Protecting One’s Identity as a VTuber

One of the cool things about VTubing is the ability to create meaningful content and interact with those who consume it pseudonymously. This allows the VTuber to set clear boundaries between their personal and public personas and lives. However, there are those who seek to unmask or “Doxx” VTubers for various reasons, be it unhealthy parasocial obsessions, political disagreements, “Griefing”, Internet Notoriety, among other reasons. Being Doxxxed isn’t just inconvenient, it can place someone in real physical danger. Currently, the greatest threat to VTubers is SWATing, where the harasser calls 9-1-1 with a false report designed to initiate a High Intensity Police Response, such as claiming that they are the person being harassed and that they have taken hostages, but there are other dangers, such as parasocially-obsessed fans stalking the VTuber in real life, and those who hate the VTuber getting them fired from the IRL job through false reports to their employer.

There are multiple ways to obfuscate one’s Identity in order to protect it. One of the most effective is to form a Business Entity, such as an LLC, and conducting business as the VTuber under the business entity. This allows the VTuber, as the Business Entity, to sign contracts, and to register and assign copyrights and trademarks as the Business Entity. However, most jurisdictions require the Managing Member of the Entity to be publicly disclosed through their State Corporation Commission or Secretary of State’s office, meaning that a dedicated Doxxer can still unmask the VTuber’s identity. There are exceptions to this, notably Wyoming and Delaware, that allow the formation of Anonymous LLCs through a Registered Agent. In these cases, we would advise clients speak to a Wyoming or Delaware attorney for more information.

Another way to protect one’s private information is to get a P.O. Box. Some Post Office locations, and some businesses that offer Post Office Box services such as The UPS Store, can provide a P.O. Box that will accept packages on your behalf. If you use these services, we advise opening packages at the store – Dedicated Doxxers have used AirTags or gifted Electronics with GPS devices to doxx the home addresses of Internet Personalities in order to later SWAT them – this was a common tactic among rivals during the peak of Internet Bloodsports.

Another simple way to prevent Doxxing is to use separate email addresses for personal & VTubing accounts and to not use personal accounts for VTubing purposes. Email address reuse is one of the easiest ways to get Doxxed – once someone has figured out that you have used a Personal Email and it gets leaked, they often can suss out old Social Media profiles such as Facebook profiles in order to determine one’s identity. Additionally, maintaining separate accounts for Discord, YouTube, Steam, and other Social Media, and keeping personal accounts off-stream is another step for preventing Doxxing. The most common way VTubers accidentally doxx themselves, opening them up to further doxxing, is through Discord Notifications from their personal Discord accounts going off and becoming visible during a stream.

Once your real identity is revealed, you can never be anonymous again – the Internet unfortunately never forgets. However, even then, you can take prudent steps to make it harder to be found. Although the most dedicated Doxxers will still be able to find you, the average Doxxer only puts in about 5 minutes of research before giving up, making it valuable to still take steps to protect your identity anyway.

If you need assistance with protecting your identity as a VTuber, or have other concerns in regard to your VTubing career such as help understanding a contract, please feel free to contact us for a consultation.

The Parol Evidence Rule – Differences between American and Japanese Contracts

As a VTuber signing with a Japanese agency or otherwise engaging in business with a Japanese company, there are many factors to consider when reviewing the contract—especially if the contract is to be enforced under Japanese law. Perhaps the biggest is the lack of the Parol Evidence Rule in Japanese law.

What is the Parol Evidence Rule?

The Parol Evidence Rule is the common law principle that, for a completely integrated written contract that is clear and unambiguous, courts will only look at the “four corners of the document” to determine the meaning of the contract. In other words, any outside communication prior to the signing of the contract is not admissible as evidence. That doesn’t mean that if a term is ambiguous or otherwise defined by prior dealings or usage of trade the court won’t take it into account, but it does mean that what is on the actual paper is the contract. This also doesn’t mean that a contract can’t be verbally modified afterwards if the modification complies with the Statute of Frauds (which states that certain contracts, including modifications, have to be in writing to be enforceable, usually involving real estate or large purchases of goods). This principle avoids drawn-out “he said, she said” disputes over written contracts, limiting the evidence to what is actually in the written document and whether a party performed under the contract or breached its terms.

Why Doesn’t Japan Have This Rule?

Although officers of the United States Army wrote Japan’s Constitution and restructured its government in the aftermath of World War II, they kept Japan’s civil law judicial system based on the Napoleonic and Prussian law codes that Japan adopted during the Meiji Restoration. Because of this, Japan did not inherit the Anglo-American body of common law that governs contracts in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and other common law countries.

In addition, there are cultural mores where contracted parties are expected to deal fairly with one another. In Confucian-influenced societies, including pre-Meiji Japan, merchants were considered below peasants in the social hierarchy. Except for Osaka and the Kansai region, there is a cultural tendency to avoid appearing as if you’re selling something or hawking a product. As noted in Robert March’s The Japanese Negotiator: Subtlety and Strategy Beyond Western Logic, there is even an aversion to reading the fine print of a contract and a tendency to trust that the opposing party is dealing fairly and honorably.

What Does This Mean For My Contract with a Japanese Agency?

