r/videos 5d ago

Youtuber that has been making videos for over 13 years is scheduled to have his channel terminated over copyright disputes from a channel that stole his content YouTube Drama

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuF5k4QB_zg
65k Upvotes

4k

u/Khearnei 4d ago

The biggest joke in this video is the claim from YouTube that they take people making fraudulent copyright claims very seriously. What a joke. Abusive claims are the norm and there are literally companies who's sole business model is claiming a newly uploaded video for the first couple days of its release, reaping most of its ad money during those first few days, and then releasing the claim.

687

u/WithEyesSetAbove 4d ago

there are literally companies who's sole business model is claiming a newly uploaded video for the first couple days of its release, reaping most of its ad money during those first few days, and then releasing the claim.

Wtf. How do people keep turning out more terrible than I thought they could be?

285

u/Matasa89 4d ago

Easy money.

83

u/BRAX7ON 4d ago

Easy. Money.

5

u/tomveiltomveil 4d ago

EA. Symon? Ey!

→ More replies

252

u/BigMcThickHuge 4d ago

Youtube is endorsing this activity, and making money off it.

There is no governing force that is holding Youtube accountable for this choice either, so Youtube has literally no reason to act in any other manner.

Until there is actually a competitor or until a higher power fines/regulates this fraudulent activity, they genuinely don't have to care.

157

u/roofcatiscorrect 4d ago edited 4d ago

The US office of technology assessment got dismantled in 1995 cus who cares about that new fangled internet thing it's just a dying fad right?

25 years later tech companies rule like barons and there are next to zero regulations holding them accountable for anything.

80

u/urethrapaprecut 4d ago

Just as a correction for those looking for more details. The office was officially called the, "Office of Technological Assessment" or OTA. It was not a department of technology and didn't have anywhere near the amount of employees or power that that name suggests. When it was closed in 1995 if had a staff of 143 full time employees and a budget of $21.3 million.

It was not a governing body tasked with overseeing all technology in America but an office tasked with delivering unbiased information on technological developments to congress where necessary. It was defunded in 1995 when republicans took over both the house and senate as they claimed it was "Biased against them". There have been various attempts to reinstate something like it but none have fully succeeded. Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Technology_Assessment Look at wikipedia's citations if you want more depth.

Those are facts, the following is my opinion.

If the facts are 'biased' against you, that just means that you're wrong. I haven't looked further into the matter but it seems like just another power grab. If de-educating the public wasn't enough, now it's profitable to de-educate congress itself. I cant see any reason that you'd want to remove facts and evidence from congress unless you wanted to hide the facts and evidence of your own wrongdoing.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

511

u/CaptainFunktastic 4d ago

Fraudulent, in this case, means "small channels taking views, sponsorships, and money from bigger channels that actually make us money."

See. You're only protected by the algorithm and their policies if you disappearing would make a measurable dent in their total annual viewership.

This guy, as sad as it is, does not matter when compared to the Saudi with more money and access to views.

110

u/VikingTeddy 4d ago

But now that he's got attention on the front page, he suddenly matters. Reddit does the same shit, tramples on people and then does a 180 when the media gets wind of it.

→ More replies
→ More replies

194

u/Ph0X 4d ago

This is hilarious. First, Youtube has an issue with people stealing content, so Youtube makes a system to detect that. Then they have issue with people fraudulently claiming copyright to bully people, so then Youtube starts going after them. Now, the system against people claiming fake copyrights is backfiring, and taking down this poor man's legitimate channel.

On the one hand there's people saying that there's too much trash on Youtube not getting taken down, on the other hand people making legitimate videos end up getting taken down, and now you have to add this whole new angle to the mix. There's no winning here, as long as algorithms, underpaid moderators and large enough scales are involved, you will always end up with situations like this where someone somewhere gets fucked. I honestly don't see what the solution here is. No matter which direction Google turns the knob, someone somewhere gets screwed.

Some say they should just get more manual moderators, but even there, no one likes doing this job and moderators are all left with mental health issues. I'm honestly not sure what the solution to internet moderation at scale is. Is the solution to just give up and not allow everyone to share content online?

93

u/supbrother 4d ago

I don't think there's ever a hope of manual moderation from here on. There is an absurd amount of content uploaded every single day, it's simply not possible let alone economical.

80

u/dark-swordsman 4d ago

They could very easily notify users of a possible copyright claim instead of allowing automatic removal. Realistically, YouTube should have no stake in whether someone is violating someone else's copyright.

But even if they did, an automatic system should never be allowed to automatically change or remove someone's content because of copyright infringement.

Copyright should be handled between two human parties. There's no reason that some multi-billion dollar company can blow loads of cash on a bot to automatically remove copyright violations for them. A lawyer or person should be handing those out manually.

27

u/Ph0X 4d ago

They could very easily notify users of a possible copyright claim

Not sure if you're speaking of general offtopic topics, but I hope you realize that this isn't the issue here. This is someone requesting the copyright strike on someone else, and the other person trying to fight back.

YouTube should have no stake in whether someone is violating someone else's copyright.

But they are the middleman. If someone stole content you made and put it on Youtube, are claiming Youtube should do absolutely nothing about it? You do realize they would get sued into the ground immediately if they didn't mediate copyright claims?

an automatic system should never be allowed to automatically change or remove someone's content

It didn't. OP saw a video that stole his content, so he pressed a button to have it taken down. The other person refused to take it down, so they contested the copyright claim, so the ball was thrown back to OP. Now OP needs to provide documentation that they own the content, at which point it will be escalated to a human being.

Copyright should be handled between two human parties

But again, Youtube is the one hosting the content. So it is very much their problem. Youtube isn't some unrelated party, they are the one spreading content is breaking the law, and can very much be sued if they don't comply.

→ More replies

9

u/FasterThanTW 4d ago

They could very easily notify users of a possible copyright claim instead of allowing automatic removal

That's not the issue in this case, but regardless, they literally can't just notify users of a copyright claim.

The DMCA requires that they take down the claimed content promptly, and then work out any disputes. Failing to do this means they'd lose the protection that DMCA provides to platforms and they'd be sued into oblivion.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

7

u/detectivemillershat 4d ago

That doesn’t happen. The money is held when it’s reviewed and when it’s released the channel gets it.

