Just had a conversation on skype with some regs from sky that I trust 100% and they say it’s some bs troll, but just want confirmation if it’s safe to stream or not ? If sky can confirm I won’t have my account shut down if I do stream that would be great.
Btw I think I know who is behind this so please stop, I am asking respectfully. Hopefully that will be the end of it, if it is some troll email. If it’s a legit email I won’t stream and respect the rules even though I don’t get it, but don’t want to lose my account.
It is probably just a mistake on sky's part. I know there was a guy that was well known for using abusive comments about players and sky would obviously not want that sort of thing to be encouraged. Maybe sky are getting the good guy you mentioned confused with that guy.
@MattBates what I love about you Matt is you say what you think and tell things how they are, I'm really looking forward to meeting you at the next live event, you can ask my friends they really know how much I'm looking forward to seeing you its been talked about a fair bit, to hear you say exactly what you think in certain situations' there is a whisper some wagers going on it for who has the sharper skills, but I think that may be pie in the sky don't listen, if you hear anything its just hear say don't you listen, its wisdom that you give that does it for me cant wait, you will love it! more so me given the real legend you are I hope am going to learn a lot.
take care mate, keep up the good work see you soon promise.
It is probably just a mistake on sky's part. I know there was a guy that was well known for using abusive comments about players and sky would obviously not want that sort of thing to be encouraged. Maybe sky are getting the good guy you mentioned confused with that guy.
@MattBates what I love about you Matt is you say what you think and tell things how they are, I'm really looking forward to meeting you at the next live event, you can ask my friends they really know how much I'm looking forward to seeing you its been talked about a fair bit, to hear you say exactly what you think in certain situations' there is a whisper some wagers going on it for who has the sharper skills, but I think that may be pie in the sky don't listen, if you hear anything its just hear say don't you listen, its wisdom that you give that does it for me cant wait, you will love it! more so me given the real legend you are I hope am going to learn a lot.
take care mate, keep up the good work see you soon promise.
It is probably just a mistake on sky's part. I know there was a guy that was well known for using abusive comments about players and sky would obviously not want that sort of thing to be encouraged. Maybe sky are getting the good guy you mentioned confused with that guy.
@MattBates what I love about you Matt is you say what you think and tell things how they are, I'm really looking forward to meeting you at the next live event, you can ask my friends they really know how much I'm looking forward to seeing you its been talked about a fair bit, to hear you say exactly what you think in certain situations' there is a whisper some wagers going on it for who has the sharper skills, but I think that may be pie in the sky don't listen, if you hear anything its just hear say don't you listen, its wisdom that you give that does it for me cant wait, you will love it! more so me given the real legend you are I hope am going to learn a lot.
take care mate, keep up the good work see you soon promise.
Just got off the phone with Sky. They confirmed the email was from them but no response yet. The lady on the phone said she will ask someone to address my reply to them but it is likely to be some time next week.
This is hilarious! I imagine this new ruling will get overturned the moment PokerStars walk into the Sky poker office. They’re currently running a competition with RunItup to find next new poker streamer. Ridiculous, making rules up as you go along as usual.
This matter is not being dealt with by the poker team and we therefore cannot issue an official public response. Legal and compliance teams are the ones dealing with this. In the highly regulated environment we operate in we have to be very strict with how our intellectual property is used. We have to be in complete control of how it is used and in the absence of a contract we are not.
From a personal point of view and as a poker player (of sorts) I can see both sides of the argument. I have watched streams and see the upside that they can bring to a poker site. I can also see the downside where weak players are identified and at times exploited. This is certainly not for the greater good of the site and poker in general.
We are looking at our options with regards to official streamers. Sky Poker is certainly not disregarding this proposition. I have seen the great content on our competitor sites and as mentioned when done in the right way it is for the greater good of poker. I would urge all streamers to be practical, consider how your content is going to be viewed, who it is going to be viewed by and consider how it is going to be perceived.
ITT JJBinks confesses love for MattBates in aggressive undertone.