If your contract is to be enforced under Japanese law per its choice-of-law provision, this means that any verbal or other agreements not in the contract itself may still be valid and enforceable. This is true even if the written contract itself has an integration clause stating that it contains the totality of the agreement, although Japanese courts will take it under consideration and weigh it heavily against any evidence of communications from before the contract was signed. Effectively, the written contract acts as a memorial that an agreement has been reached, not as a record of the entire contract.

When negotiating terms with Japanese agencies, VTubers should keep this in mind: any terms that they agree to verbally or through written communications may in fact still be enforceable, even if those terms are not in the written contract itself—even if that contract contains an integration clause stating that the written contract is the complete agreement.

If you are a VTuber currently negotiating with a Japanese agency, our firm can help. Our expertise in international law and deep knowledge of the VTuber industry allow us to ensure your interests are best represented in negotiations. Contact us today for a confidential consultation to ensure your interests are properly safeguarded.

Why You Should Own Your VTuber Model

VTubing is an exciting community to be a part of, and there are many tools for those looking to get into it. Among those tools are free-to-use models and customizable models so that someone looking to begin as a VTuber can get up and running quickly, without the cost of a customizable model. However, when a VTuber begins to take off, this path can cause them significant headache or even place them at legal risk, especially if they begin to pursue merchandise opportunities.

The cause of this is that without an express agreement, the Copyright to the model still belongs to the artist. This copyright begins as soon as an original work is fixed in a tangible medium.[1] This has applied to Digital Artwork ever since the Third Circuit ruled in Williams Electronics, Inc. v. Artic International, Inc. that Artic’s clone of Williams’ game Defender was a violation of Copyright.[2] If a person is found to be in violation of Copyright, they may be liable to the Copyright Holder for actual damages and the profits that they have made using the copyrighted material, as well as Statutory Damages.[3] In addition, platforms may be forced to take down any works using the infringing work (such as streams or videos using the model), under the DMCA.[4] Commissioning Art does not necessarily transfer this Copyright, [5] rather, it grants a private license for it.[6] An exemption for AI-created art exists, with Courts holding that AI-generated Art is not subject to Copyright.[7] However, the use of such AI art may result in community backlash, and additionally allow others to use said art since it is not under copyright.

Perhaps the best-known example of a VTuber getting into trouble over not owning their model, causing them headaches, is when Projekt Melody was banned from Twitch over a DMCA complaint after her artist claimed that Melody hadn’t paid him and hadn’t given her rights to her model.[8] Melody’s Twitch was then restored after providing that she had paid for her model, but she lost her Twitch partnership status.[9] This kerfuffle could have been easily avoided had Melody gotten in writing full rights to her model from the artist.

Another example is that of Powdur. Powdur used a customizable Live2D model, LizMeta. However, the creators of the model complained heavily about Powdur’s politically charged content and requested that Powdur cease her use of that model.[10] Some in the community sided with the creators of the model, while others sided with Powdur, believing that the creators were overreaching. In response, Powdur has announced plans for a new private model in order to avoid any possible legal action from the creators of LizMeta.

In yet another example, the popular VTuber Filian had been selected to have a Neandroid figure based on her model released by Good Smile Company. However, while Filian had streaming rights to her model, she did not own the full copyright, which remained with the original artist. The artist immediately demanded that Filian and Good Smile Company stop production of the figure, noting that they weren’t seeking royalties or payment, just that they were trying to protect their IP and prevent a precedent from being set. This resulted in the announcement being retracted and production being halted.[11] Filian has since gone on Hiatus and has allegedly engaged in an ARG in connection to a re-debut with a new model, wiping her entire social media presence as a part of it.

These three examples show the immense headache and frustration that Independent VTubers can have when commissioning models from artists or when using pre-made models. It becomes essential for Independent VTubers who are looking to expand or engage in “edgy” content to ensure that they have the full rights to their model, in writing, when commissioning them from their artists. Specifically, when commissioning models, Independent VTubers should secure, in writing, full publication rights, full rights to derivative works, and full rights to create merchandise based on the model. This advice also is extended to other creators who rely on Artists to create art for their works, such as Authors commissioning art for book covers or the interior of their books. Although this may result in higher upfront costs, it can save significant legal headaches later, especially if the creator experiences success.

[1] “Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.” 17 U.S.C. § 102 (a).

[2] Williams Electronics, Inc. v. Artic International, Inc. 685 F.2d 870 (1982).

[3] 17 U.S.C. § 504

[4] 17 U.S.C. § 512

[5] 17 U.S.C. § 202.

[6] Community for Creative-Non Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730 (1989).

[7] Thaler v. Perlmutter 130 F.4th 1039 (2025).

[8] Jacob Kastrenakes, What Happens When a Virtual Streamer Doesn’t Own Her Body?, The Verge (Nov. 24, 2020), https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/24/21591488/projekt-melody-twitch-ban-copyright-strike-digitrevx-vtuber.

[9] Id.

[10] Twitch Scrubing, The Powdur Situation Explained, YouTube (Feb. 4, 2026), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbFY_h63_Wk.

[11] Filian Nendoroid Production Halted Days After Announcement, VTuber NewsDrop (July 8, 2024), https://vtubernewsdrop.com/filian-nendoroid-production-halted-days-after-announcement/.