youtube thinks my TDM playthrough uses copyrithed material

[Diego]

So I recorded a playthrough of No Honor Among Thieves and decided to upload on youtube. After a couple of eras I have two problems: it didn't upload because of some weird bug with login account that will make me probably reupload, but that's not what I want to ask here, and it thinks I'm using copyrithed music. It automatically replaced it with some stock music.

 

Anyway, I can dispite the claim using one of the following options:

 

I own the CD / DVD or bought the song online.

I'm not selling the video or making any money from it.

I gave credit in the video.

The video is my original content and I own all of the rights to it.

I have a license or written permission from the proper rights holder to use this material.

My use of the content meets the legal requirements for fair use or fair dealing under applicable copyright laws.

The content is in the public domain or is not eligible for copyright protection.

 

Which one do you guys recommend?

 

PS: I started this playthrough for fun but, jeez, it's not worth the trouble.

[Springheel]

What music is it complaining about? Someone had trouble with Youtube because it said the main menu was using music that it obviously wasn't.

[Diego]

I can't check that right now, I'm not home. But the video just went online, so you can try to deduce yourself what was the original music (as well as having a laugh at the replacement! I'm really curious to listen to this)

 

http://youtu.be/kxt0JdOzN3c

 

It should start at 1:17:00 (one hour and seventeen minutes)

Edited October 25, 2013 by Diego

[Diego]

Strange. I found a way to check it and I don't hear anything unusual, not even the replacement it supposedly did. I wonder if I have to 'aknowledge' the fact before the replacement takes place. But anyway, what's the best option to dispute the claim from the list above? TDM music is not public domain, I believe. Do I have a license or written permission from the proper rights holder to use this material? is he here?

[Bikerdude]

Ah had the same problem, Youtube got it wrong then aswell. Ask him how he worked around it.

[jay pettitt]

The first three aren't disputes. Buying a CD (or MP3 or whatever) doesn't give you a right to distribute copies.

 

If it's vanilla Dark Mod content, the arty stuff is released under a creative commons license that allows you to make non-commercial attributed copies. So yes, you have a license. It's possible that some missions contain content released under other licenses though.

 

Fair Use includes review, but that probably doesn't include a play through - because the principle purpose isn't you saying 'I like/dislike this mission'.

(But as a general thing, fair use isn't intended to allow you to use copyrighted material. It's intended to prevent copyright holders abusing their rights. If a photograph of a street scene happened, quite incidentally, to include, say, a shop sign - Fair Use would prevent the owner of the sign the photographer can't use the photograph or should pay him. But that's not what you're doing. Your use isn't incidental. It's deliberate and intentional.)

 

The content isn't in the public domain and is protected by copyright laws.

 

This is largely guesswork on my part. But I'd imagine that music publishers and TV channels are anal about copyright, and thus Youtube will auto scan for music/TV that might be copyrighted. Where as Video Game publishers probably aren't (or at least not in the same way) - which is why there's oodles of Let's Play vids over the intertubes, but no Let's Watch TV vids. Technically they probably are infringing copyright and the copyright owner could choose to act, but games publishers seem happy to let them continue. I don't think you could claim that a vid of you playing a game was an original creative work and the art and music and level designs were only incidental.

Edited October 26, 2013 by jay pettitt

[AluminumHaste]

I had this problem because Orange something made a claim against the music during the into briefing. That is the same music I think. I put that it was in a the public domain and not eligible for copyright protection.

It depends who made the claim against it. Some of them are bogus and it's a complete conspiracy. You see, when someone is a youtube partner they can make claims against other videos. What happens in these cases is that they let your video stay up without restrictions except that ads may play.

Now, this isn't that big of a deal you say, well it is because these companies don't actually own the copyright listed in these claims, and they get payed a portion of the ad revenue from google. It's bullshit, and the only way to stop them is to dispute the claim. The worst they can do is reinstate the claim and you can dispute it again. If they are totally serious about it they can file a formal legal DMCA case against you.

 

What this company has done, is purchased sample libraries and uploaded them as fingerprints on their youtube partner channel. When someones uses these (which they are allowed to do), they get flagged. Nothing bad happens except that you lose monetization of your video, but it stays up. The only bad thing is that this company gets ad revenue from your video instead, when they never should have gotten anything.

[AluminumHaste]

So first things first, what entity is making the claim against your video? Google their name, see what you find. If it has the name Orange in it, it's totally bogus.

[Diego]

I'm going with "I have a license or written permission"

 

 

So first things first, what entity is making the claim against your video? Google their name, see what you find. If it has the name Orange in it, it's totally bogus

 

I don't know where to check that, all it gives me is this:

 

Here are the details:

 

"Dr. Akula-Disembodied Dead", sound recording administered by: 77:22

CD Baby

 

I don't know if that means he thinks "Dr. Akula-Disembodied Dead" is playing or if he's replacing that chunk of sound with "Dr. Akula-Disembodied Dead".

[AluminumHaste]

It thinks that the music at 77:22 is Dr. Akula-Disembodied Dead, which is interesting because I think this is actually correct. Go here: http://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B005XRQC34/ref=dm_sp_alb/280-7938595-8370800

 

And play the sample of Disembodied Dead. Sounds very similar.

[AluminumHaste]

Damn and the song before it sounds like one used in the Dark Mod also.

EDIT: However CD Baby doesn't own the rights to it looks like:

• Original Release Date: October 17, 2011
  
• Label: Dr. Akula
  
• Copyright: 2011 Conrad Askland
  

Check CD Baby's website for Conrad Askland:

 

http://www.cdbaby.com/Search/Q29ucmFkIEFza2xhbmQ%3d/2

 

No matches for that album, you can just dispute it and put that CD Baby doesn't own the rights to this track.

[Serpentine]

I think all of these arise out of free samples that were on opensounds. Most of the stuff on CD Baby is just one-man-'band' stuff. Wouldnt be surprised if there's a lot of similarity, but in either case sampling is fine.

[stumpy]

I got this on a video of lord dufford I put up running in tdm 2.0 also copyright claim from cd baby. they haven't claimed against lord dufford running in an earlier version of tdm, playing exactly the same sound effects, so I disputed there claim.

[demagogue]

Ugh, they're pretty stock synths any music-writing software creates.

And they're not even playing music, just droning a single M7 dyad that a million dark ambient tracks do all the time.

Sort of crazy that something that generic could trigger a copyright claim.

[Bikerdude]

Google/youtube's detection algorythims are shockly shit, time and time again it keep's mis-detecting our audio - imbeciles.

 

@Deigo, can you post a link to each of the disputes in the OP so we can just keep pointing to them to said post each time thie automated system fucks up.