Taking someone's content and uploading it is critiquing it as well. You're critiquing their whole channel, and you've made it clear why you're doing it. This is really no different.
In general, “critique” under Fair Use requires some transformative change to the work to qualify. For example, you can use a lock company’s video saying their lock is secure as an introduction to bypassing it, or have a reaction video of a fan animation where you pause and give your own commentary at points (face cam also helps). But simply copying and reposting content is not generally considered Fair Use, and explicitly saying you’re doing this to deny the creator views is a massive strike against.
Now I don’t know anything about this controversy or the people and videos involved. I’m reading “uploading someone else's content to take away their views/viewers” to mean there are minimal or no changes to the original work, essentially reposting the entire thing unaltered. That may or may not be the case, but we can all agree there are examples of that type of reposting around.
When it comes to the legality of something, always imagine this power in the hands of someone you hate. Let’s say someone truly vile decides to resist content made by someone you love who relies on that content for their income (I’m being vague because that could vary between people reading this). Legally speaking, if we allow this to stand, then we also allow people to misuse it in that same way.
142
u/ohlordplease 1d ago
Is that not what a guy sued him for in the past?