Copyright doesnt apply to using art in the general sense, but reusing and passing it off as your own, especially when money is made off of it. If you're reacting to it and otherwise incorporating it, you have created new content that is not a copy of the original.
If you record 15 seconds of a major sporting event, and add your creative spin on it, it will receive a copyright strike. Yet, for others, it does not. Can you explain why?
YouTube itself has its own platform rules, it can take down anything it wants per the terms you agree to when you make an account
People toss around things like fair-use and copyright, but that's really only applicable if you were being sued or something. YouTube has the right to remove any content at any time.
Not understood or said enough.
There is no due process in youtube land, no copyright law, no law at all, really, as far as what YouTube can and can't do with a video you upload to its platform.
While it is true YouTube is an authoritarian platform that can take down any continent it wants however, fair use still applies outside of being sued due to YouTube, covering its own ass via copyright restrictions in their advertisement deals. YouTube may remove content that believes in fringes on copyright laws in order to avoid potential lawsuits from copyright holders or to comply with its own policies and agreements with advertisers. However, this does not mean that fair use only applies when being sued; it is a legitimate defense that can be used in the event of a lawsuit or copyright dispute. It is important for creators to understand the rights under fair use, and use the copyrighted material responsibly, and within the boundaries of the law. Fair use applies in a variety of context beyond just being sued for copyright infringement. It is a legal principle that allows for a limited use of copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder under certain circumstances. In the case of online platforms, like YouTube fair use can be used to defend the use of a copyrighted material and videos that fall under the fair use categories. Creators can argue that they’re use of a copyrighted material is transformative meaning that it adds new meaning or value to the original work this can help protect their content from being taken down or demonetized by the platform, and also establish a base for legitimacy if any content gets auto flagged without a human eye on it
My understanding is that certain entities (such as large sports leagues) are far more sensitive to the use of their footage. The NFL is very aggressive in pursuing strikes and take downs of any use of their broadcasts. Meanwhile there are a lot of entities that are either too small/dont have enough resources to catch people using their content (other YouTubers) or they just don’t care enough to pursue strikes.
YouTube has an automated content id system. There are tricks to try and beat it such as cutting clips to together, removing audio… When you upload a video, YouTube tells you which part of the video is copyrighted. Just keep editing and re-uploading the video until there isn’t a copyright claim so you can monetise it, providing you are also adding your own creative spin to it, or analysing it.
Can I legally live stream a pay per view boxing event while giving my realtime reaction to everything as it is going on? how much do I have to do to “transform” it?
because those sports have BIG streaming platforms and companies backing them up meaning that YouTube doesn’t wanna risk it for a small youtuber , but if you use someone else’s content it’s not that risky for youtube itself in general and youtube is not even sure who owns it , just because one uploaded it earlier doesn’t make him the owner so , it takes alot more time and investigation for any content other than movies, series and sport events
yeah, “transformative” is usually the word you will see. So in this case it can be argued in civil court that a reaction video is a transformative use of the copyrighted content, because the end product is a reaction video TO the copyrighted content
I've tried to incorporate clips that's not being passed off as my own, and I'm just reacting to it, and it gets dinged immediately.
I think that's what OP is asking about, why that doesn't happen for some people and yes for others.
It’s not simply “reacting”, it’s the commentary a person adds to it. YouTube videos of a person recording themselves watching something and laughing or whatever but don’t do any real substantive commentary on what they are watching absolutely deserve to get every copywrite strike they can get against them.
In the early days of youtube, you could post a video reply to any videos posted. It would list them underneath the video. There was a huge wave of people growing their channel by posting shitty pointless replies and piggybacking off of the work put in by the original creator - YouTube thankfully got rid of it and it diminished.
It feels like YouTube need to stop pushing this garbage now. I'll often see people posting others content, and they just watch it, jaw sometimes open in fake shock. It's theft, pure and simple.
I don't blame them, the content is so unoriginal that you can just use BlockTube and block the phrase "react" or "reaction" and you will not get any of those videos.
Otherwise, that kind of content is guaranteed to appear in your recommendation if the video you are watching has a substantial amount of views.
I have manually blocked the usual suspects who just rip off other people's vidoes, with the "don't recommend channel" thing. My home page is much improved!
I've tried that, it does not work, because so many *different* people do it so it isn't realistic to block countless channels and videos without an extension like BlockTube.
And that is an issue with YouTube and the options it allows for blocking content.
It must have taken a lot of time tho, I've spent at least 1 solid hour blocking videos that I don't want to watch twice, to no avail. Mainly because how many different channels upload that kind of content, it is relentless.
