2K admits to sending private investigators to YouTuber's house/strikes down 60+ videos over 'leaks'

So this was a thing that happened.
The story goes a Youtuber by the name of SupMatto was reporting on some Borderlands 3 leaks. Now i don't know the Youtuber at all, but a brief glance at their page shows they're hardcore in Borderlands, and have been for years. Lore videos, tips and tricks, easter eggs, builds and live streams. Just they're to Borderlands what VaatVidya is to Souls games.
Now SupMatto has been reporting on leaked BL3 information. Note he was not the one leaking information, like he got a behind the scenes look and reported on it, nor was he leaking on someone else's behalf like he has an insider. No he was just doing breakdown videos of leaks other people had already posted.

This was a big no-no for 2k Games who sent two private investigators from their private security firm(aside: Game devs have private security?!) to this guy's house, allegedly as part of a 10 month long investigation, but from the outside it just looks like a threatening shakedown. 2K has defended this action claiming he has done way more than just post videos on leaks, though did not go into specifics as to what else those were. Worth noting a Rep from 2K claims reporting on leaked content is in fact illegal. Its not so long as you're not the leaker.
Following this 2K issused 63 content strikes against his channel, ranging from the leaked videos to just general BL2 videos. I think I read that 5 of them have since been dropped, but I can't find a source for that.

This whole thing smells...fishy. Like maybe its staged? All press is good press? Or maybe SupMatto was like a contracted employee with them? Like remember when PewDiePie was payed to play Mordor? Maybe something like that and SupMatto just broke the rules? One thing the 2K rep said that jumped out at me was that SupMatto "Repeatedly broke their policies" and unless he's an employee I don't know how they have any jurisdiction over him. Like what policies can a company just apply to a individual dude?

Thoughts?


https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/7/20758955/2k-games-borderlands-3-supmatto-defense-leaks-youtube

Sounds like a bunch of corporate assholes flexing their muscles and being petty. I don't know much about SuperMatto, but I hope he makes it out okay. How can he break their "policies" when he's not even a direct employee or contract? 2K asswipes a doing this to most likely set an example.

I don't even know why video game companies care about leaks so much, at least leaks about the game rather than ones that make them look bad like office culture or crunch issues.

It's like just say nothing and carry on business as usual who gives a fuck? Imagine how much money they waste chasing youtubers with private investigators for nothing. Unless its video or images nobody will be sure if its real anyway.

And stop abusing youtube claims for non copyright issues you manipulative fucks.

Heres another video:

Fieldy409:
SNIP

The only reason I can see them needed investigators is if they think this YouTuber actually stole this information, or has someone on the inside and they're conducting a review.
Then again, why aren't the police doing this? Its not 2K's job to conduct a criminal investigation, tacitly implying they get to punish the person too. I mean what, can game devs now arrest people?! That may seem hyperbolic, but if two guys in suits show up at my door like "We're from Games Workshop. We'd like to ask you a few questions about what you've been saying about Primaris Marines online."
That's intimidation as fuck, and I'd love to know how they got my address.

I don't understand why he didn't just tell those investigators to fuck off.

Adam Jensen:
I don't understand why he didn't just tell those investigators to fuck off.

Yeah they were private so they have zero power and you can just do that but people can go pretty far on just talk sounding important and official.

The copyright strikes seem like standard industry bullying but deploying your hired goons seems like an extra unnecessary step. Makes me wonder if they were trying to use him to figure out who the leaks had come from originally

Why am I suddenly reminder of a Simpsons scene. You know, this one:

I miss the good old days where corporations sending Solo teams after people was just in cyberpunk fiction....

See more information but it seem that SupMatto has some one leaking him information on BL3 but it seem that 2K did not care about the leaks until he may have been charging for the leaks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-6lMlEokos

residentout1:
See more information but it seem that SupMatto has some one leaking him information on BL3 but it seem that 2K did not care about the leaks until he may have been charging for the leaks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-6lMlEokos

That does make more sense. I was wondering what the other shoe was. Still makes me wonder why they sent private security instead of just calling the police if they thought SupMatto was committing a crime.
and why would they strike down videos that didn't have any leaks in them? That seems like a purposefully malicious thing to do, and false strikes are a federal crime.

I wonder what would happen if SupMatto challenged the strikes and took 2K to court...

Silentpony:
Worth noting a Rep from 2K claims reporting on leaked content is in fact illegal. Its not so long as you're not the leaker.

Not strictly true. Now SupMatto is reporting on corporate information leaked to him by a party who knows. Since this is commercial information that relates to entertainment, unless someone like CM156 wants to come in and flex that legal know-how of his, it is unlikely he could be charged with much more than civil damages if they can prove a link between the leaks and any loss of revenue.

However if you publish engineering documents from a company like Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics that refer to technologies they have developed for military or law enforcement use, well, then you're in a whole world of shit. To say nothing of vomiting contents and commentary on any document that has both your government's seal and the words 'TOP SECRET' watermarked basically everywhere.

Gordon_4:

Silentpony:
Worth noting a Rep from 2K claims reporting on leaked content is in fact illegal. Its not so long as you're not the leaker.