I can’t be more loving if I tried, don’t know were aggressive comes from? I say it straight up like Matt does. This world needs more love in it hopefully I can make a difference and get the ball rolling.
This matter is not being dealt with by the poker team and we therefore cannot issue an official public response. Legal and compliance teams are the ones dealing with this.
Inb4 someone claims this is a cop out. Tis fair enough.
However, what has triggered the sudden change of attitude towards streaming (given @The--Don has been doing this for a couple of years) from Sky Poker? Are other sites and streamers similarly affected? If not, why is Sky Poker different?
Is any of this related to the timing of TSG takeover of SB&G and a resulting shift in Sky's attitude towards Twitch/YouTube? The timing is... definitely interesting.
In the highly regulated environment we operate in we have to be very strict with how our intellectual property is used. We have to be in complete control of how it is used and in the absence of a contract we are not.
The problem with this is that it doesn't allow recreational streamers to use your site. If every site had this attitude towards streaming, there would be no Jamie Staples for instance, and the game would obviously be worse off without him.
A contract doesn't seem like a very practical way to handle recreational streaming - This would be far better covered in T&Cs. Tbh, I think allowing streaming then weeding out streamers that Sky believes are -EV for the site/brand with T&Cs is a smarter way to go.
By taking away the recreational streamer and presumably only having contracted streamers broadcasting the site, I think you push some of your audience away - Part of what makes Twitch/YouTube etc so great is the variety of content producers, and that people can go through dozens of streamers to find someone they really enjoy and want to watch on a regular basis. The relatively unknown guy with a small audience is still bringing something to your site, and who knows how much that audience will grow over time - We all know of local bands who 'made it' that we can remember playing in the local pub to two men and a dog.
There's also value in having regular players, as opposed to contracted ones, speaking positively about the site - And by positively, I don't mean "Come here, this site is full of fish".
It's all good getting someone officially linked to the site (e.g. If you used Neil Channing as a site ambassador in the future) to stream (I'd watch that btw) - But if I were someone on Twitch deciding where I wanna make my next deposit, I'm probably more likely to listen to the rec streamer who isn't on a site's payroll for an unbiased view of software/MTT schedule/do cash games run regularly etc.
Whatever happens, I think someone needs to be done to enable recreational streamers that aren't harmful to the site/brand, rather than a blanket ban - In 2018 I think a blanket ban of recreational streaming would be an incredibly dumb move on Sky's part, and I really hope that's not where we're headed as I believe it would be to everyone's detriment.
From a personal point of view and as a poker player (of sorts) I can see both sides of the argument. I have watched streams and see the upside that they can bring to a poker site. I can also see the downside where weak players are identified and at times exploited. This is certainly not for the greater good of the site and poker in general.
+1. I've only really seen the 'big' streamers (JCarver, Staples etc) but they all seem to be pretty smart with how they address weaker players in games - like how Sky Poker TV always had to find a way to be diplomatic about certain players and their play - So that mitigates the issue somewhat.
I would urge all streamers to be practical, consider how your content is going to be viewed, who it is going to be viewed by and consider how it is going to be perceived.
Is this a hint at how we can expect Sky Poker to handle situations like the OP in the future? i.e. whether Sky lets you continue streaming their site will depend on how you conduct yourself on stream.
He confirmed to me that at this time, it is a blanket ban of all streamers, although I got the impression that this wouldn't always be the case.
He also seemed to be under the initial impression that I was after some kind of affiliate deal with the company, which I never have been, despite directing probably scores of players to the site over the years.
This situation was triggered by a player complaining about their name and style of play appearing on youtube.
We had a pleasant discussion, I listened to their reasoning and whilst I disagreeing with it, I have very little choice but abide by their decision.
I am fully aware that I have put myself in this position with the language I use in my videos and with my trolling of some of the regs (who also give me plenty of stick tbf).
I would hope that Sky address this so that other streamers/youtubers can do their thing. I get I'll never be flavour of the month and Sky will probably never change their position regarding myself but if good, less offensive players than me want to create a stream or youtube channel, I hope that they will be allowed to.
