PDA

View Full Version : Cover songs and copyright



mikemiragliuolo
07-14-2014, 04:39 PM
Not sure if this the right area to post this but here goes.
This week I got a copyright notice on my YouTube account for my cover of The Scientist by Coldplay that I put up 8 days ago.

I've been to several sites and they all said the same thing. Everything I read said that doing a cover tune without permission is copyright infringement. It also said that it is not covered by the fair use act. Yikes I did not know this. I have enjoyed posting covers but now I don't know what to do. Public domain and original songs seem the only option. I don't like this. I'm not making any money from it but I guess it doesn't matter.

gouacats
07-14-2014, 04:51 PM
The world will be a poorer place if covers are not allowed. What are the consequences of the infringement?

mikemiragliuolo
07-14-2014, 05:12 PM
Not sure exactly. A friend told me one of 3 things may happen. They could put an ad on the video so they can make a few cents, they could take the audio off, or take the video down. It's a third party that's doing this not YouTube. PRS CS, UMPG Publishing, UMPI are the three listed. I could get a strike on my YouTube account and too many of those and then I'm shut down. Well this stinks. I was just starting to have fun with this.

ohmless
07-14-2014, 05:14 PM
some artists want your video up to make money off views it gets. Others apparently don't want their music shared or to make extra income.

keonepax
07-14-2014, 08:30 PM
A few years ago, major music companies like Warner Music Group was playing hardball with YouTube and claiming copyright infringement left and right. Various YouTube channels (including mine) got suspended as a result. As for now, I think the general agreement is that covered songs will be flagged for infringement, but will not be counted as a blackmark... they'll just post ads on your video. However, if a copyright owner specifically demands that your video be removed, that will count as a blackmark, and three blackmarks will result in suspension. You probably should avoid artists who are very possessive when it comes to their music. I think Prince is one such artist. I used to think Van Morrison was another, but it seems okay to do his songs now.

The scary thing is the possibility that the general agreement concerning copyright infringement will somehow change, possibly resulting in mass suspensions. After being burned once, I now post videos on YouTube knowing they could be "here today, gone tomorrow."

mikemiragliuolo
07-15-2014, 03:06 AM
Thanks for the feedback John. Wow , soon we won't even be able to talk in public without getting hit with copyright infringement. Haha! Well I guess I'll keep posting stuff for now and hope for the best. I must admit this has taken the wind out of my sails a little bit though.

uke4ia
07-15-2014, 03:14 AM
If the video is just flagged as "Third Party Content", don't worry. All that means is that YouTube has identified that someone other than you owns the copyright, and the copyright owner will get the small fraction of a cent in advertizing when someone watches your video. There is nothing you need to do in these cases, and that includes worrying.

There are a small number of artists that will not let you do YouTube covers of their songs at all. If YouTube identifies one of them, it will probably delete your video first and send you an e-mail about it afterward. These include The Eagles, Supertramp, and Jimi Hendrix. These are a problem, because they can count toward the "three strikes" YouTube gives you before they delete your entire channel.

mikemiragliuolo
07-15-2014, 03:24 AM
I acknowledged it this time. There is an option to acknowledge it or file a dispute it. I know I had no dispute because it's a cover. So is it best to just acknowledge it or just ignore it if this happens in the future ?

itsme
07-15-2014, 07:40 AM
With a third-party claim, you should at least check out who's making it. There have been instances of third parties claiming copyright on public domain songs (e.g., folk or classical). Some people will cave no matter who makes the claim. There have been third parties who make themselves out to be some kind of performing rights group (completely bogus) and lay claim to copyrights they don't own. Just because your clip was a cover doesn't mean the claimant has any right to it.

Wicked
07-15-2014, 08:59 AM
I think most acts have come to realize monetizing covers of their songs is a better way to go than forcing their removal... And it probably leads to actual album sales that they may not have gotten otherwise.

Even Prince has started allowing covers to stay up, but draws the line at people posting his studio recordings with their own video.

mikemiragliuolo
07-15-2014, 03:17 PM
Sounds right to me. It's money they wouldn't otherwise be getting (even if it's a small amount) and more exposure too. I'm thinking it's time to start another channel with originals soon.

janeray1940
07-15-2014, 03:20 PM
With a third-party claim, you should at least check out who's making it. There have been instances of third parties claiming copyright on public domain songs (e.g., folk or classical).

