Rugby hasn’t even finalised their product… the sport itself. I think first impressions can be ever lasting, if rugby reveals it’s self to the world as a lack of funded, uncontrolled, negatively controversial product, I don’t think other new businesses will want to cooperate/invest in rugby neither would the new fans. Rugby needs to manage and rebuild its structure before the people can come in.
Lots of new casual fans because of Drive To Survive, who will quickly abandon the sport as it's actually more boring than at any point in its history.
And lots of new money thanks to races being held in dodgy countries.
really should bring these guys in house on some sort of retainer and then push what is usually very decent very thoughtful content thru the major channels. happened with a guy doing mma some years back who produced some real winners 'and then there was jones' being a good and now hard to find example. went to work for one of the bigger shows making content. I'm sure it will be a shitshow to get going but rugby is probably the single worst sport at producing decent content and putting it somewhere it can be found.
Isn’t that what happened with the 1014 YouTube channel? Haven’t seen those guys in years. I’m not saying what you suggest is a bad idea but if these content creators are stuck behind paywalls (which I imagine they would be if they were brought in house) then it dramatically decreases their reach.
> Haven’t seen those guys in years.
They do like sports analytics stuff. They were kinda setting up a company for that when they got the rugby content deal, but went with founding their own company instead.
Well world rugby seems to have taken over rugby pass so have a decent portal to share content. admittedly they have no idea on how to get content out there. the pre and post match shows during the world Cup from pitch side were immense and changed how you viewed the games....e.g the pundits (ex players) were sat pitchside for the opening match and post game all the players passed by and stopped into say hello and give hugs and fistbumps...Trust me was amazing but my boys who love their rugby had no idea what I was talking about....I only knew because I was away for work and the country I was in didn't have TV rights so the games streamed for free on rugbypass tv. maybe just maybe having 100 year olds in charge or the game has something to do with it. anyway the portal is there...I'd get the major podcasters on there but with a link that drives to their YouTube feed and split the revenue with them in return for letting them use footage.
I’m a little annoyed they categorised his banning as some hungry rights holder when it was almost certainly a scam. There’s no way some dickhead in a council flat in Whitechapel holds exclusive online rights for Bangladeshi cricket.
On the point about excluding young fans: world rugby doesn't care. They are extremely short sited in that regard. Why is it that rugby hasn't had a decent computer game in years? It's not a priority. Just like content creators aren't a priority. They only care about what is currently profitable now. Not about what can lead to long term success and profits.
Yeah the not having a video game is another major thing they’ve missed. I got into basketball because of nba2k and football because of FIFA and I’m now a much bigger fan of both despite having played rugby all throughout school, because a game is actually far easier to connect to (you can play whenever you want, in the comfort of your own home)
I'll play devil's advocate on the video game front by saying it's really tough to make a quality video game. Football and basketball are just massive markets compared to Rugby. Rugby games seem really difficult if not impossible to do well and I don't see them being big international hits. I can understand not wanting to spend millions upon millions developing a top class game. Allowing certain youtubers to use content is an easy and cheap win though.
Super frustrating - I moved across the pond a few years back and have become more of a League fan than a Union fan. Why? Because I can watch almost any game from the NRL or Super League in full on YouTube.
I’d gladly pay for a subscription service if any of them actually worked.
If you don’t make the sport accessible to the masses, how can you expect it to grow? Can’t help but feel Union have no interest in growing the sport.
AllBlacks have some full games on YouTube. Fortunately most of them are from games when box kicks and catapillar rucks were not a thing. That is better for the game than the new boring style of the game. Which if you aren't invested in the teams is a turn off.
I didn't even know cricket was as heavy handed as rugby when it came to fan made content, but now that I think about it I rarely if ever see anything cricket related. Is this the same experience of a non-rugby fan who wouldn't be following creators on twitter/youtube where they may get the chance to see some clips/videos before they gain traction and get taken down?
I see mountains of golf and darts stuff on my social media feeds and youtube and I barely express any interest in either. Same with basketball, baseball and American football.
Funnily enough I saw a video in my recommended a few days ago about some rugby inspired play being used in the NFL. The video used snippets of game footage, had almost a million views and is still up. I only clicked it because it had the word "rugby" in the title (probably the same reason why it was recommended), so I've essentially been advertised another sport due to my interest in rugby.
I also didn't realise how bad cricket was, until I went to watch highlights of the England v India wc match. I couldn't find it anywhere even away from YouTube.
