First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply The Fine Brothers own "React"
9449 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 1/31/16
lel what a bunch of noobs

You can't copyright a genre. Didn't those types of videos exist before they did, anyway?
35035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 1/31/16 , edited 1/31/16

GrandMasterTime wrote:

When people watch live streams of subscriber loss you know the world has gone mad.


I'll admit I did to get an idea of what sort of loss rate we were talking about, but it's not like I have it running in the background even still. That would be like staring at a clock for no reason. The rate, if you're curious, appeared to be about 100 lost per minute while I was watching. That would be enough to drive smaller channels into heart stopping terror and shocked, tearful apology, but these guys' main channel has borderline 14 million subscribers left.

They could eat two million and change, which is why boycotting is a bit of a tricky business when dealing with large entities, particularly those with more than one revenue source. Sometimes they won't notice, or will accept the loss, or will misunderstand the loss as disinterest rather than protest, or will even try to frame the protest as unwarranted and harmful in an effort to initiate a buycott to reduce their losses and outlast the boycott. In this case, the second is the most likely if they don't pull a 180. They'll surely notice, there's no chance at their misunderstanding why this is happening, and although they might try to frame the boycott as fundamentally misguided (if not malicious) I'm not confident they'll be able to successfully do so.
2380 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / NY
Offline
Posted 1/31/16
All I have to say is, thank god the copyrighting of "let's play" has been shot down on sight repeatedly.

37333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Online
Posted 1/31/16 , edited 1/31/16
Well, whatever the case may be with these guys, they need to fire their attorneys. I'm sure they must have run their idea by them, but either their attorneys didn't tell them the legal problems they could run into, or it was their attorneys who persuaded them that it was O.K. It might even be that their idea isn't as bad as it is being percieved, but the way they introduced it and the word choices they made were really, really bad. While I understand they cannot copyright the idea of react type shows, the way they invited others to use their copyrighted presentation was obviously handled poorly.

The way I see it is like this: When George Lucas owned Star Wars, he encouraged others to add stories and content to the Star Wars universe, as long as they followed the "Rules of The Star Wars Universe". As a result a ton of books, games, and fan-made videos were made. The books and games sold for money, I'm sure that George Lucas got his cut. The writers who wrote stories within "his" Star Wars universe got paid for their works, and got recognition as well, but George got his cut. I think this is somewhat what these guys wanted to do, but they flubbed it big time.

If I was them, I'd do a React show about their fans' reaction to their marketing disaster. Then retract their ill thought out marketing strategy and go back to the way things were. Honestly, I'm not a big fan of the React series. I've seen a few and was amused, but mostly I was amazed at their closed mindedness on many subjects. Particularly the way some of them reacted to non-American entertainment (their reaction to Kiyari Pamyu Pamyu's "Pom Pom Pom" in particular and some anime, in general.)


TRKitsune wrote:

All I have to say is, thank god the copyrighting of "let's play" has been shot down on sight repeatedly.




It amazes me that McDonald's got to copyright "I'm luv'n it." That is a common phrase used in everyday conversation, no matter how it's spelled.
15259 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 2/1/16 , edited 2/1/16

DeadlyOats wrote:




Yes. I agree with you. That would be wrong of J.K. Rolling. No one would be able to make a work that contained wizards, Trolls, Orcs, Dwarves, or Elves if the owners of Lord of The Rings stopped everyone else from doing so.

I was thinking that it was a direct copy of their concept. Which is to show kids or elderlies or some other demographic a thing, and then getting their initial reactions. Like making a "Price is Right" clone. Making a "game show" that is a "Price is Right" clone can get you sued for infringement, but making up your own "game show" should not get Bob Barker to sue you for making a "game show."


The problem with “react” is that there is almost no other way of doing a reaction video IE drop a person in front of a screen, play them a video and hit record. In my books that is trying to trademark an entire "type" of video; in the same vein as trying to trademark "let’s play" or “play through”. If they were talking about more precise aspects of the show IE the soundtrack played during the opening or their logos then they would have a point.

However, their past actions have given people reason to be sceptical.

EG this

https://twitter.com/thefinebros/status/513061415016341504

because of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CMS9xnBRkc

Additionally the Finebros didn't “invent” the idea of reaction videos or even popularise them
37333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Online
Posted 2/1/16 , edited 2/1/16

Voc666IV wrote:


DeadlyOats wrote:




Yes. I agree with you. That would be wrong of J.K. Rolling. No one would be able to make a work that contained wizards, Trolls, Orcs, Dwarves, or Elves if the owners of Lord of The Rings stopped everyone else from doing so.

