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.
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.
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.
But I agree that is a very dangerous name in the time of algorithm controlled moderation.
> 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.
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}
Now I just don't share on Reddit anymore and mostly use private links because of that experience.
Someone else used the same track in their original work. They also have copyright.
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.
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.