<aside> ⚖️
Build a commentary channel with confidence. Know your rights, protect your content, and build alternative monetisation from day one - because even legally protected content gets demonetised.
</aside>
<aside> ⚠️
Important Disclaimer
This is educational information, not legal advice. Fair use is determined case-by-case. Even strong fair use cases often trigger Content ID claims - platforms and rights holders apply automated or risk-averse policies independent of what courts might decide.
</aside>
Rate your planned content against each factor before filming. Know your legal position before you publish.
<aside> 📝
Score Each Factor: Strong / Neutral / Weak
Factor 1 - Purpose & Character of Use
Transformative use: criticism, education, analysis, commentary. Your commentary dominates - original clips are evidence for your points. Simply reposting fails this test.
Factor 2 - Nature of the Copyrighted Work
Factual / documentary content gets less protection than fictional creative works. Using news footage or documentaries has stronger fair use standing - though fictional works are still usable with strong commentary.
Factor 3 - Amount Used
Less is more. Multiple very short clips are stronger than one long clip. Never use a pivotal or "heart" scene. Every second of footage must tie to a specific point.
Factor 4 - Market Impact
Your video must not replace the original viewing experience. Viewers should still want to watch the original after watching you. Commentary, critique, and education don't replace - they promote.
Overall risk level:
Weakest factor (needs work):
Go ahead / revise / abandon?
</aside>
Run every clip through this before including it.
<aside> 🎥
Before You Include Any Clip
<aside> ✅
Clip Presentation Best Practices
<aside> 💡
The "Evidence" Test
Before including any clip, ask: "What precise claim does this clip prove?" If you can't answer clearly in one sentence, omit it. Treat every clip like a footnote in an academic paper - it exists solely to support a specific point you've already stated in your own words.
</aside>
Claim first, clip as evidence, analysis second. Your voice must dominate.
| Section | Purpose | Who Dominates? | Your Notes / Script Beat |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intro (60-90s) | State your thesis / analytical claim. No clips yet. | You - 100% | |
| Context (1-2 min) | Background on subject. Build educational frame before any footage. | You - 100% | |
| Analysis Point 1 | State specific claim → short clip as evidence → your analysis of clip | You - 80%+ | |
| Analysis Point 2 | State specific claim → short clip as evidence → your analysis of clip | You - 80%+ | |
| Analysis Point 3 | State specific claim → short clip as evidence → your analysis of clip | You - 80%+ | |
| Comparison (optional) | Side-by-side with another work to illustrate your point | You - 70%+ | |
| Conclusion (60-90s) | Synthesise your argument. No new clips. CTA. | You - 100% |
Even strong fair use cases trigger claims. Know your options before it happens.
| Situation | Recommended Action | When to Dispute | Documentation to Prepare |
|---|---|---|---|
| Content ID claim (monetisation removed) | Assess: accept or dispute. Accepting doesn't admit wrongdoing. | If you have strong fair use case across all 4 factors | Script showing educational purpose, clip log, factor scorecard |
| Content ID claim (video blocked) | File a dispute with detailed fair use explanation | Almost always - blocking is more severe than demonetisation | Same as above + timestamp log of every clip used |
| Manual takedown request | Review carefully. Respond within deadline. | If your fair use case is solid and video is important to channel | Full documentation package + consult a lawyer if video is large |
| Strike | Do NOT ignore. Dispute or wait for it to expire. | Only if very confident - 3 strikes = channel termination | All documentation + consider legal advice |