YouTuber Extortion?  MxR Plays v. Jukin – Real Law Review // LegalEagle
Articles,  Blog

YouTuber Extortion? MxR Plays v. Jukin – Real Law Review // LegalEagle


100 Comments

  • LegalEagle

    © Are MxR’s videos are fair use? If so, why?
    🕹Get the 11 Myths of Online Copyright for FREE: https://www.copyrightcourse.com/myth

  • Stephen Victor

    Wouldnt Jukin media have to prove that MxR had made the reaction videos after Jukin media obtained the rights to these videos.

  • karelenhenkie666

    I was waiting for a video like this. Although I love Henry and Jeannie I do think that the way they do reaction vids are not comparable the the h3h3 court case at all. H3h3 heavily criticized every single part of that video with a lot of commentary and the way they used the clip could in no way be viewed as the original intent of the clip. As you've mentioned in the video Henry often litteraly just laughs at a clip meant to be funny. Seems the case for fair use goes straight out the window that way. It's pretty much like uploading a movie with you watching it and calling it fair use.

  • Dr. Kuhn

    The fact that Jukin can even exist in a world where media is easily obtained by an insane amount of methods, It seems like their entire company's premise is basically predatory or illogical as a foundation. It's like picturing Google coming after you for commenting on images you pulled off the web. It obviously wouldn't happen but it's the principal behind it.

    Ultimately, I WOULD suggest those kids take Jukin to court and get a lawyer. They have so much more to gain, even if they lose the court case. Also, they could easily start up a kickstarter/Gofundme and just rebound from the clash. They'll ultimately recover financially and they'll have a much larger reputation which, in turn, would get them more traffic. Whereas, Jukin has absolutely nothing to gain, and I'd hope that, as a company, they get their reputations destroyed and their company shut down.

    It's still the principal that they're basically trying to use the law to be predatory towards young kids on youtube and other media sites for shit that's EASILY obtainable. This isn't like Downloading/uploading music with Limewire/Napster back in the day; this is just trying to demonize kids for just commenting on some videos. It feels criminal and predatory in every possible way and I just can't see a rational position or reason for Jukin to exist. Jukin is literally acting like they can own memes. They can't. Please my asian friends from MxR, don't back down. Take this company to court. You'll ABSOLUTELY find financial backers both to go to court, and if you should lose, to help you recover.

    Lastly, as this video mentioned, stop admitting to things and pretending you can do these legal things alone. At least have a lawyer to get advice from and don't pay extortion level fees that companies like Jukin just pull out of thin air. It seriously don't help with how much you've paid them and how much you've admitted to the video's being their property but you still might be able to win this on the grounds of internet principality and the idea that if it's this easy to get videos and pictures and just talk about them, are they really valuable enough to call "property"? I'd argue "no".

  • Guy Fawkes

    Id be very interested to find out whether jukin media buys these clips before or after creators release reaktion videos. It seems like it would be a "good" business model to follow creators and then purchase the most popularly used clips in order to copyright claim. I cant imagine ANYONE paying 49usd per clip for this kind of material.

  • KnightOfGaea

    I learned about a custody case about a Kansas man and his ex from Iowa. He tells the judge he wants to settle the case in a sword duel. Could you look into his crazy claim that there's no law that prohibits this?

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/14/man-requests-sword-fight-ex-wife-lawyer-settle-legal-dispute

  • HeWhoSlapsHimself

    The real issue with this case is the statement that "it always belongs to someone." Imagine someone views this very comment in a Youtube video a month from now, and I then tell them that I actually copyrighted it a year afterwards. Then I try to charge them 150K. It's like "withdrawing consent." It's patently absurd.

    Or imagine I post a selfie to reddit, and then charge anyone who views it thousands of dollars, but I wait months to do so. That is scummy behavior

    You would probably say this is okay because it follows the law. Well I'm talking actual ethics here, not your legally correct garbage. The law should be changed, and you really don't deserve the hype you get because you still talk like a stereotypical lawyer.

  • David L

    And now we know why the fine bros always make some kind of point system when they have people reacting to videos: To try to turn it into a review.