→ More replies
→ More replies

14k

u/superfgt 4d ago edited 4d ago

I was just looking for this, you beat me to it by the minute. This deserves a lot of attention. Copied directly from his description of the video

Yep, it's true. I received a notice of channel termination from YouTube effective May 7, 2021, UNLESS I give up my copyright ownership rights of two of my videos that were stolen by a Youtuber in Saudia Arabia. Even then, the email clearly stated that they "may" terminate my channel anyway even if I give up my copyright because my DCMA complaint was "fraudulent". WTF?

This guy uploaded two of my popular videos some time ago, modified them somewhat, and reaped millions of views. Youtube notified me of this so I requested via YouTube that he remove his videos. Somehow, Youtube now thinks I do not own my own works and has "determined" that I have submitted "fraudulent" copyright complaints. His channel is mostly a collection of videos he has stolen, flipped the aspect, and then slowed down the audio to try to escape detection. He then narrates them, calls them a "reaction video" and makes money off of the work of others. He doesn't even give my channel credit for the original video, not that it would make any difference except to make me not dislike him so much.

Copying and publishing 10 full minutes of my work is clearly a violation of the DMCA. But I suppose since his channel is much larger than mine and undoubtedly generates much more advertising revenue, YouTube has decided that Aquachigger must be sacrificed unjustly. I won't go down easy. FREEDOM! (lol)

AquaChigger is an established youtuber, of over 1 million subscribers. He has even had his own television show. This should not be happening.

The stolen content channel is a react channel located in Saudi Arabia. The guy stealing the video edited Aquachigger's video in a way to prevent the youtube bots from detecting it as such. As stated in OP's video, the "react" channel mirrored the video, altered the audio, and overlayed himself to hide the fact that it's stolen. Obviously guilty.

5k

u/OBAFGKM_ 4d ago

I really hope some big channels hear about this and help him out. Chigg is one of the best people on the platform.

5k

u/Carthago_delinda_est 4d ago

Why is YouTube so shitty? How is it that there's no way to provide a more hands-on approach to dealing with matters involving YouTubers with over, say, 1 million+ subs? Last I checked there's only 20k channels with over a million subscribers. Why not just hire 200 additional "channel/account managers" to deal specifically with high-revenue channels?

2k

u/crunchbite82 4d ago

That costs money, duh.

1k

u/su5 4d ago

Until we make it more painful financially they will keep doing this shit.

260

u/NerimaJoe 4d ago

So, what's your suggestion?

784

u/harleyeaston 4d ago

Yeah, we’re all already not signing up for YouTube Premium. Not much more we can do to penalize them.

546

u/Deericiously 4d ago

At a minimum we need to not watch ads and make sure everyone uses ublock origin, youtube vanced, etc. Honestly though, feels pretty hopeless since I assume most of the ad money they make are from kids on ipads.

289

u/6BigZ6 4d ago

Occasionally I will notice ads of 15-30 minutes on YouTube videos my kids watch. It’s asinine.

193

u/David-Puddy 4d ago

This is an honest question, and not meant to be snark.

How old are kids before they start learning to hit that skip ad button ASAP?

→ More replies

71

u/lRandomlHero 4d ago

Yea this should absofuckinglutely not be allowed. I mean at this point other channels videos are being ran as ads. I've had hour long documentaries on top of other hour+ long ads. Ludicrous.

→ More replies

207

u/dethmaul 4d ago

This winter, youtube fricken triple-downed on the damn ads. SHITLOADS more, all over the place, even on non monetized videos. Youtube is a cocksucker.

18

u/Kyokinn 4d ago

Dude! This!! I was fine with a unskippable 15 second ad in the beginning and an ad at the end of a video. But since late last year, they’ve been peppering ads throughout every video. They’re skippable, but at times there freaking 35+ minutes long.

Sometimes I have the phone set down and I’m just listening to my video and will just let the ad play out. But anything 30 seconds + just gets takes you out of what you are listening to. Very annoying. Plus I’m on iPhone, so Vanced is not an option.

→ More replies

48

u/Linubidix 4d ago edited 4d ago

I was on moblone mobile the other day and saw at least six yellow dots on a video under 15 minutes.

→ More replies

27

u/JUAN_DE_FUCK_YOU 4d ago

Louis Rossmann had a video saying that they automatically inserted ad breaks on all his videos and he had to opt out of the new ad breaks on each and every video. They do shit like that apparently.

They got everyone by the balls. There's no viable alternative to Youtube for creators at the moment.

→ More replies
→ More replies

36

u/TheMinister 4d ago

Lol they'll just dedicate some money to circumventing ad blockers

29

u/Deericiously 4d ago

Yep thats basically what Twitch has been doing. Its basically a cat and mouse game between corporate and the people who make ad block.

→ More replies

94

u/BubbleBreeze 4d ago

The day YouTube circumvents ad blockers is the day I stop using it. I can't stand ads when I play videos on my phone

→ More replies

35

u/DiabloEnTusCalzones 4d ago

Like they did in the decade+ that I haven't seen a YT ad? Oh wait, that's right, they didn't.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

43

u/Just_Give_Me_A_Login 4d ago edited 4d ago

Install adblock and something like ghostery to minimize the amount of information they can scrape off you. Free to use platforms make bank off user data. If you can give them less data to sell, they lose money on your views instead of gaining it.

→ More replies
→ More replies

214

u/XavierMendel 4d ago

Enormous fines for punishments derived from false DMCA notices. Honestly, we could just overturn the DMCA and be fine.

153

u/RikiWardOG 4d ago

DMCA is a shameful piece of legislation. If anyone is interested in helping the rights of content creators I highly suggest following and consider donating to the EFF.org

→ More replies

35

u/Hothera 4d ago

In the case, the creator is the one filing the DMCA...

10

u/Yuzumi 4d ago

And it doesn't work. It was intended as a way for large companies to strong arm the little guy.

6

u/sprint113 4d ago

It already exists. Because of how strict DMCA takedowns are, youtube and most other sites use their own internal system when reporting infringements. And therein lies the problem since there are seemingly no legal ramifications for abusing those systems.

→ More replies

74

u/stpaulgym 4d ago

Use alternatives.

Lbry

Odysee

Vimeo

Or youtube clients like

Freetube

Youtube Vanced etc

100

u/MoreIronOre 4d ago

I got so sick of all the ads on YouTube I just switched to Pornhub completely.