This happened to me! I had posted playing Bach's Minuet in G, and some rock band I had ever heard of with a song called "Minuet" claimed copyright infringement. And it was a huge hassle, and one of the factors that made me decide that YouTube wasn't worth my time - I killed my account shortly thereafter.

mikemiragliuolo
07-15-2014, 03:29 PM
That's a real bummer janeray1940. I hate hearing stuff like this.

Bagaag
07-15-2014, 04:37 PM
Sounds right to me. It's money they wouldn't otherwise be getting (even if it's a small amount) and more exposure too. I'm thinking it's time to start another channel with originals soon.

Hell yeah. Originals for the win.

I'm all for artists earning whatever dollars a cover video I post can make for them, and I'm happy to help. The old school artists that don't get YouTube won't be around much longer, for better or for worse.

igorthebarbarian
07-15-2014, 04:49 PM
Coldplay seems like the type to whine about this sort of thing.

uke4ia
07-15-2014, 05:12 PM
Though, to be fair, Coldplay has made a good career out of whining about pretty much everything.

igorthebarbarian
07-15-2014, 05:24 PM
Though, to be fair, Coldplay has made a good career out of whining about pretty much everything.

Hi-yo!!!!!!!

itsme
07-15-2014, 05:34 PM
It's not always the artists. They assign their rights to a publishing company who administers licensing and sees that the artist/writer gets proper royalties. Some are more aggressive than others.

In some respects, copyright law isn't fully in sync with the digital age.

As I understand it, youtube has struck deals with some companies, but not others. So, a cover of one song might be kosher, one by another artist might not be.

Nothing makes a lot of sense, but if you're worried about it, some people will make a second youtube acct for covers so if they get slammed, the original is still okay.

Wicked
07-16-2014, 06:11 AM
The new YouTube music service could shake things up. They are already blocking independent groups from posting videos if they do not sign a licensing agreement.

Jools1050
07-16-2014, 07:39 AM
After reading this thread, particularly what uke4ia said about The Eagles, I'm expecting the copyright police raiding my house some time soon regarding me Desperado !! I'll be hiding behind the couch if anyone wants me !

beautifulsoup
07-16-2014, 10:16 AM
....Even Prince has started allowing covers to stay up...

Wow, that explains the pigs I saw flying past my window recently.

pabrizzer
07-16-2014, 10:16 PM
According to YouTube I have 511 videos.
I went through and I have about 20 'Matched third party content'.
I haven't done anything about them but I notice I do have adds on those vids.
I think my wife will be happy if my account is shut down.
Until then I'll keep posting.

mikemiragliuolo
07-17-2014, 03:21 AM
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I feel at ease now. I think I'll just keep posting videos for now. As long as they don't pull a video. If that happens then there is a strike against the account. Three strikes and you're out baby. Haha.

TJ Uke
07-18-2014, 12:46 PM
The notice is no biggy in regards to damaging your channel, it's DMCA and takedown notices that will get you wiped.

The network I'm with, Fullscreen, has license deals for a whole tonne of modern music - that's why I can monetise things like my Miley Cyrus and Bastille covers without getting a notice: there's an arrangement in place.

Might be worth looking into a network with licensing like that.

mikemiragliuolo
07-18-2014, 02:01 PM
Right on TJ Uke I'll have to look into that. I'm not looking to monetize right now. Just having fun doing covers, sharing and getting feedback at the moment. Maybe in the future if my channel blows up (wishful thinking, haha) I would think about that stuff.

TJ Uke
07-18-2014, 02:33 PM
Right on TJ Uke I'll have to look into that. I'm not looking to monetize right now. Just having fun doing covers, sharing and getting feedback at the moment. Maybe in the future if my channel blows up (wishful thinking, haha) I would think about that stuff.

For your sake I was thinking it would more be the aspect of them not being able to file a DMCA?

That said, their licenses don't cover everything anyway.