Youtube and Copy Right claims....

Feb 9, 2009
1,828
839
4,571
WA state
Confused as to how this works.

I have two bass covers up covering Breaking the Law and Living after Midnight by Judas Priest.

Recently a claim was made against the Living after midnight video by SME I believe that is Sony. So it's blocked just about everywhere.

The confusion is that the other video from the same album was left alone and to add to the confusion there are dozens of videos of bass players playing to Living after midnight (though not accurate!) that don't seem to be a problem.

What is the method to their madness?
 
Pretty much every "cover" video posted does. But it's up to he copyright holder to complain - and YouTube gives them the option of "monetizing" it AKA putting ads on it and receiving the income.
Yeah, it's reasonable to say that most cover videos violate copyright and don't constitute fair use. I start by knowing if my video violates copyright or not.

That doesn't mean that YouTube will enforce it consistently. And there are clear cases on YouTube where channels have been shut down for videos that are clearly Fair Use. This is a pretty significant problem right now on YT. If you're interested (and want to be angry), search for the tag #WTFU
 
  • Like
Reactions: SirMjac28
Put up a video of you on youtube playing or saying to go to a website that correctly uses Fair Use.. or just pictures of the song..

then

Upload your cover of the song to any other Video site (Dailymotion etc..) and then put huge links everywhere to go watch the video from your youtube Video..

solved..

people can still see your Cover, just on Dailymotion from a youtube video - but just have to click over to a video website to watch it.. and youtube shouldn't take that down..
 
I've had a couple videos blocked in the US. Weird. Nothing ever deleted that I can recall. Most times, they'll just insert an ad on your video. Facebook is a bit more active with copyrights. I've had several videos deleted.
 
Does your video violate copyright?

The larger question is what videos don't when talking about guitar, bass, drum and vocal covers.

As to your question, they say it does. I say no. I am not charging money or making any. It was done for demonstration purposes and I bought the CD I used to play to.

It's not different then inviting friends over to listen to my CD. You can even dub the CD to a CDR and give them away. You infringe on a copy right so far as in the traditional sense when you charge a fee or collect money on it's use.
 
Last edited:
Pretty much every "cover" video posted does. But it's up to he copyright holder to complain - and YouTube gives them the option of "monetizing" it AKA putting ads on it and receiving the income.

My page said it had been monetized and yet also blocked. If they are getting money why take it down? It's not like anyone would watch my video just to hear the song when there are plenty of videos up where you can listen to the songs minus the extra bass.
 
The larger question is what videos don't when talking about guitar, bass, drum and vocal covers.

As to your question, they say it does. I say no. I am not charging money or making any. It was done for demonstration purposes and I bought the CD I used to play to.

It's not different then inviting friends over to listen to my CD. You can even dub the CD to a CDR and give them away. You infringe on a copy right so far as in the traditional sense when you charge a fee or collect money on it's use.


IANAL - if you have a copyright issue, you should consult a qualified lawyer.

See: More Information on Fair Use | U.S. Copyright Office

What is claimed is fair use. The copyright holder has the right to stop infringing uses. To continue use, the possible infringer must go to court to show that the work does not infringe. For a youtube video this may not be worthwhile.

With respect to copying a CD to some other medium for your friend(s), that is not legal regardless of the exchange of consideration (money). In copying a copyrighted work, you have harmed the economics of the copyright holder - you have deprived them of the opportunity to sell another copy.

If you don't like it, don't complain to me, complain to you congressman/member of parliament/iron fisted dictator.
 
The larger question is what videos don't when talking about guitar, bass, drum and vocal covers.

As to your question, they say it does. I say no. I am not charging money or making any. It was done for demonstration purposes and I bought the CD I used to play to.

It's not different then inviting friends over to listen to my CD. You can even dub the CD to a CDR and give them away. You infringe on a copy right so far as in the traditional sense when you charge a fee or collect money on it's use.
I don't know the specifics, but I've heard that after you get a certain amount of views on a video, YouTube will start sending money your way for the ad revenue they received by all of the views of your video.

So, you could potentially make money off of this endeavour.

This is also why you see so many catchy/misleading titled YouTube videos that have very weak content - they're aiming for a lot of views, only to get paid.
 
I don't know the specifics, but I've heard that after you get a certain amount of views on a video, YouTube will start sending money your way for the ad revenue they received by all of the views of your video.

So, you could potentially make money off of this endeavour.