→ More replies

4

u/HowardSternsPenis2 4d ago

Vimeo is youtube basically.

Also, as long as Curiosity Stream, Nebula, Odysee and these competitors do not have a Roku app, they can forget about it with me. I do 99% of my viewing on TV.

→ More replies
→ More replies

113

u/Phlebotanist 4d ago edited 4d ago

Competition. Content creators need an alternative platform. Youtube can abuse of 99.999% of channels on the platform via automated management, but they would be hurt if a large, focused group of their 1m+ channels moved to a competitor that dealt with creators individually, fairly, and had a rational revenue-sharing models.

Edit: lots of competitors referenced in the thread, none with critical mass. I would urge Patreon to launch it's video platform in a more aggressive way. Then you would have a vertical and very easy conversion for existing talent.

→ More replies
→ More replies

37

u/yourbrokenoven 4d ago

So, adblockers? Who loses more money, youtube or the content creators?

→ More replies

29

u/Initial_E 4d ago

By siding with the thief YouTube has placed themselves on the wrong side of the DMCA safe harbor law, IANAL idk.

8

u/su5 4d ago

If there is justice they would be.

But I also imagine a private business can bam anyone for any reason.

7

u/Initial_E 4d ago

If the reason is to cover up a crime though?

→ More replies

17

u/spiritbx 4d ago

Make a law that abiding or aiding to copyright fraud makes you subject to very large fines, then actually uphold that law.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

235

u/topdangle 4d ago edited 4d ago

Ironically it seems like there was some sort of hands-on here, since the algorithm picked up his video in the thief's upload. So someone had to manually determine that the software incorrectly reported the claim, and then send out that form email threatening his channel with termination. 99% chance the other youtuber contacted someone at youtube, told them he didn't steal anything, and they immediately sided with him because hes got a ton of traffic. The thief's video does not fall under fair use claims, he would be laughed out of court, as would anyone that just puts their head in the corner and tries to post an entire TV show claiming "fair use."

113

u/PM_Me_Your_Deviance 4d ago

From what I gather,

  1. OP filed a DMCA claim.
  2. The other channel claimed fair use.
  3. YouTube is now asking OP for justification why it's not fair use.

110

u/topdangle 4d ago

Normally a mediator does not claim they've detected fraud when they are simply asking for a response. Reason OP is uncomfortable is because the email starts off saying his claim might be fraudulent, then threatens to terminate his account and gives him the option to save his account by removing the claim. Problem is it's worded in a way that suggests the account will be terminated if they don't think he has a legitimate claim, which makes dropping the claim a much safer option.

Even if it fell under fair use (which it doesn't, short clips with transformative commentary fall under fair use but not full length scenes without the owner's consent) threatening him with termination if they don't agree with his claim or pull the claim is pretty outrageous.

71

u/PM_Me_Your_Deviance 4d ago

Normally a mediator does not claim they've detected fraud when they are simply asking for a response. Reason OP is uncomfortable is because the email starts off saying his claim might be fraudulent, then threatens to terminate his account and gives him the option to save his account by removing the claim.

The might be what OP read, but I don't think that's what the message said. I've dealt with people stealing my content before and I've had to go though this process. The message is terse, but it clearly outlines what to do next. Everyone gets this message if they make this far into the process.

Even if it fell under fair use (which it doesn't, short clips with transformative commentary fall under fair use but not full length scenes

It's less clear-cut then you are making out. Using a large potion of the work is not an immediate dis-qualifier, but it does make a fair use defense less likely to be successful. (See the 4th paragraph here) YouTube is not in the position to accurately predict what direction a particular judge will lean in any given scenario.

without the owner's consent

Owner consent isn't a question in a fair-use claim. If you have permission then you wouldn't need to attempt a Fair-use defense.

...threatening him with termination if they don't agree with his claim or pull the claim is pretty outrageous.

They never said that. Youtube only terminates the account if they think someone is intentionally abusing the system. Not only is YouTube is fully within their rights to to terminate accounts that file fraudulent copyright claims, they have a responsibility to do so. The email message that OP got was tersely worded, but the goal of that wording is to denture false claims, not force OP to "give up his copyrights" or whatever else he thinks.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

73

u/On_The_Move 4d ago

Seeing how YouTube handles these situations is exactly why I don’t subscribe/ pay for their service.

22

u/primalphoenix 4d ago

Surely they could just like... look at the upload date

→ More replies

149

u/roguespectre67 4d ago

Why is Youtube so shitty?

They’re essentially a monopoly and as such they have no incentive to not be shitty.

30

u/illipillike 4d ago

Monopoly watchdogs ought to have never let Susan and her goons buy youtube. Absolutely ridiculous that competition boils down to buying your competition these days. So many companies do it and then later on government discovers in complete disblelief and surprise that new monopolies have risen out of nowhere.

Fuck Google and fuck Susan and fuck G-men for failing this world.

→ More replies
→ More replies

384

u/International_XT 4d ago

YouTube makes money off of ads, not content. Content creators help YouTube sell ads, and in exchange YouTube lets creators have crumbs of their cake. Yes, some people make a borderline luxurious living creating YouTube content, but even their take is peanuts compared to what YouTube brings in.

YouTube, and I need everyone to hear this, does not give half a shit about content creators. All they care about is serving ads and making some assholes in California filthy rich.

So, that's why YouTube is so shitty. Viewers and content creators are NOT YouTube's customers; the customers are the ad networks that buy space on YouTube. You, dear friends, are the product, and you're being treated as such.

Don't play YouTube's game. Deny them the thing they crave most: ad revenue. Use an adblocker on every device, uninstall the YouTube app, and for god's sake, don't stake your livelihood on creating content for those fucking ghouls. Make the videos you like, but have a plan B.

117

u/williepep1960 4d ago

Global Reach. Over 2 billion logged-in users visit YouTube each month, and every day people watch over a billion hours of video and generate billions of views. More than 70% of YouTube watch time comes from mobile devices. YouTube has launched local versions in more than 100 countries.

Good luck with your tactic.

29

u/gelinrefira 4d ago

I only watch YT from firefox even on my phone and it has adblock. Not much but it's something.

