The copying issue can arise when using legally licensed content loops and tracks without substantial modification and layering.
Basically when it is easy and simple and sounds good right out of the box, someone else has beat you to using it in a song, and you are in violation of their copyright.
The license to the loop/track/etc. doesn’t mean your work isn’t protected by copyright. And it doesn’t mean your work doesn’t infringe on other work using the same content under the same license.
> Basically when it is easy and simple and sounds good right out of the box, someone else has beat you to using it in a song, and you are in violation of their copyright.
No, it’s not. Not in a million years is a violation. This is not how copyright and licensing works. Youtube doing what it does is 100% wrong in every aspect, technical and practical.
> The license to the loop/track/etc. doesn’t mean your work isn’t protected by copyright. And it doesn’t mean your work doesn’t infringe on other work using the same content under the same license.
You’re 100% wrong. If you use something licensed to you, then you are not violating anything, and just because someone beat you, doesn’t mean they get exclusive rights to the sound. This is 100% pure bullshit.
ContentID is not synonymous with copyright. And ContentID is severely broken.
Just like your reply below that seems to ve flagged, your new post is also 100% wrong.
The music has been there for 8 years for one and 2 years for the second one. I’m wondering If my channel name is the reason “stupid American pig” is my band name. But it’s been that name since 2008
I wish there was a shazam service for Google... People that hijack music should not be allowed to profit from doing so at the original artist's expense, and YT is liable for letting that happen. There will probably be a class action suit in a few years where Lawyers will likely collect all the settlement money, and then justice won't be served. This is America.
> This video (link below) has been marked as having a song when there is absolutely no fragment of the song in the video.
> The video was used for Forever Young by Youth Group. But this is the original footage, from Australian TV, from 1976. Waaay before even the original Forever Young, by Alphaville in 1984.
>I went to record a complaint but you have to be the owner, so I threw it in the too hard basket.
Yep. There were several lots of other examples like this one posted in Hacker News threads and in Reddit in the recent months. This is an epidemic of ContentID scams.
Only Google people can view the back-end of Content ID... I'm talking about a service that we as normal people can use to see where our own music is being used across the Internet... Right now the only thing content creators can do is use metadata to search for their own content, but if there was a method to search for the footprints of music and film, then we could work on overall fairness better.
Use Yandex. It's all in Russian but it's... try it, and then try it some more.
I don't even find it inconvenient that I can't long-press and "search Yandex for this image" on my phone, the quality is sufficiently better enough that it's worth it to {go navigating through Recent/whatever|copy/paste the URL}
I do music as a hobby and tried to use YouTube to share some stuff with Reddit/Discord/friends and I couldn't get anything to survive unclaimed for more than a day after posting on Reddit. I was using maybe some samples from percussion but from a pack that I have a license to but the rest of the stuff was my own sound design and arrangement... also it sounded really bad.
Now I just don't share on Reddit anymore and mostly use private links because of that experience.
Using samples for percussion doesn’t mean sampling other commercial tracks, nor does it mean you’re using loops.
> Your work is similar to their work.
>
> If they were first they have a plausible copyright claim against you.
>
> Unless the license was copyleft. Which is a motivation for copyleft.
>
> The license to a drum track only protects from claims from the rightsholder of the drum track.
This is 100% incorrect. There is nothing here that matches reality of copyright.
The owner of the original recording that was sample owns the copyright but can license to others without losing it.
If you have a legitimate license and the licenser is the legitimate copyright owner, you are in the clear.
One person using it doesn’t make them the owner.
The copyleft advice is also completely wrong. Copyleft in the context of music is untested in courts and wouldn’t make a iota of difference here.
There is a wave of people copying other people's music, claiming as their own and then sending claims to the original video.
Maybe since your channel is small, Youtube decided to just ban. I've seen it happened with people who tried to pirate music more than once.
I don't post any music at all on Youtube. It all goes trough a third-party service that posts on my behalf and on streaming services.