Copyright, Fair Use & YouTube - Explained

If you are confused about parodies, copyright, transformative fair use, and strikes on YouTube, or just want to learn a bit more, give this a watch.

More Reading:

--

0:00 - Intro
0:42 - Qualifications & Caveats
2:12 - The DMCA + Takedown Notices
3:52 - Designated Agents
4:37 - Do I need a lawyer?
5:22 - YouTube Strikes
6:53 - Counter Notices
8:13 - What is Fair Use?
10:35 - Transformative Use & Reaction Videos
12:42 - Why US Law?
15:13 - Abuse of the DMCA
16:05 - How can creators protect themselves?
16:53 - Summary

I post all of the music I make, including WAV stems; sample packs; Dirtywave M8 song bundles; collections of video textures; early access to videos; and a whole pile of other stuff on Patreon. I know I know, I hate doing this as well, but if you like what I do and want to get more of it, while also helping me offset some of my ludicrous gear purchases, this is the best place to do it:

and a whole pile of other stuff...

Get in touch for possible collabs/offers of large sums of money, etc: allmyfas at gmail

[ahvetm]

This was immensely helpful, not least due to the Glaswegian no-nonsense filter

[LabRatWarfare]

I knew you would make this video one day! 😆 We've talked about this before but it was cool to see a video from you on it, especially on transformative art piece, such muddy water! Appreciate you making this man, very informative and useful! 🐀

[pjgirlproductions]

Thank you, that was beyond the worth of $2 but I'm working on a low budget!

[goingmodular]

Hey, funny to hear about your "other" life as a lawyer.
This was an interesting and very well made video about the DMCA. I remember clearly the time when it was discussed and started being enforced. I was a free-lance illustrator at the time (working mostly for US companies although based in France), and understanding the arcanes of copyright laws regarding online distribution was a necessity to tread those murky waters of the early internet.
Great summary here ! I like in particular how you reminded people that it is not so much the copyright law of their country that matters (in first instance, at least), than the copyright laws of the country under which the online content provider company is registered (here, the US). Hence the reason why poor me had to get some clear info on DMCA in 1999 while drawing little furry creatures in Paris ! Sigh ...
Keep the great vids coming!

[DCSHacks]

legend! - Just had a person complain about a logo! My reply was FU!

[MathHammer]

Thank you very much for this video. I did not know you are a lawyer. That was very informative.

[CreeewDeeeTaaay]

What an incredibly interesting dive! I hesitate to call it too deep, but certainly it was a detailed primer. Top stuff!

[RaquelFoster]

This is super legit and hopefully helps people understand that YT doesn't care. They do the bare minimum to comply with law and keep UMG / Warner from successfully suing them.

Keep in mind that videos being blocked/demonetized for Content ID matches is a separate system. Content ID is a fingerprint of the audio. When you upload something that has a Content ID match, you can see in your YT dashboard who the record label / rights owner is and what the consequences of the match are. The rights owner has settings on their end to choose the action to take. They can block the video, monetize it (add commercials and split revenue with any other rights owners), or do nothing.

But Content ID can NOT trigger a copyright strike. A strike is the result of someone giving YT a takedown notice.

There are sketchy labels that do large-scale automated submissions to Content ID, the most notorious being The Orchard. They claim any audio content they can get their hands on, which is why sample packs will often get you flagged on YT. But this still isn't a takedown notice or strike. They're just trying to monetize everything they can possibly monetize.

And again, Content ID matches are NOT AT ALL RELATED to DMCA takedowns or legal action of any kind. There is no way to defend yourself against a Content ID match, and YT certainly does not care about your 'fair use' arguments.

As a software developer who has worked in the music industry and in music distribution, I can also say that people are largely disconnected from all of this. Everybody is just shuffling around DDEX metadata and CDN links and arguing about what regions have what access to which things. Record labels are still in charge, and you better not let anybody download Taylor Swift's new track a day early or you're definitely fired. Software is completely restricted by legal agreements, and nobody cares about the customer experience. A cornerstone of modern music is that you don't own anything and the record label can at any time submit an updated DDEX for a track and the streaming service has to remove it.

[xpelled]

this was worth watching, thanks for all the details. if you could push a similar talk on the topic of copyright in context of sampling - that would be absolutely brilliant 🤘

[Napear]

That was a very informative and interesting video. It’s always nice to hear calm, rational, and incredibly well informed breakdowns of complex topics… especially those that are so often commented on by people who are not calm, rational, or well informed. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

[robertmyers]

Very useful & level-headed. Thanks for taking the time to make this video.

[n]

Great explanation! Thank you for taking the time to post this!

[sprattster]

This was an incredibly helpful video.
I know you can't provide legal advice for me here, but I would appreciate your opinion on a dilemma that I am going through right now.

I want to make a commentary channel for whatever topics I want, but I want to use Nintendo Mario Kart footage as B-roll (from their YouTube channel). Obviously I would do things like only show it for 5 seconds at a time, and repeat it for certain sections, but I'm wondering if that would qualify as fair use.

I would sincerely appreciate your thoughts!

[robertclark]

Thanks for this, it’s not likely to affect me in any way but this must be one of the most informative and concise videos I’ve watched on any subject. Marvellous.

[mathieumartin]

I sense there is something else going on that I am unaware of - but I do appreciate the clear and concise description.

[TallyTube]

Stephen! I’m starting a film criticism channel that is educational and entertaining. But I’ll be using a lot of short clips of films to discuss. My main question is if I’m reviewing a film for say a 45-minute long review video, and I’m using many short clips to evaluate multiple scenes throughout the film, does this fall under fair use?

1) I won’t use anything longer than 10 seconds
2) I won’t ever use music from the film, and will try to avoid longer clips if there is music behind them, only using audio when there is dialogue I want to discuss
3) if I show footage with no audio in the background while I discuss it, either clean b-roll or an over-the-shoulder shot with it on a monitor behind me, is that okay?

Advice is needed as I am about to go into production and have a nice tight script ready! Thank you

[michaelkonomos]

Great video! If you were so moved I would love to hear you talk about the issue that artists have been dealing with on streaming (and YouTube?) recently where AI bots will vacuum up their creative work and then the original work is hit with copyright strike. Similarly loops and samples legally licensed are being hit with strikes too. Would be cool to learn what we as artists can do to protect ourselves. You do t owe us that video but if you felt like talking about it I would watch it!

[sturdyblock]

Another great video from a man of many talents.

[DruggedBunny]

Interesting to hear that the YouTube 'takedown' process is reasonably 'fair', at least according to DMCA implementation... nice one.

[dontspamkoth]

This was worth watching for 20-odd minutes.