Kadokawa is stepping up its fight against unauthorized anime content on YouTube after a U.S. federal court rejected fair-use arguments from three South Korean creators accused of using copyrighted anime footage in recap videos. The case involves channels producing narrated summaries of series including Oshi no Ko, A Ninja and an Assassin Under One Roof, and Once Upon a Witch’s Death.
According to court records, Kadokawa sought information that could identify the creators behind the channels through a DMCA subpoena directed at YouTube. The creators challenged that request, arguing that their videos were transformative commentary rather than substitutes for the original anime.
Why the Court Rejected the Fair-Use Argument
The creators argued that their videos used limited portions of the original episodes and added narration intended for Korean-speaking viewers. One creator reportedly used around 15.8% of an episode of A Ninja and an Assassin Under One Roof, while another claimed to have used less than 10% of Oshi no Ko.
The defense also pointed to viewers being directed toward legitimate streaming services. However, Judge Trina L. Thompson found the available evidence insufficient to establish fair use and determined that the videos primarily described and narrated the underlying copyrighted works.
The ruling does not mean every anime review, reaction, or commentary video is automatically illegal. YouTube itself notes that fair use depends on the specific circumstances of each case, with factors including how transformative the use is and whether it substitutes for the original work.
The broader significance could be substantial for anime creators who rely heavily on episode footage. Kadokawa has previously established guidelines allowing certain forms of YouTube commentary and derivative content for selected anime, demonstrating that permitted usage can depend heavily on the specific terms set by rights holders.
The latest case therefore highlights an increasingly important distinction between genuine criticism and recap content that may reproduce enough of a story to function as an alternative to watching the original. The creators have reportedly challenged the ruling, meaning the legal dispute may not be finished yet.