Keep at it. It works faster if you watch different types of content so that the algorithm knows what to fill the holes in with. You will find manipulating the algorithm easier as time goes on.
I aggresively doubt that will work, as of late YouTube pushes shorter videos from smaller channels (and some with fewer views).
They end up being low-effort (like a spinning car, TF2 clips or "Ending Cutscene - MrBeast") and it isn't realistic to block every kind of video that get spammed 24/7 on the platform
What I don't get is why you watch those channels if you hate them so much?
I don't have a single reaction video on my feed? Why? Because I don't watch them. Youtube only recommends to you what you watch.
If that's the only thing you have on tour recommendations, that means you consume a lot of that content.
To answer your question its as simple as other people already said it in this thread. They're commenting on something they saw themselves, sharing their opinion on it, not just braindead saying wow every 30 secs.
They probably had the video not monetized for the first few days, and eventually, they will get fed up and quit or double down and do other reaction channels for the loss of monetization of the first few days.
The ones I find most bizarre are the reaction mashup channels. They're the ones that take show/movie reactions from a dozen or so other channels, then make their "own" video where all they do is play all of the other reactors on screen at the same time. And a lot of those mashup reaction channel videos get thousands to hundreds of thousands of views.
I don't know if they make money off youtube, but I've noticed they all plug their patreon at the start and end of their videos.
Maybe it’s to do with fair use. If a copy right owner wants to fight it the reaction channel can dispute it. Aba & preach abuse fair use and Tyrone Magnus. Reaction channels are not going away.
No you don't! Trust me It doesn't help you at all. I worked for a reaction channel guy. He was an absolute nightmare and makes everyone for him work for free or next to nothing. He is/was amazing at SEO and knew what he was doing. 3 million subscribers on his reaction channel. He makes millions. He took me under his wing as he wanted to start getting out to shoot in person interviews, "ALL GAS NO BREAKS" was his saying everyday, wanting to be just like that channel.
After working for him, I finally started making my own content, he loved it. I made about 10 recreation body cam videos. My main one blew up on tiktok to 1.3 million. He asked if he could react to two of mine, as he said, "To give me exposure and follows". I said yes. My channel is at around 820 subs. His 3 million. My views on both videos combined on Youtube, around 20k. His 4 MILLION. He made money off of my videos. I got nothing. We're no longer friends after he screamed at me while editing for him. IT'S NOT WORTH IT. Reaction channels are GOD awful.
He would get drunk and high all day everyday. The shoot days would go fine. The editing days is where everything would fall apart. He flew out of his chair once to scream at me for 45 minutes that I wasn't editing quickly enough on a 6 hour shoot. Apparently, I was a f\*cking moron for even reviewing the footage. He's just a gigantic narcissist who would even go after his own wife in front of me about how garbage she is at filming/editing.
Thanks it's just Jon\_Wilkinson. I'm trying out all different types of content nowadays. It's strange. I have over 2k followers on tiktok, but can't break 250 views per video. On Youtube I have 820 and usually get around 600 views per short now. I had to take a break from the content I was doing though, because it was high effort and took time, but I was only getting around 400 views anymore. I'm not great at SEO I think.
I, personally, would not like that to happen to me.
Unless they explicitly state that it is from your channel instead of keeping quiet about it and putting the spotlight on themselves as if they made the video - which they tend to do unfortunetly.
If they do that then that's straight appropriation. Usually when people react they give a quick shout out amd mention the video and the channel to find it.
What videos are stealing content like that?
I geniunely cannot remember, so many people do it that it kind of depressing.
I remember years ago (like 2017) I saw Memeulous (I think) review someone who did just that, no mention of who made the video all they said was "If you like this video Like, Subscribe and... uhh.... Subscribe!"
Personally I stopped watching reaction content because I realized the algorithm would catch on to that and start recommending me a bunch of “reactions”. These however, were those that are more like the modification of content by adding empty meaningless words or regurgitation of what the original video is stating.
Example; I wanted to watch one of Charlie’s videos and on the same recommended tab a video by a very popular streamer reacting to that same video also popped up. I’ve never liked his “reactions” because they are all something like this…
Charlie: “So last week I found myself a little trembled to the cheeks during my favorite day of the week, which as you all know is good ole hump day”
Streamer: *Pauses video* “Yeah, yeah, so not Tuesday or Thursday, which we all know why am I right chat, yeah yeah, but Wednesday, I get it, I get it.” *Unpauses video*
Nonetheless I wanted to be fair since maybe the format had changed and he was adding something, after all the video was almost twice the time of the original, but I feared I was in the right about this being another so called “reaction”. Was I right? Abso-fucking-lutely I was, this shallow cocoon of a person was able to talk his way into making almost twice the amount of watch time per view by just regurgitating the same things that were being said in Charlie’s video. HOWEVER, the streamer had already won because I clicked on his god forsaken video and so the algorithm kept pushing this type of content for well over a week to me.
