[Direct answer]At a minimum, three types of content must be recorded. Article 1137 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China stipulates that a will made in the form of audio or video recordings shall be witnessed by two or more witnesses; the testator and the witnesses shall record their names or portraits, as well as the year, month, and day in the audio or video recordings. Therefore, when recording, the testator's name or face, the witnesses' names or portraits, and the specific date of the will's establishment should be fully presented, and the testator should clearly verbally state the scope of the estate and the inheritance arrangements. The witnesses must meet the statutory qualifications, and the heirs and interested parties cannot serve as witnesses. Only recording the elderly's oral statement, without witnesses or dates, usually does not meet the formal requirements of audio or video wills, and it is difficult to be accepted as evidence.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

It may seem convenient to use a mobile phone to record audio and video to make a will, but in reality, it is most prone to formal defects. Typical scenarios include: only recording the elderly's oral statement but not the witnesses; no specific date appearing in the video; the video being shot by the inheritors holding the device and acting as witnesses; the elderly only stating who the property is given to but not indicating that it is a will; the video being edited or transcribed before being submitted; and oral instructions coexisting with written materials, making it impossible to determine which one is accurate. All of the above situations will be strictly reviewed in inheritance litigation.\nInheritance of property and division of family assetsIn this case, the integrity and consistency of the original video recording are the key points of verification.

II. Key points of dispute

Focus One: The way witnesses' records are presented: How should their names or portraits be displayed to comply with regulations? Focus Two: The presentation of dates: Is it necessary to include specific dates (year, month, and day) in the video recording? Focus Three: The testator's ability to express themselves: Can they clearly state their identity, property, and distribution intentions? Focus Four: The original carrier and integrity: Are there any edits or transcriptions? How are the equipment and storage media fixed? Focus Five: The qualifications of witnesses: Are they inheritors or have other interests in the inheritance? Focus Six: The order of effectiveness when coexisting with other forms of wills. Focus Seven: The distinction between oral wills and wills recorded on audio or video media.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Henglue Law Firm once handled a dispute over inheritance by will: Zou * and Liu * had four children. Liu * died in March 1992, and in November of the same year, Zou * remarried Ding *. Ding * and her ex-husband's son, Ma *, lived together with them and formed a guardianship relationship. Zou * and Ding * purchased Fengtai District House No. 05 with their joint work experience, which was considered marital joint property. On August 18, 2011, Zou * drafted a notarized will, specifying that the house under her name would be inherited by Ding *. After Zou * died on July 20, 2012, the four children refused to cooperate with the inheritance process, so Ding * entrusted our firm's lawyers to sue in court. The defendants questioned whether Zou * lacked legal capacity when making the will, whether the signature on the will was not her own, and whether the will did not reflect her true intentions. The focus of the case was whether the notarized will was valid, whether ex-wife Liu * had a share in the property, and whether stepson Ma * had the right to inherit. The lawyer's approach to providing evidence was instructive: the will was witnessed by two witnesses, one of whom wrote it and specified the date. The testator, the notary, and other witnesses signed and sealed it. The process was also supported by audio and video recordings. The lawyer applied for the witnesses to appear in court to explain the process. The court adopted the lawyer's opinion, confirming that the will was Zou *'s true intention and a valid will. It determined that ex-wife Liu * had died before the purchase of the house and did not enjoy the preferential treatment of work experience, so she did not have a share in the property. It also determined that Ma * had the right to inherit because he had formed a guardianship relationship with Ding * and the will specified his share. The court ruled that House No. 05 in Fengtai District should be inherited by Ding *, and Ding * should pay 13,933 yuan to the four children and Ma *. This case shows that video recordings and witness testimony are crucial in resisting disputes over authenticity. The case was handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm. 恒略律师曾代理一起遗嘱继承纠纷：邹某与刘某育有四名子女，刘某于1992年3月去世，同年11月邹某与丁某再婚，丁某与前夫之子马某随二人共同生活并形成抚养关系。邹某与丁某用共同工龄购买了丰台区05号房屋，属夫妻共同财产。2011年8月18日，邹某订立代书遗嘱，明确其名下房屋由丁某继承；2012年7月20日邹某去世后，四名子女不配合继承，丁某委托本所律师诉至法院。被告质疑邹某订立遗嘱时不具备行为能力、签字不符、遗嘱非其真实意思。案件焦点在于代书遗嘱是否真实有效、前妻刘某对房屋是否享有产权份额、继子马某是否享有继承权。律师的举证思路具有借鉴意义：该遗嘱有两名见证人在场，其中一人代书并注明日期，遗嘱人、代书人与其他见证人签名捺印，订立过程还有录音录像佐证，律师并申请见证人出庭陈述形成过程。法院采纳律师意见，确认遗嘱系邹某真实意思表示，属有效遗嘱，认定前妻刘某在房屋购买前已去世且未使用其工龄优惠，不享有产权份额，并认定马某因形成抚养关系且遗嘱列明份额而享有继承权，判决丰台区05号房屋由丁某继承，丁某分别向四名子女及马某支付13933元。本案说明，录像等过程性证据与见证人出庭，对抵御真伪争议十分关键。本案由北京恒略律师事务所代理。Li YonghuiThe attorney (practice license number: 11101199611955812, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action suggestions: First, at the beginning of the video, the testator and the witnesses should respectively state their names, identities, and the date of the day; Second, the testator should fully state the scope of the estate and the inheritance arrangements, with clear and coherent language; Third, choose more than two people with no interest in the inheritance to serve as witnesses and be filmed throughout the process; Fourth, use original equipment to record once, retain the original storage medium, and avoid editing or re-recording; Fifth, if necessary, ask the witnesses to testify in court subsequently. Legal basis: Article 1137 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (Audio and Video Wills), Article 1136 (Printed Wills), Article 1140 (Witness Qualifications), and Article 1143 (Invalidity of Wills) (all effective from January 1, 2021), and the Interpretation of the Inheritance Chapter of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China by the Supreme People's Court (effective from January 1, 2021). For matters involving the scope of the estate and division of assets, please refer to the relevant provisions.Inheritance of property and division of family assetsFor matters involving the disposition of real estate, you can refer to the following document for reference.Real estate transactions and construction projectsThe specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, the video must include the names or portraits of the testator and the witnesses, as well as the date. Secondly, the witnesses must not be inheritors or interested parties. Thirdly, a one-time original recording, and the content edited and transcribed is easily refuted. Fourthly, an oral explanation does not equal a recorded will, and the formal requirements cannot be omitted. Fifthly, when the video and the written will coexist, attention should be paid to determining the order of occurrence and mutual corroboration. Matters involving wills and inheritance arrangements can be resolved through legal means.Inheritance of property and division of family assetsThe service provides a comprehensive solution, which involves the integration of real estate and family assets.Real estate transactions and construction projectsFor reference, you can check the sections related to inheritance debts and enforcementCreditor's rights and debts, and enforcementColumn.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Do the witnesses need to appear in the video?

