Fair Use - What does Prince, Andy Warhol, and The US Supreme Court have to do with motovlogging?

[R-Rated]

Hey gang,

I read that "fair use" may not be what we think it is. The US Supreme Court just ruled against the Andy Warhol Foundation for his artwork based on someone else's photograph.

How does that tie to what we do? Think of how Tik-Tok and YouTube Shorts allow others to use the original creators video as part of another video.

Actual Ruling

I am still reading all of the ruling myself so let the discussion begin!

 

[Hippo-Drones]

Hey gang,

I read that "fair use" may not be what we think it is. The US Supreme Court just ruled against the Andy Warhol Foundation for his artwork based on someone else's photograph.

How does that tie to what we do? Think of how Tik-Tok and YouTube Shorts allow others to use the original creators video as part of another video.

Actual Ruling

I am still reading all of the ruling myself so let the discussion begin!

I don't tend to use anyone else's content, so not an issue for me at least.
YouTube has a setting where you either allow or don't allow others to make shorts from your content I believe.

 

[R-Rated]

I don't tend to use anyone else's content, so not an issue for me at least.
YouTube has a setting where you either allow or don't allow others to make shorts from your content I believe.

That is a good point. The option is an all (including the original creator) or none. I am not sure Tik-Tok has that.

And what about reposting on different media sites? And sampling?

As far as sampling, YouTube has a threshold before it flags infringement. That happened on a couple videos back when you and I had the highly acclaimed Tea Totaling Time collaboration. So how low of threshold (short of a clip) before YouTube flags it?

 

[R-Rated]

I found this part of the ruling a good point:
In sum, if an original work and secondary use share the same or highly similar purposes, and the secondary use is commercial, the first fair use factor is likely to weigh against fair use, absent some other justification for copying.

So for us, a video made from an original video from someone else likely could be seen as having similar purposes. There are exceptions though as noted in the ruling:

[T]he fair use of a copyrighted work, . . . for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching . . . , scholarship, or research,

The ruling reads that commercial use is also a factor as most of the fair use falls under non-profit.