Amused

Actually the hate speech and offensive behavior are not protected by fair use. And thus would infect be an infringement. To take their property or to stream a YouTube video on a hate site would violate terms of use. To RIP the video from YouTube then distribute it on another site would be copyright infringement.

It wouldn't be a question of libel. By not acting to stop the use you would by definition allowing the use. Because you did not act to stop it. You dont thing they police thier work? They have to.

I made this account for this topic. If people are going to publish thier work on youtube, they agree to the terms. If you dont like them use something else.... So if you are going to use a part of someone else's work in your video you have the obligation to explain it when asked. No one told you to do it or use it and you did not prearrange the use. Thus you have the obligation. Linus must police his works to protect the value of his company. People could use them in a mannor that they may not support ie include parts in hate speech. Thus they must protect them. Using a 3rd party who specializes in this is far more effective then them doing it on thier own. Using rules like YouTube or fullscreen is far more fair then using emotion. Linus having a soft spot for people using his companies product should not expose him to the possibility of people using it for instructions on how to make a neonazi server, forum or website how to video. This is why they have these systems. This is why you must police your work. Is it perfect? No, but this is the reality. His face and his voice and the people that work with him will end up in a situation like that. So would yours. He has an obligation to his employees, sponsors and fans to protect the use of his content.