This is also why you see so many catchy/misleading titled YouTube videos that have very weak content - they're aiming for a lot of views, only to get paid.
You have to sign up to monetize your videos. It's free and easy, but not everyone does it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matthew_84
The larger question is what videos don't when talking about guitar, bass, drum and vocal covers.

As to your question, they say it does. I say no. I am not charging money or making any. It was done for demonstration purposes and I bought the CD I used to play to.

It's not different then inviting friends over to listen to my CD. You can even dub the CD to a CDR and give them away. You infringe on a copy right so far as in the traditional sense when you charge a fee or collect money on it's use.
I get the feeling that you're mostly bothered that they blocked yours and not others. You mentioned this in your OP and you've touched on it here a) "what videos don't [violate copyright]", implying that you think it does, and b) also saying "I say no".

I can't tell you why YouTube is not consistent, nor can you control what YouTube does with other videos. You can control what you do and if it's important to you to make videos, then your best bet is to make sure you're not violating copyright.

Dubbing a CD to a CDR and giving them away is not fair use, either, BTW. Whether you get paid or not is only one factor, and simply not charging does not mean it's not a copyright violation. I'm sure that if the copyright holders could stop you from doing so, they would.

When you ask, "What is the method to their madness?" I encourage you to start with an understanding of copyright and fair use. If you want to make sure that YouTube is consistent in managing it, then you're almost certainly going to end up frustrated. YouTube is NOT consistent in how they handle it, nor are they even following the law in many cases. They say they're working on it, but their system is still imperfect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matthew_84
Your video is being scanned as it is being uploaded. I've had videos blocked before I even hit the "publish" button. It is random and arbitrary so try not to take it personally. The old tricks like "Put a copyright disclaimer in the about section beneath the video." and, "Have 30 seconds of silence before the video starts." are useless. I've had videos go up not problem, only to be blocked years later. If it's just you playing along with the song, as I do, I think the "fair use" argument/defense can be used as I've used it with 100% success over the past 6 or 7 years now. Unfortunately, what other people get away with cannot be used as a defense. I don't understand how I have to fight to keep some my videos up while there are full albums of straight audio floating around out there, but that's the way it is and always has been. YouTube goes through periods of stricter enforcement and this happens to be one of them. Also, artists publishing rights are being bought and sold, so the new "content owner" also pursues stricter enforcement. Rush sold their publishing to Ole a few years back and I'm starting to take a little heat from them, even though they've (Rush) got one of my videos embedded on their official site.

Here is the legal definition of Fair Use -
"Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."

Since I am using someone else's content as the bedrock of my videos I would never consider monetizing my channel. I'm happy to let the artist or "content owner" reap whatever small reward there might be from that.

Use the dispute process which is fairly straight forward. There are a few different levels. Your initial dispute may keep your video up for a week or two (or forever) but then "denied". In the past, that "denial" might come with a strike against your account or not. Now, YouTube has started giving you the option of withdrawing your dispute before your video is taken down, thus avoiding a strike against your channel. If your video is taken down and you've earned a strike (or not) the next step would be to file a counter dispute and this is where the rubber meets the road. You must have your phone number verified through Google and supply them with name, address, and other contact info. They pass this info along to the content owner who decides whether they actually want to drag you into court or not. This is probably the only point where the entity responsible for blocking your video actually views it. They have 10-14 business days to take legal action against you. If they do not, the video goes back up. I've filed many, many of these over the years and have not yet set foot in court.

There used to be series of questions you had to answer when filing a counter dispute, but they've streamlined it to one statement from you which they send along to the content owner. This is the statement I use. Feel free to use it if you like -
"I am playing along with this recording in order to demonstrate how it is played for those who may wish to learn it on their own. My instrument is mixed at a level that is slightly above the original recording so it stands out and can be easily heard. The video is entirely for nonprofit, educational purposes."

Some content owners are copyright super-nazis and I'd avoid posting anything by them unless you're looking for a fight - Ozzy (Sabbath is no problem), Fleetwood Mac, ELO, and, the only copyright fight where it seemed personal - Supertramp, namely Roger Hodgkins. He came after me with no fewer than 16 different publishers, I'm sure he was just making up names after a while. I only fought that one out of principle. Now, I won't even listen to Supertramp on the radio in protest.

I hope this was of some help.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Spectrum and INTP
Does your video violate copyright?
I get the feeling that you're mostly bothered that they blocked yours and not others. You mentioned this in your OP and you've touched on it here a) "what videos don't [violate copyright]", implying that you think it does, and b) also saying "I say no".

