You Tube content dispute?

[Lesley Jones]

I'm really confused with this. We got Movie Maker with the new computer and I used it to create two videos. There is an option to add music (from three sources) and I used one of them. We checked all the blurb and it says it is totally legal - some people want to give their music a wider distribution and that sort of thing. Now I have a content match on my first video. My husband told me to acknowledge the claim, but frankly the words were so confusing I don't know what it really meant. We checked again yesterday and that track is quite legal to use and I added the track and name at the end of the video. I think it said the video is still there to view, but I really don't need this stress. Should I have disputed the claim or should I just give up with the videos?

 

[Lesley Jones]

We've been thinking about this while doing the animals and if it makes any sense, this is what we believe. I checked in this morning because I can't find my You Tube account on the smart phone. We looked at the two videos and they didn't have any warnings. Then we looked at some settings and my husband told me to turn off the adverts. There was something in there about monetizing, but I didn't understand. Then when we went back to the videos there was a warning.

I found a bit somewhere on content owners having three options - to monetize, just track and one other. Am I right in thinking the music owner has "matched" one of his tracks and because he wants to monetize (advertise next to my video), then we did the wrong thing by turning off the adverts? After agreeing the claim, I noticed the adverts had been turned back on again.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Sorry, Lesley, I can't help you. I've had some run in with them in the past, and when I disputed their claim, they dropped it immediately. In my case I recorded some music by Bach, which is obviously well out of Composer Royalty time period (75 years), but some guy had published an edition of this Bach work (many publishers have) so anyone who records that piece by Bach gets warned for using his edition. I'd never heard of his edition, so challenged the claim, and it was dropped immediately. So, you can see that my experience is different to yours, so I'm not sure how to advise you. But kudos to you for at least trying to use royalty-free music!

 

[Lesley Jones]

Cheers Rob! I think it may be something to do with how the composer wants to track their music. I had to delete and upload again for different reasons and the same happened. I just agreed that it was third party content and the warning has gone. I have also added a link back to the Free Music Archive page as well as the details within the video

 

[Davie Hudson]

I had a problem with a video I done, I tried to use Clair De Lune by DeBussy, they objected on copyright and offered me an alternative ...... Clair De Lune by DeBussy lol

 

[Lesley Jones]

Oh dear...

I just found out more. The claimant is the largest online music "stable" and has recently been encouraging artists to get on board the You Tube gravy train. I don't think they want the videos taken down, just marked to generate revenue. I've gone through the licencing information with a fine tooth comb and it's definitely legal. That's why I stuck with one of the options in Movie Maker.