Not strictly true. Now SupMatto is reporting on corporate information leaked to him by a party who knows. Since this is commercial information that relates to entertainment, unless someone like CM156 wants to come in and flex that legal know-how of his, it is unlikely he could be charged with much more than civil damages if they can prove a link between the leaks and any loss of revenue.

However if you publish engineering documents from a company like Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics that refer to technologies they have developed for military or law enforcement use, well, then you're in a whole world of shit. To say nothing of vomiting contents and commentary on any document that has both your government's seal and the words 'TOP SECRET' watermarked basically everywhere.

But if there's a situation in which say, Wikileaks dumps secret documents on Area 51, the New York Times covering that is not illegal. Even if the leak itself was illegal, being a separate 3rd party just reporting on the leaks and whats in it isn't a crime.

Silentpony:

Gordon_4:

Silentpony:
Worth noting a Rep from 2K claims reporting on leaked content is in fact illegal. Its not so long as you're not the leaker.

Not strictly true. Now SupMatto is reporting on corporate information leaked to him by a party who knows. Since this is commercial information that relates to entertainment, unless someone like CM156 wants to come in and flex that legal know-how of his, it is unlikely he could be charged with much more than civil damages if they can prove a link between the leaks and any loss of revenue.

However if you publish engineering documents from a company like Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics that refer to technologies they have developed for military or law enforcement use, well, then you're in a whole world of shit. To say nothing of vomiting contents and commentary on any document that has both your government's seal and the words 'TOP SECRET' watermarked basically everywhere.

But if there's a situation in which say, Wikileaks dumps secret documents on Area 51, the New York Times covering that is not illegal. Even if the leak itself was illegal, being a separate 3rd party just reporting on the leaks and whats in it isn't a crime.

It's fine to report on the leaks but if you start to charge money for them then you have a problem.

residentout1:

Silentpony:
But if there's a situation in which say, Wikileaks dumps secret documents on Area 51, the New York Times covering that is not illegal. Even if the leak itself was illegal, being a separate 3rd party just reporting on the leaks and whats in it isn't a crime.

It's fine to report on the leaks but if you start to charge money for them then you have a problem.

Isn't the New York Times a subscription service?
And why is it a problem to charge for it? They aren't losing any revenue because of it.

Kwak:

residentout1:

Silentpony:
But if there's a situation in which say, Wikileaks dumps secret documents on Area 51, the New York Times covering that is not illegal. Even if the leak itself was illegal, being a separate 3rd party just reporting on the leaks and whats in it isn't a crime.

It's fine to report on the leaks but if you start to charge money for them then you have a problem.

Isn't the New York Times a subscription service?
And why is it a problem to charge for it? They aren't losing any revenue because of it.

Sorry I should have say that you can't directly charge for it like it's fine to put ad on your youtube video or ad on your news article or if you charge all news but you can't be charging people directly to see leaks.

They also don't want to encourage people to find leaks like get a someone to break there NDA or hacking severs for stuff.

Silentpony:

Gordon_4:

Silentpony:
Worth noting a Rep from 2K claims reporting on leaked content is in fact illegal. Its not so long as you're not the leaker.

Not strictly true. Now SupMatto is reporting on corporate information leaked to him by a party who knows. Since this is commercial information that relates to entertainment, unless someone like CM156 wants to come in and flex that legal know-how of his, it is unlikely he could be charged with much more than civil damages if they can prove a link between the leaks and any loss of revenue.

However if you publish engineering documents from a company like Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics that refer to technologies they have developed for military or law enforcement use, well, then you're in a whole world of shit. To say nothing of vomiting contents and commentary on any document that has both your government's seal and the words 'TOP SECRET' watermarked basically everywhere.

But if there's a situation in which say, Wikileaks dumps secret documents on Area 51, the New York Times covering that is not illegal. Even if the leak itself was illegal, being a separate 3rd party just reporting on the leaks and whats in it isn't a crime.

No, because at that point the New York Times is reporting on something someone has already done. But if the NYT were to have obtained the documents themselves and published them they'd be in the same world of shit Wikileaks is in.

Silentpony:
(aside: Game devs have private security?!)

No, but publishers like 2K do.

If anyone here doesn't know SupMatto, he's a huge Borderlands mark, the type who style play and enjoy BL3 even after this happened. Nothing malicious was intended by him, he's a BL YouTuber and was just excited to share the info. Which, the leak was 100% an oversight on Gearbox/2K, anyone could've grabbed it.

Adam Jensen:
I don't understand why he didn't just tell those investigators to fuck off.

Fieldy409:
Yeah they were private so they have zero power and you can just do that but people can go pretty far on just talk sounding important and official.

You can't expect everyone to act rationally when men in suits appear in your residence unannounced. Sure, calling the police was the first thing he should've done but something like this barely ever happens so you don't really prepare for it, he likely panicked.

Aerosteam:
You can't expect everyone to act rationally when men in suits appear in your residence unannounced. Sure, calling the police was the first thing he should've done but something like this barely ever happens so you don't really prepare for it, he likely panicked.

Shock is a hell of a system drug. The rational thing to do is immediately ask to see some form of identification, and if none is provided tell them to leave. If they refuse to leave, dial 911 immediately and, while on your phone, snap a few pictures of them.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here