Blowing out someone else's candle won't make mine any brighter, so I sincerely hope that the likes of @JJBinks and any other players that want to take this kind of thing on will be able to do so.
Naturally, I'm disappointed with the outcome but it is what it is. I intend to continue using Sky and using hands I play on Sky to help me create videos but I won't be using videos taken directly from my play or using players screen names going forward.
Sky have not asked me to remove any of my videos and I do not intend to remove any. Reg
This situation was triggered by a player complaining about their name and style of play appearing on youtube.
Smh. Change up your play and take advantage of people's perception if it's that big of a deal. Y'know, instead of compromising the growth of the game and the enjoyment of several hundred followers of Sky streamers such as yourself.
Really poor from Sky when people have been putting up YouTube videos for as long as I can remember on here, too - I think @GaryQQQ and @The_Don90 have some Sky Poker footage dating back to ~2008/2009ish out there somewhere from memory.
It pays to be proactive and actually know what you're going to do if someone complains about their play appearing on YouTube when it's been a distinct possibility for the best part of a decade - Certainly in light of the Twitch Poker boom a couple of years back, this should have been looked at way sooner, before we ever got here.
Thanks for your response @Sky_SamT - Fascinating response in many ways.
Inb4 someone claims this is a cop out. Tis fair enough.
However, what has triggered the sudden change of attitude towards streaming (given @The--Don has been doing this for a couple of years) from Sky Poker? Are other sites and streamers similarly affected? If not, why is Sky Poker different?
Is any of this related to the timing of TSG takeover of SB&G and a resulting shift in Sky's attitude towards Twitch/YouTube? The timing is... definitely interesting.
The sudden change of attitude has come from our compliance team getting involved. There is no doubt that this kind of stuff would not have been on their radar prior to a tip off but once it is they have to take action. I can't speak for other sites, I would imagine they have done their due diligence on all of this. Sky Poker are regulated by the UKGC and our terms and conditions allow us to comply to their guidelines. Without going in to lots of detail the whole Sky Betting and Gaming affiliate programme was closed down last year due SB&G's inability to completely police how the company was portrayed by these affiliates. Whilst this isn't a like for like case, it is along the same lines. I can confirm it is no way related to the TSG takeover.
The problem with this is that it doesn't allow recreational streamers to use your site. If every site had this attitude towards streaming, there would be no Jamie Staples for instance, and the game would obviously be worse off without him.
A contract doesn't seem like a very practical way to handle recreational streaming - This would be far better covered in T&Cs. Tbh, I think allowing streaming then weeding out streamers that Sky believes are -EV for the site/brand with T&Cs is a smarter way to go.
By taking away the recreational streamer and presumably only having contracted streamers broadcasting the site, I think you push some of your audience away - Part of what makes Twitch/YouTube etc so great is the variety of content producers, and that people can go through dozens of streamers to find someone they really enjoy and want to watch on a regular basis. The relatively unknown guy with a small audience is still bringing something to your site, and who knows how much that audience will grow over time - We all know of local bands who 'made it' that we can remember playing in the local pub to two men and a dog.
There's also value in having regular players, as opposed to contracted ones, speaking positively about the site - And by positively, I don't mean "Come here, this site is full of fish".
It's all good getting someone officially linked to the site (e.g. If you used Neil Channing as a site ambassador in the future) to stream (I'd watch that btw) - But if I were someone on Twitch deciding where I wanna make my next deposit, I'm probably more likely to listen to the rec streamer who isn't on a site's payroll for an unbiased view of software/MTT schedule/do cash games run regularly etc.
Whatever happens, I think someone needs to be done to enable recreational streamers that aren't harmful to the site/brand, rather than a blanket ban - In 2018 I think a blanket ban of recreational streaming would be an incredibly dumb move on Sky's part, and I really hope that's not where we're headed as I believe it would be to everyone's detriment.
