Youtube Dance Shows - copyright

[Paul R Johnson]

Another topic featuring hosted clips on Vimeo prevent the problem I have today with a dance show I shot a while back to commemorate the dance school owner's death. Interesting that one number in the show has been singled out, and what also surprises me is that there are lots of versions of this particular piece, so ID'ing the right one took some computer cleverness, also bearing in mind the clarity of the audio should have blurred the accuracy, and didn't.

Has anyone else discovered Youtube's copyright scanner becoming better and better? It's also intriguing that an American company register a claim against a citizen of a different country. I'd have expected the claim to come from the agency who I pay here for using the material?

This is the wordings of the email I got.

Hi Paul Johnson,

A copyright owner using Content ID claimed some material in your video.

This is just a heads up
Don’t worry. You’re not in trouble and your account standing is not affected by this.

There are either ads running on your video, with the revenue going to the copyright owner, or the copyright owner is receiving stats about your video’s views.

Video title: wendy roche complete show v2
Copyrighted content: Theme And Variations 1-4 (From Paganini's Caprice in A Minor, No
Claimed by: UMG.

[Cary Knoop]

Originally Posted by Paul R Johnson

It's also intriguing that an American company register a claim against a citizen of a different country. I'd have expected the claim to come from the agency who I pay here for using the material?

It is not a legal claim, it is merely an identification that you used copyrighted material.
Only after you disputed the claim (twice) the copyright holder can request a "DMCA Takedown", YouTube then must take the video down, if you challenge that takedown you could be sued by the copyright holder.

YouTube does due diligence on material that is posted on its platform. It detects the audio is registered by the copyright owner (or its agency). The copyright owner decided in advance what it wants to do, block, track and/or monetize. If it agrees to monetize the video it is a win-win situation, you can post your video for free with the copyrighted audio and the copyright owner gets advertising income.

If you have an agreement you can use the audio on YouTube then you can dispute the claim and refer to the license agreement. But make sure you are in the right because if you frivolously dispute claims your account may be closed by YouTube.

[Boyd Ostroff]

I'm glad to see that their policy has evolved into something more reasonable. Around 10 years ago I was posting short video highlights of our shows when I worked at Opera Philadelphia. We were completely within our rights to do this, as per collective bargaining and contractual agreements. YouTube pulled just one of these videos and would only tell us that it was the result of a user complaint. Now this was a clip from a traditional production of a nineteenth century opera, so there certainly wasn't anything "offensive".

I was not able to get any further explanation and neither was our PR director. They said there was no appeal process, the decision was final and there was nothing we could do. Since it was only one of many videos, we just gave up. But I still wonder what the complaint could have been. My only thought is that the singer in the video didn't feel it was a good example of his work.

[Cary Knoop]

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff

INow this was a clip from a traditional production of a nineteenth century opera, so there certainly wasn't anything "offensive".

I suppose you never can tell in our neo-Victorian politically correct era. ;)

[David Barnett]

IIRC Youtube has been pretty good at detected live, unclear versions of music for some time. Anyway, are you sure your license you paid for doesn't only allow the music to be used for the dance recital, and not to be rebroadcasted online?

I would think the two are mutually exclusive from one another. Chances are they'll just wanna show ads before & during the video.

I'd had an issue the The Music Bed materials having similar claim. My response back from them was the license allows me to use their music online, BUT, the content creators can still choose to request ads be shown?? (WTH, doesn't a $.99 Amazon piece essentially supply me with a similar thing?!). They said they can reach out to the creators and ask if the ads be waived, and fortunately I was granted such. (TBH I think they just have it on a list, they responded pretty quick).

[Cary Knoop]

Originally Posted by David Barnett

I'd had an issue the The Music Bed materials having similar claim. My response back from them was the license allows me to use their music online, BUT, the content creators can still choose to request ads be shown?

That's odd, that's basically the default for most footage on YouTube, everybody can use it but it's monetized. So if you payed for it you practically payed for nothing.

But I think many people are confused about Content ID. Even if you have a license you will still get tagged. YouTube obviously does not know you have a license. All you need to do is dispute the claim and tell them you have a license.

I often use creative commons classical piano music and get IDed all the time, but a simple dispute and explanation does get it removed most of the time. Sometimes it takes an extra round.

[David Barnett]

Originally Posted by Cary Knoop

That's odd, that's basically the default for most footage on YouTube, everybody can use it but it's monetized. So if you payed for it you practically payed for nothing.

In a way, yes. Keep in mind however there was the case about Tony Romo's wedding video years ago. Granted, that was almost 10 years now, but the videographer used a Coldplay sony for his highlights. It went viral, and sure enough Coldplays lawyers came around to the videographer.

So I'd be careful about doing any advertising or promotional materials showing you're profiting or improving your business (creating ads) using pop music.

I agree one could probably get away with $.99 cent music, but a bit of piece of mind for certain circumstances.

[Cary Knoop]

Originally Posted by David Barnett

In a way, yes. Keep in mind however there was the case about Tony Romo's wedding video years ago. Granted, that was almost 10 years now, but the videographer used a Coldplay sony for his highlights. It went viral, and sure enough Coldplays lawyers came around to the videographer.

I think unless you dispute a DMCA takedown or have monetized a video with copyrighted material that is not yours (for instance if content ID did not find out or found out later) I don't believe you will be sued.

Simply follow the rules of YouTube, if you get a content ID and it is correct accept the conditions which may be blocking or monetizing. If it is monetization you win because you can place the video for free and the copyright holder wins because he can have advertisement income, if it is blocked you are out of luck.

Obviously selling a wedding video with copyrighted music you use without permission is a problem, that is commercial use.