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.

 

[Retreater]

OTOH, I am a HUGE fan of D&D - I live and breathe it. And it's been a long, long time since I would have let my view of the company affect my view of the game. In fact, I never would have - or I'd have been pretty upset with TSR, too.

I'm trying to find that balance myself.
I have a group of friends who are coming this weekend to play a game of "5e D&D." These folks basically drop by once every month or so and play a very casual one-shot adventure for about three hours. (In fact, I'm running from @SlyFlourish's very nice Fantastic Lairs.)
But I really dislike WotC D&D. I may just use only 3PP stuff from here on. Use 3PP adventure content. Run the monsters from A5E's Monstrous Menagerie.
I'm trying to find out what I can do to keep my players happy while not making myself actively angry by looking at official products.
Like, I have a Tumbler with the Ampersand on it. I don't even want to drink coffee out of the thing now.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Not gonna happen. WOTC is well beyond the point where a single point can have an ear in every major step on the customer side AND have time impart their gaming knowledge.

I honestly don't care about their gaming knowledge. I'd just like marketing people to know how to market this product and everyone else to be good at their individual jobs.

I'm trying to find that balance myself.
I have a group of friends who are coming this weekend to play a game of "5e D&D." These folks basically drop by once every month or so and play a very casual one-shot adventure for about three hours. (In fact, I'm running from @SlyFlourish's very nice Fantastic Lairs.)
But I really dislike WotC D&D. I may just use only 3PP stuff from here on. Use 3PP adventure content. Run the monsters from A5E's Monstrous Menagerie.
I'm trying to find out what I can do to keep my players happy while not making myself actively angry by looking at official products.
Like, I have a Tumbler with the Ampersand on it. I don't even want to drink coffee out of the thing now.

I've been known to do that - leave my players to play "pure" WotC D&D but use exclusively 3pp Monsters and Adventures. Players won't necessarily even notice (other than they enjoy the encounters more, much of the time).

It's a solid approach if you can't get your players on board with 3pp. You don't even have to mention it unless they ask.

 

[Minigiant]

honestly don't care about their gaming knowledge. I'd just like marketing people to know how to market this product and everyone else to be good at their individual jobs.

It's is hard for WOTC will be able to hire great high level marketing people who are in or knowledgeable of the D&D community.

And again this sounds like a multiple person problem.

It is unlikely that the person who gave out the PDFs and the person who sent out the YouTube strikes were the same person. And there is a chance neither talked too either other before acting

 

[SlyFlourish]

I honestly don't care about their gaming knowledge. I'd just like marketing people to know how to market this product and everyone else to be good at their individual jobs.


I've been known to do that - leave my players to play "pure" WotC D&D but use exclusively 3pp Monsters and Adventures. Players won't necessarily even notice (other than they enjoy the encounters more, much of the time).

It's a solid approach if you can't get your players on board with 3pp. You don't even have to mention it unless they ask.

This is one of the things I love about the hobby. We can be playing a complete other system on the other side and it works just fine.

 

[SlyFlourish]

Again

They weren't treated the same.

Those with the NDA and PDFs got strikes.

Those without got last minute emails.

That's why you don't sign contracts and don't act like a partner in a contract.

I believe that is one reason why Slyflourish said they didn't sign the NDA for early info.

I didn't sign the NDA because it did me no good to have the book but not be able to talk about it. I would have been happy to just get it along with anyone else. I also didn't want to be beholden to make a video if I didn't want to. In the first email, they clearly wanted those who went on board to make content for them. I didn't want that obligation even though I ended up doing it anyway.

 

[Morrus]

I didn't sign the NDA because it did me no good to have the book but not be able to talk about it. I would have been happy to just get it along with anyone else. I also didn't want to be beholden to make a video if I didn't want to. In the first email, they clearly wanted those who went on board to make content for them. I didn't want that obligation even though I ended up doing it anyway.

The value proposition is odd there. If the creator is making content for them then an hour video for a book which cost them $2 to print is a heck of a cheap deal. Sure, we can add shipping.

How many hours did you spend making your video? And what do we think is a fair rate for that work?

I think this speaks to what I said earlier. Who’s working for who?

 

[SlyFlourish]

The value proposition is odd there. If the creator is making content for them then an hour video for a book which cost them $2 to print is a heck of a cheap deal. Sure, we can add shipping.

How many hours did you spend making your video? And what do we think is a fair rate for that work?

I think this speaks to what I said earlier. Who’s working for who?

About four hours per video before all the blurring and anxiety.

But I did get a big benefit from a high view count on the video which also plugged my own current Kickstarter so its not like charity work for a commercial company.

 

[SlyFlourish]

I received word a couple of hours ago from the D&D Creator Relations team. They apologized for all the miscommunication. They say they now have a process in place to ensure that no one receives a take-down notice before WOTC tries to contact them directly.

They also have new guidance:

As of August 7th, 2024, the following guidance replaces any previous communications.

1. DO NOT publish footage, images, or distribute files that display an entire chapter of the book end-to-end.
2. DO NOT publish footage, images, or distribute files that display the entire book, page-by-page, from beginning to end across your content.
3. DO NOT upload or distribute PDF content of any product provided to you.
4. DO use the book as a visual asset for your content, for reference, illustration, or discussion in accordance with Fair Use.

We will not ask you to remove, edit, or blur content that follows these guidelines. This refers to current and future content covering the2024 Player’s Handbook.

The blurring on YouTube is permanent so I'd have to repost my original walkthrough if it is indeed considered Fair Use by them. I don't show full chapters. I didn't walk through the whole book. But I plan to submit my new repost to WOTC to see if they consider it fair use. I don't want to have to go through this again.

I also have my "Let's Build a Character with the 2024 D&D Player's Handbook" which I will submit to them to ensure they agree that it falls within Fair Use. I think it does but my opinion doesn't have much weight against a 4 billion dollar company. And again, I don't want to have to do this again.

So tomorrow I'll repost those videos unlisted and send them to WOTC to see if they're cool with them and, if they are, I'll post them this week and next.

It's still a huge mess and a big source of stress for me this week.

 

[SlyFlourish]

The value proposition is odd there. If the creator is making content for them then an hour video for a book which cost them $2 to print is a heck of a cheap deal. Sure, we can add shipping.

How many hours did you spend making your video? And what do we think is a fair rate for that work?

I think this speaks to what I said earlier. Who’s working for who?

You're also forgetting the cost of all those lawyers and community relations people who have to work on a Saturday to deal with irate video creators who thought they had permission to preview the book they were told they could preview. That's a lot of money!

 

[Corinnguard]

How is his reputation being hurt?

Are you suggesting he views himself as a fan and partner of WOTC?

When I saw @Cergorach post a reply to your first question, I didn't think it was necessary to answer. They did a better job of answering it IMO.

As for the second question, I still think he is a fan of what WoTC's designers and artists have come out with for D&D. As for being a partner of WoTC, after seeing @Morrus explain the difference between a reviewer relationship and a promotional relationship, yeah, I now think he was in a promotional partnership with WoTC at the time.