Not happy with nuking out of Youtube all FE music, Nintendo hits GilvaSunner (copyright claims) and BrawlBRSTMs3 (terminated)

Hieroph

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,804
What the fuck Nintendo?

People have been putting their music on Youtube for over a decade, so why the hell did they decide to go apeshit over it only now?

As much as I love Nintendo, they can fuck right off concerning this.
Nintendo has been getting progressively worse in the past few years.

It's like they've set up a team to come up with shitty things to do, and when they come up with something, they're like "Yeah let's do this shitty thing!"
 

LiK

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,712
Can they let us listen to this shit somewhere else? There's no FE Three Houses OST available to buy right?
 

LunaSerena

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,039
Can they let us listen to this shit somewhere else? There's no FE Three Houses OST available to buy right?
No, the OST isn't available yet. If it is a similar situation as Fates, they'll wait until the DLC releases in case it has new tracks, a la Heirs of Fate.
Only thing available is the sound selection included in the seasons of warfare edition.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,237
Somewhere South
It's honestly surprising to me that Nintendo does not try to monetize more their OST stuff.
Nintendo is hilariously backwards, myopic and antiquated with anything pertaining to modern tech and the use of their IPs. They'll figure this shit out along with online functionality for their games in some 10 or 15 years, once we've all moved on from this stuff for a good 5 years.
 

AtomicShroom

Tools & Automation
Verified
Oct 28, 2017
1,294
Yeah I noticed lately that a Donkey Kong Country 2 OST I had been listening to regularly that had been up for like 10 years got striked by Nintendo.

It sucks because there is absolutely no legal way to listen to this music, especially not verbatim.

And you just know that Nintendo isn’t going to go through the trouble of ripping all their NES/SNES soundtracks to put them up on Spotify, even knowing they’d make tons of money from it!

You fucking suck sometimes, Nintendo!
 

Radeo

Member
Apr 26, 2019
1,030
Nintendo are so hilariously hostile to their fans it's amazing

Also it's always interesting to go through these threads and find all the brown noses
 

Rotobit

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,154
I get why they strike, in some cases, but it's really stupid to do it for soundtracks they aren't selling/streaming elsewhere. As it stands they're basically actively punishing their fans for being enthusiastic about their product.

Square Enix finally getting its music on streaming services was amazing, follow in their footsteps Nintendo, it'll pay off big time.
 

Gartooth

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,680
Used to listen to these channels a lot. Shame it came to this.

Nintendo can fuck right off. They don't give people a way to purchase their music anyways.
 

Luminaire

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,912
If only there was a way for them to have their music be available to consumers and make money off of it. 🤔
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,272
Nintendo are so hilariously hostile to their fans it's amazing

Also it's always interesting to go through these threads and find all the brown noses
Not sure I'd call it hostile to their fans to take down ripped music that they are planning to sell an album of. These aren't videos of gameplay, they are just music and nothing else.
 

J_b

Member
Apr 11, 2019
3
Unpopular opinion but I never liked those 30 min extension, when I would search for music to add to a device they always popped up and it's not realistic to have an entire ost on your mp3 player or whatever where every single song is 30 minutes long
 

metalslimer

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,897
God fuck off Nintendo. Either put the music somewhere for us to listen to legally or just let people enjoy the music and would probably do more good than harm for your franchises
 

Jobbs

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,393
You're not entitled to freely rip and distribute something just because you like it. Taking Nintendo's side here.
 

Brian Damage

Member
Nov 1, 2017
5,734
UK
To this day I don't understand the GilvaSunner/SilvaGunner dichotomy.
GilvaSunner uploads music rips from games, SiIvaGunner (formerly known as GiIvaSunner (with a capital i in place of lowercase l)) uploads high quality musical shitposts masquerading as actual game music. Basically VG music bait-and-switch that is too well done for anyone to be reasonably upset with.
 

muteKi

Member
Oct 22, 2018
7,901
a sunken pirate ship
That's very intentional, Their names used to be switched at first too, [the account currently named] SilvaGunner was always supposed to be a parody of the one that uploaded the actual OSTs.
Gah. I remember when it was GiivaSunner, but I guess now they're SiivaGunner. Of course. I guess that explains some questions I had.

Well, as long as they don't come for Super Mouthy Oh Brother I'll cope
 

Fork

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
4,786
Lima, Peru
You're not entitled to freely rip and distribute something just because you like it. Taking Nintendo's side here.
Lots of piracy encouragement, even admittance, ITT. What the hell.
Not sure I'd call it hostile to their fans to take down ripped music that they are planning to sell an album of. These aren't videos of gameplay, they are just music and nothing else.
You can still buy the OST CDs.
Just because something is on Youtube, doesn't technically make it legal.