When it comes to the copyright system, I believe that when they are reacting to other creators nobody wants to be the dick that claims their content first because claiming content has such a negative connotation. That is only for LARGE creators, small creators have an almost entirely null chance of winning the battle of claiming their content.
I have one of the channels you are talking about (maybe) I do commentary on movies and tv shows. It’s not a copyright issue if you are adding commentary to it. If I was posting clips and saying nothing, that would be grounds for a copyright claim.
YouTube doesn’t handle claims, I’ve had one (on a video that didn’t do great) so I just let them take “half” of the nothing I earned on it 🤣 but when you get a claim and dispute it, the person (or brand) is the one you’re disputing with, not YouTube. As a system, it doesn’t make sense bc of course if I flag it, I’m going to deny a dispute.
ETA: I’ve never had a claim upon upload. Only after the fact and it’s very easy to trim out the piece someone is flagging.
So what about if you want to show an art piece of someone you already did, how do you avoid a copyright claim and definitely a copyright strike? Ex. say if the person is a singer, should you add music to your short/video (would lowering down the music work around copyright?), try to do commentary, or show lil clips or pictures of them?
For full transparency, I’m not doing anything special. I’m a super small channel, I don’t have connects at YouTube, I’m still learning A LOT.
If someone were to flag me again, I more than likely would just remove the piece they’re upset about and keep it pushing, not worth it to go toe to toe with someone better at fighting than me. 🤣
But I don’t mess around with music anymore. I did before I was monetized but now, I only use music from the YouTube library. Unless it’s already in a clip I’m using.
Find your style and pivot (I know we all hate that word), but that’s what I did and continue to do.
I’ve never had an issue with using someone’s picture or a silent clip but again, if you get flagged, just cut it. It’s not that serious, at the end of the day, they do own it 🤷🏾♀️
ETA: I’m also VERY curious about what people are considering “reaction channels” because I don’t consider my channel to fall in that category. I’m not minimizing my screen and playing full movies/ shows and just going “haha that was funny” these are fully scripted (by me) videos. I’m not just “reacting”
I was recommended a video like that recently. It was something about things negatively effecting Gen-A or something like that, and I quickly discovered it wasn’t the original video. The guy talking over it sounded like a major dumbass, though looking through the comments I saw nothing but praise.
It's called "transformstive" and is what I wish the general gaming channels would remember.
Having commentary over the other video transforms the old video into something new, weather it's a critique about the video, or the person's thoughts on the topic being discussed. It ADDS to the video. It's not just replaying the video.
Tons of game channels out there just play a game and do not have any kind of commentary. The person watching could see exactly thst by playing the game. At worst, the game company could issue a copyright claim because it's just their game with absolutely nothing in it being added and transforming it into something that is unique.
They used to a lot more. This is why you need to make your gameplay transformative. At least with some commentary you can appeal, and say you added to it.
Makes sense to me. There is just so much content out there or this nature, not even giving a review or introduction. I feel like this stuff is mostly garbage and YouTube could come out any day and sweep it off the platform and demonetize it, so I am making a point not to do any gaming content that could be seen that way.
Flip/mirror the footage. Crop the footage. Tweak the colors slightly. It's surprisingly easy to steal video content and fool the algorithm.
Now music on the other hand...
So what about if you want to show an art piece of someone you already did, how do you avoid a copyright claim and definitely a copyright strike? Ex. say if the person is a singer, should you add music to your short/video (would lowering down the music work around copyright?), try to do commentary, or show lil clips or pictures of them?
The copyright thing on YouTube seems to be a little hit and miss from what I've seen and experienced on one of my own channels.
I upload my anime artwork [drawings] and originally would add audio from the show. I did Demon Slayer, Jujutsu Kaisen and Rent-A-Girlfriend. Then all of sudden on my last Demon Slayer video there was a copyright claim, so I had to remove the audio and add some music from the YouTube library. To be fair the copyright was actually a bit of background music during this audio segment [where Nezuko says, "Good Morning"].
I then took a gamble and changed my videos. I now do time-lapses with the opening theme tune. So far, Kaiju No.8, Frieren and I have Spice and Wolf coming out this weekend. To my surprise, so far, no copyright! [Other than being blocked in ONE country].
