YouTube is doling out copyright strikes on Destiny content and nobody knows why

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 3,493   +1,040
Staff member
In context: It's pretty common for game companies to issue cease-and-desist notices to YouTubers that violate their copyright. Content creators have to juggle the risks of putting something up that falls under fair use, and often, even if they are careful, they will still see aggressive companies like Nintendo come after them. Regardless of whether they are in the right or not, most cannot afford to take on a large corporation's lawyers.

Many in the Destiny community have been getting nailed with copyright strikes for about the last week, as chronicled in the r/DestinyTheGame subreddit. The claims primarily involve YouTube video makers who have been archiving sunsetted Destiny music that can no longer be found in the games.

The Destiny takedown notices come as a surprise because series creator Bungie has never gone after these creators in the past. In fact, Bungie claims that neither it nor its partners are responsible for the copyright claims. The game publisher says that even its own official YouTube channels have gotten strikes.

Indeed, it would seem that Bungie's official stance on fan-created content is that as long as it's non-commercial, it's okay to post. Its license agreement regarding intellectual property and trademarks notes that there are only a few conditions that violate its terms.

"Examples of what "player created content" may be defined as include custom commentary, animations, graphics, or gameplay. Conversely, please do not upload Bungie trailers or cutscenes with mere advertisement(s) or borders that take up 20% of the screen or 20% of the runtime. Content creators should use our stuff to make their own stuff, rather than uploading our content to their own channels."

However, for the most part, the company is pretty open to players posting all kinds of content, including "images, footage, music, sounds, dialogue, or other assets." So who or what is causing the copyright strikes? Bungie says it's looking into the matter and will let us know what it finds out.

It did not have any advice for content creators, but the wise move would be to wait for Bungie to give the green light before posting or reposting anything related to Destiny.

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,206   +4,245
These actions are NOT being taken at the request of Bungie or our partners. Please standby for future updates.

I am willing to bet this is a lie: It's likely not something at the request of Bungie true, but I am 99.99% sure it IS at the request of one of their partners. They might just don't even know who that partner is as it's likely 2 or 3 steps removed: Sony hired an external company and that external company probably hired another sub company recently to start submitting claims on their behalf.

Sorry but a partner's partner counts as *your* partner Bungie, specially if they're able to mess with your game property you're on the hook for it and won't get to claim they aren't responsible because of an hyper technicality.
 
Last edited:

tellmewhy

Posts: 183   +86
Copyright fits in well with non-interactive media such as movies and storytelling books, because once you watch them and never see them again.

For games and music that you can play multiple times, copyright does not fit well because there are communities around them and they benefit greatly from network effects (and companies are required by law to maximize profit for their shareholders rather than to exercise optional legal rights).

Thus, copyrights for these types of media (games and music) it is like the nuclear weapons, they are weapons that in practice are not used but exist only for prevention.

I think it's more than certain that after this incident of exercising her legal rights, their shares will have a fall in the coming days.
 

Edster

Posts: 118   +90
I am willing to bet this is a lie: It's likely not something at the request of Bungie true, but I am 99.99% sure it IS at the request of one of their partners. They might just don't even know who that partner is as it's likely 2 or 3 steps removed: Sony hired an external company and that external company probably hired another sub company recently to start submitting claims on their behalf.

Sorry but a partner's partner counts as *your* partner Bungie, specially if they're able to mess with your game property you're on the hook for it and won't get to claim they aren't responsible because of an hyper technicality.

I get this site has pretty high number people who are anti anything that are competitors to Microsoft, but if you are to blame Sony, then shouldn't we be getting similar things for content from games made by Sony-owned studios?
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,206   +4,245
I get this site has pretty high number people who are anti anything that are competitors to Microsoft, but if you are to blame Sony, then shouldn't we be getting similar things for content from games made by Sony-owned studios?
Not necessarily for the reason I quoted: I am almost positive Sony themselves don't manage it in-house. They hire external partner companies and yes: more than one so not just one of them manages their entire catalogue of properties in case this very scenario happens and one gets over zealous.
 

Aaron Fox

Posts: 153   +90
Copyright fits in well with non-interactive media such as movies and storytelling books, because once you watch them and never see them again.

For games and music that you can play multiple times, copyright does not fit well because there are communities around them and they benefit greatly from network effects (and companies are required by law to maximize profit for their shareholders rather than to exercise optional legal rights).

Thus, copyrights for these types of media (games and music) it is like the nuclear weapons, they are weapons that in practice are not used but exist only for prevention.

I think it's more than certain that after this incident of exercising her legal rights, their shares will have a fall in the coming days.
Copyright was supposed to protect individuals from IP theft to give them the incentive and means to create. Instead of the 14-year term (or similarly brief) it was originally intended to be it was extended beyond extremes in order to protect already-wealthy people — to make it possible to use IP to create old money families (aristocracy in all but name).

I believe I read an analysis that said 7 years is the ideal copyright length. The issue is that the ability of artists to generate new content is stifled by copyright periods that are too long. That's because all art is built from pieces of prior art. It doesn't come from thin air. A journalist even demonstrated that by posting a lengthy article in which every sentence was plagiarized from a different source. So, instead of accomplishing what it was supposed to accomplish, it's an extremely massive weapon against ordinary artists/creators.

I call it IP Serfdom.

You won't be able to create anything. You will only consume. Only corporations will create, typically by regurgitating the same things again and again.