If you're ok with listening to copyrighted music on Youtube that isn't getting monetized by the copyright owners, why not just acquire it through other means?
Games like Super Mario RPG and Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze literally do not have available soundtracks. Its impossible to listen to them without Youtube or, you know, playing the game and going to every location and level by yourself.

Lets follow some of the examples you have posted. If "not legal" soundtracks get nuked out of Youtube, how could anyone listen to the Pokemon Emerald soundtrack? Are people supposed not to enjoy art if that art isnt sold anymore? You do realize that not everyone can afford the $150 Brawl OST, right?

Add a hundred more games to that list. Are people supposed to buy 100 soundtracks? Are people supposed to buy nonexistant soundtracks?
 

Poltergust

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,930
Orlando, FL
This really sucks. So much music has simply vanished from Youtube over the past year.

Heck, even if Nintendo were to make their OSTs available, that doesn't necessarily mean that they will release extended versions of those songs like BrawlBRSTMs did. In the end, we're likely going to be losing something valuable here as consumers.
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,272
Games like Super Mario RPG and Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze literally do not have available soundtracks. Its impossible to listen to them without Youtube or, you know, playing the game and going to every location and level by yourself.

Lets follow some of the examples you have posted. If "not legal" soundtracks get nuked out of Youtube, how could anyone listen to the Pokemon Emerald soundtrack? Are people supposed not to enjoy art if that art isnt sold anymore? You do realize that not everyone can afford the $150 Brawl OST, right?

Add a hundred more games to that list. Are people supposed to buy 100 soundtracks? Are people supposed to buy nonexistant soundtracks?
This thread is mostly about how Nintendo took down Fire Emblem's ripped soundtracks, a series Nintendo does in fact release soundtrack albums to. Nintendo didn't take down all Super Mario RPG or Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze or Pokemon Emerald soundtracks from YouTube.

And really, Nintendo should have taken down the Pokemon Emerald OST, because those songs are not only sold on CD but also iTunes. You can very well listen to the Pokemon Emerald soundtrack without stealing it.
 
Last edited:

Jobbs

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,393
Games like Super Mario RPG and Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze literally do not have available soundtracks. Its impossible to listen to them without Youtube or, you know, playing the game and going to every location and level by yourself.

Lets follow some of the examples you have posted. If "not legal" soundtracks get nuked out of Youtube, how could anyone listen to the Pokemon Emerald soundtrack? Are people supposed not to enjoy art if that art isnt sold anymore? You do realize that not everyone can afford the $150 Brawl OST, right?

Add a hundred more games to that list. Are people supposed to buy 100 soundtracks? Are people supposed to buy nonexistant soundtracks?
I feel like some people in this thread have such a radically different worldview it's like we're speaking two different languages. Just because something isn't currently available at retail doesn't mean you're entitled to steal that content for your youtube channel and distribute it for free. Nintendo may very well be planning to sell it. It's their content.
 

Poltergust

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,930
Orlando, FL
This thread is mostly about how Nintendo took down Fire Emblem's ripped soundtracks, a series Nintendo does in fact release soundtrack albums to.
No, that happened a while ago. The point of this thread is that hundreds of pieces of video game music on Youtube outside of Fire Emblem essentially vanished overnight, with BrawlBRSTMs entire channel being deleted in particular (which had thousands of extended songs from many, many different games, including ones that are not associated with Nintendo).
 

Miller

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
944
Regardless of how you feel about this issue this ban is complete bullshit. YouTube uploads are piracy.

You can't ban someone for slyly advocating for downloads soundtrack RIPs when you're complaining about not being able to listen to an upload of those same files.
Yeah, that's kinda silly. The whole thread is full of people talking about pirating music. What's the difference between a stream and a download?
 

ghostcrew

Spooky
Moderator
Oct 27, 2017
8,588
United Kingdom
No, that happened a while ago. The point of this thread is that hundreds of pieces of video game music on Youtube outside of Fire Emblem essentially vanished overnight, with BrawlBRSTMs entire channel being deleted in particular (which had thousands of extended songs from many, many different games, including ones that are not associated with Nintendo).
Were those pieces of music uploaded to YouTube by the copyright holder? Or were they on fan accounts, uploaded by people who have no ownership of the tracks?

Because one of those has the right to upload and take down the tracks whenever they want because they own them. And one is a fan who is uploading rips of someone else’s work. It sucks because people enjoy those channels and those uploads and often they’re not available officially. But that doesn’t mean everyone has the right to upload and share someone else’s stuff without the possibility of it being removed. You’re gonna run the risk if it’s the kind of content you’re playing with. You don’t own it.
 