All of this I completely agree with. Apart from watching Channing on stream. He would end up on stream for 12 hours. It is going to be impossible for us to police all streaming, I am sure there are streams out there right now that people are not aware of. All I will urge is people be practical with how they are doing it and what they are saying. Unfortunately the only way we can fully regulate it is with contractual agreements. Right now we don't have any of those, but never say never. I don't want to exercise a blanket ban, but unfortunately I am not the person who can make that decision. On the flip side, fortunately I am not the person who has to ensure the whole company behaves itself in a way that means we keep our licence.
+1. I've only really seen the 'big' streamers (JCarver, Staples etc) but they all seem to be pretty smart with how they address weaker players in games - like how Sky Poker TV always had to find a way to be diplomatic about certain players and their play - So that mitigates the issue somewhat.
Is this a hint at how we can expect Sky Poker to handle situations like the OP in the future? i.e. whether Sky lets you continue streaming their site will depend on how you conduct yourself on stream.
Disappointing outcome for me and many others I would say to hear dons outcome, I feel you add value to the poker world and have given a lot of help to many players, as regards to banter vs players it happens on a daily basis (with me and regs I play a lot with) don’t think that will ever stop unless we see a blanket ban on all chat boxes at tables.
Wish you all the best mate, I like creative people so if ever you have any creative ideas for the future you know were to find me if you need support in any way. Glgl
Comments
Btw I think I know who is behind this so please stop, I am asking respectfully. Hopefully that will be the end of it, if it is some troll email.
If it’s a legit email I won’t stream and respect the rules even though I don’t get it, but don’t want to lose my account.
what I love about you Matt is you say what you think and tell things how they are, I'm really looking forward to meeting you at the next live event, you can ask my friends they really know how much I'm looking forward to seeing you its been talked about a fair bit, to hear you say exactly what you think in certain situations' there is a whisper some wagers going on it for who has the sharper skills, but I think that may be pie in the sky don't listen, if you hear anything its just hear say don't you listen, its wisdom that you give that does it for me cant wait, you will love it! more so me given the real legend you are I hope am going to learn a lot.
take care mate, keep up the good work see you soon promise.
Can you not just phone up Sky Poker Support asking them to confirm if the emails are from them or not?
If it is a dodgy email trying to get you from streaming it looks like its having the opposite effect.
I watched some of Dons vids a cpl of years back but didn,t realise he was still doing them until now.
I remember him criticizing me then but its all good. He wasn,t having at a go at me - just my play which is fair enough - GL with the streams
PS - I,m no teckie but that email address looks well dodgy
Don I’ll try to phone and see if I can get an answer on mine. Still no confirmation yet.
This matter is not being dealt with by the poker team and we therefore cannot issue an official public response. Legal and compliance teams are the ones dealing with this. In the highly regulated environment we operate in we have to be very strict with how our intellectual property is used. We have to be in complete control of how it is used and in the absence of a contract we are not.
From a personal point of view and as a poker player (of sorts) I can see both sides of the argument. I have watched streams and see the upside that they can bring to a poker site. I can also see the downside where weak players are identified and at times exploited. This is certainly not for the greater good of the site and poker in general.
We are looking at our options with regards to official streamers. Sky Poker is certainly not disregarding this proposition. I have seen the great content on our competitor sites and as mentioned when done in the right way it is for the greater good of poker. I would urge all streamers to be practical, consider how your content is going to be viewed, who it is going to be viewed by and consider how it is going to be perceived.
Sam
Inb4 someone claims this is a cop out. Tis fair enough.
However, what has triggered the sudden change of attitude towards streaming (given @The--Don has been doing this for a couple of years) from Sky Poker? Are other sites and streamers similarly affected? If not, why is Sky Poker different?
Is any of this related to the timing of TSG takeover of SB&G and a resulting shift in Sky's attitude towards Twitch/YouTube? The timing is... definitely interesting.
The problem with this is that it doesn't allow recreational streamers to use your site. If every site had this attitude towards streaming, there would be no Jamie Staples for instance, and the game would obviously be worse off without him.
