Speedruns for sale?

2009-04-30 10:42:31 pm

Back in the game!

I think that, at a very nominal fee (maybe $5), speedruns should be made available on disc to anyone who wants them for whatever reason (bandwidth limits, dial-up, etc.)

The majority of the money would be poured into shipping and the cost of disc(s), and anything left over put into...whatever SDA needs. Thoughts?

Thread title:

Satoryu

2009-04-30 10:47:24 pm

Visually Appealing

nate used to do that back in the early days of SDA. he stopped at least a year ago, probably before that.

QuestionMark

2009-04-30 10:49:46 pm

The main issue I see with this is that SDA doesn't own the copyright to the videos. Some runners may be willing to have their runs on the disc and others may not. This limits the runs that can be shipped. You also have to consider that some runs will be limited in size and not all of them could fit on a disc - though this of course depends on the type of disc used. If you use CDs you are much more likely to have profit that could be used as donations to SDA. However if you want like... blueray... it probably wouldn't be worth the time and effort with the type of profit margin you would have after shipping.

Though it really would be a copyright issue. Some runners may not care one way or the other. Some however might feel a bit irked someone is profiting off of their work with no type of royalty past their name being shown for a few seconds. Also some runners may no longer be able to be reached to asked for permission which also limits which ones can be produced.

UltimateDarius

2009-04-30 10:54:02 pm

Back in the game!

Quote from QuestionMark:

The main issue I see with this is that SDA doesn't own the copyright to the videos. Some runners may be willing to have their runs on the disc and others may not. This limits the runs that can be shipped. You also have to consider that some runs will be limited in size and not all of them could fit on a disc - though this of course depends on the type of disc used. If you use CDs you are much more likely to have profit that could be used as donations to SDA. However if you want like... blueray... it probably wouldn't be worth the time and effort with the type of profit margin you would have after shipping.

Though it really would be a copyright issue. Some runners may not care one way or the other. Some however might feel a bit irked someone is profiting off of their work with no type of royalty past their name being shown for a few seconds.

Your first point makes sense enough. Your second one does not. If I REALLY wanted your run, for example, and you said you didn't want it on disc, I'm sure that I could go to a friends house and DL/burn it just as easily. The longer runs would obviously span two or more discs, big deal. Don't offer a blueray option, or if they did, charge a lot more for it.

[quote="QuestionMark"]
The main issue I see with this is that SDA doesn't own the copyright to the videos. Some runners may be willing to have their runs on the disc and others may not. This limits the runs that can be shipped. You also have to consider that some runs will be limited in size and not all of them could fit on a disc - though this of course depends on the type of disc used. If you use CDs you are much more likely to have profit that could be used as donations to SDA. However if you want like... blueray... it probably wouldn't be worth the time and effort with the type of profit margin you would have after shipping.

Though it really would be a copyright issue. Some runners may not care one way or the other. Some however might feel a bit irked someone is profiting off of their work with no type of royalty past their name being shown for a few seconds.
[/quote]

Your first point makes sense enough.  Your second one does not.  If I REALLY wanted your run, for example, and you said you didn't want it on disc, I'm sure that I could go to a friends house and DL/burn it just as easily.  The longer runs would obviously span two or more discs, big deal.  Don't offer a blueray option, or if they did, charge a lot more for it.

QuestionMark

2009-04-30 10:54:49 pm

Yeah, but if you burned it yourself you didn't profit from it.

UltimateDarius

2009-04-30 10:58:35 pm

Back in the game!

Quote from QuestionMark:

Yeah, but if you burned it yourself you didn't profit from it.

If SDA profiting from your/someones' run is an issue, then they could alternately just charge the cost of material and shipping, and call it a done deal.

Ascetic Swordsman

2009-04-30 11:00:28 pm

Speaking as someone without a high speed cable or dsl internet connection this would be an acceptable alternative. DVD discs can usually hold 4.3 GB or 2 hours of video in SP mode so there's a lot of runs that could fit on one disc. It would take a week or two depending on where you lived to recieve the discs, but patience is a virtue. Anyone who's done a speed-run must have that trait, although most just end up losing it.