Fork

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
4,786
Lima, Peru
I feel like some people in this thread have such a radically different worldview it's like we're speaking two different languages. Just because something isn't currently available at retail doesn't mean you're entitled to steal that content for your youtube channel and distribute it for free. Nintendo may very well be planning to sell it. It's their content.
SMRPG released more than twenty years ago. Nintendo isnt planning to sell its OST, thats a game that has barely been referenced after it was made. DKC2, Perfect Dark, Super Mario World, etc. They were all released decades ago and the idea that Nintendo will just sell them again someday is wishful thinking at best.

Tell me then, if people want to listen to the Paper Mario soundtrack or to any game that was made before 2010 and that doesnt have its soundtrack available for purchase (which is most of them), what should they do?

Ok, its their content. Ok, entitlement. Tell me, people want to enjoy the art that they like, what should they do?
 

Leviathan

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,022
Assuming the OST is going to be available sometime, they likely just don't want people ripping it off of YT or getting tired of it before then.
 

Rotobit

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,154
I feel like some people in this thread have such a radically different worldview it's like we're speaking two different languages. Just because something isn't currently available at retail doesn't mean you're entitled to steal that content for your youtube channel and distribute it for free. Nintendo may very well be planning to sell it. It's their content.
Sure people aren't entitled to upload soundtracks but that doesn't mean we can't say Nintendo is really stupid for removing an outlet for their fans to be enthusiastic about an aspect of their work.

In Fire Emblem's case they're definitely losing a revenue stream, and most people in this thread would probably agree that the take-downs are justified there, but Nintendo has shown no inclination to release classic soundtracks outside of a few scant limited edition discs given away with pre-orders or raffles in Japan. They're literally losing nothing in a lot of these instances, so they're just fermenting ill-will for no good reason. The people who listened to these tracks on YouTube weren't doing it as a screw you to Nintendo's copyright lawyers.

Of course I'll be fine with it if, in a weeks time, Nintendo puts up a massive backlog onto Spotify, but I severely doubt that's gonna happen.
 

Poltergust

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,930
Orlando, FL
Were those pieces of music uploaded to YouTube by the copyright holder? Or were they on fan accounts, uploaded by people who have no ownership of the tracks?

Because one of those has the right to upload and take down the tracks whenever they want because they own them. And one is a fan who is uploading rips of someone else’s work.
Uh, I was just clarifying what this thread was about. What does the post you quoted have to do with anything you're saying?

Regardless, I will respond. I understand taking down tracks that they own, but:

1. Nintendo took down an entire library of songs that are mostly not owned by them.
2. The tracks are actually fan-edits (not straight rips) due to them being extended versions; you will likely not find such versions of these songs released in any official capacity, and there's an argument to be made for fair use here in that case.
 

xeecee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
488
just because nintendo has a legal right to do something doesn’t mean they should do it, and i’m honestly gobsmacked at the amount of cop ass behavior in here.

people love nintendo music. nintendo has an incredibly poor track record with releasing said music for purchase or streaming, and while it’s true that nobody is “””entitled””” to listen to it until they do it is truly bizarre to me that anyone here cares enough about the letter of the law to take a major corporation’s side here. the lesson is; release your soundtracks. people love this stuff and would pay for it, or listen to it on a service that does pay (spotify does not pay artists enough but that’s a conversation for another time). they’re leaving money on the table.

if there is no convenient legal access people will look for convenient illegal access. end of. it’s far better and likely way easier to provide the service people want than eternally playing whack-a-mole with piracy. there are lots of things that nintendo/companies are well within their legal rights to do that suck.
 

ghostcrew

Spooky
Moderator
Oct 27, 2017
8,588
United Kingdom
The tracks are actually fan-edits (not straight rips) due to them being extended versions; you will likely not find such versions of these songs released in any official capacity, and there's an argument to be made for fair use here in that case.
That’s not how copyright works. If you upload a 10 hour version of Thriller to YouTube then you can be sure that SME will claim it. If you’re uploading the track then you’re uploading the track. Doesn’t matter if it’s an extended version officially released on a record or not.
 

etrain911

Member
Oct 27, 2017
775
just because nintendo has a legal right to do something doesn’t mean they should do it, and i’m honestly gobsmacked at the amount of cop ass behavior in here.

people love nintendo music. nintendo has an incredibly poor track record with releasing said music for purchase or streaming, and while it’s true that nobody is “””entitled””” to listen to it until they do it is truly bizarre to me that anyone here cares enough about the letter of the law to take a major corporation’s side here. the lesson is; release your soundtracks. people love this stuff and would pay for it, or listen to it on a service that does pay (spotify does not pay artists enough but that’s a conversation for another time). they’re leaving money on the table.

if there is no convenient legal access people will look for convenient illegal access. end of. it’s far better and likely way easier to provide the service people want than eternally playing whack-a-mole with piracy. there are lots of things that nintendo/companies are well within their legal rights to do that suck.
For reals, there is so much corporate ball-washing going on this thread. People mistake moralistic arguments for legalistic arguments. Just because something is legal or illegal doesn't make it morally correct.
 

