D&D (2024) D&D Player's Handbook Video Redactions & Takedowns

There's a lot of YouTube videos looking at the brand new Player's Handbook right now, and some of them include the YouTuber in question flipping through the new book on screen. A couple of those video creators have been asked by WotC to redact some of the content of their videos, with one finding that their video had been taken down entirely due to copyright claims from the company. It appears to be the folks who are flipping through the whole book on-screen who are running into this issue which, it seems, is based on piracy concerns.

Jorphdan posted on Twitter that "Despite fulfilling [WotC's] requests for the flip through video I was issues a copyright strike on my channel. Three strikes TERMINATES your channel. I don't think going over the 2024 PHB is worth losing my channel I've been working on since 2017. I'm pretty upset as none of this was said up front and when notified I did comply with their requirements. And I see other creators still have their videos up. Videos that are not unlike mine. Covering WotC is not worth losing my channel... Meanwhile please subscribe to my D&D free channel the Jocular Junction, where I'll most likely be making the majority of my TTRPG videos."

​

Mike Shea, aka Sly Flourish, also posted a walkthrough of the Player's Handbook. While he didn't receive a copyright takedown action, after an email from WotC he has blurred out all the page images. "Note, I blurred out pictures of the book after Hasbro sent me an email saying they worried people would take screenshots of the book and build their own. Yes, it's complete b******t, but we must all do our part to ensure four billion dollar companies maximize shareholder value."

Popular YouTuber DnD Shorts had a video entitled 100% Walkthrough of the New Player's Handbook in D&D. That video is no longer available. However, his full spoilers review is still online.

 

[mellored]

There is a pirated copy of the ph from screen shots of dnd shorts currently in circulation. Has his name in watermark and you can tell it is screenshot. Likely from the video he took down.

There are also apps that can get text from pictures. And I wouldn't be surprised if there was one that could automatically make .pdfs from videos.

The effort involved isn't that high.

 

[mellored]

So it wasnt WOTC that made the mistake it was a content creator?
Fascinating.

Did you want to blame WotC for sending out free copies in the first place?

 

[KYRON45]

Did you want to blame WotC for sending out free copies in the first place?

I don't want to blame anyone for anything. Apparently we have people to do that for us.

 

[SteveC]

It's not common sense. It's the law.

This is the thing you don't seem to understand: if you don't know something is a law, you can run afoul of it and not be the wiser. And of course, because you say "it's the law," doesn't make that so. What law? For what region of the world? What are the specifics of what you can and can't show? Is it a percentage? Is it a time on the screen? If I am a youtuber. I know this how?

Now, creators have discussed how this was a bad idea, but they are very experienced in the industry. For a new creator, how much can you show and have it be fair use? Beats me. For issues like this, I think the situation is more akin to the Pirate's Code than a firm, delineated number. And if you've worked with WotC in the past where they explained what their expectations were and this time you didn't get that, is it reasonable to interpret that as meaning you don't have to follow previous guidelines?

I think my point is that this situation is a mess, and that there isn't some Judge Dredd answer.

 

[Retreater]

For a new creator, how much can you show and have it be fair use? Beats me.

I mean, I'm certainly not going to take WotC's side in anything, but DnD Shorts specifically has 474,000 subscribers and has posted 362 videos since starting 3 years ago. He has been cited as the primary offender here, and isn't exactly a "new creator."

 

[Minigiant]

Now, creators have discussed how this was a bad idea, but they are very experienced in the industry. For a new creator, how much can you show and have it be fair use?

I think anyone with a lick of responsibility and empathy to the creator would know that recreated a video catalog of another's work by posting every page in readable form isn't Fair Use.

 

[SteveC]

I mean, I'm certainly not going to take WotC's side in anything, but DnD Shorts specifically has 474,000 subscribers and has posted 362 videos since starting 3 years ago. He has been cited as the primary offender here, and isn't exactly a "new creator."

This is a case where I don't mean to blame WotC either since it seems like it was a communication mistake. And yes, I definitely would expect that DnD Shorts should know better. They aren't innocent here. No one is. I'd just say that this is a cluster-something that just detracts from the launch. It all just seems so unnecessary and something I would expect of a much smaller company that doesn't have the resources that WotC does.

The thing I will blame WotC for is everything involving Sly Flourish.

 

[Cergorach]

Do you have a ballpark figure on what it will cost to purchase the company?
I have $62.50 in my pocket...so i'm in!!!

