Valve "not interested" in supporting Machinima

[MyNameDidntFit]

I'm not sure about you guys, but this disappoints me greatly. The Source engine, and the tools that it brings with it, are possibly some of the best for the creation of machinima, and I've always thought that Valve were more open to this sort of thing, given their widely acknowledged support of modders.

However, this quote from Valve basically sums it all up:
We are not interested in licensing our technology or IP for machinima. This includes providing copyright approvals.
Source (http://pixeleyesproductions.blogspot.com/2009/12/valve-is-not-interested-in-machinima.html)

The quote comes from a reply given to Pixel Eyes Productions (machinima producers that I, admittedly, haven't heard of before) when they recently inquired about the possibilities open to them in profiting from their work.

Now, previously, I've know Valve to not be exactly supportive of film makers, but this is the first time I've seen it so explicitly stated.

Definitely bad news for creators and fans of Source machinima series' like The Leet World (http://smoothfewfilms.com/theleetworld/), Civil Protection (http://www.accursedfarms.com/Series.php?series=1) and Freeman's Mind (http://www.accursedfarms.com/Series.php?series=2) (just a few of my favourites).

What do you ladies and gents have to say on the matter?

[Rob]

I used you watch RedvsBlue. I even bought (and lost) the season 1/2 dvd's.

I'm surprised valve has taken this kind of stance towards machinima. All I can think is that they are protecting the rights because they plan on doing something on their own in the future.

[Konrad]

That's my take on it as well. Especially since the machinima studio wanted to profit from it.

Valve isn't anti-machinima, they even provided assets from their own videos for those interested. They're not shutting down hobbyists, but people using their engine and their tools to make money off their product... I can see why Valve wouldn't like that too much.

That may also be partially influenced by the fact that they want to secure a potential future in their own Machinima productions, considering how well received those TF2 videos were.

Your take on it is very misleading. Valve didn't say it's "not interested" in supporting Machinima at all. Simply that it is "not interested" in licensing the technology or IP. There is a world of a difference between those two. Like I said before, all it means is that they don't want people profiting from the use of their engine.

[Landy]

Making money on making game movies? Bah, it's about as stupid as charging money for a mod, which is also illegal. Go Valve, i support you on this.

[MyNameDidntFit]

Valve isn't anti-machinima, they even provided assets from their own videos for those interested. They're not shutting down hobbyists, but people using their engine and their tools to make money off their product... I can see why Valve wouldn't like that too much.
It seems like you think the machinima producers want to charge for watching their videos and rake in money. As it stands, producers cannot even go so far as to put imagery (characters, etc) onto merchandise to allow supporters to give them the money they need to keep making the program.

Following a number of machinima series', you'll get to see that making machinima takes a lot of time and effort. And, to a lot of producers, it becomes impossible for them to devote so much time, effort and money into an endeavour without getting something back to keep them going -- being that they need to make a living as well.

Your take on it is very misleading. Valve didn't say it's "not interested" in supporting Machinima at all. Simply that it is "not interested" in licensing the technology or IP. There is a world of a difference between those two. Like I said before, all it means is that they don't want people profiting from the use of their engine.
I'd love to know how my opinion is misleading. If you want to get into the semantics around my use of "supporting", go for it, but it's a perfectly apt word.

Making money on making game movies? Bah, it's about as stupid as charging money for a mod, which is also illegal. Go Valve, i support you on this.
Erm, Counter-Strike and Team Fortress are both mods that Valve charge for. Go Valve, eh?

[Landy]

Erm, Counter-Strike and Team Fortress are both mods that Valve charge for. Go Valve, eh?

And which Valve owns, eh? Cs and TF started off as mods, but has turned into their own franchises. Why should 3rd parties making game "movies" earn money on Valve's hard work?

[Konrad]

It seems like you think the machinima producers want to charge for watching their videos and rake in money. As it stands, producers cannot even go so far as to put imagery (characters, etc) onto merchandise to allow supporters to give them the money they need to keep making the program.

Did you read the statement? They want to profit from the videos directly through (examples provided by them) things such as the YouTube partner's program. And what are they going to put on the merchandise? A picture of the Red Spy, created, designed, voice acted, and animated by Valve with the name of their show on it? Copyright infringement at it's simplest.


