When reading about this I've seen people say that this sort of thing is settled as free use, but I'm not so sure.
Are there any court cases that found reaction videos with the following properties to be free use?
- The person reacting watches the entire original video from start to finish.
- They pause several times over the course of the video and adds commentary.
These sorts of videos are fairly common on youtube, and if you look at Vlogging Through History's channel, you'll see a lot of them.
Usually people like to cite the H3H3 Case but I don't feel like that matches the above properties. They're showing clips here and there, but I don't think they're covering the whole thing, and most of the time, the video isn't visible on the screen. You can see the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXUs5FOo-JE&t=2s
I think the biggest difference between those and VTH's videos are because if you watch his reaction videos, then you've essentially already watched the original video too, and you have no incentive to watch it on the original creator's channel.
With this question, I'm specifically curious if a reaction video like has been actually tested in court, not so much the legal theory involved.
The reason I care about specific cases is because when discussing this issue with people online, a lot of people like to cite previous cases, and I want to do what I can to see if they're right or not before asserting one way or another whether such cases exist.