The copyright issue seems valid, as does the royalty issue. I'd like to think most runners would be okay with SDA profiting from their runs if it helps. I'd imagine there might be some problems with that since it makes SDA seem more like a business. Would non-profit organization be a more accurate description?

I'm going to look more into why the practice was dropped. Or maybe nate will see the topic and explain why it's a bad idea and why he stopped doing it as soon as my post goes up, thus making my efforts a waste of time.

QuestionMark

2009-04-30 11:02:30 pm

Quote from UltimateDarius:

Quote from QuestionMark:

Yeah, but if you burned it yourself you didn't profit from it.

If SDA profiting from your/someones' run is an issue, then they could alternately just charge the cost of material and shipping, and call it a done deal.

Again, it depends on the person. If they really don't want it they can say no. I'm not necessarily saying I feel that way, I'm just stating the issue is there.

UltimateDarius

2009-04-30 11:05:21 pm

Back in the game!

Quote from QuestionMark:

Quote from UltimateDarius:

Quote from QuestionMark:

Yeah, but if you burned it yourself you didn't profit from it.

If SDA profiting from your/someones' run is an issue, then they could alternately just charge the cost of material and shipping, and call it a done deal.

Again, it depends on the person. If they really don't want it they can say no. I'm not necessarily saying I feel that way, I'm just stating the issue is there.

If they feel that way, fuck 'em. They shouldn't have a run hosted here where anyone and everyone could do it regardless. If they don't want their run on disc, they should ask for it to be removed from the site and go submit runs to TG from here on out.

Ascetic Swordsman

2009-04-30 11:17:52 pm

I don't think the issue is that SDA could profit from the runs it hosts, although it is a possibility. What UltimateDarius was trying to do was create a way people like me could access the runs without too much trouble. Not everyone has cable or dsl so there are some people who have never been able to watch a lot of the great runs done here. Having someone burn a run to disc and mail it off may be the only way they'd ever see a run. As for the profiting, if it was just the costs of the disc and shipping there shouldn't be any.

I think what QuestionMark is saying is that the only person who should profit from the run is the person who made it. However, is there anything stopping someone from just downloading a run, burning copies of it and selling them for profit?

In the end, isn't SDA just about making great runs and sharing them with the world? Just because I live in the middle of nowhere doesn't mean I'm not part of it.

QuestionMark

2009-04-30 11:25:34 pm

I'm not saying only the runner should, I'm saying some people may not like that someone is making money with no knowledge as to what that money is being used for, who it is going to specifically, and how much is *really* going to the site. Also isn't it technically true that regardless of who burns the disc, it is copyright infringement by current law for them to make multiple discs past personal fair use if they don't have express permission to do so?

I would see no problem though asking for permission from runners when they submit and only publishing runs on discs which permission is granted for. I would however see a big issue if runners were forced to give up some rights or force licensing to be accepted for their run.

nate

2009-04-30 11:41:43 pm

my blog's having issues atm but:
http://nate.metroid2002.com/blog/

ctrl-f for r.i.p. d.v.d. and r.i.p. d.v.d. ii.

tl;dr: no one bought them when i tried to sell them at a profit and dvd authoring took way too much of my time.

i'm sure hundreds of them still exist out there in the world though. iirc i made like 60 or 70 volumes over the 2005-2006 period i was doing them. the later ones were really cool - for their time i guess.

ZenicReverie

2009-05-01 12:46:13 am

Waiting hurts my soul...

I don't think sda needs to be involved in such a thing. If someone wants to request it, then someone else will most likely be available to assist with it. It might be a sticky issue if you start making money off of it, but I don't think it'd be enough that someone would complain about it. Filtering that money back into sda through donations or even bounties would be nice. So anyone willing to help Ascetic Swordsman get some much needed speedrun watching material, PM him at his request. Anyone else needing assistance, post in this thread and request it.

TheVoid

2009-05-01 02:49:21 am

Nate, dude, how's the SDA shop coming along?

I want that SDA coffeemug!

And an SDA chair, and an SDA couch, and SDA curtains, and SDA kitchen stuff, and SDA underwear, and SDA shirts, and an SDA toiletseat, etc.

Would be pretty awesome to decorate your house with SDA stuff. Sweet!