About $4.67 Billion to get 51% of Hasbro... (at the moment). You just need another 75 million like minded people with $62.50 in their pocket... Yeah... Getting a consensus in that amount of people... Good luck!

It's the law.

Jaywalking is also illegal... Have you never done that? When a cop sees that, they might give you a ticket or a warning, their prerogative. But it's a jackass move to give someone a ticket when that same cop asks you to cross the road to do something for them and you jaywalk. Sure, you should have used the appropriate crossing, but you could have acted in good faith that you had permission to cross the road right there given by that cop.

We have NO insights in what kind of documents were signed, what kind of conversations happened, etc. And certainly not for every reviewer that got a copy. So anything and everything here is speculation.

And sharing every page via a video is perfectly legal, when you have permission to distribute. And what some have shared in this thread, that could easily have been a miscommunication. WotC intended one thing, the reviewer interpreted it in another way.

Someone gave the example of streaming a movie and saying that it's obvious that's not allowed. Now let me give you the example of streaming a game, play-troughs for streamers and Youtubers in computer game world are extremely common. It's what Twitch has been build on. So if one is fine (unless you're called Nintendo) and the other isn't, what is the average YTer/streamer to know the difference, especially if what was communicated could be interpreted in a certain way?

The normal thing to do would be contact (as in call) the reviewer, discuss that this isn't what was intended and if the reviewer could offline the video asap. That would #1 be faster, #2 be the human thing to do, and #3 keeps this negative publicity out of circulation. And IF the reviewer didn't do that, THEN you could take legal action. And we don't know what happened exactly. But in my experience with big multinationals that cater to a niche hobby, this is probably a corporate overreaction.

What people seem to forget is that these weren't rando's that bought the PHB at GenCon, but 'reviewers' that were essentially acting as agents for WotC/Hasbro. There already was a communication channel going between both parties, why not use that?

 

[KYRON45]

About $4.67 Billion to get 51% of Hasbro... (at the moment). You just need another 75 million like minded people with $62.50 in their pocket... Yeah... Getting a consensus in that amount of people... Good luck!


Jay walking is also illegal... Have you never done that? When a cop sees that, they might give you a ticket or a warning, their prerogative. But it's a jackass move to give someone a ticket when that same cop asks you to cross the road to do something for them and you jaywalk. Sure, you should have used the appropriate crossing, but you could have acted in good faith that you had permission to cross the road right there given by that cop.

We have NO insights in what kind of documents were signed, what kind of conversations happened, etc. And certainly not for every reviewer that got a copy. So anything and everything is speculation.

And sharing every page via a video is perfectly legal, when you have permission to distribute. And what some have shared in this thread, that could easily have been a miscommunication. WotC intended one thing, the reviewer interpreted it in another.

Someone gave the example of streaming a movie and saying that it's obvious that's not allowed. Now let me give you the example of streaming a game, play-troughs for streamers and Youtubers in computer game world are extremely common. It's what Twitch has been build on. So if one is fine (unless you're called Nintendo) and the other isn't, what is the average YTer/streamer to know the difference, especially if what was communicated could be interpreted in a certain way?

The normal thing to do would be contact (as in call) the reviewer, discuss that this isn't what was intended and if the reviewer could offline the video asap. That would #1 be faster, #2 be the human thing to do, and #3 keeps this negative publicity out of circulation. And IF the reviewer didn't do that, THEN you could take legal action. And we don't know what happened exactly. But in my experience with big multinationals that cater to a niche hobby, this is probably a corporate overreaction.

What people seem to forget is that these weren't rando's that bought the PHB at GenCon, but 'reviewers' that were essentially acting as agents for WotC/Hasbro. There already was a communication channel going between both parties, why not use that?

So....maybe we start a Kickstarter?

 

[Mistwell]

you find the channel on YT, it is Teos Abadia. Blurred by now, originally similar to Sly’s video

Doesn't look blurred? That's his only public video in the last couple weeks.


[Edit: I watched it, good video. In my count of pages he shows, none of which were blurred, he shows about 225 pages. Now given the nature of him flipping back and forth, sometimes quickly, it was hard to tell if he repeated some pages (though if he blatantly flipped past something and then immediately flipped back to it I didn't count those as doubled). I am assuming he did, just because some of what he's doing is random flipping and even a new book will naturally break to some pages over others due to the spine. But just in pages, he shows about 225 pages.)