Nintendo has announced a revenue sharing scheme with YouTube videographers, loosening up on their previous stance of "it's all mine."
Under the arrangement, ad revenue will be split amongst Google, Nintendo, and the video maker. YouTube partners already make peanuts compared to the big slice of the pie already taken by Google, so the amount earned from making Nintendo videos will be negligible.
A vast majority of the power also remains on the side of the corporation, with Nintendo having say over whether or not a video can go live monetised. Naturally, it will want to make sure every video is family friendly, but it has also historically been fiercely protective of its characters. If approved, Nintendo ads will adorn the video.
A short while ago, YouTube introduced its massively detrimental Content ID system, which automatically analyses and flags video content which might be in breach of copyright laws. It's a guilty-before-proven-innocent approach, with revenue instantly being diverted to the supposed copyright owner, or videos taken down the moment they're flagged, and requiring human approval to be activated again -- during which time, revenue is lost and momentum stymied.
Content ID has also had its fair share of mishaps, incorrectly flagging some videos. While some companies, such as Nintendo and SEGA, welcome the heavy-handed approach, others aren't fans. Some publishers criticise the policy and, understanding the value of having people talk about your games, have staff ready to reverse Content ID decisions when necessary.
Nintendo have taken a tiny step in the right direction, but it needs to realise the position they're putting YouTubers in. There are a lot of games to talk about out there, without resorting to the meager offering of the Wii U and 3DS. And unless you're PewDiePie, content creators already get a pittance compared to Google. So why would anyone serious about YouTube make a video about Nintendo games? And if you're simply making it for fun, why would anyone monetise it?