- This topic has 190 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I’m confused by how they pull this off, but in my opt in they clearly state that I am just granting them the exclusive rights to administer my music in the YouTube Content ID program
That’s one interpretation of what youtube’s exclusivity requirement means. There’s a lot of debate about that.
How it won’t cause problems for other libraries that license the same music I don’t know.
It’s not a 3 minute hurdle for the client if you put the music into CID yourself. After a claim, the client will go straight to the library and generally won’t be happy, then the library will have to contact AdRev and realize the song is not being controlled in the CID by them because it’s being controlled by YOU (now the client isn’t happy and the library isn’t happy). Then the library would have to contact you and tell you to contact Adrev to remove the claim but you are currently not reachable because you are out for the evening on a date. So I guess it will have to wait until Monday… Now the library really won’t be happy about having to do this as they know that every minute that goes by, the client gets more and more pi***d off because their rightful monetization is going to YOU!! The only way for CID to work is to head it off at the point of sale of the license by the library so that by the time the video is uploaded the channel is already whitelisted. If you register the tracks in CID yourself, you are causing a mess to collect pennies and p****g off all of the entities who are trying to legitimately make money for you by licensing/selling/buying your music, how can this be a positive thing in any way for anyone???
What the average writer needs to understand is that Scott Schreer, is one of BMI’s most performed writers, he has over 1,700 cues, many of which are high-profile TV themes, which are just the kind of thing that amateur YT video makers like to snag to put into their videos. Who doesn’t want to make a YT video of their kid’s backyard football game with the NFL on FOX theme right?
Well said!
He wrote practically every Fox sports theme that you’ve heard over the past 15 years.
What that article didn’t mention, was that Scott Shreer is also, wait for it…the CEO of FreePlay and Tunesat.
Seems like a lot of the topics we talk about here revolve around him!
Mark, the intended meaning behind that statement may come off strong, but my intended message and your interpretation is not what I mean. What I mean is libraries need to address content id. It is not going away any time soon. It exists, and composers/some libraries use it. We are both on the same page, your library doesn’t take composers that submit their music to content id, I do not submit my music to content id.
We both have made are positions clear. That is how we are both handling content id. Time will prove whether or not we made the correct decision and hopefully it will give us that competitive edge. I am in no way advocating for content id. We are both working under the assumption that content id is here, it is a reality, and we don’t want to have are music associated with it.
That statement is bold, but I think it is a reality that the libraries that pretend like content id is not something to make a stance on are going to lose in the long term. The acceptance comes from acknowledging it and making a firm decision about what to do next. We both have already done that.
Does that clear it up, or do you still disagree?
The library that accepts that it’s the way it’s going to be and works with it instead of grinding against it will really gain a big competitive edge.
Still completely disagree with your original statement. But you have a right to your opinion and I have a right to mine.
What that article didn’t mention, was that Scott Shreer is also, wait for it…the CEO of FreePlay and Tunesat.
Wait! What?!
What that article didn’t mention, was that Scott Shreer is also, wait for it…the CEO of FreePlay and Tunesat.
Wait! What?!Actually, I knew that and forgot to mention it. It was in another article.
The point is that when they talk about numbers and dollars per month, etc., is it because of who he is and what he’s done. Not because the money is out just waiting for the average composer to claim it.
Maybe LeBron James and I both wear Nike sneakers. That doesn’t mean that I can play in the NBA.
When people throw numbers at you, get the facts…who, what, where, when and how.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/youtube-mcns-attacked-lawsuits-alleged-774389
Another day another lawsuit.
I’d like to give another example of what my friends in the business are reporting lately about ADREV. My friend is a very talented writer with tons of “high end” credits (BMW for example). He’s doing it all writing for TV spots, films, has a band, etc. etc. He gave a couple dozen songs to a “friend” for sync opportunities. This “friend” decided to then (without any opt in agreement) load the tunes up to HIS adrev account to monetize the track! When confronted, the guys says “oh well I was going to split the money with and …blah …blah …blah.”
Same friend had another story. Publisher overseas writes, Hey, my client wants to upload a video to youtube with your track titled____ but ADREV has a claim on the copyright. It seems my client has two options, allow ads to run, or have their video taken down and receive a copyright strike on their channel.
For the record, There was no sync fee paid to writer, just overseas publisher serving up a track without any concern for the writer but promising “lots of royalties eventually”. The operative word being “eventually.”
Now isn’t this empowering for composers? It’s not all just about making money off of ads while annoying music buying customers, it’s about policing thieves and undesirable usages of music. It’s about empowering individual composers over their own works. Whether we want to admit or not, ADREV is a very good invention for these situations. It’s almost getting to a point where composers have to ask themseleves “if I don’t submit my catalog to ADREV, someone else just may beat me to it.” I can not tell you how many stories I have heard about the “nice guy” composer concerned about upsetting RF customers refraining from ADREV, only to find out that someone else out there already has “ADREV’d” their music as their own!
So give that some thought.
I still have not gone “all out” but i tell you, as the stories roll in, it’s getting tempting. There finally is a solution to control, and have the final say on how our music is being used, and also being able to find out if a license was ever purchased!
Now isn’t this empowering for composers? It’s not all just about making money off of ads while annoying music buying customers, it’s about policing thieves and undesirable usages of music. It’s about empowering individual composers over their own works.
So it is about monitoring usages, not about making money. I think I will pass for now. I am more concerned with getting paid than chasing thieves.
“if I don’t submit my catalog to ADREV, someone else just may beat me to it.”
Step one: Cease and deist letter.
Step two: DMCA take down notice
Step three: lawsuitAdRev does not punish thieves. It merely collects your $.00068 from youtube ads.
If you want the thieves to pay. Hire a lawyer!
Again Dave, you can monitor your music by simply uploading your music to your private YouTube channel. You will immediately see if someone has stolen your music and is claiming to own it via YouTube contentID.
On the other hand uploading your catalog to adrev does not stop people from stealing your music, it simply produces multiple copyright claims that your real customers have to deal with.
I’m just not seeing your leap in logic that uploading to adrev stops people from stealing your music. Those libraries that upload your music to YouTube contentID without your permission or knowledge will still do the same thing. Your friend’s friend who stole his music and uploaded it to YouTube contentID would still be able to do the same thing.
You need to contact the actual people who are stealing your music to get them to stop stealing your music.Again Dave, you can monitor your music by simply uploading your music to your private YouTube channel. You will immediately see if someone has stolen your music and is claiming to own it via YouTube contentID.
+1
You need to contact the actual people who are stealing your music to get them to stop stealing your music.
+1
If all you want is your $.00068 give your music to AdRev, but you will lose more than that from the libraries that drop you.
If you want to fight the bad guys, hire a lawyer!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.