I was thinking that it was a direct copy of their concept. Which is to show kids or elderlies or some other demographic a thing, and then getting their initial reactions. Like making a "Price is Right" clone. Making a "game show" that is a "Price is Right" clone can get you sued for infringement, but making up your own "game show" should not get Bob Barker to sue you for making a "game show."


The problem with “react” is that there is almost no other way of doing a reaction video IE drop a person in front of a screen, play them a video and hit record. In my books that is trying to trademark an entire "type" of video; in the same vein as trying to trademark "let’s play" or “play through”. If they were talking about more precise aspects of the show IE the soundtrack played during the opening or their logos then they would have a point.

However, their past actions have given people reason to be sceptical.

EG this

https://twitter.com/thefinebros/status/513061415016341504

because of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CMS9xnBRkc

Additionally the Finebros didn't “invent” the idea of reaction videos or even popularise them


Correct. Not copyrightable. Correct, might be copyrightable.


UPDATE:

I decided to look at a React video to see what it is they do. They showed some teens playing a very difficult video game, and their reactions as they played. I came to conclude. There was nothing there that could be copyrighted. So, I watched a couple more episodes. The only thing that I found that might be copyrightable, in my estimation, was the opening credits that introduces each episode, but my opinion is based on only watching a couple episodes.

I went in thinking that I might find a style of editing, or background music that was unique, but there was none of that. So, based on that, I really think they seriously blundered. If their lawyers advised them to go this route, then not only should they fire their lawyers, but also sue them for malpractice.

I went in thinking they had a formula that was uniquely their own, but after watching a couple of their videos, I have to conclude that aside from the art and style they use in the opening credits, there's nothing they can say is uniquely theirs. I find this, especially after reading Morrissey v. Proctor and Gamble Co. and Herwitz v. National Broadcasting Co., as pointed out to me by maxgale.

I really thought they had a unique stylized format that was their own, but all they do is plop someone in front of a laptop or monitor and ask them to watch, and then ask questions. This is something you see all of the time in all kinds of shows, even on the news when reporters are asking people on the street for their reactions and opinions on a matter.
17065 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Fredericton, NB
Offline
Posted 2/1/16
Never heard of fine bros, did some research and came to conclude these guys are fucking idiots and should lose all their subs.
11702 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M
Offline
Posted 2/1/16
welp, they pretty much boned themselves
18054 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
U.S.
Offline
Posted 2/1/16 , edited 2/1/16
Watching the live stream... yikes and people commenting.. ugh.


Schadenfreude (I Want to See You Fail)
1106 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / PA
Offline
Posted 2/1/16
this is just as bad as King trying to trademark or copyright the word Saga so no one could make any game that had the name saga in it. Its a really dumb idea that they even attempted to do this, it's not like they are the first people to get people to react to anything.
37333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Online
Posted 2/1/16
Well, when they start demanding Google to take down other people's React videos, someone will need to sue them and challenge the legitimacy of their copyright, and the legality of their licensing scheme.
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 2/1/16

KnightOfZero1991 wrote:

Never heard of fine bros, did some research and came to conclude these guys are fucking idiots and should lose all their subs.


That can be said for many a YouTuber these days.
Posted 2/1/16 , edited 2/1/16
I am more surprised that people are still watching. Speaking for myself, one was all I needed to see.

A slightly more level headed analysis of their licensing program:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160201/01531533478/fine-bros-plan-is-actually-pretty-cool-if-you-get-past-how-they-announced-it.shtml
37333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Online
Posted 2/1/16

nooneinparticular wrote:

I am more surprised that people are still watching. Speaking for myself, one was all I needed to see.

A slightly more level headed analysis of their licensing program:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160201/01531533478/fine-bros-plan-is-actually-pretty-cool-if-you-get-past-how-they-announced-it.shtml




That's not a level headed analysis. That's Public Relations work. They're still trying to sell their idea of licensing "their format." And now the legal fireworks are about to begin. Here's an announcement by an attorney.

http://ryanmorrisonlaw.com/attorneys-react-the-fine-bros-react-trademark/
33361 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Socal
Offline
Posted 2/1/16 , edited 2/1/16
*GASP*

NOBLE SENPAI has also made a video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nimVs-Q8Tks

I've never seen noble serious o.o...

pull out the pitch forks I'm a ram some fine bros up the ass!!!
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.