I’m based in the UK and it seems Fair Use applies somewhat different here thanks to the Copyrights act in 1988.

We have a fair dealing clause[0] here.

> Certain exceptions only apply if the use of the work is a ‘fair dealing’. For example, the exceptions relating to research and private study, criticism or review, or news reporting.

[0] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright

Fair dealing comes from the POV I’m trying to get across.

> > I'm not claiming the arguments against your claim are correct - I haven't even watched the video. I'm saying that whether infringement occurred is not a simple matter that can be determined by algorithms

Yeah I somewhat agree with this. I’m pretty sure I said so somewhere (it might have been a slightly different comment thread, apologies if I didn’t make that clear).

The existence of a copyrighted work can be detected by an algorithm (although the accuracy is debatable in some cases). Whether it falls under fair use cannot.

As stated, Fair Use is decided on a case by case basis. But it’s assumed the rights holder is correct in their claim until the court decides.

In any case, before a counterclaim is approved by the court or if the court sided with the rights holder, then black and white copyright law comes into play.

Still, if the content creator took action to avoid including potentially copyrighted material, like everyone else does, then we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

Edit - before you pick up on it, criticism/review is a specific critical review of the work in question. As that doesn’t apply here, news/educational fair dealing then becomes the question. And then all those points I’ve been trying to make come into play. Could he have done things differently? What was the purpose of the content? Etc etc.