Following a number of machinima series', you'll get to see that making machinima takes a lot of time and effort. And, to a lot of producers, it becomes impossible for them to devote so much time, effort and money into an endeavour without getting something back to keep them going -- being that they need to make a living as well.

Machinima makes sense as a hobby, but when you start attempting to copyright (and therefore profit) from something which relies on other people's copyrighted intellectual property, and expect to make a living of it - you're crossing into territory of illegal. It doesn't matter if they're spending all their time animating TF2 models instead of going to real work. It's their choice entirely, and any expectations of making a living are just foolish.


I'd love to know how my opinion is misleading. If you want to get into the semantics around my use of "supporting", go for it, but it's a perfectly apt word.

It's misleading in that you suggest that "Valve is not interested in supporting Machinima". Which is, well... wrong. Valve is not interested in supporting people who want to profit in any way from their Machinima. They want to protect their copyright, what's so scary about Valve wanting to profit from their own hard work? They still support hobbyists, like I mentioned, by releasing assets specifically for people who do the animations.

In short, you're implying that they don't care for Machinima, something that is simply not true.



Erm, Counter-Strike and Team Fortress are both mods that Valve charge for. Go Valve, eh?

Well that just wasn't a well thought out argument at all, eh? I'm pretty sure this is the first time I ever see anyone try to make Valve look bad using their treatment of modders as an example. Valve bought the copyright (even though they didn't have to, mind you, legally they can just take it) to both "mods". Then years later they hired the Portal team and provided them with resources to create their own game, again, even though they could have taken the idea and rolled with it. Oh yeah, and there is Garry's mod.

So yeah, go Valve.

[MyNameDidntFit]

And which Valve owns, eh? Cs and TF started off as mods, but has turned into their own franchises. Why should 3rd parties making game "movies" earn money on Valve's hard work?
3rd parties made those, then profited from selling them, and now Valve are profiting off them. I'm not saying it's bad, I'm saying that if charging for mods is stupid, then so is charging for those.

<snip>
I don't have time to argue each point directly, so I'll just put forward my general opinion as it stands and if you disagree; great.

Is it really inconceivable that Valve could go so far as too allow machinima studios to make profit from their creations so as to allow them to continue doing so? When you think about it, popular machinima works as a giant advertisement for the software in which it is made, as well as the developer that created the software. It isn't like any machinima studio is going to come out and start going "ooh, look at this, we made this machinima on OUR engine using OUR models" when they're doing it on Valve's engine using Valve's models.

I'm not trying to make Valve look bad, as you seem to think; as I'm sure many of you know I'm pretty much a Valve fanboy, but that doesn't mean I can't find their stance on what is a brilliant 'industry' (for want of a better term) to be disappointing.

If you want to keep saying it's just copyright infringement, go for it, but surely the success of series' such as Red Vs Blue shows how far machinima can go. It's understandable that Valve would want to protect their IP/technology, but I still feel that fully supporting machinima would be a great move forward.

[Konrad]

I don't have time to argue each point directly, so I'll just put forward my general opinion as it stands and if you disagree; great.

Well. When you put it like that... I guess that's that. Not much room for argument there. >_>
Took care of this whole thread in one swift "fuck you"... Damn Aussies.

[MyNameDidntFit]

"It's Valve's work."
"Surely they could allow some profit from creations born of their work though?"
"But it's Valve's work."
"Yes, but to allow a bit of profit would let machinima continue."
"Indeed, however, it is Valves work."
"Machinima needs some form of income to allow it to flourish, though."
... so on and so forth...

So, really, there isn't much argument worth having here outside of opinions on the stance and the issue in general :p

[Konrad]

Wow... So rather than conveniently paraphrasing this thread in an equally but oppositely biased way, I'm just going to head off to bed or something before facepalm turns to rage and eats your head. This is just not how I roll.
I'm disappointed in you, I really am. :upset:

[MyNameDidntFit]

How's this:

"Valve's work."
"Yeah, but money."
/repeat?

I didn't intend bias, I was simply writing that in a hurry and trying to say that our arguments boil down to what are essentially opinions on copyright stances.

Be disappointed if you want, but I really didn't think you held any positive thoughts towards Australians to begin with :p