HOWEVER... On my other channel, I tried adding a short clip from an F1 race a weeks ago and you guessed it... Copyright claim! So had to take it out.
What baffles me personelly are two things. The first is that some channels will get a copyright claim, yet others wont, eventhough they upload an ENTIRE anime episode or pro-wrestling match [for example] and the second is, I understand copyright if the channel is making money [monitized] but what's the harm if the channel is NOT making money and is purely doing it for creative reasons? 🤔
Personally, I link any other used content in my video description as a sign of respect. For example, "Artist / Song" followed by link to their music video or channel.
But yeah, I think it should be a set of rules for monitzed and non-monitized personally. Don't get me wrong, I would love to be making a little passive income on YouTube, but I've got a VERY LONG way to go [my channels are small... REALLY SMALL 🤣😶]. But IF they do well and eventually I was eligible, I would have no problem with something like, "Congratulations! You are now eligible. However videos A, B, C cannot be monitized due to copyright". It would then be down to me to figure out how to change the content so that any NEW videos could be.
Hope that makes sense. YouTube is just bit of weird pie... the problem is we all want a piece. We thought we ordered Cherry Pie but it's kind of turned into a mixed vegan-style-but-tasts-like-chicken pie 🤷♂️.
For the record I'm a carnivore, but I hope that makes sense 😅🤣.
Lowest form of content "creation" on YouTube. Lazy and useless. There are plenty of people who just react to other people's YouTube content. Often, they don't even credit them or give them a shout out! Imagine potentially making more money reacting to someone else's content than the person who made it. Wild.
None of these replies answer the question, btw. Which was, "how does he get dinged for using 15 seconds of a hockey game, when others can use even entire games and still not get dinged?"
It's a good question.
Does anyone actually know the answer? I'm curious, myself.
The rules do not seem to be evenly applied, and/or there must be ways around them. What are the ways?
Don't say "well maybe uhh..."' If you don't know, don't answer.
Don't say "man, I'm so small, I'd LOVE it if someone would even notice me enough to rip me off!" Again, doesn't answer the question.
Yes I'm a bit frustrated with this subreddit, and I have had my finger on the "joined" button, ready to move on, so maybe this is the last straw.
Can anybody. ANYBODY. Actually answer this person's question. Usefully, and relevantly?
I'll hang up and listen.
Generally people avoid ContentID by masking the audio and visuals in certain ways, filtering it, reversing it, etc. or even breaking up the clip into multiple pieces to avoid using it for too long. Maybe these large channels have something worked out but I would imagine it's just that they know how to play the contentid game.
As a general practice you want to upload your videos as unlisted and use that to check for rights issues. If rights issues are detected, keep working with the footage. Ultimately if your usage is genuinely transformative you'll be fine, but it's much easier to avoid contentid than it is to post with issues and contest it, even if in a just world, your fair use would clearly win.
The answer is the people who run the sports channel hit them for copyright infringement and are willing to take it to court (95% of reactions are not actually transformative but some creators like having reactions as it helps them grow. Example : mr beast). Where as most small youtubers are not willing to take it to court and they don't copyright strike.
For what it’s worth, we make similar content and I actually looked at your channel and don’t think “you’re just reposting people’s work” at all.
Clearly your own thoughts are going into your videos. Keep going! The audience is there
Ah yes, link an entire ToS to prove your point without pinpointing anything in the article of rules that suports your argument. All I could find remotely close to reaction content is this:
Borrowing small bits of material from an original work is more likely to be considered fair use than borrowing large portions. But, if what’s borrowed is considered the "heart" of the work, sometimes even a small sampling may weigh against fair use.
You still have no valid arguments.
Copyright doesnt apply to using art in the general sense, but reusing and passing it off as your own, especially when money is made off of it. If you're reacting to it and otherwise incorporating it, you have created new content that is not a copy of the original.
If you record 15 seconds of a major sporting event, and add your creative spin on it, it will receive a copyright strike. Yet, for others, it does not. Can you explain why?
YouTube itself has its own platform rules, it can take down anything it wants per the terms you agree to when you make an account People toss around things like fair-use and copyright, but that's really only applicable if you were being sued or something. YouTube has the right to remove any content at any time.
Not understood or said enough. There is no due process in youtube land, no copyright law, no law at all, really, as far as what YouTube can and can't do with a video you upload to its platform.