  • al ravijn Balingit

    Don't make reaction videos its lazy and not creative.

    thx for this.i am waiting for a profetional insight into this. i don't want anyone "opinion" that is not a lawyer.

  • Ishwari

    Civil law exists because resources are scarce, copyright law exists because content is scarce. In this classic substructure-superstructure model, criminal law works like safety valves for when things get really dirty. I agree that this is a highly reductionist visualisation, maybe even inaccurate, but I somehow needed to get this out of my head. So there. And thank you for the video😊

  • Plamen Tsvetanov

    I do understand this is a very squishy situation. However I have one big problem with Jukin's claim – MxR didn't go to their page to specifically target those clips – they were shared on reddit. This does not remove Jukin's right to claim the clip, however Jukin didn't provide a way for anyone to know this is their clip. There is no watermark. And let's take your film example – a film has credits – the copyright holders are stated. In this case Jukin seem to just take advantage of the fact, that there is no way to tell if this clip belongs to them.
    I am really curious about this and id love a response. I hope my comment doesn't get buried.

  • Shenesh Perera

    Just subbed! I really enjoy your videos regarding all this complex law mumbo jumbo. It was really nice to see an unbiased perspective of the situation. Never been a fan of law, but I just registered for your Copyright Course!

  • Eboss NZ

    i dont like reaction videos and people shouldnt be aloud to make money off it. but still it isnt right to just take money from people like this

  • The Necrophymm

    Ignorance may not be a defense…but similarly…how can it be an offense? Why is it not on Jukin to show/prove they own this stuff? Further, if you can't prove your right, jukin in this case, how can they demand money? Why don't they need to be proven in the right first? Is not mxr innocent until proven guilty of this infringement?

  • Will Johnson

    The folks who review movies and only show a 10 minute portion on youtube, but then try to convince folks to sign up for their patreon to see them react to the entire movie are the ones I’ve been expecting to get hammered. I’ve been expecting Patreon to make changes.

  • Main A

    Everybody make Anonymous YouTube channels and upload all of junkins clips, we will crush these morons beneath the heel of public opinion, and it might actually do something good for once.

  • CZseventyfive

    I’m a sub of MxR and this video is disappointing. Not the legal advice and explanation of Legal Eagle. But that he’s speaking about the harsh reality of Henry & Jeannie’s situation. I do hope they get themselves a lawyer and protect themselves from future copyright trolling.

    TBH, I doubt they make, even close, to $1mil a day/week/month. MxR Mods has already been demonetized. Many of MxR Plays videos are demonetized. They make more money than me 🤦‍♂️. But i don’t think they’re getting really BIG Youtube ad money.

  • PaperiLiidokki

    What i find interesting that they have been doing reaction type videos for a long long while before this, for the sake of argument assuming there were clips Jukin owned rights to, Henry did say they claimed the video and took the revenue, prompting them to remove their clips since it was their and they didn't want to use it with out permission.

    How come Jukin now suddenly comes out with demands of pay upwards of 6000 or we will strike your channel with DMC and copyright strike and your channel will be shut down but if you pay we cool, tends to sound like extortion.

    Another interesting thing is that jukin have claimed on their own post that to access their video library, the license was only 50$, i believe MrX payed this before but still faced Jukin with their money claims

  • Steven B

    It would be best if they could split the earnings from the video directly, everyone wins, they all get paid, but that's not how the system is set up.

  • Leonid Fro

    Amazing. Those MxR guys are living in a fantasy world. On planet Earth, YouTube is private enterprise, and it can "delete channel forever" for no reason at all. This "3 strikes" rule is just arbitrary measure, not law of the land or law of nature. Google owns you nothing – exact amount that you payed for hosing your videos.
    Want to "have power against it"? – here is crazy idea: have your own server.

  • crealkillr

    I appreciate your video on this subject. I can see both sides, and we all want this to go away beneficially for both sides.

