Highlights
- xQc, a popular Twitch and Kick streamer, is facing criticism for watching YouTube videos without providing significant commentary or value, leaving some to accuse him of "stealing content".
- Streamers like xQc, SSSniperwolf, and Jacksfilms have been singled out by other content creators for profiting off of existing videos without adding their own unique perspectives or insight.
- The debate over react content highlights the gray areas of fair use laws and the need for clearer guidelines to protect original creators while still allowing transformative and engaging content.
xQc, a well-known Twitch and Kick streamer, is under fire for some of his recent streams where he watched YouTube videos with his chat. This isn't the first time that the Canadian streamer has found himself involved in controversial subjects, and it likely won't be his last. However, because xQc is one of the largest streamers in the world it comes with the title that his actions and words are going to be highly scrutinized.
While it can be difficult to have so many eyes on a person, some people think that popular Twitch and Kick streamers have a responsibility to be as ethical as possible. This is because of the sizable audiences they draw in and can potentially influence. This can include when a content creator goes live on a platform in addition to what they say on social media such as Twitter.
xQc is Singled Out By Other YouTubers
This isn't a new topic for streamers and video creators, but it has become more prevalent due to xQc's millions of followers. Similarly, Jacksfilms and SSSniperwolf were recently at odds after Jacksfilms accused the other YouTuber of adding barely any commentary to pre-existing content and profiting off of it. SSSniperwolf used to upload a lot of gaming videos but as of the last few years, she's become known for making TikTok compilations and reacting to them.
xQc's situation doesn't involve as many TikTok videos, but he is in a similar boat as SSSniperwolf. On July 24, xQc uploaded a video on his YouTube channel titled "The Kennedy Assassination | xQc Reacts to LeMMiNO" which included the entirety of another content creator's video on the shooting of John F. Kennedy. YouTubers like Bub Games voiced their discomfort with the Canadian streamer earning revenue for playing another person's video and, from their perspective, adding nothing of value. Bub Games tweeted on July 28, "LeMMiNO spends months researching, scripting, and editing a video just for react streamers to reupload the entire thing and provide zero input".
Australian Twitch streamer DarkViperAU continued to call xQc out on Twitter. He wrote in several lengthy tweets that xQc playing the video on his stream and repurposing it for his YouTube channel was "stealing content" from someone else. His stance was that not only does the original video hypothetically get fewer interactions but the person that reuploads it is taking the finite amount of views for themselves.
React Content is a Recurring Problem
The full-time Twitch and Kick streamer defended himself by stating "I’m watching a [video] I like to my people. That’s it". He also pointed out that people can claim his YouTube videos and split the revenue which "they do a lot of times". Other creators believe that there should be a button to claim all monetization on a YouTube video, which is an option that is solely available to music companies at the moment.
In a later stream, xQc escalated the situation by leaving a YouTube video by Neo Explains up while he left the room. He returned nearly ten minutes later to the dismay of Neo Explains who felt that xQc was making a mockery of his video by choosing not to react to it at all. xQc went on to make satirical comments about the video, saying that he needed to do a "full infrastructural review of the materials used in the buildings of this city" so his reaction would be enough to satisfy people.
This isn't xQc's first offense in this category, as in the past, he's also watched MasterChef, The Dark Knight, and Breaking Bad during streams. Interestingly, Pokimane was banned for watching Avatar: The Last Airbender in 2022 whereas xQc was not given a Twitch penalty or a DMCA strike for his. It should be mentioned that Kick staff did go directly to his page to ask him to stop watching The Dark Knight on stream because it violated their policies.
On the other hand, there are those who believe that because a well-known streamer shares a video with their audience, the original creator gets exposure in turn. While this can be true, others have argued that some creators prefer that their original video actually be the one to receive the views.
There are YouTube channels such as Daily Dose Of Internet and Jubilee that don't mind people reacting to their works with permission, provided they add their own commentary. Sadly, streamers don't always do their due diligence in making insightful comments, crediting the original creators, or asking for permission to use the footage.
The Debate of What Content Is Transformative
The debate over watching such content on stream highlights an important issue that unfortunately has several gray legal areas. Ludwig, a popular YouTuber, created a video on the subject for his Mogul Mail channel detailing the difference between genuine react content and stealing content to disguise it as a react video.
To some people, if the person who is reacting to the content makes what they are saying and doing transformative enough, then it shouldn't be an issue. For example, YouTube videos with titles such as "Real Lawyer Reacts to Suits" get a pass from most people because the lawyer has a unique perspective to share.
There are fair use laws in place for the US that can help people determine if a video is transformative. One of the biggest points of these fair use laws mentions the "amount and substantiality of the portion that is used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole". As such, those who show the entirety of a show or YouTube video may be infringing on fair use laws versus if they opted to show clips.
Unfortunately, what is and is not transformative work has always been difficult to discern. The future of Kick, Twitch, and other video platforms will almost certainly see more disputes between creators and the content they choose to watch. If the debates continue, perhaps YouTube and other companies will find a way to make the guidelines more clear while also giving the original content creators a viable option to move forward.