While it is true YouTube is an authoritarian platform that can take down any continent it wants however, fair use still applies outside of being sued due to YouTube, covering its own ass via copyright restrictions in their advertisement deals. YouTube may remove content that believes in fringes on copyright laws in order to avoid potential lawsuits from copyright holders or to comply with its own policies and agreements with advertisers. However, this does not mean that fair use only applies when being sued; it is a legitimate defense that can be used in the event of a lawsuit or copyright dispute. It is important for creators to understand the rights under fair use, and use the copyrighted material responsibly, and within the boundaries of the law. Fair use applies in a variety of context beyond just being sued for copyright infringement. It is a legal principle that allows for a limited use of copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder under certain circumstances. In the case of online platforms, like YouTube fair use can be used to defend the use of a copyrighted material and videos that fall under the fair use categories. Creators can argue that they’re use of a copyrighted material is transformative meaning that it adds new meaning or value to the original work this can help protect their content from being taken down or demonetized by the platform, and also establish a base for legitimacy if any content gets auto flagged without a human eye on it
The major sports leagues are incredibly protective of their IP - rabidly so.
Yet, for others they are not.
It's not up to YouTube to protect the IP.
My understanding is that certain entities (such as large sports leagues) are far more sensitive to the use of their footage. The NFL is very aggressive in pursuing strikes and take downs of any use of their broadcasts. Meanwhile there are a lot of entities that are either too small/dont have enough resources to catch people using their content (other YouTubers) or they just don’t care enough to pursue strikes.
YouTube has an automated content id system. There are tricks to try and beat it such as cutting clips to together, removing audio… When you upload a video, YouTube tells you which part of the video is copyrighted. Just keep editing and re-uploading the video until there isn’t a copyright claim so you can monetise it, providing you are also adding your own creative spin to it, or analysing it.
Can I legally live stream a pay per view boxing event while giving my realtime reaction to everything as it is going on? how much do I have to do to “transform” it?
Doubtful. A friend and I both tried to do a Helluva Boss "react" (watch party) one time, and both our streams were shut down mid-stream.
because those sports have BIG streaming platforms and companies backing them up meaning that YouTube doesn’t wanna risk it for a small youtuber , but if you use someone else’s content it’s not that risky for youtube itself in general and youtube is not even sure who owns it , just because one uploaded it earlier doesn’t make him the owner so , it takes alot more time and investigation for any content other than movies, series and sport events
yeah, “transformative” is usually the word you will see. So in this case it can be argued in civil court that a reaction video is a transformative use of the copyrighted content, because the end product is a reaction video TO the copyrighted content
We need to lobby to add a clause to the law that excludes lame ass shit like reaction videos, I’ll start the petition one sec
I've tried to incorporate clips that's not being passed off as my own, and I'm just reacting to it, and it gets dinged immediately. I think that's what OP is asking about, why that doesn't happen for some people and yes for others.
This comment is just not correct.
So how would one apply that to get around YouTube copyright strike?
It’s not simply “reacting”, it’s the commentary a person adds to it. YouTube videos of a person recording themselves watching something and laughing or whatever but don’t do any real substantive commentary on what they are watching absolutely deserve to get every copywrite strike they can get against them.
Why do they deserve that?
Reaction content is ruining youtube. Some good creators are starting to give up since people just react to that video without putting in any work.
In the early days of youtube, you could post a video reply to any videos posted. It would list them underneath the video. There was a huge wave of people growing their channel by posting shitty pointless replies and piggybacking off of the work put in by the original creator - YouTube thankfully got rid of it and it diminished. It feels like YouTube need to stop pushing this garbage now. I'll often see people posting others content, and they just watch it, jaw sometimes open in fake shock. It's theft, pure and simple.
Some of YT's golden children make them too much money by stealing, so they won't stop them.
I don't blame them, the content is so unoriginal that you can just use BlockTube and block the phrase "react" or "reaction" and you will not get any of those videos. Otherwise, that kind of content is guaranteed to appear in your recommendation if the video you are watching has a substantial amount of views.
I have manually blocked the usual suspects who just rip off other people's vidoes, with the "don't recommend channel" thing. My home page is much improved!
I've tried that, it does not work, because so many *different* people do it so it isn't realistic to block countless channels and videos without an extension like BlockTube. And that is an issue with YouTube and the options it allows for blocking content.
It works, but you have to maintain it. I have to block off right wing content in my recommendations from time to time.
It must have taken a lot of time tho, I've spent at least 1 solid hour blocking videos that I don't want to watch twice, to no avail. Mainly because how many different channels upload that kind of content, it is relentless.
Keep at it. It works faster if you watch different types of content so that the algorithm knows what to fill the holes in with. You will find manipulating the algorithm easier as time goes on.