  • Bluemoondm1

    I don't think the problem here is the set of facts at hand. If anything, I'd regretfully side with Jukin on their legal rights here. The issue, to me, seems to be the overwhelming cost involved even just to have a chance at standing up against these kinds of claims. Basically no one can throw around a million dollars to defend themselves. In this way, the system is, if not by design than by implementation, completely unfair and highly damaging to "normal" people. Yes, they may have cost Jukin money. That's not ok if indeed it is the case and they are not operating under fair use. But the punishment should match the crime, and if you ruin someone's life over cat videos, that's a bit much.

    MxR should find another way to make their scratch on youtube.

  • Edward Vermillion

    predna law…

    jukin is the youtube version of predna law… nothing at all like shutterstock (photog who has used shutterstock)

    they are trolls, abusing the legal system to make money off of others hard work.

    they need to be shut down and jailed like predna law.

  • Lilitha11

    Sounds like they should settle, and if they can't afford it ask them if they are willing to accept a smaller amount. If it is less than they owe, perhaps offer the entire amount of money they made on those videos. Losing the profit from the 4 videos probably won't break them.

  • Pustulio Skytaco

    Yeah, MxR should just pay up, and maybe rethink how they commentate on videos because the way they do it now is not really covered by copyright laws.

  • DFMGames

    Maybe it's terrible of me to think… But I have a ton more respect for you @legaleagle than I did before watching this video. I figured you would be selling out for upvotes and views, by backing the YouTube mob and only saying how MxR are angles and we should demonize Jukin Media. The fact that you presented the facts and stayed impartial shows you have character that I didn't expect. Mad props!

  • ZaynahZihoa

    "They might just react to pictures instead."
    Yeah, those aren't made by people who own the rights.
    screams in artist
    I don't know why anyone would feel bad for these two :/

  • Sub Optimal

    I've heard bad things about Jukin, like they screw original content makers. The best advice would seem to be, to avoid them like the plague.

  • jrmop 09

    Those two are just idiots, he's an even bigger idiot for trying to please her by showing her videos from others and reacting to it, their followers are the worst fools for being entertained by these idiots

  • 神影Kamikage

    YouTube consistently unsubs me from all kinds of channels, but I get resubbed to you after leaving you for who I feel is an infinitely more entertaining and informative lawyer YouTuber.
    Whether or not Jukin Media are in the right for their claim (which I sure as hell disagree with) they apparently have struck channels even after extorting them. I don't trust them at all.

  • Tenth Divine

    I love how you fairly looked at this. I find jukin media's actions as gross, but most everyone talking about this seemed emotionally invested rather than intellectually like that last video you mentioned. I hope mxr wins this fight and maybe we get a better definition of fair use because it seems… I'm not happy with what it is right now if what you say is accurate (which I'm assuming it is)

  • UberdudeRls21

    I would love to see a video of DJ responding to one of these troll copyright claims on his account, bet they'd shit themselves seeing an attorney reply to them LOL

  • Luke Colville

    Well said, sir… Thank you for taking the time and offering your expertise in this matter. Your even-handed analysis, presenting both sides arguments on your understanding of their merits has given me pause. It's so very easy to get swept up in the emotion of situations like this, and as you stated numerous times, that is PRECISELY why they need a dispassionate, level headed, expert advocate, to advise them on the best way to handle their business.

    That said… #MxRPlays #MxRmy

  • Jim Sackman Business Coaching

    I want to point out what a wonderful marketing piece this is. Legal Eagle has staked himself out as an expert on copyright law from this and his other videos. He makes a number of unsubstantiated claims in the video (this does not me that these claims are not true) about his legal practice. To meet the minimum of his claims, he would have to had at least 2 copyright cases in the last 10 years. So, this is a marvelous piece of edification. I want to be very clear:
    1 – I am not saying he is wrong
    2 – I am not saying that he does not have extensive experience.
    3 – I am not claiming that he has lost a copyright case.

    I am trying to point out what a wonderful piece of marketing this is for both his practice and his course. I think it is a great example for those that watch this channel to see how this is done.

  • kris

    So, basically MxR can't win because they don't have a literal million dollars to burn and because copyright law still sucks. What the hell are people paying so much money for in modern court and legalese? Sounds like a lot of people are being overpaid somewhere.