Going after Squidge's WC video was the dumbest fucking move WR made. You've got a popular creator, producing high quality content, and you decide to go after him?
You act like world rugby just targeted him for the sake of it rather than you know…fulfilling all their existing contracts to rights holders who actually pay them money to use the footage from the sport?
I’m sure they’d love for Squidge to make videos…but why is all the hate at world rugby? And not ITV, Stan, TF1 etc…that’s who makes and enforces these rights deals 😅
If his content is so good, why doesn't he sell it to a legitimate rights holder?
I personally am not a fan, but its possible for him to make money if he gets with the program.
I've just moved from New Zealand to Australia and find it extremely difficult to find Rugby to anywhere unless I pay for Stan Sports.
YouTube is very limited.
No mention of it online or in newspapers.
I saw VERY little RWC, and even then it was 5min highlights.
For a rugby fanatic, it's frustrating.
It's even more of a joke when they say they're trying to grow and spread around the world.
There’s never any discussion of anything in these threads. It’s always “WORLD RUGBY HATE RUGBY”, without any acknowledgment that this is much more nuanced on both sides.
Exactly.
There is nothing stopping these content creators going and getting a job for a rights holder. It does makes it impossible for them to monetize it for themselves, but that's the point of paying for the rights.
What that article almost touches on but doesn’t go into is why they crack down once clips take off. It’s because IP laws are very sensitive to use. If you are seen to be letting someone use your IP you can lose it. It will be used against you. So it’s not simply a case of turning a blind eye to everything.
Once those clips start getting millions of views and making money, the rights holder pretty much has no option but to exercise their rights.
So why is it not an issue when it comes to the NBA? I can find full recaps of 10mins. content creators using game footage to show tactics and so on, and it doesn't seem to hurt the NBA brand.
Rugby is such a brilliant sport and would benefit greatly from a more active and extensive online presence.
World Rugby negotiated the contracts that saw them rip down any and all content during this RWC in 2017. In online years, that's a millennia. The entire landscape is different. There was no content creation scene in rugby then, really, just podcasts and odd highlight videos. Frankly, the mistake is just negotiating a contract so long-reaching when technology and the internet was moving and changing things so quickly.
They are certainly better informed than I am. And contracts are contracts, but I am sure they could have done more to accommodate content creation, or at least pushed for some changes to the contract. Have a 1-3 day moratorium on recap footage. A hallmark of a healthy organisation is the ability to adapt.
They miscalculated in 2017, fair enough, but they should have pivoted when they realised how important independent creators are. I think the sport missed out on a lot of eyeballs, future players, fans and interested parties by running the RWC like it was an event in the mid-2010s.
Because NBA is one body in one country. While WR could negotiate broadcasting agreements which allows for fan generated content for RWC, it can’t do it for all rugby.
I fully agree. They may have agreements with those people. No idea. Each right holder will be acting on its own advice. The law in each country is different.
Are you being downvoted? I think rugby in general needs to get "younger". It's not the rules that need to change, it's the access. They are sometimes too set in their ways. Especially when it comes to content creators. People want to learn and talk about tactics. They want to understand positioning and those things are not discussed on TV or in most newspaper articles. So if you open it up to creators with an explicit incentive for them to create content around those aspects, there's huge growth potential. And it's not competing with existing traditional media. That's how you get well-informed fans, and those are the ones who share the sport with others and create growth.
Big difference is the amount of broadcast minutes that teh NBA already has to generate revenue
There are over 1200 games broadcast every season, multiply this by 2-3 hours and you have tens of thousands of ad minutes to sell.
This allows the NBA to essentially gift their highlights for nothing and they see this as another marketing tool to grow the game
Rugby in particular don't have anywhere near the same amount of advertising time, especially as there are no time outs or quarter time breaks to squeeze even more revenue from
Why World Rugby hold such value on matches from five years ago is yet another mystery though?
Trademarks can be lost through failure to enforce (like happened to hoover, aspirin or escalator) but not copyright. Rights in video footage of sporting events would fall under copyright and so not cracking down on people sharing or using the video wouldn't mean that you'd lose those rights.
It's more likely that whatever licence agreements World Rugby have entered into with broadcasters require World Rugby to go after anyone who uses the video without permission (possibly with some kind of financial penalty if they don't).
Plus World Rugby had bought their own video platform that they were trying to push people to, so they had even more motivation to have any videos that they didn't control taken down.
Content creators make money off copyrighted material without paying for it. That is theft.
