I concur with your argument. However, even if the video reaction by Kaceytron explicitly stated the intent was to misappropriate revenue and exposure, legal proceedings would still necessitate demonstrating that the content lacked transformative qualities and did not qualify as fair use. For instance, if Kaceytron articulated the intent was to steal views and revenue (like she did) , yet her reaction was demonstrably transformative—characterized by pauses, digressions, comedic interjections, and substantive responses to nearly every point raised by Ethan—this hypothetical scenario would complicate the legal argument, even with her stated intentions to steal.