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.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

However anybody who thought they can flip through and photograph the entire book and post it online without any repercussions was not thinking things through.

No no, that's obvious, and it was clear the videos were going to go down shortly, because companies rarely intend that amount of free access.

But still... in a month anyone can do that. Or anyone from GenCon can do that now. So it just seems weird to put another black mark onto WotC's reputation, right on the eve of the actual release.

 

[Minigiant]

This is part of the the problem with the influencer economy. Trained journalists would know that, even if a PR/marketing person said a full flip-through was OK, it's iffy at best from a legal perspective and it takes just one nervous lawyer in the corporate office for the cease-and-desists to start flying. (This is also why you don't get rid of a bunch of your experienced marketing professionals months before your biggest product launch in a decade, WotC.)

Yeah. A big problem with "non-traditional" entertainment such as video games, TTRPGs, streaming, wrestling, war gaming is the biggest people in the information sphere are not actual journalists.

So Big names in the industry can easily get caught up and stuff that traditional journalist would not never.

Replacing your fighter with a wizard as you will.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

This is also why you don't get rid of a bunch of your experienced marketing professionals months before your biggest product launch in a decade, WotC.

I've been trying to find a way to say this, without using a lot of expletives.

 

[Minigiant]

No no, that's obvious, and it was clear the videos were going to go down shortly, because companies rarely intend that amount of previewing.

But still... in a month anyone can do that. Or anyone from GenCon can do that now. So it just seems weird to put another black mark onto WotC's reputation, right on the eve of the actual release.

No it's not obvious to many people.

THAT is the problem.

And legally Wizards is required to come after you because they they don't they said the prcedent that they don't.

Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

 

[TiQuinn]

No no, that's obvious, and it was clear the videos were going to go down shortly, because companies rarely intend that amount of previewing.

But still... in a month anyone can do that. Or anyone from GenCon can do that now. So it just seems weird to put another black mark onto WotC's reputation, right on the eve of the actual release.

How much of this though is due to DnD Shorts singular YouTube video in which he posted the entire thing versus others like Jorphdan who reviewed portions but not all of it?

Frankly, I’m surprised they gave DnD Shorts any access to begin with.

 

[Hatmatter]

Perhaps I am one of only a few who find it odd that anyone would think that being delivered an early version of a book for promotional purposes would entitle that person to systematically reveal many pages of the book in video or photographic format?

I recall Wizards of the Coast making the barebones of fifth edition D&D rules available for free online back in 2014, which seemed extraordinary to me. I also recall that same company making whole cloth adventures available for free in 2020 as gift to the community when many people were shut in. These are extraordinary efforts of community engagement. Perhaps they have set up the community here to be unreasonably expectant of free deliveries and gifts?

Could someone point me to a different publisher who would not respond with a request that copyright material be removed from an Internet platform? I agree that an initial direct communication with the Youtube video creator would be preferential, but we do not know who or how many people are responsible for protecting the copyrighted material and asking for someone else to do that might be easy for us to do, but it could be a tremendously heavy workload to impose on someone else when they have a host of other duties and responsibilites.

It strikes me as common sense that a publisher would not want the contents of its book revealed online. There is a reason the "sneak peaks" of books on Amazon and other retail sites are always quite limited.

Some have argued that it would be so laborous to bootleg a version of the Player's Handbook from jpegs of screenshots or what have you. Perhaps, but all piracy requires work and the labor of the bootlegger does not mean that people do not have the right to protect their creations. Why would such a line of reasoning deter Wizards of the Coast...or any other company or, in fact, any solitary author/publisher from wanting to keep copyrighted material off the Internet. I am sure that the Youtubers involved would not want their videos copied and distributed through other channels where they no longer have a means of monetizing them.

At what point does this "cut off one's nose to spite one's face" argument become not a logical argument, but the vagitus of a community that has been entitled for so long that it has lost sight of how intellectual property -- and in fact respect for the creation of others -- works?

 

[Nikosandros]

I personally know of at least three people if there was a video that posted all of the information in the players handbook they would create their characters straight off of that video and never buy the players handbook.

But won't those three people (and the many others like them) just download a pirated PDF copy later on?

 

[SlyFlourish]

They're still not quite as bad, when it comes down to it, as TSR was back in the day, going after everyone for everything, but they have forgotten the things that they understood about how to do it, back when they were a smaller, forward-thinking company.

One difference is that, in this case, they came to me hoping I’d make a nice video for them about their new book and I did. And then they make me deface it with new rules after the fact. I wish I had never gotten the book.

 

[Minigiant]

But won't those three people (and the many others like them) just download a pirated PDF copy later on?

Doesn't matter if they can't steal it.
What matters is if it's easy.

You don't want to be the one making the piracy easy.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Perhaps I am one of only a few who find it odd that anyone would think that being delivered an early version of a book for promotional purposes would entitle that person to systematically reveal many pages of the book in video or photographic format?

I recall Wizards of the Coast making the barebones of fifth edition D&D rules available for free online back in 2014, which seemed extraordinary to me. I also recall that same company making whole cloth adventures available for free in 2020 as gift to the community when many people were shut in. These are extraordinary efforts of community engagement. Perhaps they have set up the community here to be unreasonably expectant of free deliveries and gifts?

Could someone point me to a different publisher who would not respond with a request that copyright material be removed from an Internet platform? I agree that an initial direct communication with the Youtube video creator would be preferential, but we do not know who or how many people are responsible for protecting the copyrighted material and asking for someone else to do that might be easy for us to do, but it could be a tremendously heavy workload to impose on someone else when they have a host of other duties and responsibilites.

It strikes me as common sense that a publisher would not want the contents of its book revealed online. There is a reason the "sneak peaks" of books on Amazon and other retail sites are always quite limited.

Some have argued that it would be so laborous to bootleg a version of the Player's Handbook from jpegs of screenshots or what have you. Perhaps, but all piracy requires work and the labor of the bootlegger does not mean that people do not have the right to protect their creations. Why would such a line of reasoning deter Wizards of the Coast...or any other company or, in fact, any solitary author/publisher from wanting to keep copyrighted material off the Internet. I am sure that the Youtubers involved would not want their videos copied and distributed through other channels where they no longer have a means of monetizing them.

At what point does this "cut off one's nose to spite one's face" argument become not a logical argument, but the vagitus of a community that has been entitled for so long that it has lost sight of how intellectual property -- and in fact respect for the creation of others -- works?

All the rules for Level Up are officially online, so it's not "every company" as you say. It's a choice WotC decided to make, and the consequences are theirs as well.