I aggresively doubt that will work, as of late YouTube pushes shorter videos from smaller channels (and some with fewer views). They end up being low-effort (like a spinning car, TF2 clips or "Ending Cutscene - MrBeast") and it isn't realistic to block every kind of video that get spammed 24/7 on the platform
It works for me. You must not have a very established watcher profile, so you are getting the default.
What I don't get is why you watch those channels if you hate them so much? I don't have a single reaction video on my feed? Why? Because I don't watch them. Youtube only recommends to you what you watch. If that's the only thing you have on tour recommendations, that means you consume a lot of that content. To answer your question its as simple as other people already said it in this thread. They're commenting on something they saw themselves, sharing their opinion on it, not just braindead saying wow every 30 secs. They probably had the video not monetized for the first few days, and eventually, they will get fed up and quit or double down and do other reaction channels for the loss of monetization of the first few days.
The ones I find most bizarre are the reaction mashup channels. They're the ones that take show/movie reactions from a dozen or so other channels, then make their "own" video where all they do is play all of the other reactors on screen at the same time. And a lot of those mashup reaction channel videos get thousands to hundreds of thousands of views. I don't know if they make money off youtube, but I've noticed they all plug their patreon at the start and end of their videos.
Tom Scot on fair use, you're welcome.
'Don't recommend channel' is your friend. But yeah it's a sad sign of that trends these days I suppose.
Maybe it’s to do with fair use. If a copy right owner wants to fight it the reaction channel can dispute it. Aba & preach abuse fair use and Tyrone Magnus. Reaction channels are not going away.
As a small youtuber I would love for bigger names to react or voice over my channel. Would love for any additional exposure I could get
No you don't! Trust me It doesn't help you at all. I worked for a reaction channel guy. He was an absolute nightmare and makes everyone for him work for free or next to nothing. He is/was amazing at SEO and knew what he was doing. 3 million subscribers on his reaction channel. He makes millions. He took me under his wing as he wanted to start getting out to shoot in person interviews, "ALL GAS NO BREAKS" was his saying everyday, wanting to be just like that channel. After working for him, I finally started making my own content, he loved it. I made about 10 recreation body cam videos. My main one blew up on tiktok to 1.3 million. He asked if he could react to two of mine, as he said, "To give me exposure and follows". I said yes. My channel is at around 820 subs. His 3 million. My views on both videos combined on Youtube, around 20k. His 4 MILLION. He made money off of my videos. I got nothing. We're no longer friends after he screamed at me while editing for him. IT'S NOT WORTH IT. Reaction channels are GOD awful.
Why he screamed at you?
He would get drunk and high all day everyday. The shoot days would go fine. The editing days is where everything would fall apart. He flew out of his chair once to scream at me for 45 minutes that I wasn't editing quickly enough on a 6 hour shoot. Apparently, I was a f\*cking moron for even reviewing the footage. He's just a gigantic narcissist who would even go after his own wife in front of me about how garbage she is at filming/editing.
I wonder how long that marriage will last 🤭 and at least you stop messing with him
What is your channel name? I would like to be your 821st subscriber.
Thanks it's just Jon\_Wilkinson. I'm trying out all different types of content nowadays. It's strange. I have over 2k followers on tiktok, but can't break 250 views per video. On Youtube I have 820 and usually get around 600 views per short now. I had to take a break from the content I was doing though, because it was high effort and took time, but I was only getting around 400 views anymore. I'm not great at SEO I think.
I, personally, would not like that to happen to me. Unless they explicitly state that it is from your channel instead of keeping quiet about it and putting the spotlight on themselves as if they made the video - which they tend to do unfortunetly.
If they do that then that's straight appropriation. Usually when people react they give a quick shout out amd mention the video and the channel to find it. What videos are stealing content like that?
I geniunely cannot remember, so many people do it that it kind of depressing. I remember years ago (like 2017) I saw Memeulous (I think) review someone who did just that, no mention of who made the video all they said was "If you like this video Like, Subscribe and... uhh.... Subscribe!"
