Hi Stuart No need to remove your video. YouTube will display commercials on/beside your video, and anyone clicking on those commercials will be responsible for a little money fomr the advertisers to the copyright holders. Your video will help to keep the system afloat, that's all. I have a YouTube channel for my guitar pupils, where I play mostly popsongs (over 500 videos and over 1.5 milion views). Most are copyright material, obviously. Never a problem, I receive the 'match third party content' notice and cannot 'monetize' the videos myself. If I get such notice on a video with early music, I always dispute on the grounds of 'prior to 1920 or so published, and I played or arranged from the original publication or manuscript', and the claim is always withdrawn. I think it's bots crawling YouTube, hoping to catch some money. The notice about copyright material 15 seconds into your video might have been a bot recognising a copyrighted tune within the piece you played. I believe some bots actually 'listen' to the material and check if it matches copyrighted material in their database. Kids re-posting pop videos (with lyrics or whatever) often do so a a bit higher or lower to defat these bots. Annoying for me when I try to figure out the chords/melody when listening to a transposed version of the song ... Keep posting your videos, I enjoy them. David
******************************* David van Ooijen [1][email protected] [2]www.davidvanooijen.nl ******************************* On 31 October 2013 16:38, WALSH STUART <[3][email protected]> wrote: On 31/10/2013 15:13, Stephen Kenyon wrote: I've had this on one or two things and many other users have had utterly and completely spurious claims on things that are centuries out of copyright - but which may well exist in current editions of course. There definitely are a number of scamming organisations automatedly sweeping up things like yours. You are likely to find that ads are put over or by your video if you acknowledge the claim. Personally I would delete the upload and start again, omitting mention of OUP. And if it happens again try disputing it. I did this on my Tarrega Capricho video and the claim went away. Stephen Thanks - sounds like good advice. But I can't dispute it, given the youtube options for dispute. Tarrega must be well out of copyright but Skempton's piece was published in 1994. Stuart On 31 Oct 2013, at 15:04, WALSH STUART wrote: No doubt it's all my fault - but this is a strange case. I uploaded a video to youtube yesterday and I got a notification: "Matched third-party content". That's not the really odd bit though. The video I uploaded was a modern piece and I've done similar before and in the description I have written the publication and the date. But yesterday, perhaps in a senior moment, I also included the publisher, OUP. As it was uploading I got a notification that it was taking longer than normal. I thought something was odd and deleted the reference to OUP - but, perhaps too late. On the other hand it's also possible that notification of "Matched third-party content" is not connected at all to my including OUP in the description. If I click on "Matched third-party content" I get this screen: [4]http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/Untitled-1.jpg So my video 'may include a song owned by a third party' and one or more music publishing societies may administer the rights. But the really, really odd thing is that youtube is very clear at the point in the video in which the 'matched content' starts...15 seconds in... not from the beginning. But I am playing from the very start of the video and after 15 seconds I've got to bar 12. So the first 15 bars of Howard Skempton's Prelude 5 from Images is not 'matched content' but after 15 seconds, for an unspecified amount of time, it is. I now have two options: to dispute or acknowledge this. (And I don't know what 'acknowledge' amounts to) I contacted Howard Skempton, who seems to be a sporting chap and doesn't mind me having a crack at his pieces on a lute, and told him about this. He strongly urged me to dispute the matter. If I choose to dispute it, I get this screen: [5]http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/Untitled-2.jpg There are seven options and the first three tell me that they are not valid and the 'acknowledge' button is inviting me to press it. Howard Skempton tells me that OUP hold the rights. I haven't got a licence or permission from OUP (just as hundreds of thousands of others on youtube who are playing music from books they have - or haven't - bought). Fair enough, I reluctantly suppose, OUP are the holders of the rights of the score and I haven't got specific permission from OUP (even though the actual composer is fine about it and I played the piece and took the photo). But what does 'acknowledge' mean? And what about the first 15 seconds? Could this possibly be some sort of scam? If I click 'acknowledge' do adverts start appearing and the minute amount of money start flowing - or trickling - to some dodgy copyright corporation? Stuart --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. [6]http://www.avast.com To get on or off this list see list information at [7]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. [8]http://www.avast.com -- References 1. mailto:[email protected] 2. http://www.davidvanooijen.nl/ 3. mailto:[email protected] 4. http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/Untitled-1.jpg 5. http://www.pluckedturkeys.co.uk/Untitled-2.jpg 6. http://www.avast.com/ 7. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 8. http://www.avast.com/