Miles

2009-05-01 03:34:02 am

Quote from UltimateDarius:

If they feel that way, fuck 'em. They shouldn't have a run hosted here where anyone and everyone could do it regardless. If they don't want their run on disc, they should ask for it to be removed from the site and go submit runs to TG from here on out.

That's a really idiotic attitude. If I spent tons of time working on a run, I certainly wouldn't want someone else to be making a profit off of it without bothering to ask for permission first.

Vugmer

2009-05-01 04:51:52 am

Cigar Man

Is selling footage of a game without the permission of the game company legal?

groobo

2009-05-01 04:55:09 am

boss

Quote from vgmrsepitome:

Is selling footage of a game without the permission of the game company legal?

Wanted to ask the same thing. My guess is no.

UltimateDarius

2009-05-01 05:14:54 am

Back in the game!

Quote from Jigpuff:

Quote from UltimateDarius:

If they feel that way, fuck 'em. They shouldn't have a run hosted here where anyone and everyone could do it regardless. If they don't want their run on disc, they should ask for it to be removed from the site and go submit runs to TG from here on out.

That's a really idiotic attitude. If I spent tons of time working on a run, I certainly wouldn't want someone else to be making a profit off of it without bothering to ask for permission first.

This was on the assumption that no profit is being made.

Scepheo

2009-05-01 05:55:34 am

Quote from vgmrsepitome:

Is selling footage of a game without the permission of the game company legal?

No. That's the main copyright issue you would be dealing with.

nate

2009-05-01 09:05:56 am

sure it's legal - if you have enough money to defeat who sues you.

i wonder whether ign and shit get permission for every video they post. i doubt it.

Greenalink

2009-05-01 09:49:35 am

DS Dictator

Quote:

I wonder whether ign and shit get permission for every video they post. i doubt it

What about Evo Tournament DVDs, these can be bought online and I'm sure they need to get permission from the respective companies before selling them.

Example:
http://evo2k.com/dvd/
2008 mainly featured:

Capcom vs SNK 2,
Street Fighter 3: 3rd Strike,
Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection,
Marvel Vs Capcom 2,
Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo
and
Super Smash Brothers Brawl

No discussion on Evo ok (don't want to change the subject how awesome/rubbish Evo is)

Kotti

2009-05-01 10:42:02 am

Quote from nate:

i wonder whether ign and shit get permission for every video they post. i doubt it.

As far as I know, they're not selling the videos.

nate

2009-05-01 11:10:06 am

then how do they stay in business?

Kotti

2009-05-01 12:07:44 pm

Advertising? Selling special accounts? I don't know, but I can't see how they would stay in business by selling videos.

nate

2009-05-01 01:12:33 pm

youtube doesn't sell videos either and people seem pretty peeved about copyright violations there.

typically, the amount of money you have dictates whether you will be sued. the only exception to this has been the riaa/mpaa suing single mothers and so forth to get publicity which (they hoped, anyway) would translate back into $$$ when piracy goes down.

but some industries aren't as retarded as music/recording and understand the value of free promotion. that and what we're posting is not what they're selling. that's why video games are different from movies.

trust me, this is not the first time this has come up here. i doubt it will be the last. nothing has changed in the entire time sda has existed and i doubt anything will in the foreseeable future.

no, the real question we should be asking is whether we (sda) have permission to redistribute the runs on the site. no one ever signed a contract, so we don't. if someone asked us not to use their video in a certain way then we would have to comply. but we would do that anyway. that's why sda is not the real world.

youtube doesn't sell videos either and people seem pretty peeved about copyright violations there.

typically, the amount of money you have dictates whether you will be sued. the only exception to this has been the riaa/mpaa suing single mothers and so forth to get publicity which (they hoped, anyway) would translate back into $$$ when piracy goes down.

but some industries aren't as retarded as music/recording and understand the value of free promotion. that and what we're posting is not what they're selling. that's why video games are different from movies.

trust me, this is not the first time this has come up here. i doubt it will be the last. nothing has changed in the entire time sda has existed and i doubt anything will in the foreseeable future.

no, the real question we should be asking is whether we (sda) have permission to redistribute the runs on the site. no one ever signed a contract, so we don't. if someone asked us not to use their video in a certain way then we would have to comply. but we would do that anyway. that's why sda is not the real world.