The practice of vaulting content in live-service games has become increasingly common as developers seek to manage file sizes and update their games. However, this approach has now created an unexpected legal complication for Bungie, as the studio finds itself unable to provide evidence in a copyright infringement lawsuit because the relevant game content no longer exists in a playable form.
 |
|---|
| An intriguing visual representation of the Destiny universe, reflecting the themes of conflict and storyline under legal scrutiny |
The Copyright Lawsuit
Writer Matthew Kelsey Martineau filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Bungie in October 2024, alleging that the studio lifted ideas from his blog posts published under the pseudonym Caspar Cole in 2013 and 2014. Martineau claims that Destiny 2's Red Legion faction, which features enemies using flamethrowers and trained war hounds, was directly copied from his original work. While some elements in question could be considered generic sci-fi tropes, the specific combination of features and naming has raised legal questions that now require examination.
The Content Vault Problem
When Bungie launched the Beyond Light expansion for Destiny 2, the company placed the original Red War campaign and its follow-ups into what it called the Destiny 2 Content Vault. This practice, intended to reduce the game's installation size and streamline the experience, has now created a significant legal hurdle. According to Bungie game director Tyson Green, the vaulted content can no longer run because their outdated code is incompatible with Destiny 2's underlying operational framework, which has evolved considerably since those campaigns were retired.
Bungie's Failed Dismissal Attempt
In an attempt to have the case dismissed, Bungie submitted fan-created YouTube videos as evidence, including a 10-hour lore compilation by YouTuber MynameisByf and a 2-hour-40-minute cutscene compilation. The studio also referenced the Destinypedia fan wiki to support its defense. These materials were presented as the best possible way for the Court to review the accused work since the original game content is no longer accessible.
The Judge's Decision
Judge Susie Morgan was not impressed with Bungie's approach. In her decision, she stated: The Court will not consider the exhibits attached to Defendant's motion to dismiss... There has not been sufficient time for discovery, and the attachments are admittedly of third-party origination. Their authenticity has not been established. The judge acknowledged the unusual complexity of this copyright case compared to typical infringement claims, which factored into her decision to allow the lawsuit to proceed.
Implications for Live-Service Games
This case highlights a growing concern with the live-service game model, where content is regularly removed or replaced. While this approach helps developers manage technical constraints and keep games fresh, it creates problems for preserving gaming history and, as now demonstrated, potential legal complications. The inability to access original content for legal review raises questions about digital ownership, archiving practices, and the responsibilities of game publishers to maintain access to content that players have purchased.
What Happens Next
With the motion to dismiss rejected, the copyright infringement case will now proceed to further legal examination. Bungie will need to find alternative ways to defend against Martineau's claims without being able to directly demonstrate the original game content. This situation serves as a cautionary tale for other developers who employ similar content vaulting strategies, suggesting that preserving access to original game versions might be prudent for both historical and legal reasons.