A contract doesn't seem like a very practical way to handle recreational streaming - This would be far better covered in T&Cs. Tbh, I think allowing streaming then weeding out streamers that Sky believes are -EV for the site/brand with T&Cs is a smarter way to go.
By taking away the recreational streamer and presumably only having contracted streamers broadcasting the site, I think you push some of your audience away - Part of what makes Twitch/YouTube etc so great is the variety of content producers, and that people can go through dozens of streamers to find someone they really enjoy and want to watch on a regular basis. The relatively unknown guy with a small audience is still bringing something to your site, and who knows how much that audience will grow over time - We all know of local bands who 'made it' that we can remember playing in the local pub to two men and a dog.
There's also value in having regular players, as opposed to contracted ones, speaking positively about the site - And by positively, I don't mean "Come here, this site is full of fish".
It's all good getting someone officially linked to the site (e.g. If you used Neil Channing as a site ambassador in the future) to stream (I'd watch that btw) - But if I were someone on Twitch deciding where I wanna make my next deposit, I'm probably more likely to listen to the rec streamer who isn't on a site's payroll for an unbiased view of software/MTT schedule/do cash games run regularly etc.
Whatever happens, I think someone needs to be done to enable recreational streamers that aren't harmful to the site/brand, rather than a blanket ban - In 2018 I think a blanket ban of recreational streaming would be an incredibly dumb move on Sky's part, and I really hope that's not where we're headed as I believe it would be to everyone's detriment.
+1. I've only really seen the 'big' streamers (JCarver, Staples etc) but they all seem to be pretty smart with how they address weaker players in games - like how Sky Poker TV always had to find a way to be diplomatic about certain players and their play - So that mitigates the issue somewhat.
Is this a hint at how we can expect Sky Poker to handle situations like the OP in the future? i.e. whether Sky lets you continue streaming their site will depend on how you conduct yourself on stream.
He confirmed to me that at this time, it is a blanket ban of all streamers, although I got the impression that this wouldn't always be the case.
He also seemed to be under the initial impression that I was after some kind of affiliate deal with the company, which I never have been, despite directing probably scores of players to the site over the years.
This situation was triggered by a player complaining about their name and style of play appearing on youtube.
We had a pleasant discussion, I listened to their reasoning and whilst I disagreeing with it, I have very little choice but abide by their decision.
I am fully aware that I have put myself in this position with the language I use in my videos and with my trolling of some of the regs (who also give me plenty of stick tbf).
I would hope that Sky address this so that other streamers/youtubers can do their thing. I get I'll never be flavour of the month and Sky will probably never change their position regarding myself but if good, less offensive players than me want to create a stream or youtube channel, I hope that they will be allowed to.
Blowing out someone else's candle won't make mine any brighter, so I sincerely hope that the likes of @JJBinks and any other players that want to take this kind of thing on will be able to do so.
Naturally, I'm disappointed with the outcome but it is what it is. I intend to continue using Sky and using hands I play on Sky to help me create videos but I won't be using videos taken directly from my play or using players screen names going forward.
Sky have not asked me to remove any of my videos and I do not intend to remove any.
Reg
Any kind of long term Twitch/YouTube restriction from Sky is tantamount to self-harm.
Smh. Change up your play and take advantage of people's perception if it's that big of a deal. Y'know, instead of compromising the growth of the game and the enjoyment of several hundred followers of Sky streamers such as yourself.
Really poor from Sky when people have been putting up YouTube videos for as long as I can remember on here, too - I think @GaryQQQ and @The_Don90 have some Sky Poker footage dating back to ~2008/2009ish out there somewhere from memory.
It pays to be proactive and actually know what you're going to do if someone complains about their play appearing on YouTube when it's been a distinct possibility for the best part of a decade - Certainly in light of the Twitch Poker boom a couple of years back, this should have been looked at way sooner, before we ever got here.
Wish you all the best mate, I like creative people so if ever you have any creative ideas for the future you know were to find me if you need support in any way. Glgl