Edit: I grant that it’s not for young children, but can you really say it’s on the same level as Adults Only content because of this? Is it so bad that only 18+ year olds can handle how profane this is? The video shouldn’t show up on YouTube Kids, but this doesn’t warrant making it as restrictive as adults only.
Anyway, sure he could do that. Youtube said he didn't need to, then punished him harshly for being well within the rules.
As far as possible standards go, he was very far inside the relevant rule.
I don't know why you would interpret "said he didn't need to" as "legally bound themselves to inaction in such a case".
> Abbreviated, censored, or light profanity (like “hell” or “damn”) in the title, thumbnail, or video.
People are just making up rules here.
> You can turn on ads for this content:
> Abbreviated, censored, or light profanity (like “hell” or “damn”) in the title, thumbnail, or video. Moderate profanity (like “shit” or “bitch”) used in the video. Infrequent usage of strong profanity (like the "f-word”) after the opening or up to twice in approx. the first 30 seconds of the video; or strong profanity in a music video.
There was one single burst of fucks. That's infrequent use of strong profanity.
The next category up, which is still the intermediate category for advertiser friendliness, is "Focal usage of strong profanity throughout a video (e.g. mentioned in every sentence)."
The first sentence is not "light profanity, and only light profanity, can be in these places".
The first sentence is "light profanity, ignoring other profanity, can be in these places".
The structure of the rule is "light profanity can do A, moderate profanity can do B, and strong profanity can do C".
The strong profanity in the video follows the strong profanity rules for being advertiser friendly.
And I have no idea what you mean by "label the video correctly". Are you talking about the fact that light profanity is allowed inside titles?