학내 언론사

제 2 호 Video Game Streaming: Copyright Infringement or Useful Advertising?

Video Game Streaming: Copyright Infringement or Useful Advertising? Min gyeong Lee, Editor lee.mkpeach@gmail.com "Game streaming helps to promote games." VS. "Broadcasts that are not allowed by game makers violate the maker's economic interests.” These days, online streamers who broadcasts themselve online through a live stream or pre-recorded video are in the limelight. One of the world's top YouTubers, “Pewdiepie,” who has the most subscribers for a long time has attracted attention by showing interesting reactions during gameplay (currently, he changed the main content). In the early 2010's, his popularity contributed to streaming games becoming established among YouTube's popular content. From then on, claims that exposing game content may damage game makers have begun to be steadily raised. As he was aware of such arguments, he only played the beginning of some games like Indie games, video games which are developed by individuals, small teams, or small independent companies (They are often created without the financial support of a publisher, although some games funded by a publisher are still considered independent) and he recommended that his subscribers play the rest of the games. “Great library” is also a game streamer who is paid the most attention by Korean media among the individual online broadcasters. When the game company Capcom protested against him in relation to the company's game copyright, instead of making an apology or dealing with the license, he countered to the company disrespectfully. The similar kinds of behavior were repeated by him and evoked an uproar online. This is one of the reasons why he is constantly criticized by gamers. On the other hand, some game makers and production companies are actively lobbying famous streamers to play their games. Furthermore, some game makers show gratitude and fan spirit to personal broadcasters (or small teams) who made their game famous; “Cry of Fear”, “Spooky's Jump Scare Mansion.” Therefore, game streamer fans advocate that game broadcasts help to promote the game. In the meantime, game fandoms and gamers claim that online game broadcasts harm most game makers’ rights. I also think it is unfair and not right that game streamers monopolize profits from game broadcasts. △Websites for sharing and streaming videos First of all, reacting to a game simply is difficult to be regarded as "creation" enough to guarantee a license. Other "creators", personal broadcasters or teams, develop their own content such as beauty, information, music, cooking, animation, and V-logs. By contrast, most of current game broadcasts are showing a simple level of game reaction. Of course, some people use the online gaming platform to provide multiple people’s roleplay and creative attractions. However, it is a recent trend to upload only the reaction that only plays the game from the beginning to the end, or only the play video without reaction. In this way, the enjoyment of the broadcast depends more on the quality of the game itself than on the ability of the streamer. Second, YouTube and other large online live streaming and video platforms do not guarantee the interests of game creators properly. Compared to the protected music copyright holder - making a video using music like adding subtitles to the singer's music and uploading footages using music as background music benefits the copyright holder - it is a reality that game producers cannot properly protect their interests. For example, "Undertale" is one of the few financially successful famous indie games. According to the steam-spy to provide information about the games sold on the Steam website (especially with regard to sales volume), the company of "Undertale" sold about 2.5 million pieces in 2017 standard. However, the views of the first video of the famous game streamer Markiplier (his subscribers: more than 20 million people) playing "Undertale" are much more than the sales volume of the game. Meanwhile, Korea also showed high sales volume of the video game in 10th place, but about 55,000 pieces were sold on the basis of 2017. In the case of the United States, about one third of the number of views of Americans’ most popular "Undertale" play-through video (more than 37 million) is similar to the actual sales volume (more than 12 million). In comparison, in Korea, the quantity less than 1/15 of the number of views of the most popular videos of domestic "Undertale" gameplay videos (more than 900 thousand) is similar to the sales volume (55,000). Through these analyses, we can see that it is certainly not very likely that watching videos of game streamers leads to the actual purchase of the game. Because most people think that additional consumption is unnecessary after watching the gameplay. Third, depending on the characteristics of the game, streaming games causes infringement to the producer. Of course, some of the famous game companies are happy to allow play-through videos. However, this is closely related to the features of each game. Online multiplayer games are less vulnerable to spoilers because variables exist indefinitely. There are also games created with the aim of promotional effect of viral reaction video like “Getting Over It with Bennett Foddy” known as “a pot game” (its nickname). However, on the other hand, game fans insist that when a game where the story is important leaks out, it is not different from leaks of films and music. After watching those play videos, people will not buy the game, and the game company will not try to make a good game with similar quality to the previous one after losses and it might even disappear. As a result, the recent game market is showing a big change. Many games are criticized today because many gaming companies make an investment only in exaggerated advertisements rather than investing in capital for creative stories and fun gaming or try to gather players with sexualized and sexist features even though the games are not adult rated. On the other hand, good games are priced from 30,000 won to over 100,000 won as the game companies tend to secure profits from players willing to buy conscientiously. In the end, when the number of good games is decreasing and only selective games that are not popular remain, the game streamers who ignore the problem will no longer have enough content. We should find ways to live together. △Min-gyeong Lee, Editor Sources: http://www.khgames.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=114191 https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/youtube-gaming-pewdiepie-fair-use-1.4309312 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indie_game https://steamspy.com/ https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2490020?hl=ko https://www.flaticon.com/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/138161

• 작성일 2019-05-29
• 좋아요 Like 1

제 1 호 It’s Not Me, the Alcohol/Mental Illness Did It!