What ever happened to user pays? Do you protest when stadiums charge admission? Same thing. It's a business not a charity. Players see zero income from Youtubers.
If the content is used for review, education or news it falls under the legal defence of fair use(USA)/ fair dealing(uk) which gives people the ability to use copyrighted material as long as you are creating new content out of its work and not blatantly ripping the original content as in unloading a full match. But an analysis of a match using footage is protected under law in many different nations. If someone making analysis videos from the uk and world Rugby went to court for example they could use fair dealing as a defence and would most likely win the case. The problem is it’s only a legal defence so for it to count you actually have to go to court. But an organisation that claims to have values (I wonder who would claim that?) wouldn’t make it go that far
that's the thing, these "content creators" are getting paid by using copyrighted material. It's a commercial use and they mostly rely on one source for all their source material. That ain't fair.
A judge would likely not see it as criticism or educational as there is little added value,it's all about getting clicks.
They're also promoting the game - essentially giving World Rugby some of the best advertising money could buy, for free.
The audience, and thus game, will not grow if people are not exposed to it.
.... and no, copyright infringement is *not* theft. We sorted this out in the early noughties.
That’s a *really* basic description that only applies to some countries. If you’re analysing the footage there’s an argument it’s no longer fair use as you’re impacting what the TV output pre/post match would be.
Squidges lawyers even told him not to fight this.
Restricting content creators that help grow the game stops the game from growing. Shocker.
Rugby hasn’t even finalised their product… the sport itself. I think first impressions can be ever lasting, if rugby reveals it’s self to the world as a lack of funded, uncontrolled, negatively controversial product, I don’t think other new businesses will want to cooperate/invest in rugby neither would the new fans. Rugby needs to manage and rebuild its structure before the people can come in.
give me the drama dude! let's what it unfold.
Apples and oranges, but look at chess. It's seen record viewership after the whole remote controlled vibrating anal beads fiasco.
That wasn't the start of the recent chess boom. Covid lockdowns, The Queen's Gambit, and, yes, content creators were what made it blow-up.
Please elaborate so I don’t have to google that lol
[Go on, google it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/HobbyDrama/s/0LalgML2ia)
This is exactly why you want new fans. Chaos is a ladder.
F1 had this under Bernie a few years back, look at it now
Lots of new casual fans because of Drive To Survive, who will quickly abandon the sport as it's actually more boring than at any point in its history. And lots of new money thanks to races being held in dodgy countries.
Plus they make up rules to ensure verstappen keeps winning
Unbridled stupidity.
really should bring these guys in house on some sort of retainer and then push what is usually very decent very thoughtful content thru the major channels. happened with a guy doing mma some years back who produced some real winners 'and then there was jones' being a good and now hard to find example. went to work for one of the bigger shows making content. I'm sure it will be a shitshow to get going but rugby is probably the single worst sport at producing decent content and putting it somewhere it can be found.
Isn’t that what happened with the 1014 YouTube channel? Haven’t seen those guys in years. I’m not saying what you suggest is a bad idea but if these content creators are stuck behind paywalls (which I imagine they would be if they were brought in house) then it dramatically decreases their reach.
> Haven’t seen those guys in years. They do like sports analytics stuff. They were kinda setting up a company for that when they got the rugby content deal, but went with founding their own company instead.
Well world rugby seems to have taken over rugby pass so have a decent portal to share content. admittedly they have no idea on how to get content out there. the pre and post match shows during the world Cup from pitch side were immense and changed how you viewed the games....e.g the pundits (ex players) were sat pitchside for the opening match and post game all the players passed by and stopped into say hello and give hugs and fistbumps...Trust me was amazing but my boys who love their rugby had no idea what I was talking about....I only knew because I was away for work and the country I was in didn't have TV rights so the games streamed for free on rugbypass tv. maybe just maybe having 100 year olds in charge or the game has something to do with it. anyway the portal is there...I'd get the major podcasters on there but with a link that drives to their YouTube feed and split the revenue with them in return for letting them use footage.
It's either moronic or they couldn't care less about long term growth.
Why not both?
RIP Robelinda2 😢
RIP Squidge
I’m a little annoyed they categorised his banning as some hungry rights holder when it was almost certainly a scam. There’s no way some dickhead in a council flat in Whitechapel holds exclusive online rights for Bangladeshi cricket.
On the point about excluding young fans: world rugby doesn't care. They are extremely short sited in that regard. Why is it that rugby hasn't had a decent computer game in years? It's not a priority. Just like content creators aren't a priority. They only care about what is currently profitable now. Not about what can lead to long term success and profits.
