valid[ 01 ]
Independent by design. A third-party verdict a brand can take at face value; self-certified QA carries no weight, an outside auditor's report does.
valid8 grades every clip in a campaign batch pass or fail against the campaign's own brief, with the exact fixes and an independent audit trail you can forward to the brand. Done for you, in hours.
parsed from one brief into a pinned checklist
per clip, from different AI model families
from brief and clips to a graded report
graded pass or fail against the brief
The verdict is only worth what the process behind it can defend.
Independent by design. A third-party verdict a brand can take at face value; self-certified QA carries no weight, an outside auditor's report does.
Two model families, one verdict. Two AI vendors judge every clip independently; the stricter reading stands.
Grounded in the actual clip. Captions must match what the clip really says; fabricated hooks do not clear.
Frames, not metadata. Visual rules are checked in the rendered frames, not asserted fields.
Pinned rules per campaign. Ambiguous brief rules get an explicit, conservative interpretation, and every campaign audited sharpens the next one.
Verdicts with fixes. Every failing clip comes back with the exact change that would make it pass.
48 hours, no pipeline to run. Nothing for your team to build, prompt-tune, or maintain; a named auditor answers for every verdict.
Not a fraud detector. We audit quality, brand safety, and compliance; view authenticity is a different problem.
An assertion by the party being paid is not evidence. Clipping is the last big ad channel where the operator still grades their own work.
Nobody accepts the publisher's own numbers. Brands pay IAS and DoubleVerify to verify viewability and brand safety independently. That industry exists because self-reported numbers stopped being believed.
Nobody accepts management's own books. An external audit opinion is the price of being taken seriously, and the company being audited is the one who pays for it.
Nobody accepts "our kitchen is clean." Retailers require SQF or BRC certification from an outside body before a product reaches a shelf.
Nobody accepts the builder's own sign-off. An independent inspection is what produces an occupancy permit. The person carrying the risk did not do the work.
We are issuer-pays: you pay us, the same way a company pays its auditor. That stays honest because we never do remediation. We grade, and the verdict is yours to act on. An auditor who also fixes the books is auditing their own work.
Every figure here is public and sourced. None of it is projected.
$53,088 per violation, per post. FTC civil penalty, 2025 adjustment, unchanged for 2026. Per post, not per campaign.
Liability reaches the intermediary. The 2023 Endorsement Guides extend to advertisers, endorsers and intermediaries. An agency running the campaign is one.
Unreviewed clips get paid by default. Whop's terms make the seller solely responsible, and a submission left unapproved for 48 hours is auto-approved, which triggers payment.
Enforcement has reached clipping. Polymarket's campaign: 140M+ views, no disclosure, under CFTC investigation as of July 2026. X suspended a Stake-funded clipping network in December 2024.
Platforms tax it without anyone filing. TikTok detects undisclosed branded content within hours and pulls it from For You. The clip is paid for, then stops working.
Money has moved in adjacent cases. Google/iHeart $9.4M. Teami $15.2M. SEC v. Kardashian $1.26M. A $50M class action against Revolve in 2025 naming the brand and the influencers.
The client list is the real exposure. One incident on a regulated account is how a retained client leaves. Replacing that client is not a fine, it is a year.
Regulated categories multiply all of it. Gambling carries age and jurisdiction rules, financial promotion is regulated, political ads need disclaimers, and health claims are their own regime.
Nobody is removed from the process. What changes is the ceiling on how many campaigns one person can hold.
Read everything, in no particular order. A reviewer opens the whole batch and reads every clip, because there is no way to know in advance which ones are a problem. The work scales with submissions, so signing another artist means finding another reviewer.
Read the exceptions, each one explained. They open only the clips that failed, and each arrives with the rule it broke and the exact fix. Same person, same standard, more campaigns in the same week.
For an agency, review capacity is the constraint on how many artists and brands you can sign. Lifting it is revenue rather than cost saving, and it does not need hiring ahead of the work.
The clipping stack pays non-compliant clips by default and leaves the liability with the operator. The audit flips that default.
The stack auto-pays the unreviewed. Whop's own setup guide: a submission unapproved for more than 48 hours is automatically approved, and approval triggers payment. The marketplace's terms make compliance your responsibility, not theirs.
One post can cost $53,088. The FTC's current civil penalty per violation, per post, with 700+ advertisers already on penalty notice and liability extended to intermediaries in 2023. A clipping campaign is under federal investigation as of July 2026.
Non-disclosure now costs views. TikTok detects undisclosed branded content within hours and pulls it from For You distribution. Views are the product; losing distribution is losing revenue.
Manual review misses the rules that fine you. A $120K campaign's 56% approval rate still let through the posts our teardown failed: wrong language at 79,400 views, no disclosure at 102,400 views. Placement rules die first under triage; those are the FTC's rules.
We graded 27 public TikTok submissions to Call of Duty's Modern Warfare 4 clipping campaign against the brief's own rules. 12 pass. 15 fail at least one.
The operator approved 56% of submissions. Real review happened, and still: a 79,400-view post with a caption in the wrong language, a 102,400-view post with no disclosure at all, and one account posting eight near-identical clips with captions copy-pasted from the brief. Under triage the first rules lost are placement and formatting, which are exactly the ones disclosure regulators care about.
One flat fee to see the audit on your own campaign. No subscription, no lock-in.
Flat fee, quoted per batch size. Report in 48 hours.
Custom, per campaign per month.
Per-clip rate quoted on monthly count; rates drop with volume.
What the audit needs, how verdicts work, and what valid8 will not claim.
The campaign brief as-is and a batch of clips, a folder or a feed link. Nothing else. The brief is parsed into a rule-by-rule checklist and every clip is graded against it.
The stricter verdict stands, and the disagreement is visible in the report. In our test batch, the second reviewer caught disclosure wording the first accepted.
No. valid8 is a pre-submission audit layer. You keep full control of posting and submission; we make sure nothing non-compliant reaches the brand.
You could build a checker. You cannot self-certify: a report your own tool produced about your own clips carries no weight with the brand paying you, the way a home you inspected yourself carries no inspection report. The verdicts here also lean on rule interpretations and reviewer-disagreement data accumulated across campaigns, which a single operator's in-house tool never sees, and the pipeline is maintained, evaluated, and answered for so your team does not carry that load mid-campaign.
No. We audit clip quality, brand safety, and brief compliance. View authenticity is a different problem, and anyone who tells you one tool solves both is selling you something.
valid8 is built and operated by Jonathan Poeder, an AI/ML architect with 15+ years of production AI in banking, adtech, consumer packaged goods, and Big 4 consulting.
Send the brief and the clips; the report comes back in 48 hours.