IGN Entertainment Inc (IGN) is a leading online source of video game and entertainment news.
IGN became embroiled in controversy, after allegations that its editor, Filip Miucin, plagiarised his review of Nintendo Switch title “Dead Cells”.
This incident serves as a timely reminder of the impact copyright infringement can have on an individual’s career, as well as an organisation’s reputation.
YouTube channel “Boomstick Gaming” (Boomstick) produces video content relating to video games, including reviews.
Boomstick’s content was broadcast to only a small audience, failing to obtain mainstream popularity.
On 24 July 2018, Boomstick uploaded its video review of “Dead Cells”, comprising video content ripped from “Dead Cells”, and audio of the reviewer reading from a script.
On 6 August 2018, IGN uploaded Mr Miucin’s “Dead Cells” review to its website.
Soon after, Boomstick caught wind of peculiar similarities between both reviews, subsequently uploading a video titled “IGN Copied my Dead Cells Review: What do I do?”. The video went viral (with over 1.3 million views), prompting an announcement from IGN that it was “investigating”.
Upon close analysis of IGN’s written review, it became clear that Mr Miucin had copied large sections of Boomstick’s script.
IGN took no time “parting ways” with Mr Miucin; and after further investigations revealed most of Mr Miucin’s articles were the product of plagiarism, IGN removed all of his content from its website.
The incident ruined Mr Miucin’s professional reputation (helped in no way by his half baked apology video), and was a PR disaster for IGN.
Beyond the reputational damage, Miucin’s conduct (and, consequently, IGN’s) constitutes copyright infringement.
Copyright infringement (in Australia) is governed by the Copyright Act 1 (the Act).
Pursuant to section 36 of the Act, “the copyright in a literary…work is infringed by a person who, not being the owner of the copyright [or without the owner’s authority], does any act comprised in the copyright”. This includes reproducing, publishing and adapting the literary work in a material form.2
Although Mr Miucin’s review was not identical to Boomstick’s, it copied a “substantial part” of the original.
For example, where Boomstick said:
“Dead Cells takes the progression of a Metroidvania and integrates it into this procedurally generated action roguelite”;
Miucin said:
“it takes the progression system of a Metroidvania and transforms it into a procedurally generated action roguelite”.
Miucin’s review follows Boomstick’s wording and structure so closely, as to constitute the copying of a “substantial part” (and more).
Although this copyright infringement was masterminded by Mr Miucin, IGN may also be liable.
Remedies for copyright infringement include damages (including exemplary damages), account of profits and injunctive relief.
The internet is an unforgiving place. Thousands of videos and articles (including this one) have been published highlighting Mr Miucin’s unprofessional conduct.
Given the speed at which online journalism operates, you must always be alive to the dangers of plagiarism and copyright infringement. Should an employee upload material that infringes a third party’s copyright, the employer may be in the firing line for a lawsuit.
If you require assistance or advice in the area of copyright law, do not hesitate to contact Iain Freeman or Andrew sutton on andrew.sutton@lavan.com.au.
[1] Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)
[2] Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), s 31(1)