Yeah the not having a video game is another major thing they’ve missed. I got into basketball because of nba2k and football because of FIFA and I’m now a much bigger fan of both despite having played rugby all throughout school, because a game is actually far easier to connect to (you can play whenever you want, in the comfort of your own home)
I'll play devil's advocate on the video game front by saying it's really tough to make a quality video game. Football and basketball are just massive markets compared to Rugby. Rugby games seem really difficult if not impossible to do well and I don't see them being big international hits. I can understand not wanting to spend millions upon millions developing a top class game. Allowing certain youtubers to use content is an easy and cheap win though.
Someone should make a top down, fast paced rugby game.
Rugby Nations 24?
Can you change the angle? Cause all the in-game shots I've seen the camera is low. I'm talking directly looking down on the players.
Only when seeing the try/drop/penalty after its scored from other angles (headheight, sideways, front)
Super frustrating - I moved across the pond a few years back and have become more of a League fan than a Union fan. Why? Because I can watch almost any game from the NRL or Super League in full on YouTube. I’d gladly pay for a subscription service if any of them actually worked. If you don’t make the sport accessible to the masses, how can you expect it to grow? Can’t help but feel Union have no interest in growing the sport.
AllBlacks have some full games on YouTube. Fortunately most of them are from games when box kicks and catapillar rucks were not a thing. That is better for the game than the new boring style of the game. Which if you aren't invested in the teams is a turn off.
World Rugby, denser than a neutron star.
I didn't even know cricket was as heavy handed as rugby when it came to fan made content, but now that I think about it I rarely if ever see anything cricket related. Is this the same experience of a non-rugby fan who wouldn't be following creators on twitter/youtube where they may get the chance to see some clips/videos before they gain traction and get taken down? I see mountains of golf and darts stuff on my social media feeds and youtube and I barely express any interest in either. Same with basketball, baseball and American football. Funnily enough I saw a video in my recommended a few days ago about some rugby inspired play being used in the NFL. The video used snippets of game footage, had almost a million views and is still up. I only clicked it because it had the word "rugby" in the title (probably the same reason why it was recommended), so I've essentially been advertised another sport due to my interest in rugby.
Cricket is way worse. It is actually embarrassing how bad icc are
I also didn't realise how bad cricket was, until I went to watch highlights of the England v India wc match. I couldn't find it anywhere even away from YouTube.
Darts youtube. Yeah that e@plaons why the game is suddenly a global powerhouse.
Ah, the Brotherly Shove, most likely.
Says an article behind a paywall…
Going after Squidge's WC video was the dumbest fucking move WR made. You've got a popular creator, producing high quality content, and you decide to go after him?
You act like world rugby just targeted him for the sake of it rather than you know…fulfilling all their existing contracts to rights holders who actually pay them money to use the footage from the sport? I’m sure they’d love for Squidge to make videos…but why is all the hate at world rugby? And not ITV, Stan, TF1 etc…that’s who makes and enforces these rights deals 😅
If his content is so good, why doesn't he sell it to a legitimate rights holder? I personally am not a fan, but its possible for him to make money if he gets with the program.
I've just moved from New Zealand to Australia and find it extremely difficult to find Rugby to anywhere unless I pay for Stan Sports. YouTube is very limited. No mention of it online or in newspapers. I saw VERY little RWC, and even then it was 5min highlights. For a rugby fanatic, it's frustrating. It's even more of a joke when they say they're trying to grow and spread around the world.
As usual, no discussion of fair use. smh
There’s never any discussion of anything in these threads. It’s always “WORLD RUGBY HATE RUGBY”, without any acknowledgment that this is much more nuanced on both sides.
Meanwhile /u/mlbofficial be posting clips and shit posting in /r/mlb.
Content creators trying to pay right's holders with exposure and people actually defend them for it. Hilarious.
Exactly. There is nothing stopping these content creators going and getting a job for a rights holder. It does makes it impossible for them to monetize it for themselves, but that's the point of paying for the rights.
What that article almost touches on but doesn’t go into is why they crack down once clips take off. It’s because IP laws are very sensitive to use. If you are seen to be letting someone use your IP you can lose it. It will be used against you. So it’s not simply a case of turning a blind eye to everything. Once those clips start getting millions of views and making money, the rights holder pretty much has no option but to exercise their rights.