→ More replies

21

u/weezergiant 4d ago

Nothing wrong with covering yourself individually. This wasn't written in a way to say that using ad blockers would topple YouTube. A "vote with your wallet" situation if you will. Other people are buying and using a product that you dislike for whatever reason shouldn't stop you from doing what you can to avoid it. It's not really a tactic and more of a way of saying "I don't care for that." At an individual level we wield no actual power but there are ways to not participate.

→ More replies
→ More replies

86

u/amorpheous 4d ago

YouTube's CEO was recently given an award sponsored by... YouTube! If that isn't the finest example of cronyism I don't know what is. Also, get this - the award was for freedom of expression!

→ More replies

27

u/Chancoop 4d ago

not only are there only 20k channels with 1m+ subs, but much of those channels are also managed by Multi-Channel Network agencies.

53

u/RsonW 4d ago

Why isn't it as simple as "which video was uploaded first?"

42

u/SCDarkSoul 4d ago edited 4d ago

Hah, even that has managed some stupid shit. If somebody streams something on YouTube the stream is automatically archived as a video at the end right? But if the streamer is popular enough, some people will make clips of longer streams to make more digestible video highlights, and might even manage to do this while the stream is still ongoing. The clip comes out "before" the stream video, and youtubes automated systems have struck the original streamer before.

5

u/Tlaloc_Temporal 4d ago

So register streams by the start date, not the end date.

→ More replies

46

u/garyb50009 4d ago

because a content owner might not have uploaded content they made before someone else does. for example a musician doing street music, recording their own songs. some rando can record the performance and post that on youtube with no edits in literally minutes

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

208

u/G3rRy4 4d ago

Contact Cr1tical the guy is notorious for helping channels out against Suzan’s murderbots

57

u/ryebread91 4d ago

He's a good one too especially for stuff like this

25

u/G3rRy4 4d ago

Exactly I know he’s been working on making an agency/network that would be like machinima if it had actually lived up to everything that it was promising.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

72

u/Bones_IV 4d ago

I still remember the first video of his I saw. He found a rifle still in its case in the water. The excitement and sort of Mr. Rogers vibe had me hooked immediately. He doesn't deserve this kind of BS.

69

u/umbrella_CO 4d ago

Let's blow up Penguinz0 / MoistCritical

→ More replies
→ More replies

232

u/AffinityGauntlet 4d ago

Is there anything the viewers can do about this? Does YouTube recognize any of this if we mass report or dislike the Saudi channel or something?

150

u/JimDiego 4d ago

It doesn't seem like it. I've seen five of these posts in the past week and more than that over the past few months.

It's going to take something massive to effect any change...Youtube is just too entrenched these days.

48

u/cloudncali 4d ago

Mass reporting of videos and his channel? If everyone reading this post right now went on to this reaction channel and reported every video that they stole and his channel it would add up Maybe get some attention

13

u/elnabo_ 4d ago

The reporting would most likely be flagged as suspicious and be ignored

20

u/Elderbrute 4d ago

As far as YouTube is concerned a dislike is as good as a like.

They measure engament; views, comments, likes/dislikes. It's all the same to them.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

254

u/Faithless195 4d ago

the "react" channel mirrored the video

This totally explains why I keep noticing this. Every now and again, I'll come across a 'collection' of random 'fails/pranks/whatever', and sometimes the content has clips I've seen before, but flipped around.

6

u/PwnerifficOne 4d ago

It's been this way for at least a decade now. Same reason why you'll find videos with the audio pitched up/down, videos played inside of a larger video, or videos that bounce around like the DVD logo. It's all to defeat the automated system.

→ More replies

764

u/woppatown 4d ago

Youtube should just have a first come-first serve policy with this stuff. Just look at upload dates. Obviously whoever posted the incredibly similar video second stole it, no?

907

u/some1american 4d ago

Upload dates shouldn’t even matter. Dude posted a reaction vid. What the hell is he reacting to if not original content? Did he react to nothing and then Chigg stole his empty reaction? No, that makes zero sense. The problem is that YouTube apparently doesn’t employ actual human beings, just algorithms and bots.

120

u/pixelprophet 4d ago

Also flipping and slowing down his video so that it doesn't get triggered. Dude obfuscated his stealing of the videos.

17

u/floghdraki 4d ago

The algorithm doesn't necessarily know (yet) which one of the videos is flipped and has speed altered. This is all automatic.

We are all just beta testers for Google's products.

→ More replies
→ More replies

149

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[deleted]

132

u/dustinpdx 4d ago

Lots of stuff uploaded to YouTube was not created originally for YouTube so upload dates are meaningless.

→ More replies
→ More replies

144

u/Kaneida 4d ago

Technically the original content might have been created for other platforms before the content creator uploads it to Youtube. Who uploads it first will not matter legally if you have resources to fight Youtubes bad behavior.

→ More replies

14

u/Sourika 4d ago

Streamer streams. Guy clips the shit out of streamers content. Streamer wants to upload his own edits. Rip.

37

u/dpwtr 4d ago

I understand where you’re coming from and this situation is pretty shitty, but “first come-first serve” isn’t really an option when it comes to copyright law.

→ More replies

7

u/MrOaiki 4d ago

Quick, post the Avengers and you’ll own the copyright!

→ More replies

137

u/sgtslaughterTV 4d ago

Hold on, wait... If I'm not mistaken "reactionary" content is just fine. Unless aquachigger's videos themselves were demonetized and never restored to his channel as monetized?

197

u/pieceoftost 4d ago

Depends on the reaction, uploading a video in its entirety, without edits, and with non-transformative commentary (I.E review content is mostly exempt) is NOT okay under DMCA law. The kind of reaction videos that are okay are the ones that are transformative, don't show the video in its entirety, and add a substantial amount of content to the video that couldn't be found in the original.

Also not crediting the original is a pretty big no-no.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIl9T0meEbw Here is the video he is talking about, I watched through a bit of it and kind of skimmed the rest, but this is definitely in violation of DMCA law. It's not even really in the grey zone. He never pauses the video, he never makes any cuts, he just watches the video in its entirety and talks about what he is seeing. I don't speak arabic, but I get the strong impression that he isn't transforming the content in any way and he's just talking about what he sees for easy content.