Poltergust

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,930
Orlando, FL
That’s not how copyright works. If you upload a 10 hour version of Thriller to YouTube then you can be sure that SME will claim it. If you’re uploading the track then you’re uploading the track. Doesn’t matter if it’s an extended version officially released on a record or not.
Just for clarification, are unofficial covers/remixes of songs considered to be copyright violations as well?

I actually remember there being a huge stink about that a few years ago where people singing a particular song on camera was enough to get their videos hit with a copyright claim, but I don’t remember how that got resolved.
 

greenbird

Member
Oct 25, 2017
771
Stunned that it took until page 5 for the word 'entitled' to show up, as it usually does in these threads. I see the floodgates are open now though.
 

minimaxir

Built an AI that makes better threads than you
Member
May 9, 2018
1,530
In 2019, is there any research that having YouTube videos of music cannibalizes sales/streams of the soundtrack?
 

Miller

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
944
SMRPG released more than twenty years ago. Nintendo isnt planning to sell its OST, thats a game that has barely been referenced after it was made. DKC2, Perfect Dark, Super Mario World, etc. They were all released decades ago and the idea that Nintendo will just sell them again someday is wishful thinking at best.

Tell me then, if people want to listen to the Paper Mario soundtrack or to any game that was made before 2010 and that doesnt have its soundtrack available for purchase (which is most of them), what should they do?

Ok, its their content. Ok, entitlement. Tell me, people want to enjoy the art that they like, what should they do?
The answer is that they should listen to other music. Music that is distributed legitimately.

I don't subscribe to that belief, but it's the answer you will be told. I mean, imagine you made a short film. It plays at a couple film festivals, but you opt not to sell it to consumers for whatever reason. Now, fans of your work distribute pirated copies of that short film amongst themselves freely. You say, "Hey, stop stealing my shit." They say, "But we can't buy it! What should we do?" I mean, you're under no obligation to sell it to them. That's a silly argument, right? But the fact that this thread hasn't been closed outright for "advocating piracy" should tell you right away that this isn't quite that simple. People can wave their fingers at what they perceive to be entitlement, but we're participating in an industry that lately revolves around livestreaming. Nintendo was vehemently opposed to this, but finally came around (kicking and screaming.) They were well within their rights to pursue litigation against those distributing VOD content and the like. But eventually, they realized what people are saying in this thread -- that it is a free promotional tool and that it does not devalue their products. If they don't want to bother untangling the rights to distribute their music digitally, so be it. But they are actively leaving money on the table and everyone knows it. They'll come around eventually.

Now, brass tacks, I think if you bought the game, you can do whatever the hell you want with the music included therein (short of distributing it), and obtain it through whatever means are available to you. It's part of the item you own. You own it. The law in most jurisdictions does not agree with me on this issue, however. Which is, frankly, fucking stupid. But whatever.
 

fhqwhgads

Member
Oct 28, 2017
710

The worst part about Nintendo refusing to release old music is not just them having it, but having the highest quality versions possible that can't be found anywhere else. Uncompressed music is hard to come by, I'm willing to pay if it gets released and Ninty decides to keep the vault locked and only releases occasional scraps in limited releases. For example, the album above was a Japanese Club Nintendo exclusive, nowhere else got this.
 

WetWaffle

Member
Oct 25, 2017
389
Once more with feeling , fuck Nintendo. Can't learn something from other publishers. If you refuse to sell the soundtracks of your games(yes, including the old ones) and you won't put it on YouTube. spotify or any platform people can listen legally then don't complain if people pirate it. (And no, I am not advocating for piracy, I want them to make it easy for people to legally listen to their music like everyone els3)
 

viskod

Member
Nov 9, 2017
1,066
I listen to game music on youtube all the time.

But I'm also not going to get mad at a company that forces the music to be removed. They aren't obligated to allow their soundtracks to exist on youtube for you to listen to for free, and you aren't owed those soundtracks either. Entitled whining is thrown around because that's literally what this is, entitled whining by people under the false impression that they are owed something that they are not owed at all.
 

Alexhex

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,736
Canada
For reals, there is so much corporate ball-washing going on this thread. People mistake moralistic arguments for legalistic arguments. Just because something is legal or illegal doesn't make it morally correct.
Yep. And it’s so easy for them to twist the argument from “should company do something” into “can company do something” and feel like they have an objective basis to not care