It’s Not Me, the Alcohol/Mental Illness Did It! About Mitigating Factors by Sarah Chae, Editor sarah3fran@gmail.com People commit crimes. Criminals are then sentenced with a charge or jail. However, according to the circumstances of the crime, sometimes it might result in reduced charges or a lesser sentence. These circumstances are called mitigating factors. Admitting the offense, mental or physical illness, provocation, young age, lack of a prior criminal record, and showing remorse are some examples of the mitigating factors we know. Out of all these mitigating factors, the SM Herald has decided to take a deeper look at mental illness and alcohol. The Criminal Law(Act) about Mental Disorders Let’s take a quick look at the law below which makes mental illness and alcohol a mitigating factor. We can see Korea’s Criminal Act thinks of mental illness as a mitigating factor because those people who have it are unable to make discriminations or control their will. In other words, people who are not capable of distinguishing things or making decisions are seen as a person with mental disorders. Therefore, people who have drunk alcohol and have lost control of themselves were also seen as a mentally weak people. This is why both factors are mitigating factors according to the law. The Department of Justice says that ‘being mentally disordered’ refers to a condition in which the mental/physical functions of cognition, intelligence, language, emotion, and behavior are disabled or impaired. Acknowledging this means admitting that a person who committed a crime because of their mental illness did it without self-indulgence or self-control. This means that if it were not for the disease they would not have committed the crime. Criminal Act Article 10 (Persons with Mental Disorders) (1) The act of a person who, because of a mental disorder, is unable to make discriminations or to control one’s will, shall not be punished. (2) For the conduct of a person who, because of a mental disorder, is deficient in the abilities mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the punishment shall be mitigated. (3) The provisions of the preceding two paragraphs shall not apply to the act of one who, in anticipation of danger of a crime, has intentionally incurred one’s mental disorder. The Public Opinions Toward the Mental Disorder ‘Excuse’ We now know that according to the law, people who have mental disorders have to be protected because the crime they have committed is without their self indulgence. However, we know that this law has brought us to a state of outrage. The following incidents are the biggest issues related to the mitigating factors people now seem to think as excuses. The ‘Jo Doo-soon incident’ has made, and still makes the public feel uneasy and outraged. In 2008, when Jo Doo-soon raped a child, he said he could not remember the incident because he was drunk. The court saw it as a mental disorder, (=a mitigating factor based on Article 10.2 of the Criminal Law) and he was sentenced to 12 years in prison. The‘8-year old Incheon kidnap/murder incident,’ ‘Kangnam station murder incident and the ‘Kim Sung-soo internet café murder incident’ are cases that have made the public see the criminals with mental illness seem as if they used the law as an excuse. People are not persuaded that being drunk or having a mental illness can be a mitigating factor. This is because victims have to think they were unlucky due to this reality, and it looks like criminals are not paying the price enough compared to the crime they have committed. As you can see in the picture, more than 1 million citizens signed the government petition for the Kim Sung-soo internet café murder case, and more than 4,000 petitions were written for the opposition to Jo Doo-soon’s release from prison. More than 4000 petitions were, and are still being written for the opposition to Jo Do-soon's release from prison. (above) Over 260 thousand citizens signed a single petition for the same issue as above.(below) More than 1 million citizens signed the government petition for the Kim Sung-soo internet café murder case. The public has not forgotten their outrage about these cases and you can see them through these numbers of signatures on the government petitions and the number of petitions that were written for these incidents. What has been/will be done? Let’s take another look at Article 10.3 of the Criminal Law. If Article 10.1 or 10.2 is used as an excuse, in other words, if the criminal intentionally incurred their mental disorder, the fact that they are mentally disordered does not apply as a mitigating factor. Other than that, after the Jo Doo-soon incident, later laws were enacted to prevent sexual crimes under the influence of alcohol from being thought of as mentally/physically disabled. The 2 laws below are the important laws that prevent sexual crimes (under the influence of alcohol) toward not only people, but especially children and youth. Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, Etc. of Sexual Crime Article 20 (Special Cases for Provisions of the Criminal Act concerning Reduction of Sentence) If a sexual crime (excluding a crime defined in Article 2(1) 1) is committed in the state of mental disorder induced by drinking or use of medication, it may be excluded from the application of Articles 10 (1) and (2) and 11 of the Criminal Act. Act on the Protection of Children and Youth Against Sex Offenses Article 19 (Special Cases concerning Provisions for Mitigation under the Criminal Act) Articles 10 (1) and (2) and 11 of the Criminal Act may not apply to any sexual assault against a child or juvenile committed in a state of physical and mental incapacity induced by alcohol or drug. It is questionable if the current solutions are enough. It is good that there are laws that stop alcohol from becoming mitigating factors for the sexual crimes. However, this could only be a short-term solution, and there does not seem to be a definite solution for the mental illness mitigating factor problem. We need steady attention, improvement of our consciousness, and action to make the society move toward creating a stronger social safety gate or net for the ones who may become victims. Public opinion no longer sees mental disorders as an excuse to commit a crime. However we must clear our minds. We can feel outraged but we should not let anger and revenge for individual criminals cloud our minds. Then, what can, and what should we do as individuals? As I said earlier, attention can help us to realize the need for more thorough crime prevention and social policy measures, to make policy changes and improvement in the system in a way that supports human rights. Let’s think of the moment when attention leads to deeper thought, and when this becomes a more specific demand. That is when we will have the power to change a single moment, into motion. Sarah Chae, Editor *Source: http://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_mobile/viewer.do?hseq=33019&type=part&key=16 http://www.moleg.go.kr/english/korLawEng?pstSeq=58526 https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_service/lawView.do?hseq=28627&lang=ENG http://www.law.go.kr/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=138767#0000 http://www1.president.go.kr/petitions/answer?page=2 https://blog.naver.com/mojjustice/221402486998 Official blog of the Department of Justice Image by 412designs from Pixabay Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay Image by slightly_different from Pixabay

• 작성일 2019-03-25
• 좋아요 Like 0