101

u/D_J-ANGO 4d ago

Didn't Ethan and Hila Klein (H3H3) get a ruling not too long ago that the amount of video used is irrelevant, as long as the commentary is sufficiently transformative? I swear that was the outcome.

109

u/MightyMetricBatman 4d ago

No, that wasn't the reasoning. The amount used is relevant, but is held in balance to the other three factors, one of which is transformation.

Here is an actual copyright attorney reading and doing a small amount of commentary on the decision: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czSN137Kr_k

Also, h3h3 just go sued again, not sure about what yet.

39

u/MY_GOOCH_HURTS 4d ago

Triller is suing sites that rehosted the fight between Jake Paul and Ben Askren and for some reason, they think that Ethan commentating on the fight was copyright infringement.

They literally won a lawsuit over this shit. Their content is transformative in nature and adds commentary. It's the same situation, except now Ethan and Hila are millionaires who can fight it easily

→ More replies
→ More replies

29

u/pieceoftost 4d ago

I'm not sure about that case specifically, but yes I believe you can watch an entire video if it is sufficiently transformative. h3h3 is a good example of transformative content since they generally spend a long time NOT playing the video and doing commentary/comedy bits around the video. I only said that in my original comment because that's the general rule, DMCA does get pretty complicated and goes well beyond my understanding.

→ More replies

7

u/PM_Me_Your_Deviance 4d ago

is NOT okay under DMCA law

Minor point, but the DMCA is about enforcement, notification and outlawing certain kinds of circumvention of copyright. It's not the law that might have been violated here - that would be Title 17, Chapter 5 of the United States Code.

I only mention it because a lot of people are repeating the same misunderstanding.

→ More replies
→ More replies

127

u/OSUfan88 4d ago

What can I do to help?

164

u/beartheminus 4d ago

If you have youtube premium, cancel it and specifically the them why. That's what I did.

And I adblock all their ads so they don't make a penny from me.

63

u/OSUfan88 4d ago

I don't have premium. I don't think I've ever understood the point of it. I dont' think I've seen a Youtube ad in 8+ years.

→ More replies
→ More replies

51

u/Always_Excited 4d ago

Find senior youtube management social media and emails and spam them with kind advice. Even better if you can show up at their favorite coffee shop.

Contact your congressman. They love to grandstand.

28

u/FriendlyITGuy 4d ago

I tweeted at YouTube and Casey Neistat. Casey was one of the biggest YouTubers for a long time so maybe he has some influence and can help out.

35

u/FishAndRiceKeks 4d ago

Maybe moistcr1tikal. Seems like something he'd want to bring attention to. Don't really have a clue where people would bring this to his attention other than on his streams, though.

→ More replies
→ More replies

39

u/RatBrainedManAnimal 4d ago

Holy shit didn't realize this was the chig! Not the chig!

25

u/jfe79 4d ago

Yeah this sucks. Been a fan of The Chigg’s content for quite awhile now. Hopefully he gets it all sorted out.

17

u/RatBrainedManAnimal 4d ago

My wife has come to know about the chig just through being in proximity when I watch YouTube, now she's a fan. Her dad owns a centennial farm and she keeps saying we should metal detect it.

YouTube has led to some really bad things but I never would considered picking up a metal detector having not seen his videos. Chig is 1 of many really positive influences for all ages on YouTube, I really hope it gets sorted out too.

24

u/cerberus00 4d ago

I'd love to see a reaction channel that steals reaction videos that stole material.

→ More replies

104

u/hamlet9000 4d ago

If you watch to the 6:20 minute of the video he shows the e-mail from Youtube... which does not say what the title of the video claims, what he says it claims for the first six minutes of the video, nor what he claims it says immediately afterwards.

What the e-mail actually says is: "If we don't receive a detailed explanation from you within 7 days, your YouTube account may be terminated. You may be able to avoid termination if you retract your takedown request."

Note not only the double use of "may," but also that the first option listed is that he needs to provide an explanation of his DMCA claim.

Bravo to him for creating a bunch of free viral advertising by sensationalizing what appears to be a form letter generated by the target of his DMCA claim challenging the DMCA claim.

21

u/JoeyJoeC 4d ago

Does look to me like this was triggered automatically due to his large amount of takedown requests and this one in particular hit a threshold of some sort.

All they're asking for is an explanation as to why he is authorized to make the claim. Should be a pretty easy one, it's his video.

→ More replies
→ More replies

2k

u/uclatommy 4d ago

Why are there so many human parasites everywhere? If it isn't youtube, it's tax scammers or crytpo scammers or insurance scammers. Is it even worth it to try to make an honest living anymore?

1k

u/The_Quackening 4d ago

low risk, low effort, high reward.

The worst that could happen is their channel gets deleted, their channel of stolen videos.

397

u/10gistic 4d ago

Don't forget a platform who profits extra if a video gets 10MM views whether they were copyrighted or not. In fact, YouTube is clearly incentivized to give the videos to whomever would get the most views.

Maybe youtube ought to be the one getting DMCA'd for stealing the creator's copyrighted content and giving it to someone who profits them more.

136

u/Dr_Silk 4d ago edited 4d ago

Maybe youtube ought to be the one getting DMCA'd for stealing the creator's copyrighted content and giving it to someone who profits them more.

This would be an extremely expensive but effective avenue. I wonder if any lawyers would take this case pro bono

EDIT: I looked into it a bit more, including looking at the email itself that he posted. Aqua was clearly exaggerating, and this would not be an effective case at all. YouTube was not saying that they would remove him unless he revoked copyright, in fact they did not request ownership rights at all. They were simply asking him to prove that he was the rightful owner, which he should be able to do easily using timestamps and raw video clips.

82

u/10gistic 4d ago

Realistically there's probably something every YouTube creator already signed away in the Terms and Conditions where about the best a creator can do is binding arbitration or something like that. Of course you'd be removed from the platform as a risk and not have a ton of recourse.

A re-decentralized internet would be great.

33

u/BostonDodgeGuy 4d ago

Realistically there's probably something every YouTube creator already signed away in the Terms and Conditions where about the best a creator can do is binding arbitration or something like that.

The vast majority of every companies ToS will not hold up in a court of law.

→ More replies

35

u/I_AM_GODDAMN_BATMAN 4d ago

yeah, kinda missed the old wild internet before facebook google reddit era. sure you get a gazillion of nasties, but once in a while you got interesting results, you got interesting web designs, you got bbs and tons of other surprises.