  • Edward Vermillion

    no one goes to the channel to see the vids they are commenting on, they go to see the interaction between the two presenters. the vids are secondary to the purpose of the channel. they are not making money off of the vids, but off of their reactions, however minimal that may be at times.

    edit: none of the vids i've seen on the channel, not all obvs, would be vids i would "pay to see". most 'viral' vids are viral because they are free. put them behind a paywall and watch them die. so… if they can't make money on their own account, how can any use infringe on their ability to make money.

    edit2: movies are commercial endeavors. if i take a vid and post it to facebook, there is no inherent initial commercial value that i have assigned to the vid, because i've posted it to the 'free' or open internet. i've had many convos with photogs in the past about their desire to claim something they have put on a public forum. once it's out there, it's gone.

    predn… uh jukin is trying to get the toothpaste back in the tube, using laws that aren't equipped to deal with 21st century uses. basically abusing a system that isn't equipped to deal with the realities of the modern world.

    edit3: see – monkeyface…

  • Jack Bushnell

    I think the play is just to pay the fees, then buy a license from them. It's better than the alternative and paying 50 bucks for a clip instead of 1500 might actually let you make a profit. Also adding more commentary might help. And maybe sticking to pictures. Honestly they're in this mess because they were being lazy with their research in the first place. I love them I've been a fan for a while, but they're not in the clear here legally. It could be that junkin owns none of the clips, cause they've bluffed before, but proving it would take a while and take a lot of money.

  • Niv Sito

    Ah, so this is the reason Youtube keeps recommending MxR Plays to me. I keep seeing them on my feed and thinking "Hey they look cute, maybe I'll watch a video." and then I watch like 15 seconds and realise there is nothing of substance and I get super annoyed at being tricked by the algorithm and a cute thumbnail again.

    In my opinion, their use is not transformative in any way, and they are the exact type of "cheap predatory content" which Copyright law is trying to prevent. It's not fair use at all. I have seen some really good youtube commentaries and lets play series and the like with fantastic content; things which I think are being abused by takedown notices (check out the "Sideways" channel, who is constantly getting demonetized for using content from movies and shows, even though his work is some of the most deeply thought provoking and analytical content in existence). MxR Plays is not that kind of content, and I absolutely would prefer they not prey upon the algorithm to make easy money just because she's got a cute voice and the videos they are using are good on their own.

  • Greywind

    They get no sympathy from me in this situation. Reaction videos are the bottom of the barrel in terms of "creative content", and while JM seem underhanded in their approach here you cannot ignore that if you conservatively pull in a quarter of a mil you cannot be this naive, troll or not you are a player on youtube, for better AND for worse. Making drama videos or appealing to your audience won't help you.

  • akun50

    Honestly, I would say neither should be able to claim those clips as neither of them made those clips.

    Most of them were likely taken from Reddit, 4chan or others.

  • Polodosky

    with what I understood, any gameplay video wouldn't be fair use then? Since it doesnt change the purpose of the game ''Entertainment'' and it is not likely that someone who saw the entire game would buy the game

  • Michael Clark

    Not sure of all of the legal in's and out's but, one of my favorite shows of all times, MST3K (Mystery Science Theatre 3000) played practically entire movies (though be it, 'B' movies edited to fit a 2 hour TV time format) with plenty of commentary throughout it's play. Aside from that it was quite difficult to actually follow the audio portion do to their comments (as well as my laughing) and many times the actual film was enlarged or out of frame as compared to the actual format. With all of that being said, personally, I feel there is no way that would ever fall under 'Fair Use' yet some of them actually did.
    Long story long, the point I'd like this to make is… always get permission and for the love of god Don't take this to court.

  • Allen Weaver

    "Don't listen to the Quartering" is advice that literally anyone in any situation should take, no matter what. He's garbage, a garbage human and just… garbage.

  • Mr. Trashcan

    If I, a random dude who occasionally uploads videos and gets about 10-50 views, use copyrighted music, could I be fined? Usually the videos get claimed and that's it, but… Could something worse happen?

