Reviews, breakdowns, reactions and criticism are popular formats on YouTube. But every time the same question comes up: can you put clips from someone else’s video into yours without getting a strike?
The short answer: yes, if the other material serves your statement rather than replacing it. Below is where the line runs and how not to cross it.
The core principle: your contribution matters more than the borrowed material
YouTube handles copyright complaints under US fair use rules. They weigh the purpose of the use, the nature of the material, how much is taken, and whether your video replaces the original for the viewer. Many other countries’ laws follow similar logic for quotation in criticism, review and education, usually with a requirement to credit the author and source.
The common idea: the more of your commentary, analysis and new meaning, and the less of someone else’s material, the safer.
What is usually safe and what isn’t
More likely acceptable:
- short clips you comment on right away;
- breaking down mistakes, techniques or facts from the video;
- criticism with the quotes needed for the argument.
Risky:
- long chunks with no commentary;
- a video after which nobody needs to watch the original;
- a “reaction” where the creator silently watches someone else’s video;
- trying to hide the video behind a semi-transparent layer, mirroring or speeding it up. That doesn’t make the use legal.
What I have seen in practice
- A creator wanted to comment on a popular channel’s video, inserting clips of 5 seconds and longer, and planned to cover them with a semi-transparent layer. We discussed where the line is and chose safer formats: more of their own meaning, less of the other video’s picture.
- A creator’s team found a video presenting clips of theirs in a negative light and wanted to file a complaint. We assessed the length of the clips: criticism with short quotes is usually protected, and they dropped the complaint. That saved time and reputation.
- A channel’s assistant uploaded videos from the main channel with its consent but got a strike from a third party. Verbal consent doesn’t work: the rights holder’s permission has to be in writing.
How to reduce the risk
- Define the purpose. What will the viewer get from your video that isn’t in the original?
- Take the minimum. Exactly as much as your point needs.
- Credit the author and source in the video and the description.
- Get written permission if you use a lot of someone else’s material: an email or a contract, not a chat message.
- Be ready for Content ID. Even acceptable quotation can get an automated claim. It’s not a strike, but it needs handling. I covered how in Content ID claim on music: the logic for video is the same.
What next
The line depends on format, amount and purpose, and there’s no universal “N seconds are fine” rule.
If you plan reviews or reactions and want to know where the risk is, in a consultation I’ll review your format. And if, on the contrary, your video was used without permission, see how to get a re-upload removed.
This article is not legal advice: in disputed cases, talk to a copyright lawyer.