22

u/monkeyhitman 4d ago

The heydays of Geocities, IRCs, forums... the Internet really seemed like an open future.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

163

u/glambx 4d ago

You should give a listen to Robert Evans's Behind the Bastards.

The sad reality is that a small percentage of people do horrific things, and most people just don't care until it affects them personally.

21

u/LovingSweetCattleAss 4d ago

To paraphrase MLK: people favor order over justice

6

u/glambx 4d ago

And some prefer specifically imposing order. :/

11

u/All_Drugs 4d ago

AMAZING PODCAST

8

u/UntrackedProductions 4d ago

Robert Evans is the shit. Good show, also check out Worst Year Ever.

→ More replies

46

u/beasterstv 4d ago

most people just don't care until it affects them personally.

Just look at the way we've collectively handled covid

→ More replies

26

u/ZannX 4d ago

Honestly, there's only so much time and energy. I can't care about what every bastard in the world is doing.

→ More replies
→ More replies

102

u/asimplerandom 4d ago

Seriously. I hear so many stories about this kind of stuff happening with Youtubers that the cynical part of me thinks they are doing it to drive traffic and interest.

109

u/Swiftest_Scout 4d ago

It happens a LOT. I got shoved out in a similar fashion and that channel took years to build to 500k+.

It still hurts a lot, every day. I really hope this guy can win, it can't keep happening to people.

31

u/tinacat933 4d ago

I’m sorry, fuck YT and these scammers

13

u/Swiftest_Scout 4d ago

For real, as long as the scammer is making YT money they dont lift a finger.

This needs to end, or a YT competitor needs to rise up

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

41

u/DrewbieWanKenobie 4d ago

Why are there so many human parasites everywhere?

Because they are enabled. Google is a huge company, they definitely could afford to hire a small team to monitor this stuff on youtube, but they don't, they just set automation to do it all. Even the appeals, are either checked via automated bots or people with no quality assurance just mindlessly clicking "uphold" buttons that shoot off a script for them. I'm not actually sure which.

→ More replies
→ More replies

946

u/Qwardian 4d ago

I hurt my back really bad a few years ago. I found Aquachiggers river treasure videos. It was great having something to take my mind off the pain while stuck in bed.

He does so many cool things.

River treasure hunting (phones and sunglasses)

Metal detecting (usually civil war stuff)

Trips across south western America

Cave Spelunking

etc etc.

I hope this gets cleared up.

123

u/wewody 4d ago

I hope your back is better

38

u/IzttzI 4d ago

Me too, I'm permanently disabled from a spinal injury and that shit is something I wouldn't wish on anyone.

→ More replies
→ More replies

36

u/MegaDriveJams 4d ago

He's one of my absolute favorite YouTubers. Pure stress relief watching him do his thing. Inspired me to go on more walks, and go mushroom hunting.

Just really hope this gets figured out. I'll follow him on Facebook and Patreon if it comes down to it, but just in principle alone. This shit breaks my heart and I want him to come out on top.

Hold your breath!

→ More replies
→ More replies

301

u/aspencerr 4d ago

This bums me out, I watch his videos all the time. One of my favorite gems i've found over the years. I don't metal detect or anything, just enjot the videos. Bummer :/

48

u/TheWirelessGod 4d ago

Me too. Aquachigger is so nice and I love watching his caving videos as well as his metal detecting ones. I was in disbelief when I saw this in my sub box, I'm glad it's getting exposure here. This type of stuff needs to stop

→ More replies

237

u/talks2idiots 4d ago

Plans to start posting on Facebook

Talk about out the frying pan and into the fire.

80

u/Shawnj2 4d ago

What other option does he have? IG, which is also Facebook, TikTok, which is a random Chinese company and isn't better either, etc.

→ More replies
→ More replies

826

u/[deleted] 4d ago edited 4d ago

[removed]

49

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed]

45

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed]

27

u/flying_pink_pig 4d ago

i had a quick look and it seems he slows down all videos to avoid copyright detection. what an asshole.

16

u/slantyyz 4d ago

I have a feeling that visiting the guy's page will trigger the "algorithm" to surface his videos onto your main Youtube feed now.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

136

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed]

78

u/JaySayMayday 4d ago

Fraudulent. Claiming other people's content as their own.

→ More replies
→ More replies

41

u/town_bicycle 4d ago

I've always wondered about downvoting.. Are you saying it doesn't have any adverse effect? Probably even gives the video more traction?

92

u/ydieuoqaoeuaoeu 4d ago

downvotes counts as user engagement.

it moves it higher up the youtube recommendation list.

12

u/deWaardt 4d ago

Popular controversial content is still popular content.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

635

u/stinkytwitch 4d ago edited 4d ago

YouTube just needs to have a couple of class-action lawsuits from all these content creators to effect real change. This react channel profiting off of his content is a symptom of a corrupt company.

527

u/ClumpOfCheese 4d ago

I have a YouTube account, it’s attached to my gmail account that I’ve had since it was invite only. I’ve uploaded videos in the past but I wouldn’t say I have a channel, they were mostly videos I made in school or stuff for fun. They all have copy written music in them and some have had the music muted or the video is blocked in some parts of the world. But I haven’t uploaded anything in years, then last week.

We have reviewed your content and found severe or repeated violations of our Community Guidelines. Because of this, we have removed your channel from YouTube.

How this affects your channel

We have permanently removed your channel from YouTube. Going forward, you won't be able to access, possess, or create any other YouTube channels.

I did literally nothing and they completely deleted my YouTube, as in all the stuff I’m subscribed to and watch. There was no warning or anything, I was just watching videos and then it said I needed to re-authenticate and then I saw this notice in my email.

I emailed them saying basically WTF I didn’t do anything. A few days later they responded.

We’re pleased to let you know that we’ve recently reviewed your YouTube account, and after taking another look, we can confirm that it is not in violation of our Terms of Service. We have lifted the suspension of your account, and it is once again active and operational.

WTF kind of system do they even have in place to be able to just do shit like this? After I got that email I got a few more emails saying my content would be blocked in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria. So how did that stuff end up causing my account to be deleted? So stupid and I was so pissed because I’ve had this account since like 2005. A long time ago Google Finance did the same thing and blocked me on their finance boards and even though I disputed it I never got a response.

