Content Id and OneRpm Suspended account

? If a buyer buys a clip they can use it in a commercial, movie, documentary etc etc and make money on it. They just can't sell as a stand-alone. So if a buyer uses your music in a Hollywood movie that makes $500 million profit but they bought your music for $10 do you expect to get paid more?

As Rekindle says if the audio is incorporated into another work then the buyer is well within their rights to monetise Youtube videos (such as music overlaid over an advert, film etc.)

If the buyer bought your track then uploaded it stand alone and passed it of as their own then there might be grounds for complaint.

Yup, another person who doesn't know how RF works so they delete their comments. Nope can't delete a thread, once it's started it's always there.

Slight edit ;)

No friend ... I just decided not to continue with the topic, but how do not have the option to delete the topic, it was so.

Tsk - really don't know why I bother to reply sometimes...

For you to understand a little about the rights of audio compostiores .

This was withdrawing right here forum ...

Thank you.

As this is still an issue for some clients, i would love to clarify a few points that are constantly misunderstood with the "Royalty Free Audio" claim.

If a customer buys a single license, he has the right to use the music for any non-commercial project, product. BUT if the customer starts to monetize his videos,THIS is where the problem occurs.
The customer has ONLY bought a license and does NOT own the music he bought, so he is NOT allowed to make money out of it on Youtube, as YT only allows the composer / copyright owner of the music to earn money trough it.

I really think we all should question how we act and what we expect how others act. I'm absolutely fine if a customer buys a extended license and includes this in a commercial product for resale (and this is exactly what monetizing YT Videos is), but if he buys a single license for $10-$30 - how could he think it would be fair to create a commercial product /video out of that and earn a lot of money on YT when the composer gets almost nothing ? Fair ? Legal ?

It's really simple :

Single License = You can create a product (i.e. Video) that you put on YT and anywhere else, BUT will not be sold (monetizing is selling content).

Extended License = Your fine to resell any of the bought music in your commercial product (i.e. computer game etc.) and also monetize your videos.

I think, there are to many people still think "everything must be free" and do not respect others hard work. This also applies to some of the Royalty Free Content Marketplaces, as they do not inform them self, their clients and Artists very well when it comes to copyright, PRO, Content ID and so on.

So dear customers, please do not judge artists and composers if they simply try to protect their hard work and rights in some ways. Think about how the music industry and mp3 piracy really made our lives much more complicated and almost impossible to earn enough for a living.

BTW. about 90% of the ID Content messages i get are from people using watermarked preview files in their monetized videos. The other 10% will be "cleared" within 24 hours and will not cause any issues if the customer has a license.

I hope this will bring some light and understanding to the YT ID Content issue some people have.


Thanks

Im curious as to how you know if someone is using your music? Do you register your content with Adrev?

You are absolutely correct that we need an extended license option for buyers. SS has it and I sell a large number of clips each month at the much higher priced extended license. Same royalty split so both the agency and Artist benefits.

There are different protections through different associations and organizations for music. BUT, here at P5 everything is sold as RF, the P5 rules apply to everything sold through P5. If the organization or associations rules differ from P5's then better not try to sell here unless you are willing to accept the P5 RF guidelines.

Yes, extended license option at 50/50 split is needed and will help everyone's bottom line.