Yes. According to Article 1137 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, the testator and the witnesses shall record their names or portraits, as well as the date, in the audio and video recording. If only the testator makes a statement and there are no witnesses, it usually does not meet the formal requirements of the audio and video will, and it is difficult to be recognized as a valid will.

Q2: Is it necessary to mention the date in the video?

The proposal should be clearly presented. In the video, the testator or the witnesses can verbally or in writing present the specific dates, which can avoid disputes over the time of making the will. If the video does not show the date and there is no other evidence to support the time of making the will, the completeness of the formal requirements will be questioned, which will affect the judgment of the validity of the will.

Q3: Is it okay to record it with a mobile phone? Do I need to get it notarized?

Mobile phone recordings can be used as a medium for audio and video wills, but the content and format must comply with legal requirements. Whether to notarize the will is a matter of choice for the parties involved. Notarization is not mandatory, but the involvement of notarization agencies can help standardize the format, fix evidence, and reduce the risk of disputes over authenticity and formal defects in the future.

Q4: If the testator only said who the house would be given to, is the will valid?

It usually does not meet the requirements for audio and video wills. A valid will must clearly specify the scope of the estate, the heirs or legatees, and reflect the names or portraits of the testator and witnesses, as well as the date and month of the recording. A mere verbal explanation may be deemed incomplete in both form and content, and therefore not be accepted as evidence.

Q5: Can the video still be used even if it has been edited?

The risk is great. Editing will destroy the integrity and authenticity of the original carrier, and the other party may question whether the content has been tampered with. Courts are usually cautious in determining the authenticity of audio and video recordings that have been edited. It is recommended to record everything in its entirety and keep the original files and storage media without any post-processing, so that the authenticity can be verified when necessary.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in Beijing. There may be differences in the adjudication standards in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limits.Legal services for inheritance·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.