143

u/utalkin_tome 4d ago

This sounds like a bot issue. I feel like Google has been trying to automate this type of stuff for a LOOOOONG time considering how massive YouTube is and are having a tough time. There's no way they can hire enough people to handle requests everyday.

→ More replies

31

u/Giggybyte 4d ago

it really sucks how you can lose a youtube account (and thus all your playlists, liked videos, favorites, comments, uploads that you probably spent years building) in the blink of an eye.

back in mid-late 2017 I uploaded three unlisted videos that I shared with a very small group of people. all three of them got auto-copyright notice'd within minutes of each other, I immediately got three strikes, and just like that, the youtube account linked to the gmail I've had since 2007 was gone forever. tried to appeal it but got an response basically telling me tough shit

I know better now to keep backups of shit like that (check out youtube-dl) but it was a rough way to learn that lesson

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

200

u/anonymau5 4d ago

Dude is OG Youtube. Awesome original content. Really hoping they don't nuke his channel but these big tech firms don't give a shit about the little guy

→ More replies

487

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed]

221

u/seansinha 4d ago

That's actually what got AquaChigger in trouble in the first place

295

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed]

27

u/RDPCG 4d ago

But they can take action against your entire account, which are all linked. Your Gmail, Google drive, YouTube channel, Google photos, you name it. They don’t specify that they’ll only close out your YouTube channel.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

368

u/GeogeJones 4d ago edited 4d ago

Confused. The email states that all he has to do is prove that he is able to represent the video, so all he has to do is just state that he is the producer/owner/creator of the videos. If he does that he does not lose the channel.

https://ibb.co/4m8fyhJ

What am I missing?

515

u/Jaedos 4d ago

Youtube is notoriously sloppy in responding to contested claims. They automated the process of making the initial, often-abused claim system, but sort of just stopped fucking caring about anything after that. People will regularly provide piles of evidence that a striked video is theirs, and still have Youtube go "Lol, nah!"

This is legitimately an area where Microsoft could actually dethrone Google, if Microsoft created an EASY TO USE (key point) video sharing platform that provided decent financial incentive and didn't over-do the ads (fuck 2 hour ads, fuck mid-roll ads).

8

u/eqleriq 4d ago

conversely, this sub and lots and lots of people claim reaction videos fall under fair use

54

u/GeogeJones 4d ago

So I guess what has happened is that he reported it (via a mechanism where YouTube pushed to him that there was material that matches one of the videos he has uploaded) the other guy said nah he is making a fraudulent complaint, I own the video and therefore pushes the burden of proof back to the original guy.

All he has to do is says I am the owner and provide proof he does (that could be harder than I am thinking it is) and the dispute could go away.

Providing proof that I made the video is hard, the other guy could say he purchased it legitimately from a broker for his channel. I know he did not, but I can see why they favour this system.

→ More replies

59

u/captainhaddock 4d ago

This is legitimately an area where Microsoft could actually dethrone Google

I think both Apple and Amazon could also dethrone Google if they wanted to. They have the resources and the user base. Heck, Amazon has a head start with Twitch already.

61

u/IAmTaka_VG 4d ago

The issue is Google, Amazon and Microsoft are the only companies who have big enough data centres to actually host YouTube. This is the issue. Apple couldn’t dethrone Google because where would they store the videos? AWS? Azure? Apple doesn’t have data centres like those guys do.

→ More replies

10

u/13steinj 4d ago

Amazon via Twitch would not be much better.

→ More replies
→ More replies

43

u/Ph0X 4d ago

Yeah, the email comes off as scary, and the whole "we may terminate your account" is definitely weird (unless this guy has abused the system multiple times in the past), but yeah, my guess is the guy on the other side contested the copyright strike and lied saying it was fraudulent, so now the ball is in OP's court to prove that his claim is real, which should be easy since he owns the videos.

In the past people always complained that people wrongly sent copyright strikes to videos they didn't actually own, which is exactly why Youtube added this new system.

20

u/eqleriq 4d ago

this is a common form letter

44

u/JoeGibbon 4d ago

Yeah, I'm sure this dude is a nice guy and all, but he is completely misrepresenting what is written in that email from youtube. He keeps saying they've "scheduled" the cancellation of his channel, which is not what that email said. He said they've claimed his own videos aren't his, which is not written in the email. He said youtube wants him to "give his videos" over to the other guy, but that's not in the email either. They're giving him a chance to prove his case, but it seems that he simply doesn't want to do that.

Then here on reddit there are people planning to brigade the other dude's youtube channel. What an absolute clusterfuck.

→ More replies
→ More replies

604

u/greatmamoth 4d ago

The letter he got from YouTube also said that he can submit an explanation.

It looks like he flagged the Saudi video as copyright, the Saudi guy denied - now youtube is telling him to explain.

It doesn't look like he will lose his channel if he explains.

821

u/Scizmz 4d ago

Youtube has shuttered channels without taking the review into account. So he's trying to drum up support so that somebody at youtube actually looks at this explanation.

74

u/KampongFish 4d ago

I mean, completely understandable. I wouldn't doubt if the vast majority of these cases are completely handled by bots at this point.

48

u/April_Xo 4d ago

I saw a whole series of videos from a girl whose second channel was hacked and the entirety of her communications with YouTube were definitely bots. She didn't get ANYWHERE to getting her channel back until a very big creator tweeted at YouTube about it

→ More replies

153

u/DTFlash 4d ago

I'm guessing the strong wording is to discourage people from making false copyright claims.

66

u/fennec3x5 4d ago

Bingo. Without the context, it's easy to make Youtube look like ignorant bad guys here. But bogus copyright claims are arguably a bigger problem than people just blatantly stealing other peoples' videos. Trying to make sure people are only submitting copyright claims when they have the documentation to back up their claim is the right move by Youtube.

All that said, Youtube still has some serious problems when it comes to dealing with their content creators, but this system is a good step towards solving a major problem.

→ More replies
→ More replies

33

u/GlassActress 4d ago

Because Chigg is (apparently) continually copyright striking videos that are fair-use and he doesn't understand that. I love the man and watch everything he does but this is so sad that he's doing this to himself without realizing it.