  • Matt B

    Ever since this whole thing started, I’ve been waiting for your video on this! I’m more in MxR’s corner of this situation, I’ve watched most of their reaction videos so the question is what’s the difference between them and FBE & React channels?? I do agree that MxR needs a lawyer in this situation because it is such a tricky situation though.

  • Mark Maxfield

    How on God's green earth can anyone be liable to the tune of 600 000 dollars for using a grand total of maybe 30 seconds of footage?

  • Gary Foss

    You should make a video on the history and use of the "Happy Birthday to You!" song. You should also give me 10% of the proceeds of that video for making the suggestion. © 2020. (That was a joke, BTW…. I'll take 8%.)

  • Tim Schroyer

    Objection! The behavior of Jukin Media clearly shows intent to entrap unsuspecting channels. They do not mark their videosas copyrighted, they do not identify which of the 100 videos on your channel are theirs so you can delete them, they do not list their videos so you can search to see if the one you plan to use is copyrighted. {Sure look in the catagory of CAT in the 100,000 entries to find the video you want to use}. And their only response is you should have paid our 49$ fee to avoid this. Does this sound fimillar? Pay up or something bad will happen to you? How much will they make when every one of a million channels have to pay 49$ just to cover their @@@? Clearly illegal!

  • AddAustin

    They are clearly doing a bad thing to the internet, they create no content, only distribute money to content creators so they can sue people later.

    When your entire company exists just to push legal action, its pretty damn wrong.

    (Exception being lawfirms, which exist for this sole purpose lol)

  • Noble Kelsch

    I think they're absolutely fair use. The reason we watch mxr is for his and jeannies reactions. Not the videos themselves. His commenting makes it transformative. Its technically video and meme reviews and critiques with their own jokes and commentary added in. Totally fair use to me.

  • Mighty Mediocre

    "we now can only look at pictures". That right there is how clueless they are about copyright law and should start to gather some legal advice from an actual lawyer.

  • theoriginalshew

    MxR just can't win. He had to stop reviewing Skyrim and Fallout mods because of…certain adult related things, and now this.

    Also if the Fine Bros can react to copyrighted videos why can't anyone else?

  • Max & Sujy React

    There is no way on planet earth that they have a $6 CPM with the niche they are on. First, they probably get claim 80%+ of the time due to the size of their Channel, and second, they probably make less than $1 per thousand views due to the demographic watching their reactions and the bad CPM associated with that niche. I would not even be surprised if it's less then that and they make less then 50k a year reacting. They probably depend heavily on Patreon.

  • TheHobgoblyn

    "React" channels are generally trash. They just repost others' content with some idiot sitting there going "yeah.. uh-huh… mmm… yeah… woah!… uh.. yeah….. SO! That was my reaction to this video! Please like and subscribe and hit the bell and follow me on Instagram!" React channels need to die and these two totally deserved this.

  • Natureguy01

    it' sounds to me in my personal opinion, that this media company has created a buisness by which they take legal action aganist many small and big content creators on a regular basis and
    it's sounds in my opinion that they use the legal system as a tool for making money on a regular basis, I wonder in the long run just how legal is this?
    and should some federal law enforcement agency take a long look at how this media company runs it's day to day operations?
    are they twitsting the law and the legal system to make a lot of money ?

  • artixneo The IV

    sigh,i like the olden days where the church is corrupted and church is the law and anything you done abnormally will be accused as witch and be done with without any dispute

  • Mark Maxfield

    If Jukin is just trying to account for lost revenue for the use of the clip why wouldn't they the claim the video? Why go straight for a DMCA?

  • Notes and Nerds

    I have no need to make a comment regarding MxR's claim of extortion. You did such a wonderful job. I have no remorse for MxR simply because that if they were making only $1,000 a day from Ad revenue, they have ZERO excuses as to why they can't afford to purchase a licence for the videos they are "reacting" to. If they are making your estimated $2500-3000 per day on ad CPM…again, no excuses. I have a rule of thumb with my content. I do what I can to stay away from copyrighted material. If it is unavoidable, I do what I can to find the holder and get permission.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *