fan videos or has any right to ownership of them, copyright violation or not. The proper thing to do is to take the fans to court and sue if they're monetizing MLP, but of course that'd make them look even worse. Also, at least with ContentID the video gets to stay up for the rest of us to see, unlike with DMCA cease and desist orders like with JanAnimations.
  19. nami438
    I can't imagine it's Youtube doing this, normally ContentID is automatic. It's just an algorithm that can only auto-claim video and audio that at least closely matches data submitted to them by content owners (or those who claim to be, like news stations falsely claiming video submitted to them by eyewitnesses, but that's a topic for another day). Meaning, that Youtube will only catch stuff that Hasbro submitted to them, like episodes of the show proper. Hasbro can't possibly submit fan animations that they had no idea existed before being put on Youtube, because they don't have them. ... ...hm. Now I think of a possibility, that Hasbro may be taking these fan animations after they are posted, then download them, then submit them to Youtube to be covered under ContentID, which means claiming that the animations belong to Hasbro. Or more specifically, that Hasbro is the "copyright owner". Whether Hasbro or the creator owns copyright is debatable.
  20. nami438
    That's a nicer way to look at it. I would prefer that they share money with the video creators (if the creators want money), but at present Youtube doesn't allow for this. All the Adsense money has to go to one account.
  21. nami438
    Mm? Isn't Digibro just another reviewer? Just discussing the show isn't illegal, and thank goodness Google Law has no power here.
  22. nami438
    This would explain why Max Gilardi seems not to get hit with ContentID.
  23. nami438
    These aren't C&D's, this is Hasbro making money off of these people. And now I do agree, I did not know that these videos were being monetized. Now I'm wondering why the ContentID doesn't seem to show up on the video below (NSFW), I know for a fact that the creator is monetizing it. Maybe the money is going to Hasbro and I just can't see it.
  24. nami438
    I like Lyra's colors too. Very soothing
  25. nami438
    Trying to monetize a video is what triggers content ID? I will keep this in mind. Good point on the creators not complaining about it, at least not to my knowledge. Makes me wonder if they had an agreement with Hasbro for this to happen.
×
×
  • Create New...