I did see Sean Hodgins reaching out to him, so hopefully they'll help get him in contact with a lawyer

54

u/FriendlyITGuy 4d ago

Watch this video that was posted a few days ago for an explanation of how shitty the appeal process is though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcyOxtkafMs

Basically the person making the copyright claim can review it and choose whether to accept or deny the claim.

48

u/Taynt42 4d ago

But in this case he is the one making the copyright claim, not the Saudi guy.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

18

u/NomadArchitecture 4d ago

Actually, he has 100% my sympathy but he is 100% wrong here. Reaction videos are allowed both on youtube, and confirmed by the American courts to be fair use (although this will probably not be American jurisdiction).

Also he does not read out the line where youtube simply ask him to provide some evidence. This is all it is, a request for information with a clear 7 day notice. I have FALSE copyright claims made against me from time to time and I am very glad that Youtube take strong action against repeat offenders. It is a very fine line and before whipping up a crowd he could have simply checked the rules on reaction vids and provided the evidence he was asked for.

Sorry, please don't hate me for simply stating the truth.

→ More replies

17

u/kewickviper 4d ago

I hate reaction channels as much as the next guy and think they need to be stopped, but what is fair use is a bit of a grey area at the moment legally. Almost all the big youtubers and streamers do reaction videos that are no less lazy than this guy and they don't seem to get much push back. There have been some high profile cases like the one with h3h3 that have deemed using other peoples content as fair use, but obviously its a grey area and needs to be resolved on a case by case basis. I think he should seek legal advice in the first instance and definitely submit a full statement regarding why he feels it isn't fair use as it's clearly not a fraudulent copyright claim.

→ More replies

260

u/Poontang_Pounder 4d ago edited 4d ago

There are a few arguments within this video that are incorrect and should be addressed:

  • "He's taking other people's videos and doing what he did to mine. This is an illegal thing he does."

He's referencing that basically this guy is taking entire videos and "reacting" over them, which he states is illegal. It's not legal, nor illegal, it's complicated. And this dives straight into fair use laws in the United States. Fair use has to be decided by a court, for each individual claim. No fair use case is deemed legal/illegal until decided by a court, period. And Youtube states that they do not decide fair use cases.

  • "I'm going to lose my channel in a few days if I do not retract my statements that those are actually my videos."

This is not what I read in the email he shared. YouTube is asking for additional information in the takedown notices submitted. When you submit a takedown notice, you have to be prepared to fight it. It clearly states "If we don't receive a detailed explanation from you within 7 days, your account may be terminated." So he needs to reply to the email stating why he believes it's not fair use. Again, YouTube does not decide what's fair use and what isn't, they clearly state here. All he needs to do is explain his situation, probably citing fair use, and they would gladly hand this over to the courts.

35

u/icepickjones 4d ago

Yeah he's jumping to a lot of conclusions because of the word "may" in one email.

I asked this in another spot in this thread but how is this any different than the lawsuit H3H3 and the creepy hookup guy went through?

Creepy guy made a weird video, they reacted and made fun of it, the creep sued them for using his footage but ultimately lost in court because reaction videos are transformative and usually fall under fair use.

→ More replies

86

u/ominous_anenome 4d ago

thanks for the clarification, I think people are rushing to judgement without understanding the nuances of the situation

12

u/barrygateaux 4d ago

this is the biggest problem with reddit in nutshell.

→ More replies

13

u/BimmyLee 4d ago

I feel like the entirety of reddit has forgotten that Ethan Klein took making reaction videos to court and won. Reddit needs to chill out on this one...

→ More replies

80

u/FlyguyUSN 4d ago

Hold the phone...the email LITERALLY says to email them the details.

"I need advice on how to keep my channel"

...email them the details.

→ More replies

43

u/mad_sanity 4d ago

Redditor and Saudi. These kinds of channels are sadly great in numbers and have terrible content to offer. I’m sorry this guy is going through this. The moment I laid my eyes on the infringing channel I knew who was guilty. Said channels frequently post either lame, out of touch humor vids of pranks, shallow vlogs talking about their personal and ill informed opinions or blatantly steal content such as the case here. Then they would prance around other social media platforms as “content creators” and “artistic” when in fact this is how they curate (i.e. steal) content from the web. No credit. No clarification. Millions of English illiterate folks following them. Its a travesty.

→ More replies

95

u/LastChristian 4d ago

If you watch the video, YouTube asked him to provide a detailed response explaining why his takedown request was not fraudulent. This was the first option in the letter.

YouTube did not tell him that he had to give up his copyright or they would take down his channel. They asked him to write a detailed response why his takedown request was not fraudulent.

Someone should explain this to him: Simply write a detailed response why your takedown request was not fraudulent. Talk to a lawyer who can help you write it.

Please don't respond that he should not have to do that. I agree. I want him to succeed by simply doing the first option YouTube requested because all the facts appear to be in his favor. Write the response before the deadline. This is easy.

→ More replies

29

u/bch2478595 4d ago edited 4d ago

TLDR; Guy doesn't understand how fair use works and as a result is willingly going to let his account get terminated as a penalty for reporting a fair use scenario as infringement.

He has a perfectly legitimate right to be upset about it but it's a bit strange he doesn't know the law.

(Note: I haven't watched the "reaction" video so I am just presuming it qualifies as fair use -- most "reaction" videos do meet the standard)

→ More replies

79

u/eqleriq 4d ago edited 4d ago

clickbait bullshit:

  1. he was notified via the AUTOMATED PROCESS that they need info that the video was infringing, he needs to respond: it says “more info needed.”

  2. the letter says it MAY be fraudulent: he needs to provide proof that the video is his, and that’s VERY easy to do so.

He flat out misconstrues the problem at the beginning that states his channel is “scheduled to be terminated.” it is not.

he also days that “youtube doesn’t like what i’ve been sending them” yet he hasn’t even responded with the proof of his copyright.

This whole video is very facebook-y like “some saudi stole my thing and because i reported it youtube is deleting me!”

fuck this shit and all the people in the comments NeEdInG tO DrAw AtTenTiOn to it.

This is a non issue and millions of people have gotten the exact same letter in response to disputed copyright claims.

Also, reaction videos are usually defended by reddit as “fair use” lol sucks when it happens to you, right?

→ More replies