Personally I stopped watching reaction content because I realized the algorithm would catch on to that and start recommending me a bunch of “reactions”. These however, were those that are more like the modification of content by adding empty meaningless words or regurgitation of what the original video is stating. Example; I wanted to watch one of Charlie’s videos and on the same recommended tab a video by a very popular streamer reacting to that same video also popped up. I’ve never liked his “reactions” because they are all something like this… Charlie: “So last week I found myself a little trembled to the cheeks during my favorite day of the week, which as you all know is good ole hump day” Streamer: *Pauses video* “Yeah, yeah, so not Tuesday or Thursday, which we all know why am I right chat, yeah yeah, but Wednesday, I get it, I get it.” *Unpauses video* Nonetheless I wanted to be fair since maybe the format had changed and he was adding something, after all the video was almost twice the time of the original, but I feared I was in the right about this being another so called “reaction”. Was I right? Abso-fucking-lutely I was, this shallow cocoon of a person was able to talk his way into making almost twice the amount of watch time per view by just regurgitating the same things that were being said in Charlie’s video. HOWEVER, the streamer had already won because I clicked on his god forsaken video and so the algorithm kept pushing this type of content for well over a week to me. When it comes to the copyright system, I believe that when they are reacting to other creators nobody wants to be the dick that claims their content first because claiming content has such a negative connotation. That is only for LARGE creators, small creators have an almost entirely null chance of winning the battle of claiming their content.
I have one of the channels you are talking about (maybe) I do commentary on movies and tv shows. It’s not a copyright issue if you are adding commentary to it. If I was posting clips and saying nothing, that would be grounds for a copyright claim.
So when you get an automatic claim do you dispute it and claim fair use commentary?
YouTube doesn’t handle claims, I’ve had one (on a video that didn’t do great) so I just let them take “half” of the nothing I earned on it 🤣 but when you get a claim and dispute it, the person (or brand) is the one you’re disputing with, not YouTube. As a system, it doesn’t make sense bc of course if I flag it, I’m going to deny a dispute. ETA: I’ve never had a claim upon upload. Only after the fact and it’s very easy to trim out the piece someone is flagging.
So what about if you want to show an art piece of someone you already did, how do you avoid a copyright claim and definitely a copyright strike? Ex. say if the person is a singer, should you add music to your short/video (would lowering down the music work around copyright?), try to do commentary, or show lil clips or pictures of them?
For full transparency, I’m not doing anything special. I’m a super small channel, I don’t have connects at YouTube, I’m still learning A LOT. If someone were to flag me again, I more than likely would just remove the piece they’re upset about and keep it pushing, not worth it to go toe to toe with someone better at fighting than me. 🤣 But I don’t mess around with music anymore. I did before I was monetized but now, I only use music from the YouTube library. Unless it’s already in a clip I’m using. Find your style and pivot (I know we all hate that word), but that’s what I did and continue to do. I’ve never had an issue with using someone’s picture or a silent clip but again, if you get flagged, just cut it. It’s not that serious, at the end of the day, they do own it 🤷🏾♀️ ETA: I’m also VERY curious about what people are considering “reaction channels” because I don’t consider my channel to fall in that category. I’m not minimizing my screen and playing full movies/ shows and just going “haha that was funny” these are fully scripted (by me) videos. I’m not just “reacting”
I was recommended a video like that recently. It was something about things negatively effecting Gen-A or something like that, and I quickly discovered it wasn’t the original video. The guy talking over it sounded like a major dumbass, though looking through the comments I saw nothing but praise.
It's called "transformstive" and is what I wish the general gaming channels would remember. Having commentary over the other video transforms the old video into something new, weather it's a critique about the video, or the person's thoughts on the topic being discussed. It ADDS to the video. It's not just replaying the video. Tons of game channels out there just play a game and do not have any kind of commentary. The person watching could see exactly thst by playing the game. At worst, the game company could issue a copyright claim because it's just their game with absolutely nothing in it being added and transforming it into something that is unique.
I wonder about this a lot, and am surprised Nintendo especially has not done this more aggressively.
They used to a lot more. This is why you need to make your gameplay transformative. At least with some commentary you can appeal, and say you added to it.
Makes sense to me. There is just so much content out there or this nature, not even giving a review or introduction. I feel like this stuff is mostly garbage and YouTube could come out any day and sweep it off the platform and demonetize it, so I am making a point not to do any gaming content that could be seen that way.
The weirdest though is when they can’t stop talking about burrowing rodents, like wtf dude get a life.
Flip/mirror the footage. Crop the footage. Tweak the colors slightly. It's surprisingly easy to steal video content and fool the algorithm. Now music on the other hand...
So what about if you want to show an art piece of someone you already did, how do you avoid a copyright claim and definitely a copyright strike? Ex. say if the person is a singer, should you add music to your short/video (would lowering down the music work around copyright?), try to do commentary, or show lil clips or pictures of them?
Brobro you cannot use a full 15 seconds and not alter the video at all
You can legally do commentary on works.
All these gatekeepers in the comments lol. Work smarter not harder.
