>>9515441Its not the official working because I am not a lawyer and legal jargon is cancer.
But for the most part if works that way. See the lawsuit that was filed against Ray William Johnson of =3. He did reaction content to viral videos on YouTube and got hit with a massive lawsuit because a lot of those videos were """"sold"""" to a media company that claimed the rights to all those videos.
He won for every single video except 1 or 2. Those two lost because the judge ruled that all he did was explain what is happening in the video and didn't add any content that "transformed it" to his own.
Then there was a lawsuit Sargon of Akkad was in. In order to show some liberal retard they were a hypocrite, he created a video where ALL HE DID was take clips of the liberal and re-arrange them so that they kept saying opposite statements over and over again. He provided no commentary and no change to the clips themselves.
The United Kingdom Judge ruled that it was considered fair use for 2 reasons:
- The clip arrangement was unique and therefore changed the context of all the clips into something new.
And my favorite point, that Sargons fans are completely different from the libtards fans and therefore no money would be lost by the liberal because those fans would never watch their content anyways, therefore there were no damages to sue for
In both of these landmark YouTube cases the idea of taking a work and making it into something unique ergo "Transforming it" is what allowed the content to stand without lawsuit.
Yes, there's technical legal-speak that says this in a different way, but that's what happened
Meidos pls no bully copyright is important to /vt/'s existence.