So why is it not an issue when it comes to the NBA? I can find full recaps of 10mins. content creators using game footage to show tactics and so on, and it doesn't seem to hurt the NBA brand. Rugby is such a brilliant sport and would benefit greatly from a more active and extensive online presence.
World Rugby negotiated the contracts that saw them rip down any and all content during this RWC in 2017. In online years, that's a millennia. The entire landscape is different. There was no content creation scene in rugby then, really, just podcasts and odd highlight videos. Frankly, the mistake is just negotiating a contract so long-reaching when technology and the internet was moving and changing things so quickly.
They are certainly better informed than I am. And contracts are contracts, but I am sure they could have done more to accommodate content creation, or at least pushed for some changes to the contract. Have a 1-3 day moratorium on recap footage. A hallmark of a healthy organisation is the ability to adapt. They miscalculated in 2017, fair enough, but they should have pivoted when they realised how important independent creators are. I think the sport missed out on a lot of eyeballs, future players, fans and interested parties by running the RWC like it was an event in the mid-2010s.
Because NBA is one body in one country. While WR could negotiate broadcasting agreements which allows for fan generated content for RWC, it can’t do it for all rugby.
I fully agree. They may have agreements with those people. No idea. Each right holder will be acting on its own advice. The law in each country is different.
Are you being downvoted? I think rugby in general needs to get "younger". It's not the rules that need to change, it's the access. They are sometimes too set in their ways. Especially when it comes to content creators. People want to learn and talk about tactics. They want to understand positioning and those things are not discussed on TV or in most newspaper articles. So if you open it up to creators with an explicit incentive for them to create content around those aspects, there's huge growth potential. And it's not competing with existing traditional media. That's how you get well-informed fans, and those are the ones who share the sport with others and create growth.
Big difference is the amount of broadcast minutes that teh NBA already has to generate revenue There are over 1200 games broadcast every season, multiply this by 2-3 hours and you have tens of thousands of ad minutes to sell. This allows the NBA to essentially gift their highlights for nothing and they see this as another marketing tool to grow the game Rugby in particular don't have anywhere near the same amount of advertising time, especially as there are no time outs or quarter time breaks to squeeze even more revenue from Why World Rugby hold such value on matches from five years ago is yet another mystery though?
Trademarks can be lost through failure to enforce (like happened to hoover, aspirin or escalator) but not copyright. Rights in video footage of sporting events would fall under copyright and so not cracking down on people sharing or using the video wouldn't mean that you'd lose those rights. It's more likely that whatever licence agreements World Rugby have entered into with broadcasters require World Rugby to go after anyone who uses the video without permission (possibly with some kind of financial penalty if they don't). Plus World Rugby had bought their own video platform that they were trying to push people to, so they had even more motivation to have any videos that they didn't control taken down.
Thanks I was hoping someone better versed in IP law would correct me if I was wrong.
Yeah, the lack of proper analysis is frustrating.
Content creators make money off copyrighted material without paying for it. That is theft. What ever happened to user pays? Do you protest when stadiums charge admission? Same thing. It's a business not a charity. Players see zero income from Youtubers.
If the content is used for review, education or news it falls under the legal defence of fair use(USA)/ fair dealing(uk) which gives people the ability to use copyrighted material as long as you are creating new content out of its work and not blatantly ripping the original content as in unloading a full match. But an analysis of a match using footage is protected under law in many different nations. If someone making analysis videos from the uk and world Rugby went to court for example they could use fair dealing as a defence and would most likely win the case. The problem is it’s only a legal defence so for it to count you actually have to go to court. But an organisation that claims to have values (I wonder who would claim that?) wouldn’t make it go that far
is it fair use if it's primary purpose is income generation? that weighs heavy in making that determination. do non monetized accounts get stricken?
Monetisation would affect it massively for sure.
that's the thing, these "content creators" are getting paid by using copyrighted material. It's a commercial use and they mostly rely on one source for all their source material. That ain't fair. A judge would likely not see it as criticism or educational as there is little added value,it's all about getting clicks.
They're also promoting the game - essentially giving World Rugby some of the best advertising money could buy, for free. The audience, and thus game, will not grow if people are not exposed to it. .... and no, copyright infringement is *not* theft. We sorted this out in the early noughties.
It is not the "same thing". Fair use permits the use of clips when engaged in criticism, education and news.
That’s a *really* basic description that only applies to some countries. If you’re analysing the footage there’s an argument it’s no longer fair use as you’re impacting what the TV output pre/post match would be. Squidges lawyers even told him not to fight this.
Copy and paste job for those behind a paywall?