I can't tell you why YouTube is not consistent, nor can you control what YouTube does with other videos. You can control what you do and if it's important to you to make videos, then your best bet is to make sure you're not violating copyright.

Dubbing a CD to a CDR and giving them away is not fair use, either, BTW. Whether you get paid or not is only one factor, and simply not charging does not mean it's not a copyright violation. I'm sure that if the copyright holders could stop you from doing so, they would.

When you ask, "What is the method to their madness?" I encourage you to start with an understanding of copyright and fair use. If you want to make sure that YouTube is consistent in managing it, then you're almost certainly going to end up frustrated. YouTube is NOT consistent in how they handle it, nor are they even following the law in many cases. They say they're working on it, but their system is still imperfect.

What would be fair use? It seems they have a NO use policy. Fair would be at least giving me an option to pay a reasonable fee. There is no such option. And yes it's mostly that they are not consistent that bothers me. As for videos this is the best way for me to learn songs so I hate to see this kind of censorship. They want fair use I want responsible censorship, if they are going to block these videos they should provide their own how to videos on the songs they own.
 
Your video is being scanned as it is being uploaded. I've had videos blocked before I even hit the "publish" button. It is random and arbitrary so try not to take it personally. The old tricks like "Put a copyright disclaimer in the about section beneath the video." and, "Have 30 seconds of silence before the video starts." are useless. I've had videos go up not problem, only to be blocked years later. If it's just you playing along with the song, as I do, I think the "fair use" argument/defense can be used as I've used it with 100% success over the past 6 or 7 years now. Unfortunately, what other people get away with cannot be used as a defense. I don't understand how I have to fight to keep some my videos up while there are full albums of straight audio floating around out there, but that's the way it is and always has been. YouTube goes through periods of stricter enforcement and this happens to be one of them. Also, artists publishing rights are being bought and sold, so the new "content owner" also pursues stricter enforcement. Rush sold their publishing to Ole a few years back and I'm starting to take a little heat from them, even though they've (Rush) got one of my videos embedded on their official site.

Here is the legal definition of Fair Use -
"Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."

Since I am using someone else's content as the bedrock of my videos I would never consider monetizing my channel. I'm happy to let the artist or "content owner" reap whatever small reward there might be from that.

Use the dispute process which is fairly straight forward. There are a few different levels. Your initial dispute may keep your video up for a week or two (or forever) but then "denied". In the past, that "denial" might come with a strike against your account or not. Now, YouTube has started giving you the option of withdrawing your dispute before your video is taken down, thus avoiding a strike against your channel. If your video is taken down and you've earned a strike (or not) the next step would be to file a counter dispute and this is where the rubber meets the road. You must have your phone number verified through Google and supply them with name, address, and other contact info. They pass this info along to the content owner who decides whether they actually want to drag you into court or not. This is probably the only point where the entity responsible for blocking your video actually views it. They have 7-14 days to take legal action against you. If they do not, the video goes back up. I've filed many, many of these over the years and have not yet set foot in court.

There used to be series of questions you had to answer when filing a counter dispute, but they've streamlined it to one statement from you which they send along to the content owner. This is the statement I use. Feel free to use it if you like -
"I am playing along with this recording in order to demonstrate how it is played for those who may wish to learn it on their own. My instrument is mixed at a level that is slightly above the original recording so it stands out and can be easily heard. The video is entirely for nonprofit, educational purposes."

Some content owners are copyright super-nazis and I'd avoid posting anything by them unless you're looking for a fight - Ozzy (Sabbath is no problem), Fleetwood Mac, ELO, and, the only copyright fight where it seemed personal - Supertramp, namely Roger Hodgkins. He came after me with no fewer than 16 different publishers, I'm sure he was just making up names after a while. I only fought that one out of principle. Now, I won't even listen to Supertramp on the radio in protest.

I hope this was of some help.

Thanks for this post. I will try re recording the bass line with the music at a way lower level then I will push it as you say I can. Volume of the track might have been a problem. As for the disclaimer I had added one to Stand up and shout, a DIO song and still some two months later it was blocked.
 
What would be fair use? It seems they have a NO use policy. Fair would be at least giving me an option to pay a reasonable fee. There is no such option. And yes it's mostly that they are not consistent that bothers me. As for videos this is the best way for me to learn songs so I hate to see this kind of censorship. They want fair use I want responsible censorship, if they are going to block these videos they should provide their own how to videos on the songs they own.
Not everyone agrees that copyright law and fair use are the best solution, but it's the situation we have now.