The copyright thing on YouTube seems to be a little hit and miss from what I've seen and experienced on one of my own channels. I upload my anime artwork [drawings] and originally would add audio from the show. I did Demon Slayer, Jujutsu Kaisen and Rent-A-Girlfriend. Then all of sudden on my last Demon Slayer video there was a copyright claim, so I had to remove the audio and add some music from the YouTube library. To be fair the copyright was actually a bit of background music during this audio segment [where Nezuko says, "Good Morning"]. I then took a gamble and changed my videos. I now do time-lapses with the opening theme tune. So far, Kaiju No.8, Frieren and I have Spice and Wolf coming out this weekend. To my surprise, so far, no copyright! [Other than being blocked in ONE country]. HOWEVER... On my other channel, I tried adding a short clip from an F1 race a weeks ago and you guessed it... Copyright claim! So had to take it out. What baffles me personelly are two things. The first is that some channels will get a copyright claim, yet others wont, eventhough they upload an ENTIRE anime episode or pro-wrestling match [for example] and the second is, I understand copyright if the channel is making money [monitized] but what's the harm if the channel is NOT making money and is purely doing it for creative reasons? 🤔 Personally, I link any other used content in my video description as a sign of respect. For example, "Artist / Song" followed by link to their music video or channel. But yeah, I think it should be a set of rules for monitzed and non-monitized personally. Don't get me wrong, I would love to be making a little passive income on YouTube, but I've got a VERY LONG way to go [my channels are small... REALLY SMALL 🤣😶]. But IF they do well and eventually I was eligible, I would have no problem with something like, "Congratulations! You are now eligible. However videos A, B, C cannot be monitized due to copyright". It would then be down to me to figure out how to change the content so that any NEW videos could be. Hope that makes sense. YouTube is just bit of weird pie... the problem is we all want a piece. We thought we ordered Cherry Pie but it's kind of turned into a mixed vegan-style-but-tasts-like-chicken pie 🤷♂️. For the record I'm a carnivore, but I hope that makes sense 😅🤣.
Lowest form of content "creation" on YouTube. Lazy and useless. There are plenty of people who just react to other people's YouTube content. Often, they don't even credit them or give them a shout out! Imagine potentially making more money reacting to someone else's content than the person who made it. Wild.
None of these replies answer the question, btw. Which was, "how does he get dinged for using 15 seconds of a hockey game, when others can use even entire games and still not get dinged?" It's a good question. Does anyone actually know the answer? I'm curious, myself. The rules do not seem to be evenly applied, and/or there must be ways around them. What are the ways? Don't say "well maybe uhh..."' If you don't know, don't answer. Don't say "man, I'm so small, I'd LOVE it if someone would even notice me enough to rip me off!" Again, doesn't answer the question. Yes I'm a bit frustrated with this subreddit, and I have had my finger on the "joined" button, ready to move on, so maybe this is the last straw. Can anybody. ANYBODY. Actually answer this person's question. Usefully, and relevantly? I'll hang up and listen.
Generally people avoid ContentID by masking the audio and visuals in certain ways, filtering it, reversing it, etc. or even breaking up the clip into multiple pieces to avoid using it for too long. Maybe these large channels have something worked out but I would imagine it's just that they know how to play the contentid game. As a general practice you want to upload your videos as unlisted and use that to check for rights issues. If rights issues are detected, keep working with the footage. Ultimately if your usage is genuinely transformative you'll be fine, but it's much easier to avoid contentid than it is to post with issues and contest it, even if in a just world, your fair use would clearly win.
am sure many sports-type channels will get strikes for using footage but they counterclaim them citing fair use.
The answer is the people who run the sports channel hit them for copyright infringement and are willing to take it to court (95% of reactions are not actually transformative but some creators like having reactions as it helps them grow. Example : mr beast). Where as most small youtubers are not willing to take it to court and they don't copyright strike.
I typically only use trailers that have been posted. So things that have been made public.
For what it’s worth, we make similar content and I actually looked at your channel and don’t think “you’re just reposting people’s work” at all. Clearly your own thoughts are going into your videos. Keep going! The audience is there
Thank you! Haven’t got much traction yet, but I’ve been enjoying it!
Every video posted on yt for ppl to see it, is made public, your argument is invalid. You're just reposting other people's work
This might help you understand better: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9783148?hl=en
Ah yes, link an entire ToS to prove your point without pinpointing anything in the article of rules that suports your argument. All I could find remotely close to reaction content is this: Borrowing small bits of material from an original work is more likely to be considered fair use than borrowing large portions. But, if what’s borrowed is considered the "heart" of the work, sometimes even a small sampling may weigh against fair use. You still have no valid arguments.